I just dont see it, I see that it can be anything you make of it. Its freedom and the right to own property. Left wing to me means state owenrship and control. Again I say, where is you starting point.
Please answer the question.
Where is your starting point?
For the very last time.
This shows that Libertarianism is not a right wing doctrine. It does not mean (and this interpretation is borne out by the supporting text) that no parts of libertarianism are right wing.
Of course, if I was accused of blathering, especially in conjunction with a rolling eyes emoticon, that would change the meaning of the quote above to “No part of libertarianism could ever ever ever be called right wing in any circumstances at all in the whole of the universe and anyone who says different is an American hating jihadi evil muslim who uses the Koran to kill babies”
More importantly - having done some philosophy I am sure IRONMAN will agree that a “doctrine” is the harder edge of an Ideology, more commonly associated with its implication than with its theoretical boundaries. Isnt that right IRONMAN.
Libertarianism might be left wing in implementation and practice but the theory is based in a right of centre position- especially regarding the right to own property.
Of course the idea of a dichotomy between Ideology and Doctrine is ONLY Semantics and can be dismissed as such.
Wittgenstien - You have failed to show you understnad any of the logical positivist movement therefore your attempts to discount the value of Semantics are painfully inept. At least learn some philosphical background to semantics before using smileys to belittle their worth.
You’ve read it. You understand the simple statement. You can pretend all you like to be as dumb as a stump, but you still understand it.
[quote=“Crab_to_be”]
For the very last time.
This shows that Libertarianism is not a right wing doctrine.[/quote]
Right. It’s clear. You understand that much. Playing semantics changes nothing. Now if you actually do believe the statement disqualifies itself in the rest of the article, you need special education.
Well,im going to be a love 
.
but,when the duty calls…
Egad, batboy! Holy oil factory! And you claimed to have studied philosophy? Yet you still maintain your argument with one vague sentence from a summary which you have repeated over and over and over again ad infinitum (that means “to infinity”, btw, so you don’t have to google for it).
And the way you interpret this sentence is that not right wing = left wing, which is a logical non sequitur (that means that it doesn’t follow), since not all things which are not right-wing are left-wing - it’s not a black-and-white issue. Oh, that’s a good analogy - using the same logic, it’s not black, therefore it must be white :roll:
I’m sure that you at least skim-read the rest of the piece it comes from, but we all know that you won’t have read the words and interpreted their meanings (since that would require semantics, which you have renounced as unnecessary and blather), and have read into them whatever you wanted to.
Did you use this style in your philosophy term papers (if you indeed did go to college & did indeed study philosophy as you claim)? If so, what was your GPA? Frankly, I’ve seen better argument styles at GCSE level (and my god that’s been dumbed down!)
If you are correct, you should cite some more sources, not just one. We can all boringly cite one sentence over and over again to support just about anything, no matter how unsustainable (except you with BRENS and tracer, it would appear ;)) since there’s normally one barking moonbat out there who’s written something bonkers to support just about everything.
Oh, and if EVERYBODY is arguing against you over something like this, then it’s quite likely that you are WRONG. What you normally do in this case is evade the issue, change the subject, or just not post further in the thread. You’ve done it enough times already.[/i]
You’ve read it. You understand the simple statement. You can pretend all you like to be as dumb as a stump, but you still understand it.[/quote]
ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!
I’d have thought that ad nauseam was a better descriotion.
For all your blather, the statement is still unchanged.
8 - discombobulator
9 - thingamajigy
10 - whatchamacallit
Oh, man, this game is too easy! :twisted:
what is with the
8-
9-
10-
(guys careful IRONMAN is about to take off his shoes and socks)
Here is my take.
There is a place out there called IronWorld and in it lives our friend. He is the master of this world and his word is Gospel.
No one must question the benificent wisdom of Iron Man and No-one who questions him will recieve an answer.
Lo and IrnMan spake, bring me your facts and I shall ignore them
Bring me your experience and I shall belittle it, for I have no experience and knowest more.
Bring me your quotes and I shal use them against thee later using my prime servant Misquote-Man.
And finally, there is no country on Earth that can compare to the US of A and if ye shall question this, well ye must be anti-american-jihadist-baby killing murderers.
In the name of Ironman, Misquote man and the Holy Guano
Amen.
I couldn’t remember which bits were labelled 8, 9 & 10 on one of frionscam’s diagrams, the original of which had turned into a little red “x” in a box, and the one posted had the labels cut off due to being resized. And this is the biggest stick he’s got to beat me with - and he’s the guy who can’t remember who’s in the army, who’s got kids, who lives where, or in fact which of us said what when.
It’s like being tapped lightly on the head with a small bundle of straw wielded by a very weak straw man… :lol:
In response to Firefly.
Our Guano which art in Batboy,
Captain whammo be your name,
your posts will come
your friends you have none
not since the age of eleven
Give us this day our daily inbred -
Wisdom, and lead us not into revelation
but deliver us from evil, anti American hatemongering Limeys
for yours is the Blather, the Bullshot and the phoneys
Forever and ever
IRONmen.
:lol:
It’s like being tapped lightly on the head with a small bundle of straw wielded by a very weak straw man…
Loving the rural references!
Frionscam’s such a fine example of a dullard and a walt that he’s justfied his own arrsepedia entry!
http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/index.php/IRONMAN
It is by far complete, since listing all the great man’s talents and “wisdom” is far too big a task for one person alone. It’s been great reviewing some of the earlier bits on this thread before it got bogged down with frionpan going on like a stuck record.
yes,im in that wikipedia too.Congrats to the spanish translator in that site!,it´s a good pelotudo.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
That’s funny man. Seriously. Nice one. :lol: