Libertarians...Quite Possibly the Stupidest People in the World....
- Thread starter CanadianKid
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
It is funny how some people can manage to twist reality to where a libertarian minded economist is responsible for the actions of a totalitarian regime.
But I suppose they do go hand-in-hand when you stop and think about it.
/sarcasm off
Yet, you still claim to know that he never talked about civil liberties
I never said this. Please post where I said that Milton Friedman NEVER talked about civil liberties.
And if you can't find a post where I said that, please come back and admit you were wrong, or you made it up. thanks.
TheDanold
Unimatrix
I don't think anyone thinks you're important.
I do find your deceit incredible and yeah it does burn me, the way you try and pretend that you are just discovering new things, when I have seen you make similar statements before.
You try and pawn yourself off as this naive lefty who gets shocked at things that other lefties care about and how much you agree with them.
Yet in reality you are the ultimate power whore who will sign onto to any piece of bullshit, no matter how well you know it not to be true, to hype it.
You're the biggest fucking fake on here. Desh, Darla, BAC, Lorax, Dungheap, Thorn, uscitizen and so on I disagree with, but you'll notice I never call any of them deceitful - because it's only you that is and to the core.
Yeah, did you find that post yet Warren?
Cause you are the third guy to claim I said something today that I didn't say, and you picked the wrong day to do it, because I'm tired of it.
find the post, or admit you are a liar.
Now.
Yet, you still claim to know that he never talked about civil liberties
I never said this. Please post where I said that Milton Friedman NEVER talked about civil liberties.
And if you can't find a post where I said that, please come back and admit you were wrong, or you made it up. thanks.
It's in what I quoted...
Have you ever noticed that the freidman, grover norquist types are all about "economics" low taxes, and "free markets". Its virtually all most of their puppets blather on about. Occassionally they'll make some rhetorical nod towards civil liberties, or social justice.
...
He was out front and very vocal about the war on drugs.
Yet, you still claim to know that he never talked about civil liberties
I never said this. Please post where I said that Milton Friedman NEVER talked about civil liberties.
And if you can't find a post where I said that, please come back and admit you were wrong, or you made it up. thanks.
This has been happening to me all day.
SF has done nothing but this, and now Warren. Also the new guy, demo something or other.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Although I don't agree withthe title that libertarians are stupid people, there does indeed seem much to be questioned about libertarian thought.
If there is any libertarian, or semi-libertarian here who can step away from the noise and perhaps engage in a bit of civil thought, I offer a hand in peace so that we could engage in that discussion.
Let's start from here ...
"Friedman returned home to a firestorm of protest, aggravated by his celebrity as a Newsweek columnist and ongoing revelations about Washington's and corporate America's involvement in the overthrow of Allende. Not only had Nixon, the CIA, and ITT, along with other companies, plotted to destabilize Allende's "democratic road to socialism," but now a renowned University of Chicago economist, whose promotion of the wonders of the free market was heavily subsidized by corporations such as Bechtel, Pepsico, Getty, Pfizer, General Motors, W.R. Grace, and Firestone, was advising the dictator who overthrew him on how to complete the counterrevolution * at the cost of skyrocketing unemployment among Chile's poor.
The New York Times identified Friedman as the "guiding light of the junta's economic policy," while columnist Anthony Lewis asked: if "pure Chicago economic theory can be carried out in Chile only at the price of repression, should its authors feel some responsibility?"
Friedman defended his relationship with Pinochet by saying that if Allende had been allowed to remain in office Chileans would have suffered "the elimination of thousands and perhaps mass starvation . . . torture and unjust imprisonment." But the elimination of thousands, mass hunger, torture and unjust imprisonment were what was taking place in Chile exactly at the moment the Chicago economist was defending his protégé.
Allende's downfall came because he refused to betray Chile's long democratic tradition and invoke martial law, yet Friedman nevertheless insisted that the military junta offered "more room for individual initiative and for a private sphere of life" and thus a greater "chance of a return to a democratic society." It was pure boilerplate, but it did give Friedman a chance to rehearse his understanding of the relationship between capitalism and freedom.
These are excerpts from my previously posted link to this article .. and these ARE the words of Friedman .. search for yourself, as I already have.
Given that these are indeed the words of friedman, can we now stop pretending that Friedman did not support Pinochet and his government? Friedman DEFENDED his relationship with Pinochet and claimed that Allende would have caused torture, death, and suffering at the same time Pinochet was causing torture, death, and suffering.
Does this not all seem eerily familar to you?
In many ways libertarian thought does not appear to be well-thought out. For instance, libertarians claim to be antiwar .. but they support the central element and guiding force of war and intervention .. corporate profit. Friedman spoke for Bechtel, Firestone, Getty and all the other plutocrats who backed him .. who in fact WERE the "free market"
There is a serious disconnect betweem praising the holiness of the "free market" while talking about "liberty", "freedom", and most specifically, "anti-corporatism." That was not only true in Chile then, it's true in America today. One word .. Iraq
Libertarians defend the failure that was Friedman, pretend he had no responsibility for his relationship with evil, and claim to be antiwar but support the very reason for war and intervention.
If there be a libertarian who can discuss this with civility .. I'd like to hear it.
If there is any libertarian, or semi-libertarian here who can step away from the noise and perhaps engage in a bit of civil thought, I offer a hand in peace so that we could engage in that discussion.
Let's start from here ...
"Friedman returned home to a firestorm of protest, aggravated by his celebrity as a Newsweek columnist and ongoing revelations about Washington's and corporate America's involvement in the overthrow of Allende. Not only had Nixon, the CIA, and ITT, along with other companies, plotted to destabilize Allende's "democratic road to socialism," but now a renowned University of Chicago economist, whose promotion of the wonders of the free market was heavily subsidized by corporations such as Bechtel, Pepsico, Getty, Pfizer, General Motors, W.R. Grace, and Firestone, was advising the dictator who overthrew him on how to complete the counterrevolution * at the cost of skyrocketing unemployment among Chile's poor.
The New York Times identified Friedman as the "guiding light of the junta's economic policy," while columnist Anthony Lewis asked: if "pure Chicago economic theory can be carried out in Chile only at the price of repression, should its authors feel some responsibility?"
Friedman defended his relationship with Pinochet by saying that if Allende had been allowed to remain in office Chileans would have suffered "the elimination of thousands and perhaps mass starvation . . . torture and unjust imprisonment." But the elimination of thousands, mass hunger, torture and unjust imprisonment were what was taking place in Chile exactly at the moment the Chicago economist was defending his protégé.
Allende's downfall came because he refused to betray Chile's long democratic tradition and invoke martial law, yet Friedman nevertheless insisted that the military junta offered "more room for individual initiative and for a private sphere of life" and thus a greater "chance of a return to a democratic society." It was pure boilerplate, but it did give Friedman a chance to rehearse his understanding of the relationship between capitalism and freedom.
These are excerpts from my previously posted link to this article .. and these ARE the words of Friedman .. search for yourself, as I already have.
Given that these are indeed the words of friedman, can we now stop pretending that Friedman did not support Pinochet and his government? Friedman DEFENDED his relationship with Pinochet and claimed that Allende would have caused torture, death, and suffering at the same time Pinochet was causing torture, death, and suffering.
Does this not all seem eerily familar to you?
In many ways libertarian thought does not appear to be well-thought out. For instance, libertarians claim to be antiwar .. but they support the central element and guiding force of war and intervention .. corporate profit. Friedman spoke for Bechtel, Firestone, Getty and all the other plutocrats who backed him .. who in fact WERE the "free market"
There is a serious disconnect betweem praising the holiness of the "free market" while talking about "liberty", "freedom", and most specifically, "anti-corporatism." That was not only true in Chile then, it's true in America today. One word .. Iraq
Libertarians defend the failure that was Friedman, pretend he had no responsibility for his relationship with evil, and claim to be antiwar but support the very reason for war and intervention.
If there be a libertarian who can discuss this with civility .. I'd like to hear it.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
You are so full of shit. You are the one who has spent the day weaving strawmen and attributing them to me. How many fucking times did you do it today? Then you call me a drunken chimp and get pissed when I respond with bimbo? Fuck off.
Epicurus
Reasonable
You're technically right. For whatever reason I now cannot find the quote I was looking for. It appears that you did not come right out and say that Friedman never criticzed Pinochet.
However, let's address another point here.
If Friedman's sole affiliation with Pinochet's regime was broad advice on economic policy (which it was), then it is nothing short of dishonest to claim that Friedman is responsible for the deaths that Pinochet ordered; particularly when you consider that he did criticize Pinochet on civil liberties.
You want to attack him for supporting a dictatorship when his sole function was economic policy advice; even though he criticized Pinochet's decisions.
Right, so you admit that I never said, Friedman and his flunkies NEVER talked about civil liberties. So, you were wrong.
My point was, their whole ideology is rolling back the new deal, and Teddy Roosevelt's square deal. Take us back to the gilded age. That's what Grover Norquiest himself acknowledges.
You know as well as I do, that the libertarian movement is fundamentally about economics. It was a reaction to the New Deal. At its core.
SF, you said anyone that responds to a poster who has you on IA, is a moron, a dipshit, and an idiot! What are you doing man? You're acting like a dipshit!
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
That is not what Friedman believed which can be clearly demonstrated in the above quotes.
How about we step away from what Friedman believed and discuss the consequences of that belief?
Let me ask you .. Is George Bush a murderer?
Epicurus
Reasonable
Libertarianism is fundamentally about liberty; in both civil and economic issues.
FDR shackled liberty in both civil and economic spheres through his detention of Japanese Americans and his institution of a tax rate for the wealthy that would climb to above 90%. FDR drew the ire of liberty loving people everywhere with his authoritarian internments and his collossal expansion of government power over the lives of its citizens.
She's got you on ignore, SF.
Ah, he is acting like you then?SF, you said anyone that responds to a poster who has you on IA, is a moron, a dipshit, and an idiot! What are you doing man? You're acting like a dipshit!
That feels good...
Battleborne
Terminator
BFD................!
I am on ignore with all the commies on this board...you included...ya can't debate so ya ignore...bfd!
I am on ignore with all the commies on this board...you included...ya can't debate so ya ignore...bfd!
Well, some people were once in his classroom, they went back and created havoc afterward, he must have implanted it in them and taught them how to do all of it, especially the torture.
He went and spoke at the Catholic Private school that had an exchange program on the "Fragility of Freedom" and met with Pinochet for less than an hour. Everything bad that happened there must be his fault!