Jim, that's a fair question, so I'll clarify.  

A people label being derogatory is ONE concern.  

Another concern about 'people labeling' is when it obviously 
calls for an interpretation(sp?) in a meritorious(sp?) context.  

So and so iz a REAL 'libertarian'  

iz not....    iz so....   and so on ad-pukedom  :(  

While some can be reasonable, imo, these exchanges too ofter 
degenerate to juvenile 'labeling' contests.  

Too much heat for whatever light is generated.  

So, instead, you can say things like: 

that person's expressed views have been consistently libertarian.  

that person's position on this issue is authoritarian.  

and so on like that with supportive data of course.  


This is different from saying things like:  

'that child is a '5 year old' 
(when the child is indeed 5 yrs old)  

'Sally has is a red head' (if indeed she is)  

'John is a Harvard grad'  (if true)  

But, if even the above are being said as insult or abuse it 
would be OFF-topic ad hominem in this forum.  

The aim of the policy is to focus the finite bandwidth of this 
forum on exploration of LIBERTARIANISM pro/con


I don't claim to have said everything perfectly here, but hope 
that I did well enough to get the concept across to those who 
are being genuine.    

Does this help?  


-Terry Liberty Parker 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian 




--- In [email protected], Jim Syler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Um...........
> 
> I don't understand.
> 
> These are not meant to be derogatory labels, merely descriptive 
ones. I ~refuse~ to define 'libertarian' as "someone who subscribes 
to the non-aggression principle," as I strongly believe that 
libertarianism includes (in fact, is the successor to) classical 
liberalism. When I say 'real' libertarian or 'NAPster,' I am only 
trying to find a convenient label for those people who do subscribe 
to the non-aggression principle without (incorrectly in my view) 
conflating them with all libertarians.
> 
> As Geof has accurately stated (well, implied really), MOST people 
in the LP can more accurately be called classical liberals than hard-
core, NAP-believing libertarians, so I have to have another word to 
distinguish between the two.
> 
> What's the problem here? If you have a better label (OTHER 
than 'libertarian), let's hear it.
> 
> j
>  
> On Tuesday, March 28, 2006, at 10:57AM, Terry L Parker 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >Jim, STOP the 'people labeling' ('real libertarians') and 
> >'name calling' ('NAPsters') so I don't have to put you on 
> >imposed moderation!  
> >
> >-TLP
> >
> >
> >
> >--- In [email protected], Jim Syler <Calion@> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:47 PM, Cory Nott wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Jim Syler:
> >> >> Umm...Constitutional? Isn't the Constitution an initiation of 
> >force?
> >> >> Isn't any government an initiation of force?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, it is. What is your point?
> >> 
> >> Well, I'd tell you if you hadn't deleted all the previous 
> >discussion 
> >> below (please don't).
> >> 
> >> ::grumble grumble::
> >> 
> >> Alright, there it is:
> >>  > While everyone loves power, libertarians are aware that they 
> >would
> >>  > fall prey to the same issues and once in power would quickly 
> >move to
> >>  > minimize the ability to be corrupt by enacting term limits 
and 
> >putting
> >>  > the country back on solid Constitutional ground such that 
even 
> >the
> >>  > most corrupt President could do little in the way of harming 
the
> >>  > country. Everyone else would be more likely to slide down the 
> >path to
> >>  > totalitarianism if the powers that controlled the state at 
least
> >>  > agreed with their values to start with.
> >> 
> >> Umm...Constitutional? Isn't the Constitution an initiation of 
force?
> >> Isn't any government an initiation of force?
> >> 
> >> My point is that how could "real" (in your view) libertarians--
that 
> >is, 
> >> NAPsters--work to getting this country back on solid 
Constitutional 
> >> ground? Wouldn't that be a violation of their principles?
> >> 
> >> j
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not 
care 
> >what 
> >> color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it 
only 
> >> cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is 
the 
> >> most effective system we have discovered to enable people who 
hate 
> >one 
> >> another to deal with one another and help one another.
> >> -- Milton Friedman
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
>







ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to