pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @88b0c423eb OP 18h \ parent \ on: To talk or not to talk with normies about libertarianism ideasfromtheedge
a sane individual simply doesn't drink tea with stalin.
Comparing me and what I have said with Stalin is as absurd and is failure to respond logically and with any convincing argument to what I have actually said.
It is a crude and blatantly dishonest attempt at shooting the messenger instead of engaging in a reasoned contest of ideas.
BTW Churchill and Roosevelt did!
If your ability to present your ideology cannot cope with the real world and challenges to your viewpoint directly then your grasp of your ideology is not strong.
When others present an alternative viewpoint this is the golden opportunity to advance your position and refute theirs in a reasoned manner.
If you fail to take that opportunity then you fail in the contest of ideas.
Those who are confident and secure in their beliefs are not frightened of different ideas.
They welcome the opportunity to engage and compare logic.
Very few Libertarians appear capable of this.
It makes them look more like a cult than a philosophy.
reply
I do not know what the 'NAP principle' is and it has not been explained in any dialogue I have been part of but as you state it is a 'belief' I can only guess it is a belief that individuals 'should' not exercise aggression toward others?
If that is the case then I might agree with the principle intent but would suggest that expecting all other humans to comply would be a very dangerous assumption to make.
reply
You don't believe in the NAP (non aggression principle), it's the same thing only with a different scale. I don't care what my lack of engagement with declared socialists and communists may look like.
reply