Rightwing libertarians and drugs

Earthmother

Just more evasion.

The upshot of which is that you once again get out of having an open and honest debate.

I’m asking you to explain you view on the drug issue and the seeming contradiction between your general views and those expressed earlier in this thread.

I’m left wondering why you are going to such lengths to evade that question.

 

what are we arguing about again?

 

Deranged

Well I’m up for a discussion on differing policies toward drugs; some others seem to be doing there best to evade the issue…what are you here for?

 

just curious about the 3 threads with the same argument going on. what exactly is it about?

 

It's about Balbus trying to make a point that only he is interested in, and not getting the desired responses in one thread, starting yet another where the same things happened. And so we come full circle once more with Balbus getting in the way, chasing his tail and saying nothing but "no one will have an open and honest debate, your ideas don't stand up to scrutiny, blah blah blah".

Back to topic.

I don't know what "right wing libertarians" think about the drug issue because I am not one of them. I suspect that the term right wing libertarian just came originally about because someone neededed a label for someone they didn't like who wouldn't fit into any other category.... And I really can't imagine what a right wing libertarian actually IS? Even tho I read all the definitions.

I don't waste a lot of time going thru old posts or I'd never get anything done in the real world, so if I repeat myself, sorry, but a certain someone makes these threads so hard to follow....

I can only say what I think regarding drugs. And if I must be labeled, I would fall under the heading of "anarchist". And it is probably not the most common idea, but having been surrounded by the drug culture most of my life all I can say is that it is generally a mistake to have drugs be SUCH a legal issue.
I'd like to see the law OUT of the equation for the most part.

Specifically, let them keep things like transporting or selling to minors illegal if they like. Also things like polluting the environment with the leftovers from manufacturing things like coke and crank. Or being publicly obnoxious while under the influence... But NO ONE should be tossed in jail for being a user, or selling their prescriptions to their friends, or growing weed, or shrooms, or even manufacturing LSD, etc... Basically, if your drug use stays at home and does not cause trouble for anyone it would be your CHOICE as to whether you wish to receive drug treatment or not, and the cops would have nothing to arrest you for. However, if you got arrested for committing a CRIME while under the influence of a drug of any kind, it should be determined IMMEDIATELY, by placing the offenders in a CLINICAL environment, to see if they have addiction or mental issues and those issues should be addressed first and foremost.. The legal system turns the drug issue into a criminal issue. But I'm certain the majority of drug users do not see themselves as criminals, nor are they. This is only common sense. Example: Are all drinkers of alcohol criminals? No, but sometimes consuming alcohol makes you do things you wouldn't do otherwise. Does THAT make you a criminal? No. It makes you needing some type of HELP for your drinking problem. Does going thru the court system and going to jail HELP people with their drinking problems? No. Usually the opposite.

This is all simple common sense (which seems to be sorely lacking in a lot of people)
So, I guess the big question would be does having common sense make someone a "right wing libertarian"?

I didn't think so.

 

Deranged

This one is about the drugs issue have you anything to contribute – if not why are you in it?

 

Earthmother

Oh there are right wing anarchists.

*

Great so people are offered treatment, but who pays for it and how?

But you still haven’t answered why your general view point that people shouldn’t be ‘molly coddled’ fit in with this view that they should.

 

THAT is what taxes should be for and if you have been so diligent as to read all the posts I have ever made you would know this.

And yes, humans in this society ARE mollycoddled. That is a very easy thing to see and understand. We have everything at our fingertips. Electricity, plumbing, easy transportation, and a billion rules and regs designed to keep us "safe, quiet, and subservient". We are not allowed to make our own decisions, some lawmakers have already done this for us. Hungry? Go to the store. Thirsty? Turn on the faucet. Headache? Grab a pill.
It is this not being able to take responsibility for ourselves that is feeding the beast. People ASSUME they should have all the niceties. They mistake PRIVILEGES for RIGHTS. They have lost sight of just what it actually TAKES to keep them fed and alive. This is why people become so reliant on the government programs etc. The HUMANITY has been taken out of the equation. I suspect, left to their own devices, that most humans are intelligent enough to figure out that no matter HOW their society is set up, the sick and elderly still need to be cared for, the roads and bridges still need fixed, the kids still need taught.... But not many at this time realize just how spoiled we all are. But all I have to do is look at someone with nothing but the clothes on their back and a cardboard box to live in to realize that.
And altho I choose to take advantage of things that are available if it is handy to do so, I never want to feel that I can not live without... And so I live accordingly. Because I DO see that most "civilized" human beings ARE spoiled and mollycoddled. This is just simply reality. Not a right or left wing philosophy. Not a "social Darwinist" stance. Just common sense. Truth.

 

p.s. I NEVER once said humans "shouldn't" be mollycoddled. I said they ARE. Learn to read.

 

Earthmother

I do try to read your posts but what I get is a patchwork of often contradictory ideas or implied ideas, the problem is that when I try to seek clarification or explanation you so often become evasive and/or huffy.

For example you say people are molly coddled but you implied in the tyranny thread that you desired a world with no rules, stores, money, government, or modern medicine and (seem to realise it would mean the death of millions) you even indicated that you’d want to move in that direction I asked -

You were ambiguous in your reply seeming to indicate they were good ideas and to the bit on taxations you were positively exuberant.

And at another time you seemed to imply that you were not in favour of taxes being raised on people that would never benefit from them something you called highway robbery.

So I’m still unsure of what you think.

You rant against regulations that keep people safe but you want regulations that keep people safe.

You rant against people being mollycoddled but you now seem to be saying they should be mollycoddled?

You say people shouldn’t be taxed for things they’d not use but you want people who will never need it themselves to pay for other peoples treatment for drug addiction?

Oh I know you’ll stamp your feet and huff about out of context and being in other threads and all your usual evasion techniques, but maybe for once you’ll put aside all the melodramatics and actually give some explanation for these apparent contradictions.

*

Well history doesn’t seem to be on your side in this belief.

From unwanted children being exposed to grannies being put in work houses the record isn’t all that great. Even now around the world people are dying from starvation and easily treated ailments.

 

Dude. you are sick. If you'r gonna point to other threads and claim I said something, out of context, at least put up a link to it.

Every single response I have to make to you is a repetition of something I have already said. I can only find so many different ways to say the same things without resorting to poetry next. Why do you wonder why I won't debate you??? You refuse to understand anything I say. I feel like I'm beating my head against a wall trying to get you to grasp what everyone else finds obvious. And at that point, it just ain't important enough to me to continue. I mean, who the hell do you think you are anyhow? I know about everyone here is sick to death of your attitude and tired of having to sift thru all the BALBUS created B.S. (which includes the rebuttals from me which would NOT even be happening if you were not such a dunce.) And for all that I am truly sorry guys...

Quote:
But maybe you are not being so ambitious maybe you’d want to try and weed out the ‘weaklings’ in different ways and remove the layers more incrementally?
Less government, ‘telling people what to do’ so that people have to take ‘responsibility for their own lives’ – so no state provision of welfare, healthcare, social security, education or training.
Few if any of those silly regulations and laws that have an effect on wages, prices, rents, employment, health and safety and so on.
And of course if government was small then there would little or no need for taxation.

But all this is is YOU misinterpreting something I said. And you have pulled this quote of YOURS out more than once trying to prove that you are right. But when you MADE this statement you were being sarcastic. And I responded in a sarcastic way. Maybe you don't understand what sarcasm is? -

And I'm not and it is. So? I've already stated in DETAIL what I think taxes should be for.

Bullshit. You are just trying to confuse the issue. What I WANT is for people to stop ALLOWING themselves to be pieces of meat that can be manipulated and controlled by the government. I want people to stop allowing their minds and bodies to atrophy all the while thinking that they will be protected/taken care of no matter what. I want people to STUDY on how to SURVIVE in a world where maybe you DON'T always get what you want so that they will stop being so RELIANT and DEPENDENT on the system to take away all their troubles. I want people to start LEARNING to take responsibility for themselves. And, As I have already said and you missed completely, even if changes STARTED being made in this regard, it would take a VERY LONG TIME in which all systems would have to be SLOWLY changed so that people could have TIME to learn to adjust and figure out better ways of doing things. If you read anything else into this, it's just your ego lying to you.

What I have SAID, over and over, is that the entire system, rather than work on the idea that everything is bad and therefore you have to fight bad with bad and people need to be MADE to pay for the whole thing -rather than THAT, how about creating LOCALIZED POSITIVE changes POSITIVE and HELPFUL programs for people who need them. We are after all, all brothers and sisters and we all have to live here on the earth together. And you can not even look at creation of POSITIVE new concepts and elimination of negative and controlling old ones that do not work, without realizing that EVERYONE BENEFITS when people are happier and healthier.

So. Did you get it this time? Did you READ it? How does this philosophy fit in with your apparent bias towards me? I don't think it does.

 

I think that the reason you feel that you are beating your head against a wall is because...






You are.


How important is it?

 

Earthmother

More evasion. I mean you admit below that what I was ‘claiming’ was true about the tax thing and as to the other things you don’t exactly explain why they’re wrong.

And if you need the links to find what you said here they are I’m not trying to hide anything.

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showpost.php?p=5583934&postcount=122

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showpost.php?p=5440153&postcount=35


*

 

Earthmother

The thing is that what you seem to be suggesting is very close to right wing libertarian thinking.

There wouldn’t be in fact taxes; they would be replaced with voluntary contributions (I’ve heard that from right wing libertarians before).

Sounds nice but in reality it doesn’t work, very rich people who can effort it pay accountants money so they don’t and they don’t make up the shortfall with charity.

For employees there might be a short term gain but not long term as wage levels would equalise with goods and services.

It might be a nice dream that people would support large scale drug treatment programmes but the hard reality is that most wouldn’t.

You’d return to the old charity system (and I’ve heard right wing libertarians promote that before) that was at worst corrupt and at best unable to cope.

So the reality would be that treatment would be patchy, underfunded and in places non-existent.

You’d have the individual right to use drugs and a liberalised market in them, with few regulations, which would be exploited my big corporations, with little or no treatment.

For all the talk about helping people and being beneficial the reality doesn’t seem to fit with the rhetoric.

Maybe if you could explain things in a bit more depth, we could see if you have any answers to these criticisms.

Or are your only answers to be yet again evasion.

 

this conversation makes absolutely no sense to me. you people need to just say stuff point by point succinctly or something. bullet form!

 

Balbus, I choose to be evasive.:beatdeadhorse5:

Only towards YOU.

Yea, I read your latest whining.
It is all so much bullshit that it does not deserve a response. As are most of the other whining rants you post.

How can anyone take a conversation in which someone is totally speculating on how things MIGHT HAPPEN IF..., with someone who has already proven to be such a dunce that they understand nothing - A conversation laced with sarcasm, a conversation that is more along the lines of POKING FUN AT SOMEONE rather than actual realities, and somehow turn that particular conversation into something to be used a fodder for more nonsense... Jeez, this is how government works.

I totally see now that you are to be pitied. There IS no amount of human conversation that can drag your mind out of it's narrow little hole. You simply can not grasp human conversation, humor, sarcasm, or anything else it seems. That is very sad.

It would seem to be the difference between someone who can not interact with others without categorizing, labeling and judging, and someone who would prefer if labels were left out of the mix and people could be simply heard for their individual ideas. If I place a label on someone, I no longer really hear them. I believe that is pretty much human nature all the way 'round.

:beatdeadhorse5:

Oh, and the post about school taxes... WTF does that have to do with a damn thing?

 

See!



Its not that important!

 

Earthmother

LOL – I can’t say I’m surprised

It seems to me that you are a right wing troll who for some reason is pretending not to be right wing.

And the reason you evade any open and honest discussion of your views is because it would clearly show just how right wing you actually were.

*

PS

It was presented as an example of your views on taxation, which you then admit I was right about, so they were very relevant.

*