Seeing the political leaning thread, I figured I'd post this.

There is now an active organization on campus for NCSU College Libertarians. The group is open to anybody with libertarian ideas; it's not required to be a capital L lib. This year we'll be working on things such as NC ballot access for third parties, getting speakers to come to campus, promoting a sensible drug policy, and getting Libertarian views publicized around campus.

Our first meeting of the year is going to be Monday, January 22nd, at 5:30 pm in Talley 3118. Feel free to pass the word on to anyone you know who may be interested. If you are interested but can't make it, shoot me a PM.

1/22/2007 2:01:51 AM

I was under the impression that this club had been around for some time. Didn't you wankers auction off a rifle a couple of years ago or some such?

1/22/2007 2:11:04 AM

Okay, here we are, alt.nerd.obsessive .... need to know meeting time of the College Libertarian club

1/22/2007 3:03:08 AM

Are we talking about the Spoiled Rich don't want my trust funds taxed Libertarians or the SHTF NWO Conspiracy theory Buckshot County 82nd and a half division Free Militamen Libertarians?

[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 3:29 AM. Reason : ]

1/22/2007 3:27:36 AM

^

we have a winner

[/thread]




[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 3:42 AM. Reason : ]

1/22/2007 3:32:07 AM

What was I thinking posting here? I knew there would be nothing but negativity.

1/22/2007 11:56:20 AM

I'd join up, but I'm a grown-up now.

1/22/2007 1:11:23 PM

I think that a majority of people in this country are actually Libertarian when you analyze the survey data. They just identify themselves with a particular party due to the two party duopoly. A viable third party in this country would do wonders for the democratic process.

1/22/2007 1:21:27 PM

^not gonna happen w/o campaign reform.

1/22/2007 1:38:49 PM

All of this talk about organization and meetings doesn't sound very libertarian to me.



[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 2:01 PM. Reason : .]

1/22/2007 1:59:26 PM

^ I know rite

next they're gonna want to build roads or schools or city parks or some shit

1/22/2007 3:19:52 PM

Quote :

"^not gonna happen w/o campaign reform."

or a viable Libertarian party

1/22/2007 3:25:18 PM

Quote :

"I think that a majority of people in this country are actually Libertarian when you analyze the survey data. "

According to The World's Smallest Political Quiz, maybe, which is (suprise!) developed by Libertarians.

I will say that I do agree w/ the lib wing of the Democratic Party, which means that small gov. is fine and dandy, but it shouldn't happen at the expense of utility or happiness, or succumbing to those who believe altruism is suicide. I like state's rights, not privatizing the firehouse, etc.

Join this club instead!: http://ncst.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2222228787



[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 3:41 PM. Reason : .]

1/22/2007 3:38:04 PM

"There is now an active organization"? I'm sure you mean that it's just you trying to start it up again. Someone else tried that 2-3 years ago. There were four of us at the first meeting and overall not much really happened.

Good luck though.

1/22/2007 3:40:38 PM

i'd say that there is a very substantial % of the population that is relatively libertarian in ideology

but the Libertarian Party, as it stands now, is ensured to never be more than a minor footnote--and it's not just the fault of the "2 party system".

1/22/2007 3:41:04 PM

in some way or another, sure. who doesn't want lower taxes, more civil liberties, etc? The divide comes in the extent of the govt's role, and I believe there are some areas where they do more good or do a better job cooperating w/ the private sector.

When you say "libertarian", I think of anyone from Ronald Reagan, who I dislike for a number of reasons, to Russ Feingold, who many others would not regard as a libertarian despite his pro-gun, anti-waste stance, to RINOs like Lincoln Chafee (civil libertarian) to Margaret Thatcher (econ. libertarian). It's fuzzy territory.

I think the best common example for Americans on both sides of the libertarian divide is, not suprisingly, Thomas Jefferson. I am a libertarian in his sense in that I am all for the state's taking up the flag of social programs and dealing with their problems in the best matter they see fit. I'm also big on civil liberties, of course. I appreciate most RINOs, and all Dems that aren't Blue Dogs nor are they Kucinich-types.

[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 3:52 PM. Reason : .]

1/22/2007 3:47:12 PM

Quote :

"I'd join up, but I'm a grown-up now."

1/22/2007 4:16:52 PM

1/22/2007 4:24:08 PM

^What's up with that? It isn't as if there are tons of people who read Atlas Shrugged (or much Rand in general) before college.

I have no problem with people making fun of Ayn Rand (whom I like) but it at least should be on point.

More likely it should have read "You're in college now. It is trendy to trash Ayn Rand."

1/22/2007 4:51:05 PM

Quote :

"I think that a majority of people in this country are actually L libertarian when you analyze the survey data."

[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 4:59 PM. Reason : Fixed it for you.]

1/22/2007 4:59:00 PM

More likely it should have read "You're in college now. It is trendy to like Ayn Rand until you grow up a little bit and realize what a choad she is"

1/22/2007 5:04:44 PM

Quote :

"More likely it should have read "You're in college now. It is trendy to like Ayn Rand until you grow up a little bit and realize what a choad she is""

1/22/2007 5:12:00 PM

Quote :

"More likely it should have read "You're in college now. It is trendy to like Ayn Rand until you grow up a little bit and realize what a choad she is""

I don't see how anyone might be suprised that some people think objectivism and the "suicide of altruism" is a horrible way to look at life.

I was a big fan of hers after reading The Fountainhead when I was 16, but by the time I graduated high school, I had grown to hate that book as I found myself becoming more altruistic due to a break from my parent's church and a realization of the value of humanism and utilitarianism.

I'm interested in how religious types are able to reconcile her stuff. Not that it's impossible, I'm sure it isn't, but at the least we agree on SOME sort of altruism.

[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 5:36 PM. Reason : .]

1/22/2007 5:30:21 PM

I like her fiction but her philosophy makes me laugh.

1/22/2007 5:58:06 PM

^
I'm curious. Specifically which part of objectivism is particularly funny to you?

Quote :

"and it's not just the fault of the "2 party system"."

Very true. As long as the Libertarian Party keeps behaving as a uncompromising protest group, they will never make much headway with folks.

1/22/2007 8:10:08 PM

In a two party system that is all the Libertarian party should be, a special interest group.

Back in the early days of the party, particularly in the North East, it used to be nothing more than an advocacy group. The two parties would lobby the libertarians for their support and every election the aparatus of the party would pick either the Republican or the Democrat to support. But as time passed it soon became clear that even the most compromising libertarian could no longer support either party.

Like they say, the party didn't leave us, we left the party.

1/22/2007 11:39:43 PM

You mean there are objectivists who are older than 19??

1/22/2007 11:55:53 PM

theres a lot of 30-something objectivists. usually the ones who just recently started going to community college and like to argue with their Survey of Philosophy instructor..

1/23/2007 12:02:16 AM

^^

Yes.. There are even many socialists who are over 40... some of whom slaughtered millions all in the name of altrusim.

1/23/2007 12:25:48 AM

Quote :

"I'm interested in how religious types are able to reconcile her stuff. Not that it's impossible, I'm sure it isn't, but at the least we agree on SOME sort of altruism."

I reconcile it in the following way. I don't think it is wrong to do something for others out of charity, pity, or whatever altruistic trigger it is that you are looking for. I don't, however, think that any man, woman, or child should be forced to do so by their government.

How is that so hard to reconcile?

BTW, your attempts to straw-man anyone who subscribes to some sort of objectivism is sad, not only because it is a flagrant violation of logical argument, but because you are doing so in order to simply dismiss an idea with which you happen to disagree with and I'm sure can more coherently assault, should you ever choose to put into words.

1/23/2007 12:29:51 AM

^ I'm made to do many things by my government which I don't approve of. I guess them taking my money is the last of my problems. Insurance companies and over priced water is where you need to worry.

1/23/2007 12:38:44 AM

why are Ayn Rand fans so cultish in their behavior?

i mean, i used to be one, but i cant remember why. i think i was just stupid.

i mean, like, stupider than i am now.

1/23/2007 12:48:04 AM

Quote :

"I reconcile it in the following way. I don't think it is wrong to do something for others out of charity, pity, or whatever altruistic trigger it is that you are looking for. I don't, however, think that any man, woman, or child should be forced to do so by their government. "

Well, what it seems Rand argued is that the willfull sacrifice of one's values is altruism, and that only rationally selfish acts allow one to fulfill the aims for one's life. If one willfully decides to give to charity, so be it, but would that not be a willful sacrifice of the value of capitalism?

You're a libertarian, to be sure. you believe that the gov. should not force you to be charitable, and that charity should be voluntary. To be a true objectivist, you'd have to be a rational egoist and neglect such beliefs such as:

Quote :

"Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me. . . . Whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me"

Sounds like Christ objected to rational egoism in that what you did, in fact, do for those in need (voluntarily or as a society, depending on who you ask, im not going into that), you do unto him.

1/23/2007 12:51:08 AM

Quote :

"what it seems Rand argued is that the willfull sacrifice of one's values is altruism,"

I like this explanation better...

Quote :

" Rand defined altruism as the principle ``that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue, and value.'' As Rand put it, the issue is not whether or not you should give a dime to a beggar, but rather if you ``have the right to exist without giving him that dime. The issue is whether you must keep buying your life, dime by dime, from any beggar who might choose to approach you. The issue is whether the need of others is the first mortgage on your life and the moral purpose of your existence.'' Altruism holds that one person's need is a blank check against the lives of others. "

1/23/2007 1:03:27 AM

Quote :

"If one willfully decides to give to charity, so be it, but would that not be a willful sacrifice of the value of capitalism?"

I don't see how, you traded voluntarily. You gave them something they wanted, charity. They gave you something you wanted, praise, thanks, and an all around good feeling. Sounds like effective utility maximization to me.

Of course, as the sole purpose of production is consumption it strikes me that it could be better to hire them to do something productive for you instead of just giving them charity. Regretfully, if you do that today you will end up in jail, but I digress.

1/23/2007 1:07:04 AM

^^so did you write that yourself, i assume?

1/23/2007 1:10:06 AM

Ayn Rand used to force her followers to have sex with her under threat of excommunication.

1/23/2007 1:11:25 AM

^ good times.

1/23/2007 1:15:30 AM

Quote :

"I don't see how, you traded voluntarily. You gave them something they wanted, charity. They gave you something you wanted, praise, thanks, and an all around good feeling. Sounds like effective utility maximization to me."

True enough, this does maximize utility for both, but how does this hold up to the examples given in her books?

I feel I've gotten off track here by defining rational egoism as such in relation to capitalism.

V lol, good deal. the guy burns down the public housing and rapes a girl to gain her love, and he's not a tragic hero either (well, according to me).

[Edited on January 23, 2007 at 1:23 AM. Reason : .]

1/23/2007 1:16:46 AM

^ Wouldn't know, quit reading.

1/23/2007 1:18:41 AM

Speaking of libertarians, Ron Paul filed paperwork to run for President in 2008.

1/23/2007 3:25:23 PM

i see he last ran in...1988?

what, is lyndon larouche running this time, too?

I'm forming a party called "A Thousand Points of Light". It sounds cool.

[Edited on January 23, 2007 at 3:33 PM. Reason : /]

1/23/2007 3:31:55 PM

^ he's an elected representative in Congress for the Texas Republican Party y'know?

(LaRouche runs every time...and he gets paid $500,000 every 4 years by the government to do it)

[Edited on January 24, 2007 at 5:59 PM. Reason : .]

1/24/2007 5:58:32 PM

do what?

i think the only thing you can say about Larouche, is he's NOT a republican. he's some sort of whack conservative socialist moonbat conspiracy nutjob.

1/24/2007 6:12:19 PM

larouche. haha.

1/24/2007 6:18:20 PM

Quote :

"Larouche. Larouche. Larouche is on fire."

1/24/2007 6:58:40 PM

i was making a joke about old guys coming out of the woodworks for this election.

is larouche dead?

1/24/2007 10:15:33 PM

I wonder how many showed up.

1/25/2007 12:39:04 PM

So libertarians are supportive of public universities now?

[Edited on January 25, 2007 at 12:53 PM. Reason : libertarian is asking for a typo]

1/25/2007 12:52:57 PM

Rand is an all-around joke. You can tell because she got little to no response from the philosophical community. There are some objections of note, however.

This aside, one of her ideas that really strikes me as being particularly retarded is the rejection of a priori knowledge, that every bit of knowledge can regress back until it terminates in some sort of sense data. This betrays her inexperience and her lack of knowledge and context in philosophy.

Just a bitch who could write, shooting from the hip. This is what happens when you're reasonably smart and lack proper background.

1/25/2007 12:56:29 PM