Posted on 09/15/2014 8:33:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
I’m very depressed that my beloved Georgia Bulldogs lost to the South Carolina Gamecocks. So instead of writing about a serious topic, we’re going to enjoy some laughs today by reviewing some new anti-libertarian humor.
I’m a libertarian, of course, as are all decent and humane people.
But I appreciate clever humor, even when I’m the target. This video about Somalia being a libertarian paradise, for instance, is an excellent example of political satire. It takes a stereotype and milks it for some great laughs.
I also have to tip my proverbial hat to the person who put together this image of libertarian utopia.
It’s misleading, of course, since libertarians either have no problem with local paramedic services or they believe in private contracting of such services. But for purposes of humor, this image is great satire since it combines the stereotype of libertarians being all about profit and the stereotype of no basic government services in a libertarian world.
If you liked the above image, here’s some additional anti-libertarian satire that is similarly amusing.
Now let’s look at some anti-libertarian humor that falls flat.
As I suggested above, political humor effective is effective when it seizes on something that is true and then applies that stereotype to an absurd situation.
But this next image makes no sense. It implies that there will be more violent, drug-related crime in the absence of prohibition.
But there’s lot of violence surrounding marijuana and other drugs precisely because they are illegal and that creates lucrative opportunities for sellers in the black market.
Simply stated, if you end drug prohibition, then criminal gangs and cartels will lose their markets.
If you don’t believe me, ask yourself why there was lots of violence during the Al Capone era in the 1920, whereas you don’t see Heineken and Anheuser-Busch engaging in shoot outs today.
Or let’s look at the issue from another perspective. What if the lifestyle fascists banned cigarettes. Right now, with cigarettes being legal, there’s no violence between Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds. But imagine what would happen if cigarettes went underground and their distribution was controlled by thugs? Of course there would be violence.
I’m not trying to turn this post into a lecture on drug prohibition, so I’ll stop here. But I did want to expose the intellectual vapidity of the person who put together the second image.
By the way, some of my libertarian friends complain when I share anti-libertarian humor. I have three responses.
1. I share lots of humor mocking statists and regular readers know that advocates of bigger government are my main targets.
2. Self-confident people should have the ability to laugh at themselves and libertarians (thanks in part to Obama) have ample reason to be confident of their ideas.
3. I’m more than happy to share pro-libertarian humor. The only problem is that I’ve only found a handful of examples.
Libertarian Jesus scolding modern statists.
This poster about confused statists.
The libertarian version of a sex fantasy.
So feel free to send any new material my way. All (good) political humor is appreciated.
If that’s the best you have, you have nothing.
What else you got?
You know, you actually sound like a demoted DU’er going on about all Republicans being this or being that, when we all know for a fact that there is an array of thought present on practically any given issue under discussion.
Libetarianism is the same. Your one-dimensional cardboard cutout stereotype is not based in reality at all. You dislike Libertarianism, that much is clear, and you’re campaigning negatively with nothing whatsoever to say that is positive. You’re certainly entitled to do so. But, please do not pretend that you actually know the first thing about anyone who actually is.
Just stick to what you do best, manufacturing negative perceptions of what you oppose, rather than building something positive pertaining to what you support.
Losertarians AREN’T funny. They cost elections.
At best your just trying to stoke the fire.
At worst you don’t have a clue.
Either way your comments distortions, and now direct misstatements, etc certainly add to,the intellectual discourse.
Play with some one else.
What else you got?
__________________________________________
Ohhhh, just every post by Morphing Lib; mountain liar, Conserving Free Dope, and other liberals on this thread.
That was pretty much gibberish, and I don’t think that I have even mentioned “republican”, not even enough to say that I have never been one.
Fixed it.
Not everyone is a lock-step linear dullard as you are, ansel12.
It was a comparison, of your behavior to the typical demented behavior of a DUmmie when discussing their caricature of Republicans.
You share many traits.
Who does and in exactly what words?
No they aren't, for one thing they are expressing freerepublic ideals of being pro-life and pro-marriage and against homosexulizing the militaryy, and protecting our borders and preserving our Godly traditions and resisting libertarian policies that create more and more liberal voters, which vote for larger and more government, a cycle that we have watched for 50 years.
With your incoherence, the only thing that comes through, is that you want to get personal with every poster on this thread.
Wow. Thanx for making up my position. You did that before.
You can make misrepresentations about libertarian positions all you want but you need for governmental control is antithetical of freedom.
There is a difference between saying prostitution is humane and spending tax payer money to stop it.
If you don’t recall I believe abortion is the taking of innocent life and should be illegal. That’s why I left the libertarian party.
Your fervor will not you acknowledge the consequences of your anti-freedom position and your need to codify all beliefs. Also if you’d stop for a minute and think you would see some worthwhile libertarian positions.
Unfortunately you have been cursed with the delusion of perfection.
Keep on spinning out the negativity, ansel12. One thing at which you’ve thus far been very effective is smearing any potential allies to the conservative cause. Peeling them right off.
Was he right to do so? Are you following in his footsteps?
I know where this is headed. We have engaged before.
So take the last word. I accidentally stumbled into your comments because I addressed the other guy.
You also are a major contributor to intellectual discourse on this topic.
It's certainly not how they themselves would describe it; I agree with you there.
Some crimes are malum in se (wrong in and of themselves.) Others are malum prohibitum (wrong because they are legally prohibited.)
Copywrite infringement is technically malum prohibitum, yet I suspect that most libertarians would agree that there should be laws against it -- since intellectual property is, well, property.
Theft of livestock is malum in se. Nevertheless there are laws against it as well. Why? Because society needs have a legal mechanism by which it defends itself from malum in se behavior.
Now....what to do about other malum in se behaviors such as drug use and prostitution? So far, society ( American society) has refused to be left defenseless against those particular offenses against society.
Or at least it has so far -- but we are have been collectively "slouching towards Gomorrah" so who knows what the future will bring.
Did you read post 90?
Where did it describe you or your positions, it merely described social conservatives.
As far as accepting Libertarianism, why would I, as a conservative I oppose their social liberalism and weakness in national defense.
I disagree with them on abortion and borders, and homosexualizsing the military, and polygamy and gay marriage, etc. etc., that is why there are “conservatives” and their opponents who are “Libertarians”.
First off you didn’t address my comment about how you characterized libertarians and their belief that prostitution and drugs should be legal. Your comment was untrue and hyperbole. In my experience I don’t know anyone of any political stripe who believes drug addiction is decent.
Until you admit your lie there is no reason for me to believe you will enter into an honest exchange.
Just wondering to myself...Are all Losertarians stoners or just most of them?
Most are drug dealing, addict, whores, big government, tax raising, socialists. Aren’t you following along?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.