RE: META: What did I do wrong?

Joshua Clingenpeel (
Fri, 21 May 1999 12:30:40 -0700 wrote:

> Please provide quotes of what evil things I have spewed here. You
> continue to assert that what I have written contradicts the viewpoints of
> others on this list, yet you do not back up your statements with any
> facts. What have I actually written that you are in such disagreement
> with?

Then, Mike Lorrey wrote:

"As in my prior reply, your contention that property rights are a 'fictional concept'. Property is a concept of Natural Law, and trying to fictionalize something as real as that is just another meme that the totalitarian forces use to destroy the rights of the individual. It is evil in every sense of the word."

Property rights are not fictional, but I don't think they could rightly be called a concept of Natural Law. I offer the Native Americans as an example, whose egalitarian lifestyle was indicative of the lack of property rights. Communism, although a pipe dream, attempted to destroy property rights, but capitalists are, in my experience, greedy and materialistic. So although david_musik was incorrect about property rights being fictitious, you were also incorrect assuming the extreme opposite, in that property rights are made necessary by Natural Law.

"How have I done that? I did observe that if you practice your rude, obnoxious, condescending ways of poking people's buttons in real life, I wouldn't be surprised if you got your nose broken at least once for your actions. That is not to imply that it would be me doing it. I consider myself a rather non-violent and non-confrontational person, but I am rather adamant about defending my own rights. I will not ever shy away from that. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Live free or die, death is not the worst of evils. No one who values the freedom of the individual need fear me. Those that don't, do, though.

"If anyone is using straw man tactics, it is you."

Okay, this has got to stop. I'm talking about the mudslinging, gentlemen. I would suggest you read Irvine Welsh's "The Acid House," for one story in particular, although the title elludes me currently. I do believe it's called "Philosophers" or something. Reminds me of the controlled anger I'm reading here. "I wouldn't be surprised if you got your nose broken at least once," "I and others know now to avoid you for our own safety." You sound like animals who understand diplomacy and are just saying enough not to start a war but to stir each other's blood. Shake hands, back off, do whatever you have to do, but stop whining and finger-pointing, and remember that everyone's opinion matters; maybe not to you, but to at least one person, they do. That's all that matters. For a list touting enlightenment and tolerance and the advancement of the species, this seems slightly detrimental to the process and degrading on the whole. Any problems?

Shaking his finger with consternation,
Pope Arhat Al-Hazred Mateed XXIII