🚀 go-pugleaf

Bob. your about dumb to absolutely stupid.

Firstly, so called "totalitarians" enforce whatever they like. That's why
the word "total" is the root word, son.

Secondly, we have so many airheads in the USA who express and demonstrate
their total ignorance to the entire known world every day, it's very
difficult to understand how any thinking human being could possibly believe
we operate such a state here.

God Bless Our truly great President, George W Bush!!!


"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:ieefrv85qvqkbhn4994afpci1h5ik6e2ii@4ax.com...
> "rex" <rexy@ij.net> wrote:
> >"Roger" <rogerfx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:wMFtb.31778$Hb3.11180@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
> >> "joe" <joebird_11@netzero.com> wrote in message
> >> news:bp6qhi$13sp$1@news.wplus.net...
> >> > yes they could have done the raid in a private school too, had the
> >> principal
> >> > invited them in to do it ( as is the case in the S.C. school) the
> >> difference
> >> > is that in a private school the principal would have to answer to
angery
> >> > parents.
> >>
> >> Don't public school principals have to answer to parents too? Or at
least
> >to
> >> the school board, who the parents elected?
> >
> >That is the classic reasoning of totalitarian socialism.
>
> Not really.  Totalitarians would not care whether the principals are
> answerable to anyone except the totalitarian power.
>
> >If the issue is
> >education, food, clothing, shelter, TV, widgets or any goods or services,
> >then a freedom advocate will point out how people provide for needs in a
> >free market economy, and the response of the classic totalitarian
socialist
> >is that everything that people have in a free society can be provided by
a
> >totalitarian government because "Don't government providers have to
answer
> >to citizens too? Or at least to the provider board, who the citizens
elect?"
>
> Therefore the argument is valid to justify neither a totalitarian
> socialist government nor a totally free market approach, since it does
> not distinguish.
>
> >It is frightening how commonplace that response has become and how the
> >people who provide that response to one subject (e.g. schools) NEVER
OPENLY
> >expand the response as was done in the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics,
> >Communist China, the National Socialist German Workers Party, Cuba, etc.
> >It is as if the people who use that simplistic response do not know all
the
> >horrible ideologies that have used that same response.   Very
frightening.
>
> Even horrible ideologies do some things properly, or they would never
> manage to stay in power long enough to be seen as horrible.
>
> Your argument is fallacious.
>
> On the other hand a "free market economy" hasn't existed since the
> world was confined to primitive barter systems (if even then), so it
> has even less stature in the modern world than a horrible ideology.
> Libertarianism is thus a worse-than-horrible ideology, it is a
> seemingly impossible one.
>
> lojbab
> --
> lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
> Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
> (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
> Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org