[poekfpojoibien]

Yes we certainly need less thinking in the world.

Don't twist my words to make a point at my expense… that's dishonest of you.

I wonder if you think it worked for the tens of millions that starved to death as a result of their communist government or were outright murdered by the government.

Last I checked, Russia is still a world Superpower and the British Empire is history.

[pokerbonuscod]

"Thinking" is idealistic by definition. Academia necessarily is quite idealistic at its height. Academics (ie. Professors) do carry heavy biases & dogmas, similar to religious Theocrats. The difference is between "Science" and "God", empirical processes versus faith, belief, and conviction.

Action is realism. It is often a good thing that thinkers do not have power; because ideologies can be very dangerous as previously mentioned.



I really am not "for or against" one government style over another. Each type of government fits different types of societies & peoples. One government works for one culture, but not another culture. Communism works for the Homogeneous Chinese and Slavic Russians… but not for the Heterogeneous United States. Democracy works for Europeans but not Saudi Arabians, etc.

---------- Post added 2012-07-03 at 08:14 ----------


Everybody is corruptible, implying that Academics are somehow (?) immune to this… is very humorous to me. You must not be familiar with University professors and their habits?? They are not the people I would want to follow… just my "two cents", my opinion on this.

Are politicians not dogmatic?

[Injurnerona]

While I agree with privation of Security, and Libertarian ideals in general… not everybody is born into the middle or upper classes of wealth. The poor, being born poor, are at extreme disadvantages within a Libertarian society. For Libertarian government to work, inheritance and taxation have to become reduced. But very few people are willing to give-up inheritance or regulating it.

Can you imagine having a government be in control of your Final Testament and Will… doling out your life savings, or debt, to your family members or anyone else?

Poor people are already paying for security today via the taxes that pay for the police force.

---------- Post added 2012-07-03 at 16:23 ----------

Last I checked, Russia is still a world Superpower and the British Empire is history.

I bet that is a great comfort to all those who starved to death.
By the way the British economy is larger than the Russian economy, yet we have half as many people. Not that much of a superpower then...

[Drugsonl]

Are politicians not dogmatic?

Not as much as Academics or Theocrats…

Democratically elected politicians base their power on Popularity. If they are unpopular then they have no power. So corruption is limited to what is popular, not what is dogmatic. Dogmas tend to be unpopular or traditional. Dogmas are long-term. Politickal popularity is short-term. For example the popularity of a president rises & falls with his media coverage.

Limiting terms of office for politicians reduces short-term corruption in a Democracy.




________________________

Poor people are already paying for security today via the taxes that pay for the police force.

That's a good point; but you have to consider the tax rates, expenditures, and returns on taxation in terms of social protection for all.

In a Libertarian society, police & military have a special interest to protect the wealthy and not the poor. In fact there probably would be massive die-offs and murders in the poor class of a Libertarian society. Gangs would rule the streets & ghettos. Because they have no incentives whatsoever to pay for protection after being born into poverty.

I bet that is a great comfort to all those who starved to death.
By the way the British economy is larger than the Russian economy, yet we have half as many people. Not that much of a superpower then...

But you guys have no nukes; and the Russians would have conquered much more than just East Germany had the US not been a staunch ally of Western Europeans. Economy is one part of a superpower; military and technology is the other part.

[sydramySweame]

It was government that ended segregation and slavery. That's good government.

[MidwestMadman]

Academia is not filled with left-wingers. What I find ironic is that you and others alike disdain academia because it's "liberal". This is laughable. Do you happen to know about freshwater economics? Milton Friedman is well regarded among conservatives and libertarians when he was an academic himself. There are tons and tons of conservative academics. George Will, Thomas Sowell come to mind?

I am talking about 'liberalism' in the classical sense, not the way Americans often use the word. What you would call libertarianism, I suppose.

But yes, thank you for proving my point that academia is inherently ideological and that choosing between different alternatives is always a political statement. There is no such thing as a 'neutral', technocratic government.

[kimaddison]

Not as much as Academics or Theocrats…

Democratically elected politicians base their power on Popularity. If they are unpopular then they have no power. So corruption is limited to what is popular, not what is dogmatic. Dogmas tend to be unpopular or traditional. Dogmas are long-term. Politickal popularity is short-term. For example the popularity of a president rises & falls with his media coverage.

Limiting terms of office for politicians reduces short-term corruption in a Democracy.




________________________

That's a good point; but you have to consider the tax rates, expenditures, and returns on taxation in terms of social protection for all.

In a Libertarian society, police & military have a special interest to protect the wealthy and not the poor. In fact there probably would be massive die-offs and murders in the poor class of a Libertarian society. Gangs would rule the streets & ghettos. Because they have no incentives whatsoever to pay for protection after being born into poverty.



But you guys have no nukes; and the Russians would have conquered much more than just East Germany had the US not been a staunch ally of Western Europeans. Economy is one part of a superpower; military and technology is the other part.

Lol

Where are you from?

In the US Congress, there are no term limits. Right now, most conservative politicians won't accept that there's climate change after academia has proven that there is global warming.

There's not much conflict of interest in academia. There's is, however, tons of special interest in government.

[geniusxs81]

In a Libertarian society, police & military have a special interest to protect the wealthy and not the poor.

No. There are many more "poor" than "rich" people, are there not? The total purchasing power of poor people is a huge amount then.

Rich people could afford better protection, but they have more to protect.
Rich people can afford better cars. Should the government fund all of our cars via taxes then?

It was government that ended segregation and slavery. That's good government.

It was government that started those things too.

[mudozvonf]

No. There are many more "poor" than "rich" people, are there not? The total purchasing power of poor people is a huge amount then.

Rich people could afford better protection, but they have more to protect.
Rich people can afford better cars. Should the government fund all of our cars via taxes then?



Yes we do.

---------- Post added 2012-07-03 at 16:35 ----------



It was government that started those things too.

But after being lobbied by private interest.

[Greapyjeory]

But after being lobbied by private interest.

That is an argument against government, not private interests.

[cepAceryTem]

That is an argument against government, not private interests.

Do you agree with the war on drugs?

[chootsonege]

Jonny, this thread is about the relationship between government and academia, and not about whether the government should exist. You can start your own libertarian bullshit thread about how all government is oppressive and evil and how you're just so freedom-loving.

[FoetAgerhot46]

Jonny, this thread is about the relationship between government and academia, and not about whether the government should exist. You can start your own libertarian bullshit thread about how all government is oppressive and evil and how you're just so freedom-loving.

Are you a liberal?

[KellyMP]

Do you agree with the war on drugs?

No. Drugs should be legalised.
Take a look at prohibition of alcohol in America and all the gang warfare. Now look at drug prohibition and gang warfare. Now think about who sells alcohol today and whether the problems of alcohol prohibition still exist.

It is every individuals choice whether to use drugs, alcohol or cigarettes. People will do it anyway whether it is legal or not.

It doesn't affect anyone else.

Why should it be illegal?

---------- Post added 2012-07-03 at 16:44 ----------

Jonny, this thread is about the relationship between government and academia, and not about whether the government should exist. You can start your own libertarian bullshit thread about how all government is oppressive and evil and how you're just so freedom-loving.

Oh I am sorry, I didn't realise the thread police were around.

My apologies officer.

[GutleNus]

Are you a liberal?

What is a 'liberal', according to you?

[Audi_z]

What is a 'liberal', according to you?

Is there confusion on the word liberal?I already thought there was a consensus on the term.

[seekfrieddy]

Is there confusion on the word liberal?I already thought there was a consensus on the term.

I think I've basically already said this, but I'm not American and your specific political spectrum doesn't apply to me.

[ThisIsOK]

Is there confusion on the word liberal?I already thought there was a consensus on the term.

There are two types of "liberal".

In the UK and Europe:
Liberals who support laissez faire economics and personal freedoms.

In the U.S.:
Liberals who support socialist economics and personal freedoms to a slightly lesser extent.

[CFstantony]

I think I've basically already said this, but I'm not American and your specific political spectrum doesn't apply to me.

Do you believe in welfare?

[picinaRefadia]

Do you believe in welfare?

Difference between welfare and charity: force.