|
 Originally Posted by boost
You're quick with the butthurt.
I'm not quick with the butthurt. It's been your debate strategy time and again to insult the intelligence of the other without providing an according retort of his point, and it's become tiresome. You keep acting like I'm the one with the brittle and unbending belief system when your's is cast iron.
You are essentially claiming that the complete restructuring of society is the most reasonable solution. Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence, and libertarian theoretical talking points are not that. You are rightfully frustrated with the flaws of our current system, but this frustration has rendered you blind to all the drawbacks and potential cobra effects of the solutions proposed by the ideology you've adopted.
Further and again, I will ask whether less government is always the solution, or if there are circumstances where it would be detrimental? Supposing Libertopia is the winning ticket, is it really to be assumed that the transition to Libertopia will see a progressively better world the further we get along? For example, let's retire all police forces tomorrow. We have less government, but are we better off? How do we taper down until it's gone?
My point is, the complexity of the undertaking is immense and daunting, so instead of figuring that out you just rail against the evils of government and claim if we dismantle government the invisible hand will guide us to salvation. This is unsubstantive rhetoric, and if you weren't raging so hard you might see that it doesn't deserve much more than a five word pejorative remark.
I've always argued the anti-government side while being in favor of incremental change, not a complete restructuring. You may note that at the start of this I said that American society would be "much better off" without the cops. That doesn't mean I'm not in favor of a police force, it just means the current situation is so abysmal that the alternative of no cops at all would be merely less abysmal, a net positive but still a bad situation. Am I in favor of reform? Of course. Any improvement would be better. To me the easiest improvement in every case is a contraction of the duties/responsibilities/powers of the state. It's curious that you invoked the cobra effect, nearly every government endeavor does harm to the very issue it means to remedy.
As far as providing evidence to support my unsubstantive/fantastic/Libertopian claims, I've done nothing but to do that. I've provided examples on top of examples in this thread and others of how nearly everything the state does is harmful. It is you who has countered each of my reasoned critiques time and again with flippant dismissal and very little actual retort. The other statists like coccobill who have responded to my points have at least done so with according courtesy and that's the reason I even bother with these threads. I enjoy puzzling out the strengths and weaknesses of the other side and, believe it or not, I question the libertarian argument constantly.
|