Isn't it a sad election cycle when the Democrat is less statist than the LP nominee?

[Anarchist420]

Isn't this the saddest election cycle precisely due to the fact that one of the two main party nominees is more independent than the two independents? Obama could never run against Dr. Paul because they'd be too friendly towards each other!

Anyway, Romney is the same as Gary Johnson. People like Romney because he's a a tool (i.e., a natural born sword). Jill Stein is just angry at Obama and she's really just running against him as revenge. Revenge gets society nowhere.

Gary Johnson is more of a member of Hamilton's Party (the Republican Party) than Dr. Paul ever was. Johnson is more a Hamiltonian because Johnson favors the 14th Amendment and efficiency/reform over abolition. He ran for governor on a crime control platform and he contracted prisons out to corporations rather than try to introduce parts of Xeer (in other words, Johnson was mainly against restitution and civil liberties for the victims of his conquest) to NeoMexico.

Johnson was also a sword and not a purse. I don't give a damn about "executive experience", I'd rather the purse of liberty be allowed. Would you rather have a true representative like Dr. Paul or an Executive like Johnson?

Johnson means well, but he should just drop it, because Obama in a second term would be almost as libertarian as Grover Cleveland. Obama wouldn't want big govt because he realizes it's not popular. He opposed increasing spending at the rate Bush did both as Senator and as President.
Johnson also didn't really spend less than Romney did as governor!

My ethical advice: Voting, especially when electing the state, is a revolt against nature, so it's best not to do it.

My utilitarian reason for giving my advice: Obama wouldn't live through a second term no matter how many intend to vote for him.

My prediction: Johnson will set a record for LP Presidential vote percentage and/or number of votes for anyone ever nominated by the LP which is and was mostly a Kochtopus machine.

My request: Don't try to reward me if my prediction turns out right.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Obama could never run against Dr. Paul because they'd be too friendly towards each other!

Obama is FAR closer to Romney than he is Paul, and he seems to be running against Romney just fine.

My ethical advice: Voting, especially when electing the state, is a revolt against nature, so it's best not to do it.

It is impossible to revolt against nature. There is nothing else.

My request: Don't try to reward me if my prediction turns out right.

Nobody really pays attention to anything you say. It's all garbage.

 

[Anarchist420]

It's all garbage.

So are you. So am I.

It is impossible to revolt against nature. There is nothing else.

You're right because Revolutions don't really last... evolution is natural, it just happens, and there is nothing collective action can do to redo evolution just like Govt reform always fails. However, people can rebel against nature... I've done so.

and he seems to be running against Romney just fine.

Obama is capable of better than fine.

Obama is FAR closer to Romney than he is Paul

You really don't pay attn to what I say... Obama is closer to Romney now, but Romney is the one who is not liberal (he's neither classically liberal nor modernly liberal).

Nobody really pays attention to anything you say

You won't be fooled by me twice.

 

[DominionSeraph]

So are you. So am I.

Such a valuation is relative. It is again part of your retarded illogic to try to make it an absolute.

So, once again your output is useless.

However, people can rebel against nature... I've done so.

No you haven't. Nature is the sum total of what is. If something is, it is natural. You can't have an "is" that is not a part of nature. This is separate from human social norms and what is efficient in the summation of standard human values, but don't get to thinking that it is nature that gives a shit.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Goddamn, why am I arguing with the mentally ill?
Fucking emotions.

 

[Jaskalas]

Anyway, Romney is the same as Gary Johnson.

So... you claim Gary Johnson is the same as Romney, but Romney is a Neocon like Bush. Maybe you forgot who Bush was, what he did, but Neocons are most certainly not Conservatives or Libertarians. They love big government, they love police state security, they love spending money to buy votes, they love starting wars.

If you think that's a fitting description of Gary Johnson because he's not an abolitionist...then we have no rational basis for further discussion. Reform is a good, healthy approach to changes that people are scared of. It makes the concept more palatable and last I checked this is a Democracy where those things matter.

I will not hold it against a Libertarian if they do not climb atop the hills and shout forth "Burn government burn!". Cause then maybe they are sane enough to recognize the nature of man and the need to do things in a calm and reassuring manner. Especially during a campaign.

He has my vote because he's neither Democrat nor Republican. He is neither my enemy not the traitor stabbing me in the back. That's an improvement from the status-quo. I think I'll take it.

The most significant step for me, is that it's not a vote for the two incumbents.

 

[Anarchist420]

Alright, it's clear that neither DominionSeraph nor myself are logical (psychology states that there is either logic or senses and it could go on all day between myself and DominionSeraph) so can we please discuss the topic I started with the help of the good people at AT?

In other words I'm also requesting... more individuals to tell me why they agree or disagree with what I said in the original post of this thread.

 

[Anarchist420]

So... you claim Gary Johnson is the same as Romney, but Romney is a Neocon like Bush. Maybe you forgot who Bush was, what he did, but Neocons are most certainly not Conservatives or Libertarians. They love big government, they love police state security, they love spending money to buy votes, they love starting wars.

Gary Johnson would just start wars he deems humanitarian. He lacks Dr. Paul's logic just as do I... Dr. Paul believes in violence only if it is in self-defense and he realizes that Assad is no less humanitarian than other sovereigns. Humanitarian war is not possible because the head of state orders it, then the head of state's subjects have to sacrifice their own money and blood to possibly (but not probably) save someone else when it is done out of the goodness of no one's heart. If it is not done out of the goodness of someone's heart or is not done fully voluntarily, then it is not real.

You should research Johnson's record of Gov of NM. It isn't that impressive, even from a libertarian view and there haven't been any good governors that I know of in a long time.

EDIT: The state only protects bad and ambivalent people at the expense of good people... people like myself who should be dead.

 

[Agent11]

Romney would be Bush 3 for all intents and purposes in my opinion. He is a big money executive, so was Bush jr.

Obama is very centrist, I think he and Ron Paul may have many issues that they agree on, but I know for a fact they would also have many that the would be diametrically opposed. Such as health care, drone strikes, government spending etc. etc. etc.

Ron Paul should have ran for the senate. I think they may have appreciated him more there as it is the more deliberative and thoughtful body.

Johnson though, is literally a non factor. He has absolutely no chance of winning and his party has so far been unable to gain substantive traction in the state or federal assemblies.
The libertarians should get together with other minority parties and merge, just hammer out some simple core beliefs and make it work. Otherwise they will all remain irrelevant and there will not be a third party with any chance of making a real difference nationally.

 

[bfdd]

Anarchist, you seriously have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Really, you don't. Someone who thinks the only role of Government is to fill the niche spots where the private market can't be or isn't yet competitive, is a statist? I also find it funny you call him an executive when he was that for what? 8 years vs the 30 years as a handy man? Yeah that's really genuine of you. If anything Ron Paul is far more of the career politician, he chose a position that puts him in basically infinite campaign mode being a representative. So derp a der, getting into politics makes you an asshole that's just a fact. You're just so wrapped up in non-sense you're failing to see the bigger picture.

 

[Anarchist420]

Ron Paul should have ran for the senate. I think they may have appreciated him more there as it is the more deliberative and thoughtful body.

He did, he lost, and he never tried it again.

Anarchist, you seriously have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Really, you don't. Someone who thinks the only role of Government is to fill the niche spots where the private market can't be or isn't yet competitive, is a statist? I also find it funny you call him an executive when he was that for what? 8 years vs the 30 years as a handy man? Yeah that's really genuine of you. If anything Ron Paul is far more of the career politician, he chose a position that puts him in basically infinite campaign mode being a representative. So derp a der, getting into politics makes you an asshole that's just a fact. You're just so wrapped up in non-sense you're failing to see the bigger picture.

Attacking me is quite a way to refute what i was saying
/sarcasm.

Anyway, I guess Johnson is an asshole too since he got involved in politics. The big picture is either death (what I need for myself and what I need for myself like now) or moving the hell out of the U.S. when the time is right.

As for your question... yes, Gary Johnson is a statist. He didn't even come up with innovative ideas like Dr. Paul does. Doing stuff like quasi-privatizing prisons and putting a small surplus on your record when he still spent more than Dr. Paul would've has been done in these States since Hamilton was alive.

Dr. Paul favors voluntary govt... he's a Jeffersonian because he believes that every State should have a right to be free and independent. The world will always have states, because it is just the nature of the majority, but Somalia can't be stateless because of the U.S. gov and the U.N. can't bring world peace because it is controlled by the remaining superpower. That said, the Constitution made the govt too strong and prevented the rebellions/revolutions that were necessary. One side of the atlantic, you have a unitary republic that controls the revolutionaries on the other side of the atlantic. If things had just been left at the Declaration of Independence and the decentralized militia had not started to share power with the Continental Army, then the world would be more stable today. That barred, the Articles of Confederation would've allowed microrevolutions, but it likely would've inherently prevented macrorevolution so every State should just secede on its own. Unfortunately, that can't happen until enough people withdraw consent by not voting or by getting swallowed... the problem with Johnson is that he is endorsing the system by running for govt which means he is giving false hope.

Due to all of that, I simply believe that Johnson is not a libertarian because he ambivalent to secession... Secession is really necessary to keep up with the Jeffersonian Tradition and to support the Great Governor of the World.

Do you understand any of the truth? I don't.

 

[bfdd]

Anyone who gets involved in politics is an asshole, but I believe we're all assholes and I wasn't really attacking you as I was your silky positions. PS "Jeffersonian" means nothing to me. Jefferson created the Democratic Republican party, we currently live under the thumb of the Party of Jefferson. I would say Johnson is a voluntary government supporter, as someone who likes voluntaryism. I don't necessarily consider myself a voluntaryist though, mostly because it doesn't seem to agree with evictionism.

Read George Washintons farewell address and his warning about parties. You say we need to keep up Jeffersonian tradition, well we have been as far as i can tell. I'm a Jefferson fan too, he was a bright man, but he set in motion many of the machinations we suffer from today.

 

[Anarchist420]

Anyone who gets involved in politics is an asshole, but I believe we're all assholes and I wasn't really attacking you as I was your silky positions. PS "Jeffersonian" means nothing to me. Jefferson created the Democratic Republican party, we currently live under the thumb of the Party of Jefferson. I would say Johnson is a voluntary government supporter, as someone who likes voluntaryism. I don't necessarily consider myself a voluntaryist though, mostly because it doesn't seem to agree with evictionism. Read George Washintons farewell address and his warning about parties. You say we need to keep up Jeffersonian tradition, well we have been as far as i can tell. I'm a Jefferson fan too, he was a bright man, but he set in motion many of the machinations we suffer from today.

Thank you for such good courtesy Better than I'm capable of, for sure

Washington didn't write his farewell address though. He simply delivered it. You probably knew all of that though. Good point about voluntaryism (most people have too low of self control to do anything voluntarily and so people can be evicted against their will especially if the evicted has low self control like myself). That said, I don't know what the right word is other than anarcho-confederalist. I support something in between confederalism and anarcho-capitalism. Nothing in this world works well, hence government not being needed due to all of the average and bad people.

I may have believed some govt was good in high school (I was a lot like Craig234 TBH), but I've since realized that if it's evil, then it's not necessary.

I think big govt will have one last burst of power with the Western Powers fully ruled by the International Democrat Union (i.e., the Conservative Parties of the world) and then after that the remaining people will realize that govt was no good. Hopefully, I'll be 100% dead and in the Bad Place by the time the last part of the second Great War is over... there won't be a third Great War. You may want to see Dr. Walter Block on that one... he gave Johnson at least somewhat of a chance because Dr. Block and you are better people than I am. He does like Dr. Paul more though and so do I.