5

112 comments

[–] PhuksNewfag 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

You cannot have liberty and (enforced) equality, it's contradictory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty

You also completely ignored my point of words being misused. You said that the the founding fathers were "liberals", do you think they were "liberals" as in liberalism or liberals as in Libertarianism?

The American founding fathers were deeply influenced by liberalism. Not Libertarian-ism.
Open a history book. This is basic stuff that you should know if you're going to debate politics with the adults.

You also completely ignored my point

Because I can't find one. Your ranting is only semi-coherent, and does not seem related to the points I made.

[–] PhuksNewfag 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

They wanted a minimalist state, did they?

How do you achieve equality without using wealth redistribution and a giant state?

Your ranting is only semi-coherent, and does not seem related to the points I made.

I provided you statistical evidence that republicans are more supportive of freedom of speech than democrats. Instead you argue over a "TERM".

It doesn't matter if they call themselves liberals if they do not support freedom of speech as much as the opposition, does it?

They wanted a minimalist state, did they?

Is this a statement, or a question? If it's a question, why are you asking me? Google it yourself.
If it's a statement, does it come with a point, or are we just sharing interesting facts?

How do you achieve equality without using wealth redistribution and a giant state?

Good question. Again, I'm not sure why you're asking me. Personally, I'm not sure 'equality' can be achieved, but that would depend on how you define the word.

I provided you statsitical(sic) evidence that ..

You gave me an image file of a survey that had a pool less than 100. That is not conclusive evidence of anything.

Instead you argue over a "TERM".

I have not argued over any terms. I provided you with the definition for a word you misunderstood. That's not an 'argument'.
It's educating you with facts.

It doesn't matter if they call themselves liberals if they do not support freedom of speech as much as the opposition, does it?

Uh, yes.. no? I'm not sure. That's a run-on sentence that makes the meaning ambiguous at best. I assume English is not your native language?
But you're correct if you're trying to say that it's a persons actions that count, and not their preferred labels.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to clarify the obvious, but sure, ok.