Is Dave Snider still a ''hardcore'' libertarian ?

Obviously he is not the Hardcore Dave anymore, but do you think his political views, albeit likely softened, stayed with him ?

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

He's a hardcore father-to-be. Isn't that enough?

GOLD STANDARD

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

A murder slingshot, if you will.

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

JUST BECAUSE I'M FOR GIANT SLINGSHOTS DOESN'T MEAN I'M FOR MURDER!

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

Cruel and unusual punishment. Launching prisoners via missiles ensures unneeded excessive harm doesn't come to the prisoner(s).

TAKE HIM TO THE MURDER SLINGSHOT! is the only acceptable political view imho.

2016 Jeff Gertsmann, he is pro Murder Slingshot

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

Cruel and unusual punishment. Launching prisoners via missiles ensures unneeded excessive harm doesn't come to the prisoner(s).

The potential complications that could arise from such an endeavor outweighs the prisoners desire to be treated humanely. Send them to the M. Slingshot!

I imagine like everyone else he grew out of libertarianism.

Listening to him and Jeff talk about stuff (especially on older episodes of the Bombcast when stuff might have gotten mildly-political at times) they both sounded very much Libertarian, or at least what would be considered a "Classical Liberal"

They don't come right out and say it, but if you read between the lines, they definitely have that "people can do whatever the fuck they want" kind of mentality that many Libertarians have.

@ThePickle said:

I imagine like everyone else he grew out of libertarianism.

You don't "grow" out of libertarisnism, you get tricked out of it.

How do you guys feel about pennies.

@I_smell said:

How do you guys feel about pennies.

Fuck 'em.

@Jay_Ray said:

2016 Jeff Gertsmann, he is pro Murder Slingshot

Time to update my photoshop campaign poster... ?

@Godlyawesomeguy said:

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

Cruel and unusual punishment. Launching prisoners via missiles ensures unneeded excessive harm doesn't come to the prisoner(s).

The potential complications that could arise from such an endeavor outweighs the prisoners desire to be treated humanely. Send them to the M. Slingshot!

Fucken waste of resources! Just launch them to the moon and have them work in the cheese mines for the rest of their days.

Under perfect libertarianism, criminals would only be launched into the sun by private enterprises.

Dave is a hardcore librarian now, I've seen the videos.

@Veektarius said:

Under perfect libertarianism, criminals would only be launched into the sun by private enterprises.

I think, like most, your mistaking Anarcho-Capitalism for Libertarianism.

@Stonyman65 said:

Listening to him and Jeff talk about stuff (especially on older episodes of the Bombcast when stuff might have gotten mildly-political at times) they both sounded very much Libertarian, or at least what would be considered a "Classical Liberal"

They don't come right out and say it, but if you read between the lines, they definitely have that "people can do whatever the fuck they want" kind of mentality that many Libertarians have.

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

As a resident of the UK I must raise the issue of sun ownership. What right do you have to launch people into the sun? The whole "launching into a deadly abyss" part is fine, but last time I checked the USA did not own the sun. What if the sun doesn't want people thrown into it? What if multiple global launches collide resulting in said people falling back down to earth, albeit probably in bits. What if you launch them too powerfully and they come out of the other side of the sun? What if they land on a planet and colonise it? What if America is just creating a society of tax-evading sun-surviving super Martians? I personally don't think this administration is up to the task of fending off the super tanned hordes from outer space, especially in this economy.

I hope that answers your question.

Also I have to ask OP, what is your interest in the political leanings of the staff?

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

HARDCORE 4 LYFE SON

@GrantHeaslip said:

@Stonyman65 said:

Listening to him and Jeff talk about stuff (especially on older episodes of the Bombcast when stuff might have gotten mildly-political at times) they both sounded very much Libertarian, or at least what would be considered a "Classical Liberal"

They don't come right out and say it, but if you read between the lines, they definitely have that "people can do whatever the fuck they want" kind of mentality that many Libertarians have.

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Where did you get all of that from? That's more of a Republican viewpoint.

And I'm talking about the American version of Libertarian, that IS more or less Classical Liberalism - small government, and emphasis on individual and state rights....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

@ZanzibarBreeze said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

You’re right that right-wing politicians straddle the line on a lot of this stuff — we’ve got the same problem in Canada.

Probably, he did shoot that Jamaican Gun Seller in Blade Runner.

@Stonyman65 said:

I'm talking about the American version of Libertarian, that IS more or less Classical Liberalism - small government, and emphasis on individual and state rights....

I would say that's basically correct; the differences that do exist are minor -- that is, we'd call them minor for the level of discussion appropriate for a place like this.

@GrantHeaslip said:

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

What I meant is that the philosophy itself doesn't make those sort of value judgments. A writer like Rand certainly does, so you're correct in that respect. Some libertarian writers might say that kind of stuff, but I don't think that should reflect on the actual philosophy. If I had to encapsulate it quickly in a sentence, libertarianism is basically just the idea that almost any act forcing somebody to do something they don't want to do is immoral -- so long as that act doesn't infringe on the rights of others. Government should therefore avoid being immoral, and that means that it is kept at an absolute minimum -- just the police and the courts.

Civil libertarianism is best libertarianism.

@GrantHeaslip said:

@ZanzibarBreeze said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

You’re right that right-wing politicians straddle the line on a lot of this stuff — we’ve got the same problem in Canada.

Then why bother making statements about it at all?

He's still a threat.

@GrantHeaslip said:

@ZanzibarBreeze said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

You’re right that right-wing politicians straddle the line on a lot of this stuff — we’ve got the same problem in Canada.

That is true, but I (and most other Libertarians I know of) aren't that. We're all more of the Milton Friedman type than the Rand type.

Regardless, there are going to be crazy, intolerant assholes in any political party. Libertarianism is no different in that respect.

@JackSukeru said:

@Godlyawesomeguy said:

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@Scooper said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

I don't care about the staff's political beliefs, unless it involves launching prisoners into the sun.

I think it's worth asking... are you pro or anti launching prisoners into the sun?

Personally I'm not a fan of the massive waste of rocket fuel so I propose a giant slingshot?

Cruel and unusual punishment. Launching prisoners via missiles ensures unneeded excessive harm doesn't come to the prisoner(s).

The potential complications that could arise from such an endeavor outweighs the prisoners desire to be treated humanely. Send them to the M. Slingshot!

Fucken waste of resources! Just launch them to the moon and have them work in the cheese mines for the rest of their days.

Place trash in the rocket along with the prisoners, it justifies the use of fuel and upholds Gerstmann values.

@Stonyman65 said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

@ZanzibarBreeze said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

You’re right that right-wing politicians straddle the line on a lot of this stuff — we’ve got the same problem in Canada.

That is true, but I (and most other Libertarians I know of) aren't that. We're all more of the Milton Friedman type than the Rand type.

Regardless, there are going to be crazy, intolerant assholes in any political party. Libertarianism is no different in that respect.

This. If I'm not mistaken, the Rand type Libertarians are on the extreme end of the philosophy.

@ZanzibarBreeze @Stonyman65 @SathingtonWaltz: I don’t agree — I simply don’t think a functioning modern society could be built on tiny/non-existent government — but I’m just not interested in having a discussion about libertarianism here. You’re right that I shouldn’t have waded into this if I wasn’t prepared to.

@SathingtonWaltz said:

@Stonyman65 said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

@ZanzibarBreeze said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

There’s a difference between “people should be able to do whatever they want within reason” and “taxes are theft, the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue”.

Classical liberalism and libertarianism are two very different things.

Libertarianism doesn't make value statements like "the poor had it coming, self-centredness is a virtue." You're talking about objectivism, I think.

Edit: Also, I would say that while you're right that the two are different things, the two terms have grown to be basically interchangeable (at least in the U.S.), for better or for worse.

I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about it, but the stuff I wrote appears to at least fit within the spirit of modern libertarianism. Does Randian libertarianism not make value judgements about the worth of people?

You’re right that right-wing politicians straddle the line on a lot of this stuff — we’ve got the same problem in Canada.

That is true, but I (and most other Libertarians I know of) aren't that. We're all more of the Milton Friedman type than the Rand type.

Regardless, there are going to be crazy, intolerant assholes in any political party. Libertarianism is no different in that respect.

This. If I'm not mistaken, the Rand type Libertarians are on the extreme end of the philosophy.

Pretty much.

@GrantHeaslip: I'm not a Libertarian, but I wasn't trying to sound like a dick either. It was just apparent that you knew little of the philosophy. I feel that it's generally silly to make statements regarding subjects that one hasn't really researched. But yeah, I generally agree with you when it comes to the size of the government.

Libertarians are pussies. Anarcho-capitalism is where it's at.

@McGhee said:

Libertarians are pussies. Anarcho-capitalism is where it's at.

I find Anarcho-Capitalism to be a very fascinating ideology, it's certainly entertaining to read up on. I don't mean that in a condescending way either! While I have doubts that such a system could work, it's got a lot of very intelligent individuals supporting it.

"people can do whatever .. they want"

Except women who aren't allowed to wear swimsuits because apparently that's sexist. And only women, because "it is different when its a woman".

You can't try to pretend the site isn't political when it publishes pieces like the ones recently, they are entirely political and you don't need to "read between the lines" to see that.

@SathingtonWaltz said:

@McGhee said:

Libertarians are pussies. Anarcho-capitalism is where it's at.

I find Anarcho-Capitalism to be a very fascinating ideology, it's certainly entertaining to read up on. I don't mean that in a condescending way either! While I have doubts that such a system could work, it's got a lot of very intelligent individuals supporting it.

My view is much like yours. It's an interesting idea. Super cool version of it is in Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" if you haven't read it.

@Mustachio said:

As a resident of the UK I must raise the issue of sun ownership. What right do you have to launch people into the sun? The whole "launching into a deadly abyss" part is fine, but last time I checked the USA did not own the sun. What if the sun doesn't want people thrown into it? What if multiple global launches collide resulting in said people falling back down to earth, albeit probably in bits. What if you launch them too powerfully and they come out of the other side of the sun? What if they land on a planet and colonise it? What if America is just creating a society of tax-evading sun-surviving super Martians? I personally don't think this administration is up to the task of fending off the super tanned hordes from outer space, especially in this economy.

I hope that answers your question.

That's just like someone from the United Kingdom to complain about our tendencies of launching people into the sun. It's pretty god damn obvious that you're just afraid of our American exceptional-ism (of occasionally throwing people into gigantic solar spheres at a high velocity.) Listen here, buddy. If we want to punch a hole straight through the sun with millions of jaywalkers, we'll do it and make sure we throw them harder than anyone else!

@videogamesarenotart said:

"people can do whatever .. they want"

Except women who aren't allowed to wear swimsuits because apparently that's sexist. And only women, because "it is different when its a woman".

You can't try to pretend the site isn't political when it publishes pieces like the ones recently, they are entirely political and you don't need to "read between the lines" to see that.

I disagree. The only "political" person on the site seems to be Patrick, the others are very quiet about their political beliefs.

@SathingtonWaltz said:

I find Anarcho-Capitalism to be a very fascinating ideology, it's certainly entertaining to read up on. I don't mean that in a condescending way either! While I have doubts that such a system could work, it's got a lot of very intelligent individuals supporting it.

Robert Nozick disagreed with anarcho-capitalism on the grounds that a society with free market courts and security services can't function properly. If you and I disagree over a contract, and you sue me in Court Gerstmann and I sue you in Court Famous Davis, and you call Shoemaker Security to summon me to your court and I get the Caravella Zaibatsu to wrangle you into my court, then nobody wins and it's all a mess. (In this equation, I think Patrick is, like, the Watcher, and he's just up in the clouds shaking his head or something.)

@Mustachio said:

As a resident of the UK I must raise the issue of sun ownership. What right do you have to launch people into the sun? The whole "launching into a deadly abyss" part is fine, but last time I checked the USA did not own the sun. What if the sun doesn't want people thrown into it? What if multiple global launches collide resulting in said people falling back down to earth, albeit probably in bits. What if you launch them too powerfully and they come out of the other side of the sun? What if they land on a planet and colonise it? What if America is just creating a society of tax-evading sun-surviving super Martians? I personally don't think this administration is up to the task of fending off the super tanned hordes from outer space, especially in this economy.

I hope that answers your question.

Don't worry, you'll get your own version of the murder slingshot. It'll be a biscuit shaped jaffa cake disc that you sit criminals or as you call them, "Australians" and shoot them into the sun.

@SathingtonWaltz said:

@videogamesarenotart said:

"people can do whatever .. they want"

Except women who aren't allowed to wear swimsuits because apparently that's sexist. And only women, because "it is different when its a woman".

You can't try to pretend the site isn't political when it publishes pieces like the ones recently, they are entirely political and you don't need to "read between the lines" to see that.

I disagree. The only "political" person on the site seems to be Patrick, the others are very quiet about their political beliefs.

I feel like they all make their fair share of political comments, nothing is very blatant though.

Not political, but my favorite "controversial" comment the staff has made in a long time was definitely when they were talking about ad 30 Assassins Creed and Jeff made a comment about Jesus being a templar and driving the nail into the cross. I was walking to class and literally laughed out loud, totally looked like a crazy person.

@videogamesarenotart said:

"people can do whatever .. they want"

Except women who aren't allowed to wear swimsuits because apparently that's sexist. And only women, because "it is different when its a woman".

You can't try to pretend the site isn't political when it publishes pieces like the ones recently, they are entirely political and you don't need to "read between the lines" to see that.

I disagree. The only "political" person on the site seems to be Patrick, the others are very quiet about their political beliefs.