[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

Oh goodness, look at that:
> Of course, all true Pacifists are by default Libertarians.
>  But only a (one hopes) tiny faction.

Gosh, that was STATED CLEARLY.  And written on August 8, 2010.



--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Wraith  wrote:
> >
> > At 03:47 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
> > >
> > >Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> > >"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> > >http://www.libertopia.org/home/
> > 
> > Since Le Neil is involved, I doubt they are pacifists... ^^   I doubt 
> > that many of us actually like violence. But its unfortunately 
> > necessary in some cases of initiation.
> >
> 
> Has nothing to do with LIKING violence or not liking it.  It says these folks 
> REJECT violence.
> 
> Of course, all true Pacifists are by default Libertarians.  But only a (one 
> hopes) tiny faction.
> 
> Violence is never NECESSARY.  One can always, in true Pacifist fashion, allow 
> the rapist full access to oneself and one's wives.
> 
> The problem arises with the faux Pacifists.  They oppose Violence so 
> assiduously that they propose to punish me (by Force) when I exact Vengeance. 
>  Hypocrisy at its finest.
> 
> A society of 100% Pacifists would be a place I would enjoy (I would be the 
> only non-Pacifist and would do as I please at all times).  A mostly-Pacifist 
> place with fewer than 100% Pacifists would most likely be a hellhole ruled by 
> the first bloodyminded dictator or Church Lady to come across it.
>

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

I wrote this on Dec. 24, 2008:

--- In smith2004-disc...@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> There is nothing wrong with being a Pacifist.
> All Pacifists are libertarians by default.
>

Go ahead, look it up, it's Message #10279.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smith2004-discuss/message/102795

See that?  I stated it clearly.  LIAR.



--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
> 
> Larry, you have never stated clearly any fucking thing
>
> - Original Message -
> 
> > From: "Zack Bass" 
> > To: LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, August 8, 2010 10:09:38 PM
> > Subject: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010
> > 
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > People who relish the idea of having a 
> > > prodctive life on their own terms without
> > > initating violence against any one,
> > > you sneer at for not meeting your definition of libertarian.
> > >
> > 
> > Liar.  I stated clearly that ALL true Pacifists are by default
> > Libertarians.
> >

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[wdg3rd]

Sorry about the delay, kids, I drafted this then had to go to work.

Larry, you have never stated clearly any fucking thing except that you want to 
fuck your pets in your front yard.  (And that you want to piss off your 
neighbors, something I can deal with, but since as long as I live and breathe, 
my neighbors are already pissed off, I don't need to do anything special).

-- 
Ward Griffithswdg...@comcast.net



Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller


- Original Message -

> From: "Zack Bass" 
> To: LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 8, 2010 10:09:38 PM
> Subject: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010
> 
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"
>  wrote:
> >
> > People who relish the idea of having a 
> > prodctive life on their own terms without
> > initating violence against any one,
> > you sneer at for not meeting your definition of libertarian.
> >
> 
> Liar.  I stated clearly that ALL true Pacifists are by default
> Libertarians.
> 
> http://www.ncc-1776.org/whoislib.html
> "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right,
> under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being
> for any reason whatever; nor will a libertarian advocate the
> initiation of force, or delegate it to anyone else.  Those who act
> consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they
> realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not
> libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."
> — L. Neil Smith
> 
> Thus one's MOTIVES are irrelevant.  All that matters is that one hold
> that Moral position and behave accordingly.  Which I always do.  What
> I might WANT to do is irrelevant.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Curt Howland]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 01 September 2010, Jim was heard to say:
> I continue to suspect that you don't really care what was written,
> by whom, in what context, at what time.  After all, I really don't
> care very much.

Projection.

> Of course.  I'm obnoxious and disliked, I know it's true.  So what?

Got it.

Curt-

- -- 
Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end,
for they do so with the approval of their consciences.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBTH6aSC9Y35yItIgBAQIM/Qf8DkGQ4HlCNsmfFgLYrlTvwT8Shywetk4E
K2VavU6jTB8AMhwVkyWk+J9hyDmVCas8fSHH142TE3Q+YK2y4+1z9pKL0NeF6oYp
91kgam/Do5v14Z4Sc5QI2XkKkorcErrlSC69zcwKDL+Egea370JWLI/xYfw+R3Nh
LR8jKgIXGb6nlL750RM29CmvtAsCkxB+CFBF7ywSyKgyqHEmlW95u+axM9mEMOhl
hC1wkpivyeFaNG+UnC7oLnRl7aP8imEfOpJKNoMIbYP4EftvygL1jMZPJ76C+g9L
WyVEHNt4FW0of0qq3PVXsvST4ClHSia+5Yfbv77kFLTWCuMoTo2jiQ==
=T+hw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

Dear Curt,

> earn such anger from you?

I'm not angry.  I wasn't angry when I wrote that.  You've never seen me very 
angry.  Nobody on this continent has.

I continue to suspect that you don't really care what was written, by whom, in 
what context, at what time.  After all, I really don't care very much.

> your mouth that you accuse me of not caring?

Why should my suspicions be mutated into an accusation?  Where is the 
indication that you give a shit?  I'll suspect anything I please.  If you think 
that's a failure of understanding on my part, perhaps that result includes a 
failure of communication on your part.

> If you came into it with the nastiness with which you're 
> greeting my scepticism of THEIR opinion, 

I see.  So voicing a suspicion is nastiness.  Well, that's entirely fine with 
me.

> then I could understand how you wouldn't 
> have to explicitly do it.

Of course.  I'm obnoxious and disliked, I know it's true.  So what?  The point 
of freedom of speech is that it be free, to everyone, even to speak the 
unspeakable.  The fact that Ian Freeman and the Keene crowd are judgemental and 
chased me off is not a surprise.  Nor is it any kind of difficulty for me.

I really don't like human beings.  When I was two years old my father beat me 
for walking on a garden hose in the garage.  Since then I have been rebellious 
about everyone and everything.  If you believe that I'm supposed to give a 
fuck, you'll need to explain it in little words.

> Fair enough.

Like you should be any judge of what is fair.  It isn't a matter of fair, it is 
a matter of choice.  My choice.
 
> Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end,
> for they do so with the approval of their consciences.

I'm still looking for the persons who won't torment anyone, ever.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Curt Howland]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 24 August 2010, Jim was heard to say:
> Dear Curt,
>
> > I found it interesting, when your name came up, that the
> > impression you had given was one of initiating violence, not
> > violence in defense.
>
> Ian Freeman is a liar.  I'm not the first person he has told lies
> about to justify his childish behaviour.

I never spoke to Ian.

> Perhaps if you cared, which I suspect you don't, you would ask to
> see the actual words written by me, in the context of the original
> thread, about a pig and a judge bashing one of the activists in
> Keene and then putting him in a cage.

Please look over this sentence. What have I ever said, or done, to 
earn such anger from you?

"which I suspect you don't"

Imagine, for a moment, that I was merely reporting what had been said. 
Since I not only payed attention, but actively remember the 
discussion, what words did I use that gave you such a bitter taste in 
your mouth that you accuse me of not caring?

> Ask yourself how what I 
> wrote had to do with initiating violence.

If you came into it with the nastiness with which you're greeting my 
scepticism of THEIR opinion, then I could understand how you wouldn't 
have to explicitly do it.

> I was told what I was told.  I believe Ian Freeman is a liar and a
> hypocrite.  I won't have anything to do with him.

Fair enough.

> > As usual, virulent disagreements amongst Libs end up being
> > because of misunderstanding.
>
> No, not at all.  This disagreement arose because people in the Free
> Keene movement are suspicious, arrogant, and false.
>
> Don't come to me with your analysis after the fact.  I don't give a
> shit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim

Well, ok, never let it be said I don't know when I've tripped over 
someone's 3rd rail.

Curt-

- -- 
Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end,
for they do so with the approval of their consciences.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBTHQqgC9Y35yItIgBAQKyIQf/ZTsTBVeEky5UGENRBHK+z9nZkEWgVVLG
tOg4Y5s6Af4DGYSdTP+TYq9glO7B7NahxlHbfXZTabSYQvImq6CNOJ40NlYCWFgf
qY4QYOPDviSTBd8mPNdhXlJngA5l0Z6/JZ0Mq5aEGooPIB20RhBQG9jl/Drc75Ed
4Mwm1YKAu9gKZgQDzLx1Hym0KqyLLdHXcINS2pkQ64ueTPSrfnyBFJgtFecBQ/11
yNpv1MssYmvPoZWn+C+xuvvunV1PSL0EFWoM6fqQfXWpyd1DCMR9ACJ9kxH7pJyF
sAkKGrIaZjmqT5id9yWeSRNlSCBti7Tk0TlL1CbvnPWc0+AjdbDUkA==
=Ut3j
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

> who cares about liberty and the principles there of.

I'm beginning to lose interest.  I'm particularly vexed that 
homophobic bullies like Jason Talley are respected in the
freedom movement.

> regarded by his peers as a radical, and thus a dangerous 
> individual. 

I am dangerous.  Every human being is dangerous.  We're apex
predators.

And I am way past the point where I have anything to lose.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> 
> The VAST MAJORITY of people in this country threaten me with Violence By 
> Proxy a hundred times a day.  Try neglecting to wear your pants someday.

But don't neglect to wear your gun.  Never, ever, ever show up to a 
gun fight with fists.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

Dear Curt,

> I found it interesting, when your name came up, that the impression 
> you had given was one of initiating violence, not violence in 
> defense.

Ian Freeman is a liar.  I'm not the first person he has told lies
about to justify his childish behaviour.

Perhaps if you cared, which I suspect you don't, you would ask to see the 
actual words written by me, in the context of the original thread, about a pig 
and a judge bashing one of the activists in Keene and then putting him in a 
cage.  Ask yourself how what I wrote had to do with initiating violence.

Personally, I don't give a shit.  The people in Keene aren't interested in 
self-defence, they have no integrity, and I don't wish to speak to them, to 
attend their events, nor to have aught to do with them.
 
> Considering the number of firearms in their midst, it's clear 
> that the impression you received was also in error.

I was told what I was told.  I believe Ian Freeman is a liar and a
hypocrite.  I won't have anything to do with him.  

> As usual, virulent disagreements amongst Libs end up being 
> because of misunderstanding.

No, not at all.  This disagreement arose because people in the Free
Keene movement are suspicious, arrogant, and false.

Don't come to me with your analysis after the fact.  I don't give a
shit.

Regards,

Jim

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

"the Objectivist ethics is the morality of life"  --  Ayn Rand


--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> 
> Nah, I got an A+ in my college Ethics course, but I still use the terms 
> Morality and Ethics interchangeably.  I am in line with Ayn Rand's usage:
> "A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality."
> See 
> 
> 
> 
> When you mention Religion, though, I do believe you are conflating the ideas 
> of SIN and Immorality.
> 
> Asshole though I may be, I have demonstrated over and over that I *AM* Moral 
> and Ethical, because I follow the Non-Aggression Principle and advocate it at 
> all times - regardless of my baser leanings, I always follow it and hold it 
> as the highest Principle... and that makes me a libertarian, with Morals and 
> Ethics.  As Ayn Rand says, it is a code of values accepted by CHOICE by 
> someone who might have motives to choose otherwise; a code of Morality and of 
> Ethics.
> 
> 
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg3rd@ wrote:
> >
> > I wouldn't say whether there was a moral difference,
> > since I run my life on ethics.
> > Groups mean nothing to me unless they have
> > baseball bats aimed at me
> > (it's illegal to defend yourself with even your
> > fists in New Jersey).
> > I hold to high ethical standards, especially the ZAP, and have no morals 
> > (I've been an atheist for a long time), and while asshole that you are you 
> > respect neither morals nor ethics, you may know the difference between 
> > ethics and morals, you are well-read.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Ward Griffithswdg3rd@
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller
> > 
> > 
> > - Original Message -
> > 
> > > From: "Zack Bass" 
> > 
> > > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg3rd@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> > > > the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has
> > > > nothing to do with individual interactions
> > > >
> > > 
> > > You dare to say, in this forum, that there is a Moral difference
> > > between the actions of an Individual and the actions of a hundred or a
> > > million Individuals in a Group?
> >
>

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

Nah, I got an A+ in my college Ethics course, but I still use the terms 
Morality and Ethics interchangeably.  I am in line with Ayn Rand's usage:
"A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality."
See 



When you mention Religion, though, I do believe you are conflating the ideas of 
SIN and Immorality.

Asshole though I may be, I have demonstrated over and over that I *AM* Moral 
and Ethical, because I follow the Non-Aggression Principle and advocate it at 
all times - regardless of my baser leanings, I always follow it and hold it as 
the highest Principle... and that makes me a libertarian, with Morals and 
Ethics.  As Ayn Rand says, it is a code of values accepted by CHOICE by someone 
who might have motives to choose otherwise; a code of Morality and of Ethics.


--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
>
> I wouldn't say whether there was a moral difference,
> since I run my life on ethics.
> Groups mean nothing to me unless they have
> baseball bats aimed at me
> (it's illegal to defend yourself with even your
> fists in New Jersey).
> I hold to high ethical standards, especially the ZAP, and have no morals 
> (I've been an atheist for a long time), and while asshole that you are you 
> respect neither morals nor ethics, you may know the difference between ethics 
> and morals, you are well-read.
> 
> -- 
> Ward Griffithswdg...@...
> 
> 
> 
> Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> 
> > From: "Zack Bass" 
> 
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg3rd@ wrote:
> > >
> > > I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> > > the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has
> > > nothing to do with individual interactions
> > >
> > 
> > You dare to say, in this forum, that there is a Moral difference
> > between the actions of an Individual and the actions of a hundred or a
> > million Individuals in a Group?
>

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[wdg3rd]

Been known to wear the kelt meself, Eric (both dress and great).  And me middle 
name _is_ Donald (was used as my main name until Jr High).  I've worn kelts, 
robes, tunics and other historic-style garments over the decades to avoid 
jockeys.  (Not that that ever helps during the work week, then I'm lucky to get 
away with camp shorts).
-- 
Ward Donald Griffiths IIIwdg...@comcast.net



Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller


- Original Message -

> From: "Eric Oppen" 
> To: LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 9, 2010 11:57:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010
> 
> Quoting Zack Bass :
> 
> >
> > The VAST MAJORITY of people in this country threaten me with   
> > Violence By Proxy a hundred times a day.  Try neglecting to wear   
> > your pants someday.
> >
> 
> *singing*
> 
> Let the wind run high, let the wind run low,
> Thro' the streets in me kilt I'll go,
> All of the lassies say "Hello!
> Donald, where's your troo-sers?"

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[wdg3rd]

I wouldn't say whether there was a moral difference, since I run my life on 
ethics.  Groups mean nothing to me unless they have baseball bats aimed at me  
(it's illegal to defend yourself with even your fists in New Jersey).  I hold 
to high ethical standards, especially the ZAP, and have no morals (I've been an 
atheist for a long time), and while asshole that you are you respect neither 
morals nor ethics, you may know the difference between ethics and morals, you 
are well-read.

-- 
Ward Griffithswdg...@comcast.net



Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller


- Original Message -

> From: "Zack Bass" 

> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
> >
> > I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> > the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has
> > nothing to do with individual interactions
> >
> 
> You dare to say, in this forum, that there is a Moral difference
> between the actions of an Individual and the actions of a hundred or a
> million Individuals in a Group?

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Eric Oppen]

Quoting Zack Bass :

>
> The VAST MAJORITY of people in this country threaten me with   
> Violence By Proxy a hundred times a day.  Try neglecting to wear   
> your pants someday.
>

*singing*

Let the wind run high, let the wind run low,
Thro' the streets in me kilt I'll go,
All of the lassies say "Hello!
Donald, where's your troo-sers?"


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"  
wrote:
> 
> I will not do business with you.
> I will have as little to do with you as possible.

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext00/remus11.txt
"I don't keer w'at you do wid me, so you don't fling me in dat brierpatch. 
Roas' me, but don't fling me in dat brierpatch."

Robert Blake and I are simply crushed.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> There is Violence, namely the hunting down and
> punishing of offenders AFTER THE FACT, that is
> neither Initiation of Force nor Defense.
> 
> If one opposes this hunting down AFTER THE FACT,
> then one is without recourse when he arrives home
> to find his family already raped.
>

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
>
> I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has
> nothing to do with individual interactions
>

You dare to say, in this forum, that there is a Moral difference between the 
actions of an Individual and the actions of a hundred or a million Individuals 
in a Group?

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
> 
> Like the next time we catch Larry with a 10-year-old.
>

How does this "self-defense" of which you speak work?  You propose to defend 
your Self against a 10-year-old boy?  What did he ever do to you?

>
> He brags about his polygamy (with imported brides),
> I don't brag, I just live (with American women)).
>

I didn't brag about anything, I responded to the Libel in which you accused me 
of "masturbatory hallucinations".  I showed that you were mistaken, it is not a 
hallucination.  (I have videos too.)

But... are American women somehow better for "bragging rights", in your 
estimation?  Is that what you're on about?
Anyhow, only one of my wives is Imported, I complained quite clearly that I 
have not been Allowed to import the other one, that's the PROBLEM.


Okay.  Here is the relevant joke:
Chauncey is chauffeuring The Queen and runs into a limousine driven by his old 
nemesis, Worthington.  Chauncey leaps out of his car and says, "Can't you 
drive?  You moron!"
Worthington replies, "Keep your voice down.  Are you aware that Lady Smedley is 
in my car?"
Whereupon Chauncey runs to his car, throws open the door to reveal The Queen, 
and yells, "And what do you think this is, a piece of shit?"

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacifism
duh
"Anarcho-pacifism (also pacifist anarchism or anarchist pacifism) is a form of 
anarchism which completely rejects the use of violence ***IN ANY FORM FOR ANY 
PURPOSE***."
duh


--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg3rd@ wrote:
> >
> > > From: "Wraith" 
> >
> > I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> > the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has nothing
> > to do with individual interactions unless the
> > individuals have names like Ghandi, Stalin,
> > Truman and Hitler) and have been for decades.
> > I shoot to kill when I have to.
> >
> 
> When I use the term Pacifist, I refer to those people who say that they 
> oppose "THE USE OF VIOLENCE".  Some of them have posted such shit here.  
> THOSE people are Pacifists who oppose Violence EVEN IN SELF-DEFENSE.  Ask 
> Planetary Jim.  There really are such morons.
>

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
>
> > From: "Wraith" 
>
> I am a pacifist (have you actually looked up
> the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has nothing
> to do with individual interactions unless the
> individuals have names like Ghandi, Stalin,
> Truman and Hitler) and have been for decades.
> I shoot to kill when I have to.
>

When I use the term Pacifist, I refer to those people who say that they oppose 
"THE USE OF VIOLENCE".  Some of them have posted such shit here.  THOSE people 
are Pacifists who oppose Violence EVEN IN SELF-DEFENSE.  Ask Planetary Jim.  
There really are such morons.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[wdg3rd]

> From: "Wraith" 
> To: LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 8, 2010 1:41:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010
> 
> At 09:35 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:

> >--- In 
> ><mailto:LibertarianEnterprise%40yahoogroups.com>LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com,
> 
> >Wraith  wrote:
> > >
> > > At 03:47 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> > > >"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> > > ><<http://www.libertopia.org/home/>http://www.libertopia.org/home/
> 
> >  >http://www.libertopia.org/home/
> > >
> > > Since Le Neil is involved, I doubt they are pacifists... ^^ I doubt
> > > that many of us actually like violence. But its unfortunately
> > > necessary in some cases of initiation.

> >Has nothing to do with LIKING violence or not liking it. It says 
> >these folks REJECT violence.
> >
> >Of course, all true Pacifists are by default Libertarians. But only 
> >a (one hopes) tiny faction.
> >
> >Violence is never NECESSARY. One can always, in true Pacifist 
> >fashion, allow the rapist full access to oneself and one's wives.
> >
> >The problem arises with the faux Pacifists. They oppose Violence so 
> >assiduously that they propose to punish me (by Force) when I exact 
> >Vengeance. Hypocrisy at its finest.
> >
> >A society of 100% Pacifists would be a place I would enjoy (I would 
> >be the only non-Pacifist and would do as I please at all times). A 
> >mostly-Pacifist place with fewer than 100% Pacifists would most 
> >likely be a hellhole ruled by the first bloodyminded dictator or 
> >Church Lady to come across it.
> 
> Nonsense. Violence IS necessary to the *sane* in certain 
> situations.  For exactly the reasons you illustrate.  

Like the next time we catch Larry with a 10-year-old.  I am a pacifist (have 
you actually looked up the word in the dictionary, Larry, it has nothing to do 
with individual interactions unless the individuals have names like Ghandi, 
Stalin, Truman and Hitler) and have been for decades.  I shoot to kill when I 
have to.  I don't want to.  I'd rather Larry straightened out his act.  (He 
brags about his polygamy (with imported brides), I don't brag, I just live 
(with American women)).

Larry, you still don't underfuckingstand that pacifism does _not_ conflict with 
self-defense.
-- 
Ward Griffithswdg...@comcast.net



Aim high and you won't shoot your foot off.  --   Phyllis Diller

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

The VAST MAJORITY of people in this country threaten me with Violence By Proxy 
a hundred times a day.  Try neglecting to wear your pants someday.


--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass"  wrote:
>
> 
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Violence, vengeace and insanity are the exception, not the rule.
> >
> 
> Insanity is the exception, sure.  But Violence and Vengeance... what fantasy 
> history book have YOU been reading?
>

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"  
wrote:
>
> Violence, vengeace and insanity are the exception, not the rule.
>

Insanity is the exception, sure.  But Violence and Vengeance... what fantasy 
history book have YOU been reading?

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Curt Howland  
wrote:
> 
> I found it interesting, when your name came up, that the impression 
> you had given was one of initiating violence, not violence in 
> defense.
>

False dichotomy.
There is Violence, namely the hunting down and punishing of offenders AFTER THE 
FACT, that is neither Initiation of Force nor Defense.

If one opposes this hunting down AFTER THE FACT, then one is without recourse 
when he arrives home to find his family already raped.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"  
wrote:
>
> People who relish the idea of having a 
> prodctive life on their own terms without
> initating violence against any one,
> you sneer at for not meeting your definition of libertarian.
>

Liar.  I stated clearly that ALL true Pacifists are by default Libertarians.

http://www.ncc-1776.org/whoislib.html
"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any 
circumstances, to initiate force against another human being for any reason 
whatever; nor will a libertarian advocate the initiation of force, or delegate 
it to anyone else.  Those who act consistently with this principle are 
libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act 
consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."
— L. Neil Smith

Thus one's MOTIVES are irrelevant.  All that matters is that one hold that 
Moral position and behave accordingly.  Which I always do.  What I might WANT 
to do is irrelevant.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Wraith]

At 06:00 PM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>I had been invited to speak at Libertopia, and had agreed to do so.
>
>Then I wrote about Joe Stack flying a plane into an IRS building. 
>Jason Talley pronounced me an idiot, Joyce Brand agreed. Talley also 
>had a number of outrageously homophobic things to say in his rants 
>against me on Google Buzz.
>
>So I withdrew from speaking.
>
>Several years ago I was invited to speak at FreedomFest 2005. But 
>Mark Skousen made it clear at a convention in New Orleans in 
>November 2004 that any member of the audience who disagreed with 
>anything I said should be entitled to beat me up. Skousen actually 
>staged such a fight between Doug Casey and a disgruntled marine who 
>didn't like something Casey had said.
>
>Naturally, I withdrew from speaking at FreedomFest.
>
>I won't ever speak at Libertopia. I won't ever speak at FreedomFest.
>
>These are my choices, and they are not negotiable.

That's too bad Jim. I've almost always enjoyed your articles. I may 
not always agree with you on everything, but you've always struck me 
as an intelligent, thoughtful person who cares about liberty and the 
principles there of.
Not to place too fine a point on this, but you remind me of this 
generations Patrick Henry.  He as you well know, was also widely 
regarded by his peers as a radical, and thus a dangerous 
individual.   History has shown the truth of his fears about the 
expansion of the central government established by the federalists.

I'd not place too much stock on the opinions of various LINO's. They 
are much closer to one or the other aspect of our one party state, 
than they are libertarians.  

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Curt Howland]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Sunday 08 August 2010, Jim was heard to say:
> I ran into the same nonsense on the Free Keene forum.  Violence
> used in self-defence is not acceptable.
>
> Well, too bad, people.  I don't give a shit whether you think
> self-defence is acceptable or not.  I'll say what I please.

I found it interesting, when your name came up, that the impression 
you had given was one of initiating violence, not violence in 
defense.

Considering the number of firearms in their midst, it's clear that the 
impression you received was also in error.

As usual, virulent disagreements amongst Libs end up being because of 
misunderstanding.

Curt-


- -- 
Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end,
for they do so with the approval of their consciences.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBTF9SsC9Y35yItIgBAQLNEwf+JzKWZw44vAxMWq1Q2s+N2sBszVUOBrPC
hruo4Fp5uEKw9/TqYlCbJRnJ4irRKz/JhxeC+S6wuqObsO4/pupLry3IISFdPZaO
XlP70QCZ8MW7U1hVdeRUTvmA6gJGPN0ozCQ2xNzSvwWGs7FbtlpUGDCqg1HNS3o5
s50FkLeWoF5YKEQOnLH48Dzkltsw4kr8knQo7t6Lg96pLdKYlNh9s1zzJDS2kTG0
iAU/5P7Jx3R4/Uj+uSWPbY+n+ycOQs2bkuucSqI8JdpoiTV59oLbG9n45nD2aenF
11Rpbx3GWxLwiciFtdI9GR6Y9L2KJkCtk3odMF/hUdhWt93S0M/ygg==
=AoCw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

I had been invited to speak at Libertopia, and had agreed to do so.

Then I wrote about Joe Stack flying a plane into an IRS building.  Jason Talley 
pronounced me an idiot, Joyce Brand agreed.  Talley also had a number of 
outrageously homophobic things to say in his rants against me on Google Buzz.

So I withdrew from speaking.

Several years ago I was invited to speak at FreedomFest 2005.  But Mark Skousen 
made it clear at a convention in New Orleans in November 2004 that any member 
of the audience who disagreed with anything I said should be entitled to beat 
me up.  Skousen actually staged such a fight between Doug Casey and a 
disgruntled marine who didn't like something Casey had said.

Naturally, I withdrew from speaking at FreedomFest.

I won't ever speak at Libertopia.  I won't ever speak at FreedomFest.

These are my choices, and they are not negotiable.

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jim]

> Violence is never NECESSARY.  One can always, in true Pacifist fashion, allow 
> the rapist full access to oneself and one's wives.

Yes, I believe this was the position of pacifist libertarian
Robert LeFevre.  It is clearly the position of Joyce Brand.

Violence used in self-defence is not acceptable.  See my previous
post on Joe Stack.

I ran into the same nonsense on the Free Keene forum.  Violence
used in self-defence is not acceptable.

Well, too bad, people.  I don't give a shit whether you think
self-defence is acceptable or not.  I'll say what I please.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jay P Hailey]

> The problem arises with the faux Pacifists.  They oppose Violence so 
> assiduously that they propose to punish me (by Force) when I exact 
> Vengeance.  Hypocrisy at its finest.
>

No. anyone who initiates violence against you oor anyone foolish enough to 
accept you as their agent, is buying all the bloody violent, angry twisted 
revenge you can imagine.

So when someone steps on Joe's grass trying to get a better view of a 
passing parade, and you torture them to death for trespassing - technically 
you'e in the right.

But you're not there for justice, you're not there for restitution, you're 
looking for a rationalization to enact your own anger and violent fantasies.

I will not do business with you.  I will have as little to do with you as 
possible. I may well say "hurr durr!" at you, if I'm not doing anything else 
at that moment.

You're hiding behind the NAP,  when really all you want to do is get an 
excuse to have "Vengeance" against "Bad Guys".

And then you say that people who don't agree with your rationalization 
aren't "Real" libertarians.  People who relish the idea of having a 
prodctive life on their own terms without initating violence against any 
one, you sneer at for not meeting your definition of libertarian.

That calls for a "Hurr Durr" or two cast your way.

And if you exact bloody, violent, tortuous "vengeance" against someone and 
it turns out that you were WRONG about your victim having initiated force, 
I'd promise to point and laugh, except that it would be a total tragedy and 
net loss for all of us.

Violence, vengeace and insanity are the exception, not the rule.  What are 
you going to be doing to produce something for a customer if we ever get to 
a truly free society? How will you put bread on the table when no one shows 
up to volunteer for a gun fight with you?

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jay P Hailey]

> What's your point?  Someone fucks up a press release and I'm the bad guy 
> for catching it?  Every criticism or value judgment of any sort on this 
> Group is henceforth going to draw your eloquent denunciation?
>


Who elected you to decide who's a libertarian or not?  You're making an 
arrogant assumption that your opinions define facts. Yes,  I will make fun 
of you for that, unless I have something better to do.

Jay ~Meow!~

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Wraith]

At 09:35 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>
>--- In 
>LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com,
> 
>Wraith  wrote:
> >
> > At 03:47 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
> > >
> > >Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> > >"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> > ><http://www.libertopia.org/home/ 
>  >http://www.libertopia.org/home/
> >
> > Since Le Neil is involved, I doubt they are pacifists... ^^ I doubt
> > that many of us actually like violence. But its unfortunately
> > necessary in some cases of initiation.
> >
>
>Has nothing to do with LIKING violence or not liking it. It says 
>these folks REJECT violence.
>
>Of course, all true Pacifists are by default Libertarians. But only 
>a (one hopes) tiny faction.
>
>Violence is never NECESSARY. One can always, in true Pacifist 
>fashion, allow the rapist full access to oneself and one's wives.
>
>The problem arises with the faux Pacifists. They oppose Violence so 
>assiduously that they propose to punish me (by Force) when I exact 
>Vengeance. Hypocrisy at its finest.
>
>A society of 100% Pacifists would be a place I would enjoy (I would 
>be the only non-Pacifist and would do as I please at all times). A 
>mostly-Pacifist place with fewer than 100% Pacifists would most 
>likely be a hellhole ruled by the first bloodyminded dictator or 
>Church Lady to come across it.

Nonsense. Violence IS necessary to the *sane* in certain 
situations.  For exactly the reasons you illustrate.  

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Jay P Hailey"  
wrote:
>
> > Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> > "... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> > http://www.libertopia.org/home/
>
> Then DON'T GO!  Hurr Durr!
>

What's your point?  Someone fucks up a press release and I'm the bad guy for 
catching it?  Every criticism or value judgment of any sort on this Group is 
henceforth going to draw your eloquent denunciation?

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Wraith  wrote:
>
> At 03:47 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
> >
> >Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> >"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> >http://www.libertopia.org/home/
> 
> Since Le Neil is involved, I doubt they are pacifists... ^^   I doubt 
> that many of us actually like violence. But its unfortunately 
> necessary in some cases of initiation.
>

Has nothing to do with LIKING violence or not liking it.  It says these folks 
REJECT violence.

Of course, all true Pacifists are by default Libertarians.  But only a (one 
hopes) tiny faction.

Violence is never NECESSARY.  One can always, in true Pacifist fashion, allow 
the rapist full access to oneself and one's wives.

The problem arises with the faux Pacifists.  They oppose Violence so 
assiduously that they propose to punish me (by Force) when I exact Vengeance.  
Hypocrisy at its finest.

A society of 100% Pacifists would be a place I would enjoy (I would be the only 
non-Pacifist and would do as I please at all times).  A mostly-Pacifist place 
with fewer than 100% Pacifists would most likely be a hellhole ruled by the 
first bloodyminded dictator or Church Lady to come across it.

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Wraith]

At 03:47 AM 8/8/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>
>Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
>"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
>http://www.libertopia.org/home/

Since Le Neil is involved, I doubt they are pacifists... ^^   I doubt 
that many of us actually like violence. But its unfortunately 
necessary in some cases of initiation.  

Re: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Jay P Hailey]

> Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
> "... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
> http://www.libertopia.org/home/


Then DON'T GO!  Hurr Durr!

Jay ~Meow!~

[LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Libertopia 2010

[Zack Bass]

Sounds like PACIFISTS, not libertarians:
"... a movement that rejects the use of violence or coercion"
http://www.libertopia.org/home/

--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, wdg...@... wrote:
>
> Looks like a lot of damned fun.  Can't afford to go.  (Along with my pledge 
> never to set foot back in California until Sacramento is bulldozed back into 
> the swamp upon which it was built, and I was born & raised plus spent much of 
> my adult life in the former republic).
>