Eric, you're starting to veer into ad hominem (to the person) which is OFF-topic in this forum. Please pull back and focus on message rather than messenger.
Moderator, -TLP --- In [email protected], "Eric S. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You're fun. > > Paul wrote: > > > First, Ido not advocate anarchism. I advocate libertarianism. > > Depending on who is doing the defining, they could be the same thing. > > I'd ask you for your definition, but that seems an unprofitable > approach. You are the guy who thinks that tariffs aren't coercive but > other sales taxes are, right? > > > Second, the plege ensures that those who join are consistent with > > libertarianism, not anarchism. It says that those who join adhere to > > the NAP which is the core belief of libertarianism. > > Ah. That's not quite a definition, but it's close enough. > > Are taxes collected for social or political goals? Are taxes coercive? > That is to say, do they violate the N.A.P.? > > If so, I'd say that using that definition of libertarianism makes it > pretty much the same as anarchism. <http://www.dictionary. com> > > Is it possible for someone to lie, and sign the > pledge/oath/credo/whatnot even though they don't believe what it means? > (Whatever that is...) > > > I'd rather be small and principled than big and not (like the > > Republicans and Democrats). I will never sacrifice our principles in > > the name of growth, and that's exactly what getting rid of the pledge > > would do. It would open the door for people who refuse to join with > > the pledge; mostly because they don't believe in non- interventionism, > > or the non-aggression principle and therefore don't belong in the LP. > > I'm thinking you're pretty small, all right. Oh, you meant the number > of LP members. (Or did you mean voters for Libertarian candidates?) > > See question about lying, above. > > Well, if you're right, there's no point in trying to achieve anything > politically via the LP. It will never have more than a few tens of > thousands of members. Well, "never" is too strong a claim. Better: > Won't have that many members before the Social Security "trust fund" > goes empty. > > In fact, if the meaning you ascribe to the LP's > oath/pledge/credo/whatnot (AKA o/p/c/w) ever becomes the undisputed > meaning, "tens of thousands" is too big a number. People who are > opposed to all taxation are relatively rare in the United States, and > those who are willing to join a political party are rarer still. > > > When you mention that you were talking to someone who has had to "deal > > with me" for some time, I'm sure it was someone like Bruce Cohen, or > > Eric Dondero. > > What are they like? (Not that it matters, really. You're the > fascinating one.) I'm just curious. > > > The goal of the LP is to clean up Washington, but we can't clean up > > the house of representatives until our own house is clean. Those who > > don't believe in the non-aggression principle don't belong in the > > party and do nothing to further the cause of liberty. > > Really? What does "clean up Washington" mean? I assume you're speaking > metaphorically rather than literally (i.e. not streetsweepers, etc.), > and are referring to reforming the federal government, in some way. > > > I most certainly don't make libertarian advocacy look bad, but those > > who claim to be promoting libertarianism and suggest we vote for > > Republicans do make us look bad. Those who support a wholly > > unwarranted, unprovoked, unconstitutional, unreasonable, and > > unlibertarian war in Iraq make the party look bad. > > I'll go along with the second statement. The first is a matter of > opinion. If you're the guy who thinks that tariffs aren't coercive but > other sales taxes are, I'm pretty sure a survey of randomly selected > folks would provide data in support of the notion that you do. > > > You've asked me to answer a yes or no question. The ony yes or now > > question you asked was the following: > > > > "Am I reading it correctly? Specifically, is this an accurate > > paraphrase?" > > > > The yes or no answer you're looking for is NO; you are not reading it > > correctly and it is not an accurate paraphrase. > > And the pessimists thought you couldn't do it. Hah! > > Could you correct that paraphrase, retaining as much of it as you can > manage, to enlighten us? I'd quote it, but you had "top-posted" and I > deleted the text, which was below. -Eric > > -- > Eric S. Harris > > If this address ever fails, try visiting http://www.returnpath.net > 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/
