Originally posted by wedgehead2Yeah, that's right. They get bad press. Ever been there? I have. The bad press is true.
They get a bad press. Lots of people go there on holiday thiugh- but not while risking their lives...
Anyway- look at everyone trying to get into the supposedly socialist state of China- though thats businesses trying to exploit labour, rather than for any ideological reason.
1 edit
Originally posted by wedgehead2we are back to the question: are/were there any socialist/communist countries that aren't/weren't fascist?
"Mussolini defined fascism as being a right-wing collectivistic ideology in opposition to socialism, liberalism, democracy and individualism."
Being opposed to socialism hardly makes it socialism!
🙄
Originally posted by kmax87yes, as in: Castro.
I thought that one of the most significant features of fascism was an embrace of some form of religion or cult of the leader. Usually in the form of an embrace of nationalism and a promotion of paternalism. I would have thought that the targeting of a particular group within as the other would be a definite feature.
The problem with all of this is that the ...[text shortened]... fascist and communist rule become very blurred, the commonality shared being totalitarian rule.
2 edits
Originally posted by kmax87It’s true I don’t have any problem with a lot of the actions you claim to be unfair, with the exception of espionage and violence, neither of which come under the immoral antitrust laws. It should be made clear there is no such thing as a monopoly in the free market. There is something called market dominance; it is only guvamint that can create monopolies through force and threats of force. E.g. lotto in NZ, plus a number of certification bureaucracies.
"Rebates, preferences, and other discriminatory practices in favor of the combination by railroad companies; restraint and monopolization by control of pipe lines, and unfair practices against competing pipe lines; contracts with competitors in restraint of trade; unfair methods of competition, such as local price cutting at the points where necessary to supp ong with that then I'll stop now because I don't think there is anything left to say.
Here’s how things proceed: You run off to wiki and dig up some examples of the supposed 'good' antitrust laws have done, I then run off to wiki and dig up some examples of the 'bad' antitrust laws have done and round and round we go. So I prefer to argue from the property rights position. Whose product is it? Whose company is it? And in the case of “thereby preventing the carts from crossing his property.” Whose property is it?
And why should the companies be punished when there is a willing participant in all this, snapping up the cheap kero or flights i.e. the customer. Livelihoods are not destroyed because it still takes X amount of labour to fly a passenger from A to B.
You yourself have said that there has never been a market large enough to test the theory so a reason for the regulation has never been proven, and as I have pointed out, in an unregulated market, by definition, monopolies are not possible. Entry can be difficult but entrants are not barred by force. So when you wail “Why did the laws come into being?” You should consider that when buying and selling is controlled by legislation the first to be bought and sold are the legislators.
"take-it-or-leave-it position" . What other way is there?
Originally posted by wedgehead2Libertarians are definitely right wing- that is not a debate.
How am I meant to find out what you support?
I am trying understand what kind of Libertarian you are- a more leftish one (which I doubt) or one closer to the Republicans.
I am trying understand what kind of Libertarian you are- a more leftish one
Do you know left from right? Which hand do you use when you and your mates "all pull together."
Originally posted by WajomaWhy don't you answer the question- unless you don't actually know what you are.
[b]Libertarians are definitely right wing- that is not a debate.
I am trying understand what kind of Libertarian you are- a more leftish one
Do you know left from right? Which hand do you use when you and your mates "all pull together."[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by wedgehead2Neither left nor right. As opposed to the controls on the economy espoused by the left as I am to the limits on personal freedoms favoured by the right.
Why don't you answer the question- unless you don't actually know what you are.
So you see neither left nor right.
It's quite clear you don't know what libertarianism is, that's ok, just that you shouldn't get so carried away with the verbal diarhoea.
Originally posted by WajomaThe right isn't opposed to personally freedoms, in the sense f private property, carring a gun, etc. If you can explain in what way you are to the left I would be interested. You seem to say the right is more restrictive than the left- which isn't true- the right is individualistic, the left more collectivist.
Neither left nor right. As opposed to the controls on the economy espoused by the left as I am to the limits on personal freedoms favoured by the right.
So you see neither left nor right.
It's quite clear you don't know what libertarianism is, that's ok, just that you shouldn't get so carried away with the verbal diarhoea.
1 edit
Originally posted by wedgehead2I am not going to explain the way in which I am to the left because (for the tenth time) I am neither left nor right wing.
If you can explain in what way you are to the left I would be interested.
Here's a small political quiz, there are a number of versions but it will give some indication of what I'm talking about
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
1 edit
Originally posted by WajomaSo do you vote?
I am not going to explain the way in which I am to the left because (for the tenth time) I am neither left nor right wing.
Here's a small political quiz, there are a number of versions but it will give some indication of what I'm talking about
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
http://www.politicalcompass.org/questionnaire
This is a good one as well.
Originally posted by wedgehead2Yes, I believe a political party is a good tool for getting the message out there. Can't speak for the US LP but in NZ the Libertarianz party is more concerned with the ideas than gaining X number of seats, which, let's face it, is unrealistic in the near future.
So do you vote?
http://www.libertarianz.org.nz/
Originally posted by WajomaOn their principles they point out that they are pro-capitalist- believing in an extremely free market economy.
Yes, I believe a political party is a good tool for getting the message out there. Can't speak for the US LP but in NZ the Libertarianz party is more concerned with the ideas than gaining X number of seats, which, let's face it, is unrealistic in the near future.
http://www.libertarianz.org.nz/
On policies they appear to be quite into defence spending, no taxes and pro business. How can they not be a right wing party!