Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment! Algorithm free!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HerePolitical Opinion Page - The Hot Seat › Just in case you missed it...
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Just in case you missed it... (Read 409 times)
The D-Man
LNF Representative2
***
Online

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 2,966
Joined: Jul 20th, 2019
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #10 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 3:05pm
Print Post  
crepe05 wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 6:50am:
That's segregation and boring.


There could be places where there is no segregation, and people who like that and think segregation is boring can live there. But people who like segregation should also be able to live in a place where they can have that.

The problem is that when people with different ways, like those who like segregation and those who don't, live in the same place, there is going to be conflict, and one side or the other, or maybe both, will have to give up some of what they want to live together.

And the more different people with different ways you have living together, the more each group will have to give up what they want. By separating them, though, each group can live how they see fit without having to worry what anyone else thinks about it. That would allow for the most freedom to live life how they want.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 38,188
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #11 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:41pm
Print Post  
The D-Man wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 3:05pm:
The problem is that when people with different ways, like those who like segregation and those who don't, live in the same place, there is going to be conflict, and one side or the other, or maybe both, will have to give up some of what they want to live together.

And the more different people with different ways you have living together, the more each group will have to give up what they want. By separating them, though, each group can live how they see fit without having to worry what anyone else thinks about it. That would allow for the most freedom to live life how they want.

The way around this problem is to favor liberal or pluralist politics. If you don't have a one size fits all policy and if you don't try to unite people around too many common ends, politics does not need to break down along friend-enemy lines.
  

Open Trade, Open Borders, Taco Trucks on Every Corner

"It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.” F A Hayek
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 38,188
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #12 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:46pm
Print Post  
The D-Man wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 3:01pm:
The problem with that is that some people's ways will be more prosperous than others'. This would create the desire for people with less prosperous ways to go to the places of people with more prosperous ways. But when they do, many of them will also want to bring their ways. So the goal of people with different ways living in different places is undermined.


How is it undermined? There will *always be different people living in different ways.* There's no way around that.

Quote:
I think the only way people with different ways can live in different places is with closed borders, because otherwise there will be that tendency for people with less prosperous ways to want to go where the prosperous ways are, but also to keep their own ways.


I don't follow. If people migrate to where there is prosperity, you will still have people who live in different ways living in different places. Those places just get a lot closer. And over time so do their ways.

Quote:
If the problem with closed borders is that it requires authoritarianism to keep people out, the same would be true of open borders, in that authoritarianism would be required to make people with more prosperous ways let people with less prosperous ways in. The only difference is who the authoritarianism is directed at, either the people who want to come in, or the people who don't want to let them in.


I'm not sure I understand how open borders is authoritarian. You're going to have to walk me through that.

Quote:
You might think of it as a house where an outsider wants to come in, but the residents don't want him to. The police could then use authoritarian means to keep the outsider out, or the police could use authoritarian means to quell unrest among the residents when the outsider comes in. Either way, authoritarianism will be used. The only question is who it will be directed against.

No, the house analogy does not work. You own your house in a way that does not apply to your neighbors property, nor to the nation as such.

The only way someone can live in the US is for other residents to approve, in some fashion, through rental, labor or other contracts.
« Last Edit: Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:56pm by TowardLiberty »  

Open Trade, Open Borders, Taco Trucks on Every Corner

"It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.” F A Hayek
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The D-Man
LNF Representative2
***
Online

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 2,966
Joined: Jul 20th, 2019
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #13 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:55pm
Print Post  
TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:41pm:
The way around this problem is to favor liberal or pluralist politics. If you don't have a one size fits all policy and if you don't try to unite people around too many common ends, politics does not need to break down along friend-enemy lines.


I see, so the way around the problem of a one-size-fits-all policy is for everyone to adopt a one-size-fits-all policy of liberal or pluralist politics.

The problem with that is that everyone has their preferred one-size-fits-all policy which is in conflict with others. Some prefer liberal or pluralist politics, and some prefer others.

The way to fix that is for people with different preferred politics to live in different places, one with liberal or pluralist politics, one with another kind of politics, and so forth.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 38,188
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #14 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:56pm
Print Post  
The D-Man wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:55pm:
I see, so the way around the problem of a one-size-fits-all policy is for everyone to adopt a one-size-fits-all policy of liberal or pluralist politics.

The problem with that is that everyone has their preferred one-size-fits-all policy which is in conflict with others. Some prefer liberal or pluralist politics, and some prefer others.

The way to fix that is for people with different preferred politics to live in different places, one with liberal or pluralist politics, one with another kind of politics, and so forth.

There is no one size fits all pluralist policy.

Plural means more than one.

Pluralist policies are only in conflict with one size fits all policies.
  

Open Trade, Open Borders, Taco Trucks on Every Corner

"It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.” F A Hayek
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The D-Man
LNF Representative2
***
Online

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 2,966
Joined: Jul 20th, 2019
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #15 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:25pm
Print Post  
TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:46pm:
How is it undermined? There will *always be different people living in different ways.* There's no way around that.


It is undermined because in the beginning, people with different ways live in different places. However, because some of those ways lead to greater prosperity, those with different ways will want to move to the place of greater prosperity. When they do, they will bring their ways of lesser prosperity with them. They will want to gain from the prosperity of the other ways while keeping their own ways.

Thus what started as separate ways living in separate places changes to people with different ways living in the same place because they all come to the place with the ways of greatest prosperity, but while keeping their own ways. It is this change from people with different ways living in different places to people with different ways living in the same place that undermines people with different ways living in different places.

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:46pm:
I don't follow. If people migrate to where there is prosperity, you will still have people who live in different ways living in different places. Those places just get a lot closer. And over time so do their ways.


If people move from place A to place B, they won't be in place B. OK. I would rather not have conclusions that require me to to do that kind of thing.

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:46pm:
I'm not sure I understand how open borders is authoritarian. You're going to have to walk me through that.


If people don't want open borders because they like their own ways and they don't like other people coming in who change the ways of the land, authoritarian force will have to be used to make those people comply with open borders unwillingly.

Again, it's the same as with a house. You have the owner of the house and an interloper. The owner of the house doesn't want the interloper to come in his house, and the interloper wants to come in. As you understand, authoritarian force would have to be used against the interloper to keep him out. But on the other hand, authoritarian force would also have to be used against the owner to make him let the interloper in. So the question is, which authoritarian force is worse, that used against the interloper to keep him out, or that used against the owner to make him let the interloper in?

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:46pm:
No, the house analogy does not work. You own your house in a way that does not apply to your neighbors property, nor to the nation as such.

The only way someone can live in the US is for other residents to approve, in some fashion, through rental, labor or other contracts.


Upon what basis do you "own" your house except by the force you use to keep people out of it or by the force the government would use to keep people out of it because of a legal contract of ownership you have in the house? There is no ownership of your house that you can claim against another person except by those means of force. Thus ownership of a house is based on the authoritarian use of force, either your own personal force or the authoritarian force of the government.

On the other hand, someone who wanted to claim ownership of the house you claim to own could do so either by defeating you by force or by defeating the government by force. It is only because the latter is usually impossible that you are able to retain your "ownership" of your house.

The same can be extended to the nation, such that citizens can own the nation solely based on their ability to use force to keep others out. Or, if they are not able to mount such force, they lose the ownership of their nation, just as you would lose the ownership of your house.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The D-Man
LNF Representative2
***
Online

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 2,966
Joined: Jul 20th, 2019
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #16 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:28pm
Print Post  
TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 4:56pm:
There is no one size fits all pluralist policy.

Plural means more than one.

Pluralist policies are only in conflict with one size fits all policies.


But everyone has to adopt the policy of pluralism. So it's one-size-fits-all.

What I would propose is that people who like pluralism can live in one place. And people who like various other kinds of policies can live in another place. That removes the conflict.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 38,188
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #17 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:34pm
Print Post  
The D-Man wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
It is undermined because in the beginning, people with different ways live in different places. However, because some of those ways lead to greater prosperity, those with different ways will want to move to the place of greater prosperity. When they do, they will bring their ways of lesser prosperity with them. They will want to gain from the prosperity of the other ways while keeping their own ways.


That doesn't seem to be borne out in practice or countries with high immigration would be poorer, not richer.

Quote:
Thus what started as separate ways living in separate places changes to people with different ways living in the same place because they all come to the place with the ways of greatest prosperity, but while keeping their own ways. It is this change from people with different ways living in different places to people with different ways living in the same place that undermines people with different ways living in different places.


No, because there is no place in the world where there aren't different people living near each other. We are all different from each other. Even in my own family, I can count numerous cultures and languages spoken, not to mention religions, educational attainments, and so on.

Quote:
If people move from place A to place B, they won't be in place B. OK. I would rather not have conclusions that require me to to do that kind of thing.


I'm confused.

Quote:
If people don't want open borders because they like their own ways and they don't like other people coming in who change the ways of the land, authoritarian force will have to be used to make those people comply with open borders unwillingly.


No, those people don't have to comply. As long as they are leaving other people alone and staying "in their lane" as it concerns their rights and liberties, all is well.

Quote:
Again, it's the same as with a house.


A country is nothing like a house. You own your house and have control over it in a way that is impossible with a country because of the rights of other people.
« Last Edit: Nov 30th, 2019 at 6:04pm by TowardLiberty »  

Open Trade, Open Borders, Taco Trucks on Every Corner

"It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.” F A Hayek
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TowardLiberty
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

anti-state, anti-war and
pro-market

Posts: 38,188
Location: Houston
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #18 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:35pm
Print Post  
The D-Man wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:28pm:
But everyone has to adopt the policy of pluralism. So it's one-size-fits-all.


If everyone has to adopt a policy that leaves them free to choose their own path, that's the opposite of a one size fits all policy. That's a many size fits all policy.

Quote:
What I would propose is that people who like pluralism can live in one place. And people who like various other kinds of policies can live in another place. That removes the conflict.

That's clumsy because you're forcing people to move and splitting up the country. Far better to relax our politics and let people do their own thing while living right where they are.

And that has the added benefit of preserving freedom and keeping authoritarianism at bay.
  

Open Trade, Open Borders, Taco Trucks on Every Corner

"It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.” F A Hayek
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The D-Man
LNF Representative2
***
Online

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 2,966
Joined: Jul 20th, 2019
Re: Just in case you missed it...
Reply #19 - Nov 30th, 2019 at 6:05pm
Print Post  
TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:34pm:
That doesn't seem to be borne out in practice. Or countries with high immigration would be poorer, not richer.


Such countries end up being places with people of different ways, which are often in conflict. What is undermined is "people with different ways living in different places." When people with ways that lead to lesser prosperity move to a place with greater prosperity to benefit from that prosperity, you end up with "people with different ways living in the same place." When "people with different ways living in the same place" replaces "people with different ways living in different places," "people with different ways living in different places" is undermined because it no longer exists. And it is "people with different ways living in different places" that is our goal because that leads to the least conflict and the most freedom for people to fully live their own ways, whereas "people with different ways living in the same place" leads to more conflict and less freedom for people to fully live in their own ways.

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:34pm:
No, because there is no place in the world where there aren't different people living near each other. We are all different from each other. Even in my own family, I can count numerous cultures and languages spoken, not to mention religions, educations attainments, and so on.


Difference is not dichotomous but continuous, in that there are varying degrees of difference between different ways. The more difference there is between the ways of different people, the more conflict there is when those people live in the same place. And the more difference there is in the ways of different people, the more they have to restrict living in their own ways in order to live in the same place as people with different ways. On the other hand, when the ways of people are very different, they can most fully live in their own ways without conflict with others if they live in different places.

Furthermore, these differences in ways create more conflict the closer the people are to each other. It is by living further apart, in different houses, different neighborhoods, different school districts, and completely apart that people with different ways will be free to live their lives according to their own ways.

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:34pm:
I'm confused.


You said that if people with one set of ways moved to a place of people with a different set of ways, they would still be living separately, even after they just moved to the place of the other people. So it's as if people moved from place A to place B, but somehow they are not in place B. It was conclusions that require such incoherence that I was saying I like to avoid.

TowardLiberty wrote on Nov 30th, 2019 at 5:34pm:
No, those people don't have to comply. As long as they are leaving other people alone and staying "in their lane" as it concerns their rights and liberties, all is well.


If they think they have a right to live in a place of people only of their own ways and to use force to defend that right, force would have to be used to convince them they don't have that right and to make them stop using force to defend it.

Again, the right to live in a place of people only of one's own ways is as much a right as the right to live in one's house and to keep others out. It is based solely on the belief that one has that right and one's ability to use force to defend that right.

Furthermore, the concept of "in their lane," if construed broadly enough, could become quite authoritarian if force is used to enforce it. For example, one who wants to keep others out may want to refuse to do business with those others and otherwise to associate with them in order to make them leave. As we see in our own country, authoritarian force is used to make people associate with and do business with others they don't want to associate with.

Generally, as people with different ways come together in the same place, there will be conflict between those people, and authoritarian force will have to be used to resolve that conflict. A better solution is for people with different ways to live in different places so that there is not such conflict. This will restrict the use of authoritarian force to the borders of the places instead of within the places, as is needed when people of different ways live in different places. The conflict is restricted to the borders, so the use of force is restricted to the borders, while within the borders there is less conflict and less necessary use of force.

  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HerePolitical Opinion Page - The Hot Seat › Just in case you missed it...

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
A1 News Page
David Limbaugh
Political Frog
Conservatives Directory
President Trump Approval Poll
Presidential Party Election Poll
News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules