Lauchlan
Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2010
- Messages
- 671
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2011
lol, no wonder you want tony abbott voted in - you cant help but bring religion into this.oh fuck you.
fucking incoherent sack of jew.
but im not jewish so wtf?
lol, no wonder you want tony abbott voted in - you cant help but bring religion into this.oh fuck you.
fucking incoherent sack of jew.
listen mudu fukulol, no wonder you want tony abbott voted in - you cant help but bring religion into this.
but im not jewish so wtf?
pathetic.... if you had an argument you would have responded with it... instead you try to insist im jewish which i obviously am not. period.listen mudu fuku
you're a fucking Jewish cunt because I said you are. Period.
Now go get your eyes translated so you look like a slant.
hai bby great minds think alike post a pic bbyExcept our only real alternative is Tony "abortion is a national tragedy and hey, how about a return to the at-fault divorce system? BTW UNEMPLOYED TO THE MINES!" Abbott. I'm not happy with either option (hence Greens) but the fact is that someone will be in charge and I'd rather it not be Abbott.
no uLauchlan is an asian
no ustfu gtfo
listen you mother fucking kike. i know you are not a fucking big nosed yahoodi but i like to use the term as an insult because jews are sub human fucking animals.pathetic.... if you had an argument you would have responded with it... instead you try to insist im jewish which i obviously am not. period.
now go and get your eyes checked because you need to re-examine posts.
This, except will vote LDP in the senate.Frankly I can't stand either of them. But the reality is Rudd has been EXTREMELY socially regressive in his term in government, while Abbott is just a dunderhead who would hopefully be restrained by his party. For me it comes down to this: Rudd HAS fucked up, Abbott MIGHT fuck up, and either way the Greens will have the balance of power.
Who will I vote for? I don't actually think it matters beyond preferencing Greens first. Rudd's crackpot agenda and the sacking of Turnball as opposition leader in place of Abbott drained me of any faith in Labour or Liberal and I'll probably just flip a coin on election day.
Somalia is not a libertarian nation and it does not have libertarian values. It is a war-torn country ruled by warlords and the like. Absence of government on its own does not imply libertarianism, as the authoritarian State is merely replaced by militant warlords vying for power and resources. To draw a connection between Somalia and Anarchist or libertarian thought is foolish and ill-considered.-lemon- said:Incorrect.
In the 'libertarian' world there are no laws to break, thus one cannot be a criminal.
Just take rural Somalia for example, it's one of the most libertarian countries in the world. The government has little to no role in peoples lives, there is no social security, there is no 'government interference' in the 'free market', in fact the entire society is governed by these 'free market' forces you worship.
Now if someone in Somalia decides to go and murder a family and acquire there house and land, one cannot label them a criminal without appealing to, and projecting onto them, the laws of a foreign country. In the eyes of the 'free market' they are perfectly rational utility maximizes, and their actions are perfectly efficient.
I would agree that traditional i.e 'Anarcho'-Capitalism or free market libertarianism is academically outdated and morally repulsive. But even still, Somalia does not represent free market libertarianism, as the country is in a precarious economic position to begin with, and has to contend with various Statist governments interfering with it.-lemon- said:I say no to this, the libertarian doctrine is academically outdated and morally repulsive.
So you have two options, stay in 'big-goverment' Australia, or go and live in 'free market' Somalia.
I think I know which one you deadbeats will choose.
Hypocrites.
lol tossing a coin ftw.Frankly I can't stand either of them. But the reality is Rudd has been EXTREMELY socially regressive in his term in government, while Abbott is just a dunderhead who would hopefully be restrained by his party. For me it comes down to this: Rudd HAS fucked up, Abbott MIGHT fuck up, and either way the Greens will have the balance of power.
Who will I vote for? I don't actually think it matters beyond preferencing Greens first. Rudd's crackpot agenda and the sacking of Turnball as opposition leader in place of Abbott drained me of any faith in Labour or Liberal and I'll probably just flip a coin on election day.
lol?The only possible government I can think of that wouldn't be socially regressive in this country, would be something like Turnbull/Hockey as PM with a substantial Greens minority to keep out any conservative bullshit.
Not gonna happen but. I'll continue to vote 1 Greens, ... , n-1 Liberal, n Labor, lol.
shooters party m8The only possible government I can think of that wouldn't be socially regressive in this country, would be something like Turnbull/Hockey as PM with a substantial Greens minority to keep out any conservative bullshit.
Not gonna happen but. I'll continue to vote 1 Greens, ... , n-1 Liberal, n Labor, lol.
they are not meant to be progressive, they the liberal party a centre right party, they don't advertise themselves as being progressivehes only been in office for almost one term. jesus christ look at his time in office in context to the previous gov't who were in for a decade or so. i dont think you'll find they were "progressive" after their first term either.
and dont act all 'i didnt accuse rudd of anything' because your thread calls his a crimal and a betrayer. again, you have a pretty pathetic argument here.
fuck that, they're loonies, same as every party outside Lib/Lab/Green, too many nutcasesshooters party m8