Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Re: Question on Mises

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Katz
    Right, but I think the bigger issue is to point out the inevitable results of statism. What can you call, say, the past century, if not chaos? Or our inner
    Message 1 of 40 , Sep 6, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Right, but I think the bigger issue is to point out the inevitable results of statism.  What can you call, say, the past century, if not chaos?  Or our inner cities during the war on drugs?

      On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM, James <jeo1@...> wrote:
       

      All good points.

      Again, though, just like our discussions about religion and "faith", he would probably respond that anarchists don't come out and admit that they believe in "chaos", but that is what it boils down too, or what would result if their beliefs were implemented.

      In other words just because one might have to search hard for quotes of anarchists trumpeting the virtue of "chaos" (although, contrarily, it is not difficult to find quotes of religionists singing the praises of 'faith'), it doesn't follow that "chaos" is not what they are really endorsing, whether they know it or not, or admit it or not. (I'm saying what I would expect this fellow to say).



      In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Byrd" <nfactor13@...> wrote:
      >
      > Similar to the discussion about religious people and faith, it might be helpful to challenge him to provide quotes from anarchists that show that they believe this. It also might help to know why he thinks government is immune to chaos and how it can enforce its own rules apart from people's willingness to do so, the same flaw that is supposed to render anarchy impossible to maintain.
      >
      > Nathan
      >
      > --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, "James" <jeo1@> wrote:
      > >
      > > At the risk of angering Juan :), what was Mises' position vis a vis the need for a state? I had an online exchange where a minarchist of sorts, calling himself a classical liberal and "true libertarian" stated that Mises and Hayek were "openly derisive" of anarchists and that Mises would have been appalled at all the "Rothbardian anarchists" using his name at Mises.Org.
      > >
      > > Is this correct? I wasn't sure how to respond. I know that Hayek believed in the need for a state, and we have discussed how Mises endorsed the draft in WWII etc. But were Mises and Hayek "openly derisive" of anarchists?
      > >
      > > The fellow I had this exchange with is a Friedmanite and does despise anarchists, going so far as saying that anarchists are not in any way libertarian as they believe in chaos, not ordered liberty like Jefferson and company.
      > >
      > > Thoughts?
      > >
      >


    • James
      not into American football ? What kind of football are you into , soccer?
      Message 40 of 40 , Sep 12, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        "not into American football"? What kind of 'football' are you "into", soccer?

        --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Dan <dan_ust@...> wrote:
        >
        > I'm not into American football and I just thought there was a certain symmetry to talking shit and eating it.
        >  
        > Regards,
        >  
        > Dan
        >
        > From: James <jeo1@...>
        > To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Friday, September 9, 2011 3:15 PM
        > Subject: [LeftLibertarian2] Re: Question on Mises
        >
        >  
        > Well he's not really "my friend".
        >
        > Wake up today on the wrong side of the bed Dan? You sound a bit grouchy.
        >
        > Cheer up, it's Friday and football is back.
        >
        > --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Dan <dan_ust@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Tell your friend to eat his shit.
        > >  
        > > Regards,
        > >  
        > > Dan
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.