For the 100th time. I only read Mises, Rand, et.al. long after I had become a Libertarian.
I did watch the PBS Special "Free To Choose" by Milton Friedman way back in 1980. I became a Libertarian by the television NOT by books. I saw Free To Choose, saw a Bill Meyers Special on PBS about Third Parties in America. Say Ed Clark TV Commercials. And decided that of all the Parties, though I admired Reagan and a lot of what the Republicans were saying, I was more Libertarian than anything else. That was back in 1980. Didn't read Mises till about 1987!! Does that answer your question??? If not, honestly, I give up. --- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Eric, > > > > I simply fail to see much continuity from my post to yours. I'm > sorry that I'm at such a loss, but I honestly can't see hardly > any coherence or libertarianism or logic in your post(s). > > > > If you read Mises, how do you come to your views (or lack of) on > force and consent? Mises, Rand, Friedman, etc do NOT reinforce > them. If you are a meat and potatoes libertarian, how could you > have read them? > > > > Exactly how did I "hit on" the idea that libertarianism is far > too philosophical and dogmatic? The accusation against the > movement is also untrue. Libertarian philosophy is the most > logical, therefore easy to understand. Most people get it without > reading volumes or deep contemplation; which begs even more > suspicion about your glaring "meat and potatoes" philosophical > deficits. > > > > -Mark > > > > > > ************ > {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote > "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the > case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions. > There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a > unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill > its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and > unjust lawsuits. > See www.fija.org > [Please adopt this as your own signature.] } > > > > > _____ > > > > I'm a meat and potatos advocate of libertarianism. My > libertarianism comes instinctively from the gut. > > Yeah, I've read Mises, Rand, Rothbard, Hayek, Friedman (my > favorite), Hazlitt, Nozick, Hospers, you name it. They just > serve > to reinforce the beliefs that I already have. > > You've actually hit on something quite brillant. IMHO the > biggest > problem the libertarian movement has these days is that it's far > too > philosophical and dogmatic. We can't seem to relate to "meat and > > potatos libertarianism" like that of the Reform Party/Perotista > crowd. > > As soon as we get a recruit into a more consistent libertarianism > and most especially LP ranks, we hit them over the head with > ises. "Hey, you gotta read this, you gotta read that..." > > Why can't we accept that people sympathetic to libertariansim are > out there who are not deeply contemplative and there's absolutely > no need to turn them on to being book worms. Accept them for who > they are. > > > > > > > _____ > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > 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/
