Are anarchists overgrown teenagers?

[sjw]

If the US government were reduced to the legitimate functions defined for government by Ayn Rand, including separation of the economy and the State, what would be the objections to this state by anarchists?

Under George's twisted-like-a-pretzel view Ayn Rand was an anarchist: http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~thomas/po/rational-anarchism.html

Shayne

[George H. Smith]

This is one of the most disgusting things I have ever read on OL. A physician does not violate his professional oath by investing in prostitution. But even if he did, this would be a matter for a board of ethics within that profession to decide, not for the State.

So do you think that everyone who disagrees with you on moral issues should be thrown in jail? I see nothing immoral in prostitution per se. Should I be imprisoned as well? Who is the "victim" in consensual prostitution? Who is being coerced? Should pornography be illegal as well? After all, porn actors are paid to engage in sex.

Maybe you could get some jollies by wandering around at night, shining a flashlight into cars, and reporting any activities you don't approve of to the police. Then you could go home and jack off.

Ghs

George: "I see nothing immoral in prostitution"

Fair enough, you're a scumbag. Fine. At least it's clear what we're dealing with here.

So I suppose I belong in jail as well?

Btw, here is what I actually wrote: "I see nothing immoral in prostitution per se." In other words, I see nothing wrong in the exchange of sexual services for money. There may be immoral and even unjust aspects to prostitution in some situations, but that is a different issue.

George : " A physician does not violate his professional oath by investing in prostitution"

Bullshit.

What professional standard is violated? Name one. I'm afraid we will need something more than your emotive ejaculations.

Btw, there are various professional oaths in medicine. How do you know the exact one that the physician in question swore to uphold?

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

If the US government were reduced to the legitimate functions defined for government by Ayn Rand, including separation of the economy and the State, what would be the objections to this state by anarchists?

Under George's twisted-like-a-pretzel view Ayn Rand was an anarchist: http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~thomas/po/rational-anarchism.html

Shayne

I didn't say that "Ayn Rand was an anarchist." I wrote that "Ayn Rand was essentially an anarchist in substance, if not in name." I then go on to give reasons for this conclusion. You know, reasons --those things you are allergic to.

Sorry if I caused your brain to explode once again with subtle distinctions. I don't know how to discuss complicated philosophical issues in "See Jane run" prose, but, for your sake, I will see if I can learn.

Btw, are you going to reveal your monumental principle once again? No one seems to recall what it is. If not, I will begin the game of 20 questions.

Question #1: Is it bigger than a breadbasket?

Ghs

[sjw]

I didn't say that "Ayn Rand was an anarchist." I wrote that "Ayn Rand was essentially an anarchist in substance, if not in name." I then go on to give reasons for this conclusion. You know, reasons --those things you are allergic to.

You're the last one who should whine about being misrepresented. Your entire purpose in this thread seems to be to weave yet another pretzel view of whatever I say, just like you can distort Rand and make her look like she was an "anarchist in substance."

Sorry if I caused your brain to explode once again with subtle distinctions. I don't know how to discuss complicated philosophical issues in "See Jane run" prose, but, for your sake, I will see if I can learn.

Btw, are you going to reveal your monumental principle once again? No one seems to recall what it is. If not, I will begin the game of 20 questions.

Question #1: Is it bigger than a breadbasket?

Ghs

Look, I get your game. I say something, and then you see if you can conjure up some twisted logic to turn A into not-A. It's like intellectual yoga. Who pays you for this extremely useful skill? That's really what Rothbard was good at. He took some sensible ideas and turn and twisted them to make it appear like they were anarchy.

At least Ptolemy wasn't doing it on purpose. Or was he? Maybe the Church liked it and paid him for it. You're the historian, you tell me.

Shayne

[George H. Smith]

What makes you think that I call myself an "anarchist" when I'm marketing ideas? The minarchist/anarchist debate is an in-house controversy. I have always called myself a "libertarian" when addressing general audiences. Only in a highly specialized discussion or debate would the label "anarchist" have relevance.

Interesting that even you don't think anarchy is worth promoting. Good call.

It's worth promoting to libertarians, but to a nonlibertarian audience there isn't a dime's worth of difference between libertarian anarchism and a limited "government" with no power to tax. I would be delighted to live under the latter system. Anarchism under any other name is just as sweet.

Any other not-so-secret secrets that you care to share? This one was one a bust. I sure hope it wasn't the principle that you referred to earlier.

Ghs

No, but I don't see the point in sharing with someone whose main contribution to anything is to zoom in with microscopic detail nitpicking things. Not that that's a bad skill. It's admirable. It's just not the be all end all.

I thought you already shared it, many times. Beating a hasty retreat, are you? Come on, grow a pair. Show everyone how brilliantly original you are. I promise not to hurt your feelings.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

I didn't say that "Ayn Rand was an anarchist." I wrote that "Ayn Rand was essentially an anarchist in substance, if not in name." I then go on to give reasons for this conclusion. You know, reasons --those things you are allergic to.

You're the last one who should whine about being misrepresented. Your entire purpose in this thread seems to be to weave yet another pretzel view of whatever I say, just like you can distort Rand and make her look like she was an "anarchist in substance."

I didn't complain about anything. I simply corrected another one of your errors. Whining about your incompetence would be like whining about too much snow in winter. Both are forces of nature that no one can do anything about.

Sorry if I caused your brain to explode once again with subtle distinctions. I don't know how to discuss complicated philosophical issues in "See Jane run" prose, but, for your sake, I will see if I can learn.

Btw, are you going to reveal your monumental principle once again? No one seems to recall what it is. If not, I will begin the game of 20 questions.

Question #1: Is it bigger than a breadbasket?

Ghs

Look, I get your game. I say something, and then you see if you can conjure up some twisted logic to turn A into not-A. It's like intellectual yoga. Who pays you for this extremely useful skill? That's really what Rothbard was good at. He took some sensible ideas and turn and twisted them to make it appear like they were anarchy.

The game actually goes like this: You say something, and then I see if I can figure out what the fuck you are talking about. So far you are way ahead.

Question #2: Is it something people can eat?

Ghs

[BaalChatzaf]

If prostitution is victimless and morally neutral (or good), ask yourself how you'd feel if your daughter decided to pursue this "profession". You know you're full of crap.

Bob

I would have the same queasy feeling as I would if my daughter were a lawyer or worked for the government.

Vater, vater! Ich bin ein kapperiene ins konzentrationlager. I would not approve.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sjw]

I didn't say that "Ayn Rand was an anarchist." I wrote that "Ayn Rand was essentially an anarchist in substance, if not in name." I then go on to give reasons for this conclusion. You know, reasons --those things you are allergic to.

You're the last one who should whine about being misrepresented. Your entire purpose in this thread seems to be to weave yet another pretzel view of whatever I say, just like you can distort Rand and make her look like she was an "anarchist in substance."

I didn't complain about anything. I simply corrected another one of your errors. Whining about your incompetence would be like whining about too much snow in winter. Both are forces of nature that no one can do anything about.

Sorry if I caused your brain to explode once again with subtle distinctions. I don't know how to discuss complicated philosophical issues in "See Jane run" prose, but, for your sake, I will see if I can learn.

Btw, are you going to reveal your monumental principle once again? No one seems to recall what it is. If not, I will begin the game of 20 questions.

Question #1: Is it bigger than a breadbasket?

Ghs

Look, I get your game. I say something, and then you see if you can conjure up some twisted logic to turn A into not-A. It's like intellectual yoga. Who pays you for this extremely useful skill? That's really what Rothbard was good at. He took some sensible ideas and turn and twisted them to make it appear like they were anarchy.

The game actually goes like this: You say something, and then I see if I can figure out what the fuck you are talking about. So far you are way ahead.

Question #2: Is it something people can eat?

Ghs

LOL

Insults coated in intelligent humor is good. I wish I got a tenth the value from Selene's insults.

Shayne

[Selene]

How many times have I said that you agree with me (or I you)? If you take a list of all propositions I hold, and a list that you (or Rothbard) hold, the differences will be very slight. The main difference is how I organize, emphasize, and prioritize. That, and I haven't turned my mind into a pretzel while trying to say that A is not-A.

Shayne

Please produce that list as it will be extremely instrumental in settling the differences and congruences between the three (3) of you.

George Rothbard Shayne/The Chosen One/The Golden Child/The Whistler/

Thanks

Adam

What, you don't care about Rand?

Shayne

You rang?

Here is my ten cents ($.10 worth), but not of humor. You are actually virtually without a sense of humor.

However, you are possessed with an ability to evade and avoid.

I am interested in you producing the list that you suggested.

Additionally, I am now also interested in you producing what George has asked you to produce.

Adam

[sjw]

You rang?

Here is my ten cents ($.10 worth), but not of humor. You are actually virtually without a sense of humor.

However, you are possessed with an ability to evade and avoid.

I am interested in you producing the list that you suggested.

Additionally, I am now also interested in you producing what George has asked you to produce.

Adam

At least George adds value. What do you add Mr. Humor? I'm sure you have some good jokes lying around here somewhere to show off what a good sense of humor you've got. You believe in value for value right? You're asking me to give you something. You want me to put in some effort for you. Well what do you have to make it worth my time? As far as I see it you're just a big sneer machine. You try to be funny but all you end up producing is smarmy sneer.

Shayne

[George H. Smith]

If prostitution is victimless and morally neutral (or good), ask yourself how you'd feel if your daughter decided to pursue this "profession". You know you're full of crap.

Bob

I would have the same queasy feeling as I would if my daughter were a lawyer or worked for the government.

Vater, vater! Ich bin ein kapperiene ins konzentrationlager. I would not approve.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Norma Jean Almodover, the libertarian who wrote Cop To Call Girl, once said that she left the LAPD for prostitution because she wanted to pursue an honest profession.

Norma Jean is a very nice, intelligent lady. Go here to see one of the posters she used while running on the LP ticket for Lt. Governor of California in 1986. I was invited to attend the photo shoot, but I had work to do. Talk about dumb decisions!

Addendum: I just noticed the complete title of Norma Jean's book: Cop to Call Girl: Why I Left the LAPD to Make an Honest Living As a Beverly Hills Prostitute . (The link is to Amazon.)

Ghs

[9thdoctor]

Norma Jean Almodover, the libertarian who wrote Cop To Call Girl, once said that she left the LAPD for prostitution because she wanted to pursue an honest profession.

I know someone who had a positive experience with it.

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7892&st=0&p=83982&hl=belle&fromsearch=1entry83982

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj4E3j8d8PI

[Selene]

You rang?

Here is my ten cents ($.10 worth), but not of humor. You are actually virtually without a sense of humor.

However, you are possessed with an ability to evade and avoid.

I am interested in you producing the list that you suggested.

Additionally, I am now also interested in you producing what George has asked you to produce.

Adam

At least George adds value. What do you add Mr. Humor? I'm sure you have some good jokes lying around here somewhere to show off what a good sense of humor you've got. You believe in value for value right? You're asking me to give you something. You want me to put in some effort for you. Well what do you have to make it worth my time? As far as I see it you're just a big sneer machine. You try to be funny but all you end up producing is smarmy sneer.

Shayne

Therefore, your answer is that you are not going to produce the list you suggested, nor are you going to produce what George asked you for?

Adam

[sjw]

Therefore, your answer is that you are not going to produce the list you suggested, nor are you going to produce what George asked you for?

Adam

I'll likely produce what George asked for when I get more time, Mr. Sneer Machine. Now how about you produce some humor. Or anything else of value. Or you can just sneer and sneer and sneer while I ignore your sneering questions.

Shayne

[George H. Smith]

Therefore, your answer is that you are not going to produce the list you suggested, nor are you going to produce what George asked you for?

Adam

I'll likely produce what George asked for when I get more time, Mr. Sneer Machine. Now how about you produce some humor. Or anything else of value. Or you can just sneer and sneer and sneer while I ignore your sneering questions.

Shayne

If you make the effort I will write a serious response, without the sarcasm.

<a href="http://media.photobucket.com/image/sarcasm/tiggerbby95/sarcasm.jpg?o=14" target="_blank"><img src="http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/tiggerbby95/sarcasm.jpg" border="0"></a>

Ghs

[Bosco]

"Victimless" is absolutely absurd. Only the most superficial and irrational pretzel-logic interpretation comes up with prostitution as victimless and morally OK. Complete nonsense.

If prostitution is victimless and morally neutral (or good), ask yourself how you'd feel if your daughter decided to pursue this "profession". You know you're full of crap.

Bob

I'm sure any decent parent would be worried about the physical risks associated with the sex trade, given the fact that it's illegal. One can be arrested, imprisoned by police, or beaten and raped without legal recourse. The same would be true of being Jewish and resisting the resettlement laws of 1930's Germany. So I guess by this standard, the Jews who refused to wear the Star of David on their sleeves were naive to think that their crimes were "victimless and morally neutral".

Why don't we define "victimless crime" here? The popular expression doesn't imply that ones actions don't negatively impact others, only that the action by itself does not violate the rights of other individuals (does not constitute the initiation of force). Let's say a law was passed prohibiting bungee jumping. Certainly there may be victims, if a person goes bungee jumping anyway and endangers his life by not taking reasonable precautions; namely, his family and friends who would have to carry on without him. And I suppose there would then be debate over whether bungee jumping is a "victimless crime", but clearly (among libertarians at least), this is understood in relation to the use of physical force, not whether a person is "harmed".

Tim

[Selene]

"Victimless" is absolutely absurd. Only the most superficial and irrational pretzel-logic interpretation comes up with prostitution as victimless and morally OK. Complete nonsense.

If prostitution is victimless and morally neutral (or good), ask yourself how you'd feel if your daughter decided to pursue this "profession". You know you're full of crap.

Bob

I'm sure any decent parent would be worried about the physical risks associated with the sex trade, given the fact that it's illegal. One can be arrested, imprisoned by police, or beaten and raped without legal recourse. The same would be true of being Jewish and resisting the resettlement laws of 1930's Germany. So I guess by this standard, the Jews who refused to wear the Star of David on their sleeves were naive to think that their crimes were "victimless and morally neutral".

Why don't we define "victimless crime" here? The popular expression doesn't imply that ones actions don't negatively impact others, only that the action by itself does not violate the rights of other individuals (does not constitute the initiation of force). Let's say a law was passed prohibiting bungee jumping. Certainly there may be victims, if a person goes bungee jumping anyway and endangers his life by not taking reasonable precautions; namely, his family and friends who would have to carry on without him. And I suppose there would then be debate over whether bungee jumping is a "victimless crime", but clearly (among libertarians at least), this is understood in relation to the use of physical force, not whether a person is "harmed".

Tim

Tim:

I agree with defining the term, but I do not see your comparison as a valid one.

Adam

[bmacwilliam]

"Victimless" is absolutely absurd. Only the most superficial and irrational pretzel-logic interpretation comes up with prostitution as victimless and morally OK. Complete nonsense.

If prostitution is victimless and morally neutral (or good), ask yourself how you'd feel if your daughter decided to pursue this "profession". You know you're full of crap.

Bob

I'm sure any decent parent would be worried about the physical risks associated with the sex trade, given the fact that it's illegal. One can be arrested, imprisoned by police, or beaten and raped without legal recourse. The same would be true of being Jewish and resisting the resettlement laws of 1930's Germany. So I guess by this standard, the Jews who refused to wear the Star of David on their sleeves were naive to think that their crimes were "victimless and morally neutral".

Why don't we define "victimless crime" here? The popular expression doesn't imply that ones actions don't negatively impact others, only that the action by itself does not violate the rights of other individuals (does not constitute the initiation of force). Let's say a law was passed prohibiting bungee jumping. Certainly there may be victims, if a person goes bungee jumping anyway and endangers his life by not taking reasonable precautions; namely, his family and friends who would have to carry on without him. And I suppose there would then be debate over whether bungee jumping is a "victimless crime", but clearly (among libertarians at least), this is understood in relation to the use of physical force, not whether a person is "harmed".

Tim

Tim:

I agree with defining the term, but I do not see your comparison as a valid one.

Adam

A better comparison is the situation where one person in a transaction is in a desparate situation. Buyer or seller, doesn't really matter. The man dying of thirst willingly signs over his entire worldly possessions of his own free will, not forced - to buy the water. Illegal? Immoral? Two different questions, but the answer to the second is most certainly yes. That's the point. It is generally immoral to take advantage of people in desparate situations AND it is always immoral to pay for sex (in my view anyway). SHould prostitution be illegal? Perhaps not. Is it immoral - no question yes by more than one criterion.

George claimed that it was not immoral. Then he claimed it MAY be immoral in SOME cases. Even though he admitted his original statement was false, his "clarification" is also nonsense and he knows it.

Bob

Edited December 22, 2010 by Bob_Mac

[9thdoctor]

A better comparison is the situation where one person in a transaction is in a desparate situation.

Belle de Jour did it to finance her doctorate. Is that what you call a desperate situation?

[bmacwilliam]

What professional standard is violated? Name one. I'm afraid we will need something more than your emotive ejaculations.

"Conduct unbecoming a physician" nails doctors for a lot less.

A doctor in my jurisdiction got into a fight after a fender-bender. He plead guilty AND therefore college found him guilty of a professional conduct violation and he was reprimanded and fined. He did not lose his license in this case, but according to the college, "assault is never acceptable".

A doctor found investing in prostitution would be metaphorically nailed to a cross... (for a professional standard violation)

Bob

Edited December 22, 2010 by Bob_Mac

[bmacwilliam]

A better comparison is the situation where one person in a transaction is in a desparate situation.

Belle de Jour did it to finance her doctorate. Is that what you call a desperate situation?

Not every situation is desperate. I think it is immoral to take advantage of someone AND I think it is immoral to buy, and perhaps to a lesser extent, sell sex. Therefore prostitution is immoral - always.

Bob

[Brant Gaede]

A lot of what is called morality--moral, immoral--is a way to control other people even when there are no rights violations involved.

Prostitution is immoral. Therefore the prostitute is immoral, the john is immoral; please come to church on Sunday, children.

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

What professional standard is violated? Name one. I'm afraid we will need something more than your emotive ejaculations.

"Conduct unbecoming a physician" nails doctors for a lot less.

What oath is this from?

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

A better comparison is the situation where one person in a transaction is in a desparate situation.

Belle de Jour did it to finance her doctorate. Is that what you call a desperate situation?

Not every situation is desperate. I think it is immoral to take advantage of someone AND I think it is immoral to buy, and perhaps to a lesser extent, sell sex. Therefore prostitution is immoral - always.

Bob

Why is it immoral to buy or sell sex? Because you say so?

Ghs

[bmacwilliam]

A better comparison is the situation where one person in a transaction is in a desparate situation.

Belle de Jour did it to finance her doctorate. Is that what you call a desperate situation?

Not every situation is desperate. I think it is immoral to take advantage of someone AND I think it is immoral to buy, and perhaps to a lesser extent, sell sex. Therefore prostitution is immoral - always.

Bob

Why is it immoral to buy or sell sex? Because you say so?

Ghs

Yes, there is no other justification of morality - clearly.

Bob