Alright, I did not mean 'real' libertarian as opposed to 'false' libertarian, or else I would have to put myself in the category of 'false' libertarian! I'm perfectly willing to not use 'real' libertarian, as there was indeed a sarcastic tone to my using it. I'll continue to use NAPster as a cute (though not derogatory), accurate label for those libertarians who subscribe to the Non-Aggression Principle, unless you can tell me what word (besides 'libertarian') you'd prefer I use.
j On Tuesday, March 28, 2006, at 01:59PM, Terry L Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >YOU are welcome here! > >Labeling people as REAL 'libertarians' or FALSE 'libertarians' >is OFF-topic in this forum. You, I and all other persons are >NOT qualified to judge another person per se. Do that in some >other forum if you must. > >But, you CAN 'judge' AND 'label' their ideas, positions, actions >and so on as libertarian or not, with supportive info of course. > > >-Terry Liberty Parker >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > >--- In [email protected], Jim Syler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, March 28, 2006, at 01:24PM, Terry L Parker ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >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 mean 'libertarianism' as YOU define it, so that I am not >permitted to make the distinction between those libertarians who do >not believe in the non-aggression principle (such as myself) and >those that do? Because I refuse to play that game. All I want is a >simple label to identify those people who believe in the non- >aggression principle other than the word 'libertarian.' >> >> If that makes me not welcome here, say so. >> >> j >> >> >--- In [email protected], Jim Syler <Calion@> 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 >> ><txliberty@> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >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/
