[extropy-chat] Who's Who? and What's What? (was Meta: List quality)

[Mike Lorrey]

--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >
> > I agree entirely. Nobody has an inherent right to not be offended.
> The
> > amount of socialism going on in transhumanist circles these days
> > offends me daily but I don't demand that all be tested for
> libertarian
> > purity ...
> 
> Someday, Mike, if you are so inclined, please explain how (and if)
> you distinguish differences between socialism (a term you throw
> around a lot here), lower-case-l-iberalism, upper-case-L-iberalism,
> communism, leftism, and other similar ilk-i-isms (and without going
> to the dictionary - just off the top of your head). 

The Fabians, who were essentially intent on instituting a form of
Platonic feudalism run along socialist lines on a global basis, decided
to hijack the term "liberal" in the late 19th-early 20th century. They
were dedicated to an incrementalist 'lobster bake' program of slowly
instituting socialism in the US through the takeover of large moneyed
foundations (including Rhodes, Carnegie, Guggenheim, Rockefeller, Ford
Foundations) and to use their assets in this enterprise. 

In this, socialist=liberal in the modern American political world. One
is just more honest than the other as to what he or she is about. If
you look at the modern Democratic Party in the US, their
accomplishments in the 20th century and the planks of their platform
today, it is clear that they believe in the platform of the Communist
Manifesto word for word.

An uppper case L-Liberal is a member of the New York Liberal Party.
The only distinction between a socialist and a communist really is that
the communist will either shoot you or send you to re-education camp
when you object to the state taking your stuff, while the socialist
will merely publicly brand you a racist sexist anti-semitic neo-nazi
wife beater and child rapist who doesn't pay his 'fair share', or some
other combination of similar smears.

> And what would you propose to do with the bulk of humanity that may
> never hear of - or not cotton to - libertarianism?

I happen to believe that any person, when they are no longer being lied
to by the PTB, and stop lying to themselves, recognise the inherent
superiority of the libertarian position on an objectively moral/ethical
basis as well as practica/utilitarian. You can't force an ass to water,
though.



Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs