[–] beren 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
You don't have an argument, you only have assertions that "things would be really bad if libertarians had their way", but absolutely zero evidence or arguments to back it up. There is no situation that is illegal today where someone commits violence against anyone else that would suddenly be OK under a libertarian philosophy.
And now you're trying to back out a little bit with the "but we're both right..." which is also nonsense and not an argument.
Again: libertarian philosophy ONLY states the initiation of force is immoral, now if you want to make some kind of argument that states the initiation of force is needed, then make it. Otherwise, you're just going to keep flopping around in circles with your goofy assertions that "things would be bad".
[–] Crashmarik [S] 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
No we both aren't right at all. You are completely wrong. For someone who whines and bitches about assertions you sure make lots of them.
Tell me again how Libertarianism deals with hordes of people that feel they are entitled to your stuff ? It doesn't. The libertarian solution is magic.
Yeah how lovely historically nations that start wars win them. Libertarian philosophy breaks down and relies on magic to deal with this problem.
[–] beren 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Tell me again how Libertarianism deals with hordes of people that feel they are entitled to your stuff ?
The EXACT same way we do now. How do you not understand that? You just WANT it to not be true so you can say it won't work, but ignoring logic isn't an argument.
I think you are intentionally ignoring something very important. The initiation of force is allowed, but force used in defense is. If someone starts a war with us, it is morally right to defend ourselves.
If you're done trolling, I'm done wasting my time with you.