Introduction to Hoppe's main work

[Catfish]

Be careful tribesman, this is exactly the logic the far right in the US uses - it loves Mises as it loves Hoppe. And Communism is the same as National-socialism. No joke, they do believe that.
It makes things easier to condemn, however unfortunately it never solves the real problems.

We are approaching Bingo at alarming rate.

Muslim Jews Obama?

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Muslim Jews Obama?

Oh come on, even I'm not sad enough to cheat at Subsim Bingo.

[Quietly goes ticking boxes while no one is looking]

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

If people can disprove the logic and data in this, then criticism becomes valid. Until then, it is just noise, and an expression of displeasure over being disturbed while wallowing in one's cozy illusions.

Disprove it to who? You have obviously made up your mind. Or have you just found someone who agrees with your own 'cozy illusions'?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by u crank

Disprove it to who? You have obviously made up your mind. Or have you just found someone who agrees with your own 'cozy illusions'?

The participants in a discussion are your audience. When you make a claim about something, somebody being wrong, it is in that context you have to give arguments for your claim.

I did as best as I could in the brief time and by using those quotes, I do not wish to tranbslate a whole book jjust to post it then when people can read it themselevs in English, already. It'S just that it is very unlikely that many, even even a single one, will buy the english book and read it. So I took the second-best option and gave that link, and took some quotes from there that at least give a very general idea of what he is about - without going into the details. If it wopuld be possible to pout it all into ust a few sentences - he would not have needed to write several books, som eof them going into the hundreds of pages.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Skybird

-> LINK

If people can disprove the logic and data in this, then criticism becomes valid. Until then, it is just noise, and an expression of displeasure over being disturbed while wallowing in one's cozy illusions.

You've got it backwards. You are the one proposing something radical, therefore the burden of proof is on you, dear Skybird. When you can show that your proposed methods will create your utopia, then we have something to talk about. Linking to Amazon is simply noise, and your radio has been playing too loud for too long.

Just go start a blog already. That way you can proselytize to your heart's content and not have to deal with pesky nay sayers that refuse to sit at your feet and accept your views as gospel truth. At the same time, the forum no longer has to be subject to your conspiracy-driven hatred. It's a win-win for all parties involved.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

No. It's just thinking against the mainstream follies that have ruined us and even already ruined our future. .

He might have pointed out some problems within current western system to some of which i may agree while some others might not be as serous as he likes them to be.
Nothing new here.

That solutions he comes up with are not some "out of the box thinking".

Just At first glance there so many flaws in them and some others make my stomach turn up side down....well...i'm dramatising here.
His solutions could not be agreeable even if applied in perfect world.
Also in perfect world democracy would work much better therefore his much more dangerous solutions would not be needed.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

He might have pointed out some problems within current western system to some of which i may agree while some others might not be as serous as he likes them to be.
Nothing new here.

That solutions he comes up with are not some "out of the box thinking".

Just At first glance there so many flaws in them and some others make my stomach turn up side down....well...i'm dramatising here.
His solutions could not be agreeable even if applied in perfect world.
Also in perfect world democracy would work much better therefore his much more dangerous solutions would not be needed.

And you are sure you know "his solution" in detail, that well, after just having picked up some sentences that I quoted from random quote pages to give not more than just the most compact of summaries about the reasoning by him? Then you do better than I did. It took me to read all those 600 pages of the full book, and s second, smaller one, and to read them even twice, and then some random input from websites, to finally get sufficient details on the implications he suggests, and to put it all together.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And you are sure you know "his solution" in detail, that well, after just having picked up some sentences that I quoted from random quote pages to give not more than just the most compact of summaries about the reasoning by him? Then you do better than I did. It took me to read all those 600 pages of the full book, and s second, smaller one, and to read them even twice, and then some random input from websites, to finally get sufficient details on the implications he suggests, and to put it all together.

If you quoted the quotes you quoted i should suppose that the quotes somehow bring about the essence of his ideas.
Then i haven't red the book...
Again...sometimes it is possible to summarise book with just the amount of quotes you used.
It is also possible to put a book/subject out of context with just few cherry picked quotes but i don't think that you meant it.
Did you?

anyway... i don't like it.