[r] Flamebaiting and Trolling in LDT

[Doosh]

viewtopic.php?p=34237965#p34237965

viewtopic.php?p=34241893&sid=d207af588f801c87751e2e0d022bc20f#p34241893

Gilded Age had its unemployment falling from 10% in 1870 to 4% in 1890. Unsurprisingly, real wages also grew at a spectacular rate. Even more unsurprisingly, the Gilded Age was one of the longest and most pronounced economic expansions in the United States' history.

I like how the part of outrageous worker abuses during the Gilded Age, to the point of literal murder, went ignored by you there. Goes to show what you're really arguing for.

One percent are under alleged conditions of slavery. In the meanwhile, the large amount of people with good conditions -- as espoused through data -- counterbalances those few disadvantaged. ;')

I like how you completely ignored the part about human rights abuses separate from the literal slavery. Also, good job justifying literal slavery with, "b-but everyone else is happy!"

"muh statistics r stupid bc they disagree with that I think"

You literally posted statistics showing that the UAE - a place with slavery - is number 14 in HDI, and went on to justify the slavery because of said statistic. GG no re, statistics are still dumb :^)

Do you have a hundred thousand anecdotes to prove your point or statistics about worker abuses and life expectancy evolution during the period?

I could get those anecdotes with a little bit of time. It's not hard to find written interviews or the like from the era.

Call this argument a tu quoque as much as you want, but you too want to shit on the wealthy to pay for your delusionally expensive proposals. So we are at odds, I guess?

Ideally that wouldn't happen. Better than literal slavery though, which you literally just justified; especially because, y'know, the rich, business-owning class wouldn't become slaves, they'd just lose their businesses to democracy. :^)

When did I justify their slavery? I said that their HDI is high because the overall life quality more than outbalances the slavery problem. Strawman people's arguments elsewhere.

The whole, "well overall life quality counterbalances the slavery issue!" statement. But I guess that's too hard to see, all things considered. Totally fine for the HDI in the rest of a country to be fine if it's built off the back of slavery.

Accusing the OP author of the Libertarian Discussion Thread II of "justifying slavery" is absurd trolling. Doubling and tripling down on it after being corrected is trolling plus flamebaiting.

Please give Torrocca some time to learn some social skills.

[USS Monitor]

I'm not seeing trolling, just vigorous disagreement between two people with very different ideologies.

[Doosh]

I'm not seeing trolling, just vigorous disagreement between two people with very different ideologies.

Requesting second opinion. There is no rational basis whatsoever for Torrocca to continue to twist and misinterpret GM's posts into a "justification of slavery" and continuing to impugn GM's motives even after being corrected. If you don't see the obvious trolling ("stats are shit") you sure as hell ought to see the flamebaiting.

[Audioslavia]

I don't see any trolling here. Use of the :^) face isn't quite enough to smack someone for it.

I concur with Monitor. These are two people with different ideologies and neither are breaking any rules.

[Torrocca]

In regards to this, actually, I have a few posts of Doosh's here that might constitute flaming/baiting and/or trolling. I was initially considering letting it go, but considering I seem to be a target of theirs, I'd rather not:

Why do you claim that he derived the term Libertarian from the Summa Theologiae if you can't even give me a page number from his book wherein he makes an explicit reference to the Summa Theologiae?

I'm starting to feel like you've never heard of Belsham until today, either.

Oh, and again:

William Belsham's Essay on Liberty and Necessity, pp. 5 - 15.

Now then, what do windows taste like?

Specifically as a distinguisher from authoritarian Socialism, like the tankies that you think I'm a part of.



Yes; specifically, Left-Libertarian thought.

You forgot the bicycle horn, clown.

Do tell us about the left-libertarianism that predates and rejects socialism.

So... anything in that work, in particular, that represents libertarianism?

If you're so cocksure of this, you could've dropped a specific page number or a link by now. :^)

Wouldn't it be faster for you to study libertarian history and philosophy than challenge yourself with Latin?

Where did William Belsham come up with the word "libertarian?"

What? Wikipedia doesn't quote him referencing the Summa Theologiae?

Do you even know the name of the book Belsham wrote?

You're not even fooling yourself now, tankie.

Do take note that that tankie quip was ruled on recently as well with a warning toward Doosh (that also saw me banned for my own behavior, which I think I've done enough to correct in regards to the overuse of snark and the like, but I'm not sure entirely on that; I've tried at least, but if it's not enough I'd love to know and I'll gladly tone down some more.) as seen here.

I'd appreciate at least a looking-at in regards to this. Thanks in advance.

[Doosh]

I don't see any trolling here. Use of the :^) face isn't quite enough to smack someone for it.

I concur with Monitor. These are two people with different ideologies and neither are breaking any rules.

I could care less if Torrocca uses a Dorito smiley. That isn't my complaint.

Torrocca is absurdly and repeatedly accusing GM of "justifying slavery" when clearly GM has done no such thing. That isn't an ideological difference, that's flamebaiting.

If the moderators are endorsing Torrocca's absurd demogoguery, then by all means announce the floodgates are open. What exactly is the difference between anarcho-syndicalism and child molestation anyway?

[Frisbeeteria]

Torrocca is absurdly and repeatedly accusing GM of "justifying slavery" when clearly GM has done no such thing.

Third opinion: It's not "clearly" to me either. The quoted posts from Great Minarchistan could be slavery justifications quite easily in the quoted context. Just because you don't read them as such doesn't make your viewpoint the only correct one.

[Doosh]

Torrocca is absurdly and repeatedly accusing GM of "justifying slavery" when clearly GM has done no such thing.

Third opinion: It's not "clearly" to me either. The quoted posts from Great Minarchistan could be slavery justifications quite easily in the quoted context. Just because you don't read them as such doesn't make your viewpoint the only correct one.

Actual justifications of slavery come in the form of ardent anti-capitalist George Fitzhugh....

"The capitalist cheapens their wages; they compete with and underbid each other, for employed they must be on any terms. This war of the rich with the poor and the poor with one another, is the morality which political economy inculcates ... Slavery relieves our slaves of these cares altogether, and slavery is a form, and the very best form, of socialism."

Floodgates open.

[The Archregimancy]

Fourth opinion:

Vigorous debate is not trolling; the reported posts do not consist of trolling.

I see no reason for further discussion of this point; I'm therefore locking this thread.