Does anyone know why Mises.org is full of Catholics?

[sjw]

What does Catholicism have to do with anarcho-capitalism?

Shayne

[Peter]

Shayne wrote:

What does Catholicism have to do with anarcho-capitalism?

End quote

Now don’t get me started. Oops! Too late.

There is no such thing as anarchism or anarcho capitalism. There is no such thing as a Christian deity.

Virtually all of the folks who even DABBLE in anarchism turn out to be hucksters. Watch “The Tudors” for updates on past Catholic shysters.

Anarchists try to rope believers into buying gold or investing in their Anarcho-Community.

Catholics try to rope believers into paying out ten percent of their gold, for nothing, except a mythical cloud in heaven.

They are all delusional or crooked.

They are all delusional or crooked.

They are all perverts

They are all perverts.

And the list of corollaries goes on.

Semper cogitans fidele,

Peter Taylor

[sjw]

I frankly do not understand any of it, but you could be right. As a Ron Paul fan, I find it troubling that he trucks around with anarchists.

I couldn't help think of Catholic priests when I read this by Walter Block (Reason Papers Vol. 26):

Suppose, now, with an age of consent law of seventeen years old,

which we for argument’s sake stipulate as legitimate, a NAMBLA member

accosts a four year old boy. As far as I am concerned, this should be

considered illegal. Any parent who allows this to happen should be found

guilty of child abuse, which implies not only losing charge of his son, but also

a jail sentence. However, there is one exception to this rule. This,

presumably, will drive Schwartz to apoplexy, but I persevere nonetheless.

Suppose that there is a starvation situation, and the parent of the four

year old child (who is not an adult) does not have enough money to keep him

alive. A wealthy NAMBLA man offers this parent enough money to keep him

and his family alive – if he will consent to his having sex with the child. We

assume, further, that this is the only way to preserve the life of this four year

old boy. Would it be criminal child abuse for the parent to accept this offer?

Not on libertarian grounds. For surely it is better for the child to be a

live victim of sexual abuse rather than unsullied and dead. Rather, it is the

parent who consents to the death of his child, when he could have kept him

alive by such extreme measures, who is the real abuser.

This is not the kind of argument that should ever be made, regardless of the qualifications.

Shayne

[syrakusos]

(never mind...)

Edited September 27, 2010 by Michael E. Marotta

[sjw]

(never mind...)

LOL

Got a copy of that in my inbox.

Shayne

[Brant Gaede]

I frankly do not understand any of it, but you could be right. As a Ron Paul fan, I find it troubling that he trucks around with anarchists.

I couldn't help think of Catholic priests when I read this by Walter Block (Reason Papers Vol. 26):

Suppose, now, with an age of consent law of seventeen years old,

which we for argument's sake stipulate as legitimate, a NAMBLA member

accosts a four year old boy. As far as I am concerned, this should be

considered illegal. Any parent who allows this to happen should be found

guilty of child abuse, which implies not only losing charge of his son, but also

a jail sentence. However, there is one exception to this rule. This,

presumably, will drive Schwartz to apoplexy, but I persevere nonetheless.

Suppose that there is a starvation situation, and the parent of the four

year old child (who is not an adult) does not have enough money to keep him

alive. A wealthy NAMBLA man offers this parent enough money to keep him

and his family alive – if he will consent to his having sex with the child. We

assume, further, that this is the only way to preserve the life of this four year

old boy. Would it be criminal child abuse for the parent to accept this offer?

Not on libertarian grounds. For surely it is better for the child to be a

live victim of sexual abuse rather than unsullied and dead. Rather, it is the

parent who consents to the death of his child, when he could have kept him

alive by such extreme measures, who is the real abuser.

This is not the kind of argument that should ever be made, regardless of the qualifications.

That's "reason"? I never read his Defending the Undefendable and if that's an example of what he does thinking wise, I don't think I ever will. When I get done with the "wealthy NAMBLA man" we'd have plenty to eat even if it was mystery meat. I hate to say this is so bad one might objectively want to defend NAMBLA here, but I'll refrain. How does one starve in this country of one dollar hamburgers? The whole argument is an obscenity against liberty and thinking, parenting and the kitchen sink.

--Brant

[Selene]

Correct Brant:

I would accidentally, on purpose, gut the bastard with the nearest kitchen knife and watch his eyes as the life leaked out.

Adam

[kiaer.ts]

Funny, my thought was, no jury will ever convict if you simply kill the bastard and take the food. I didn't, however, consider eating him as well.

[Selene]

Funny, my thought was, no jury will ever convict if you simply kill the bastard and take the food. I didn't, however, consider eating him as well.

Ted:

Agreed. Brant is exceptionally creative and practical. I guess my aversion to considering eating human flesh is pretty deep set culturally, but it is a great solve.

Adam

[kiaer.ts]

Funny, my thought was, no jury will ever convict if you simply kill the bastard and take the food. I didn't, however, consider eating him as well.

Ted:

Agreed. Brant is exceptionally creative and practical. I guess my aversion to considering eating human flesh is pretty deep set culturally, but it is a great solve.

Adam

Oh, no. The aversion was not even to eating human flesh. Just that creature's.

[Jerry Biggers]

As far as I can tell, the patron saint of the anarcho-capitalists at mises.org and allied sites is not Ludwig von Mises, but Murray Rothbard. If they were intellectually honest, they would rename the site to Rothbard.org.

As for the argument proposed by Walter Block (quoted above in this thread), it is "reasoning" such as this that has kept Rothbardian anarchists in their self-imposed intellectual ghetto, which few want to visit, much less join.

[sjw]

As far as I can tell, the patron saint of the anarcho-capitalists at mises.org and allied sites is not Ludwig von Mises, but Murray Rothbard. If they were intellectually honest, they would rename the site to Rothbard.org.

Absolutely true. Mises would have disowned them. (Perhaps more so than Rand would have disowned Peikoff).

As for the argument proposed by Walter Block (quoted above in this thread), it is "reasoning" such as this that has kept Rothbardian anarchists in their self-imposed intellectual ghetto, which few want to visit, much less join.

I wish it were true. The intellectual impotence of the alternatives (e.g. Objectivists) is, I think, causing a lot of young people to become ensnared. The worst aspect of this I know of is Ron Paul's association with the anarchists. A lot of youthful energy is getting diverted into the anarchist sewer. But you should realize that it is the failure of Objectivism that is causing this. Rand has no theory of rights, Rothbard and crew do.

Shayne

[Rich Engle]

What does Catholicism have to do with anarcho-capitalism?

Shayne

About as much as you want it to have.

Keep it up, Shayne--before you are done, you'll completely alienate everyone, and then, if you are lucky, the "no man is an island" part will kick in.

But, and I have said this before, I am not sure which of y'all is worse--you, or your "opponents."

Here's a real kick-ass radical religionist idea: Why not both make peace with one another, under the common understanding that we are all one?

Make peace with one another(s).

So, I will leave myself wide open to all the people that hate, among others, spiritual people. Make fun of my writing when I write about this stuff. In between, do a little study...

Like, what is the difference between a covenant or creed based church congretation? Those are two very distinict things.

I have more, but let's start there, and I am more than ready to debate. I have been practicing.

And performing in one of the best praise ministry teams you will ever hear.

13 straight-weekly gigs for me, 2 weeks off, and back today at 9a. We had a harpist today.

But see, none of this will matter to some because the mere thought of me playing at a church will trigger the traumas. And that is a shame.

But still, I had a good day and connected with people. And I played some really good muzik.

rde

Happy Sunday

Warm Blessings

Spirit of LIfe

All That Is

That what is Holy

Swirling particles

--various examples of reverence, knowing that no matter what word is used, the thing in question is wordless; language is inadequate for such sentiments.

[sjw]

So I think I've inadvertently discovered two Catholics at OL.

I'm not a hater of Catholics by the way, I hardly know anything about the religion except what is reported in the news, e.g., http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/09/pope-benedict-stalled-chi_n_532073.html. And that so many Mises.org people seem to be Catholic. The connection here escapes me. I do not know why anarcho-capitalism is a Catholic phenomena...

Did a search just now and found this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard56.html

and this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard59.html

Hmmm, this is interesting too:

http://blog.dianahsieh.com/2010/04/murray-rothbard-versus-childrens-rights.shtml

ttp://www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n3p33_Weber.html

While not religious, Rothbard had great sympathy and respect for Christianity, particularly Roman Catholicism, which he regarded as largely responsible for creating and preserving Western culture. He detested the dismissive attitude toward religion, Western culture and traditional morality of many fellow libertarians.

Perhaps the connection is of a more personal nature, rather than something being in Catholicism regarding anarcho-capitalism. Perhaps since Rothbard favored the Roman Catholic religion above all else, then libertarian-leaning Catholics tended to be attracted to him over (say) Rand.

Shayne

[kiaer.ts]

So I think I've inadvertently discovered two Catholics

The Catholic Sniffer strikes again!

i

[sjw]

On second thought, instead of saying I'm not a hater of Catholicism I should say that I really haven't given the matter much thought, because perhaps if I did give it some thought and research, I might have some serious trouble with the Dark Ages and what happened to one of my heroes at the hands of the Catholic Church, namely Galileo. I live out West and there don't seem to be many Catholics around so it's not really on my radar.

I was simply curious at the seemingly odd association with Mises.org.

Shayne

[kiaer.ts]

On second thought, instead of saying I'm not a hater of Catholicism I should say that I really haven't given the matter much thought, because perhaps if I did give it some thought and research, I might have some serious trouble . . .

. . . oh . . . Nevermind . . .

[Peter]

Jerry Biggers wrote:

“ . . . it is "reasoning" such as this that has kept Rothbardian anarchists in their self-imposed intellectual ghetto, which few want to visit, much less join.”

End quote

What a nice cookie, Little One! Are you going to eat it all by yourself? You are?

Wait a second and it will taste even better. You know, when Uncle Murray closes his eyes and really concentrates he can see a most wonderful place. The streets are paved with gold. People are happy. When I walk to the fountain in the palazzo my pockets are full of coins to toss. Quick, I think! Make a wish. And it will come true.

That place is more real, than what I see when I open my eyes. Want to come with me? Just close your eyes . . . that’s it . . . close them and we are walking in a most wondrous place. Concentrate. See the fountain? Yes that’s it. It is The Utopian Anarchist State where I can do whatever I please. I have convinced you, because you see it too! Now there are two of us, Rothbards.

What? Your cookie? Why you ate it didn’t you? Sure you did! No, no don’t cry and tell your mother. I was just teaching you about Anarchic life. See . . . there are two kinds of people. There are the people who can be fooled out of their cookies. I call them “rubes.” And there are people who trick rubes out of their cookies like me. I am a “Prudent Predator.” Don’t you want to be a Prudent Predator like me, and have more than your share of cookies?

Good! Well, burp, that’s enough for today. Tomorrow I will teach you how to fool even more people into starting a private self defense pact. The rubes call it a gang, but I say it is just what a Prudent Predator needs to enforce his will!

Why don’t you go see if Mother will give you another cookie?

Semper cogitans fidele,

Peter Taylor

[Brant Gaede]

Just cook thoroughly and you won't have to worry about trichinosis.

--Brant

my idea about "black humor"

[sjw]

Just cook thoroughly and you won't have to worry about trichinosis.

--Brant

my idea about "black humor"

Oh no Brant, we need the FDA just in case we are incompetent cooks.

Shayne

still doesn't know why Mises.org is full of Catholics.

[9thdoctor]

Jeff Riggenbach Catholic? No way.

http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=208

BTW, where is he?

[william.scherk]

Shayne

still doesn't know why Mises.org is full of Catholics.

I'd rather put it this way: "Shayne doesn't know if the Mises Organization is full of Catholics."

[sjw]

Shayne

still doesn't know why Mises.org is full of Catholics.

I'd rather put it this way: "Shayne doesn't know if the Mises Organization is full of Catholics."

Lew Rockwell, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell

Jeffrey Tucker, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Tucker

Thomas Woods, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Woods

If you dig around there seems to be a not insignificant association, but perhaps that is simply explainable in terms of who owns/controls Mises.org.

Jabs aside, no offense is intended toward Catholics; again, I am not well-informed enough to properly offend. I am just curious about possible doctrinal associations with anarchy and Catholicism.

A highly speculative explanation informed by history: Why would a closet theocrat want to overthrow a secular government? To establish a theocracy. This is pure speculation, I have no other reason than the history of Catholicism's desire to have a Catholic theocracy to put it forward (a desire which is certainly not limited to Catholicism, e.g. the Mormons explicitly desire their prophet to be made President or some such thing).

Shayne

[Selene]

Shayne

still doesn't know why Mises.org is full of Catholics.

I'd rather put it this way: "Shayne doesn't know if the Mises Organization is full of Catholics."

Lew Rockwell, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia....ki/Lew_Rockwell

Jeffrey Tucker, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia..../Jeffrey_Tucker

Thomas Woods, Catholic: http://en.wikipedia....ki/Thomas_Woods

If you dig around there seems to be a not insignificant association, but perhaps that is simply explainable in terms of who owns/controls Mises.org.

Jabs aside, no offense is intended toward Catholics; again, I am not well-informed enough to properly offend. I am just curious about possible doctrinal associations with anarchy and Catholicism.

A highly speculative explanation informed by history: Why would a closet theocrat want to overthrow a secular government? To establish a theocracy. This is pure speculation, I have no other reason than the history of Catholicism's desire to have a Catholic theocracy to put it forward (a desire which is certainly not limited to Catholicism, e.g. the Mormons explicitly desire their prophet to be made President or some such thing).

Shayne

Shayne:

For your edification, there is a tremendous tension between the Papal state in Rome and the evangelical aspects of the Catholic missionary worldwide efforts. Have you ever seen the movie Mission?

I think the film is brilliant. Moreover, the marxists in the colonial empires have been quite wise in making alliances amongst the people and the Catholic priests. The black liberation aspect of Catholicism is a very potent recruiter.

One of the reasons that Catholicism is one of, if not the fastest growing religions in the world, similar to Islam, is two fold.

First, it emphasizes procreation. Second, the message of Jesus Christ is very marxist in its basic premises. Divesting yourself of worldly goods. Pacifistic. Egalitarian to the most basic level.

Now, I cannot understand why or how there is a link in the Mises organization.

Here is the link to the movie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mission_%281986_film%29

I think the film is brilliant. The score is great. If you are not moved by the film, I would feel sorry for you. It is also in my top 200 films.

Adam

[Peter]

Shayne wrote:

Lew Rockwell, Catholic . . . Jeffrey Tucker, Catholic . . . Thomas Woods, Catholic . . . I am just curious about possible doctrinal associations with anarchy and Catholicism . . . A highly speculative explanation informed by history: Why would a closet theocrat want to overthrow a secular government? To establish a theocracy.

end quote

You know, after laughing, I now think that is an interesting analysis, Shayne.

I can imagine an Anarchist/Catholic saying: “I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.”

What do real life Anarchists do? Let’s see. Phony forged documents. Scams. Prostitution rings (Ross Lavvatter. Was he even a real doctor or was that a scam too?) Phony communes. Gold scams. Extortion . . . no wonder they gravitate to the mystical meanderings of Murray Rothbard as a cover for their Mafia style activities. Narcisstic Rock Star complex. Altered state aficionados. Nietzchean superman complex. The psychologizing could go on for ever, yet the actual facts speak for themselves.

Anarchists can no more predict human behavior in detail than can a constitutionalist, but a constitutionalist compensates for this lack. Until anarchists exhibit a superior predictive ability, one that derives from anarchistic laws of human behavior, then they are merely philosophers arguing with other philosophers. Anarchism in the realm of human action is philosophy, not science, or demonstrable fact.

From “The Goddess of the Market, Ayn Rand and the American Right,” by Jennifer Burns, pages 217 and 218:

Far from welcoming the swelling in Objectivist ranks, Rand was increasingly suspicious of those who claimed to speak in her name . . . Nathan closed with a strong attack against another group of Rand readers, the “craven parasites” who sought to use Objectivism for non-Objectivist ends. Into this category fell anyone who advocated political anarchism and anyone who tried to recruit NBI students into schemes for a new free market nation or territory.

End quote

From the Virtue of Selfishness:

Anarchy, as a political concept, is a naive floating abstraction: . . . a society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. But the possibility of human immorality is not the only objection to anarchy: even a society whose every member were fully rational and faultlessly moral, could not function in a state of anarchy; it is the need of objective laws and of an arbiter for honest disagreements among men that necessitates the establishment of a government.

From The Ayn Rand Lexicon:

Philosophically, Nietzsche is a mystic and an irrationalist. His metaphysics consists of a somewhat “Byronic” and mystically “malevolent” universe; his epistemology subordinates reason to “will,” or feeling or instinct or blood or innate virtues of character. But, as a poet, he projects at times (not consistently) a magnificent feeling for man’s greatness, expressed in emotional, not intellectual, terms.

Nietzsche’s rebellion against altruism consisted of replacing the sacrifice of oneself to others by the sacrifice of others to oneself. He proclaimed that the ideal man is moved, not by reason, but by his “blood,” by his innate instincts, feelings and will to power—that he is predestined by birth to rule others and sacrifice them to himself, while they are predestined by birth to be his victims and slaves—that reason, logic, principles are futile and debilitating, that morality is useless, that the “superman” is “beyond good and evil,” that he is a “beast of prey” whose ultimate standard is nothing but his own whim. Thus Nietzsche’s rejection of the Witch Doctor consisted of elevating Attila into a moral ideal—which meant: a double surrender of morality to the Witch Doctor.

End of quote from the Ayn Rand Lexicon

As an added bonus Shayne, here are some more Paraprosdokian sentences sent to me by sister. I don’t know where she got them.

To save you the trouble of looking it up, not that you would need to:

Paraprosdokian A paraprosdokian (from Greek "παρα-", meaning "beyond" and "προσδοκία", meaning "expectation") is a figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe the first part. It is frequently used for humorous or dramatic effect, sometimes producing an anticlimax. For this reason, it is extremely popular among comedians and satirists.

Ø Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Ø The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.

Ø Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Ø If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong.

Ø We never really grow up, we only learn how to act in public.

Ø War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

Ø Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.

Ø The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

Ø Evening news is where they begin with 'Good evening', and then proceed to tell you why it isn't.

Ø To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism. To steal from many is research.

Ø A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station.

Ø How is it one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?

Ø I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted pay checks.

Ø A bank is a place that will lend you money, if you can prove that you don't need it.

Ø Whenever I fill out an application, in the part that says "If an emergency, notify:" I put "DOCTOR".

Ø I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you.

Ø Why does someone believe you when you say there are four billion stars, but check when you say the paint is wet?

Ø Women will never be equal to men until they can walk down the street with a bald head and a beer gut, and still think they are sexy.

Ø Why do Americans choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America ?

Ø Behind every successful man is his woman. Behind the fall of a successful man is usually another woman.

Ø A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

Ø You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.

Ø The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

Ø Always borrow money from a pessimist. He won't expect it back.

Ø A diplomat is someone who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you will look forward to the trip.

Ø Hospitality: making your guests feel like they're at home, even if you wish they were.

Ø Money can't buy happiness, but it sure makes misery easier to live with.

Ø Some cause happiness wherever they go. Others whenever they go.

Ø There's a fine line between cuddling, and holding someone down so they can't get away.

Ø I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.

Ø When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water.

Ø You're never too old to learn something stupid.

Ø To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target.

Ø Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

Ø Some people hear voices. Some see invisible people. Others have no imagination what so ever.

Ø A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.

Ø If you are supposed to learn from your mistakes, why do some people have more than one child?

Ø Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.