If you hit reply, then scroll all the way down the page, you'll see the links.

It worked for me :scratchchin:

Quote from: Guest

I don't strike poses. I'm quite inhibited that way. Sometimes I cross my arms, or put my weight on one foot.

Quote

I didn't. I'm afraid that's not interesting to me.

 


There's a lot of great names on that page. And faces.

I would have chosen Giulia deProphetis or Isabelle Vaudeville for best name.

I don't remember seeing those names. None of the women were my type, in looks.

What was your favorite family trip as a kid?

Tough question.

But it has to be the cross-Canada trip. We took the VW camper van all the way from Toronto to the west coast, then up to the Yukon, then back. We spent the whole summer. My dad read us The Prisoner of Zenda (and other things) in the evenings. It's still one of my favourite books. I saw the prairies (dead flat!) and grizzly bears and great horned owls and the northern lights.

That was the summer between grades five and six. Thanks for asking that.

Do you ever worry about your future?

Sometimes. It is too personal.

Libertarianism is (1) false and (2) impracticable.

(1)   First, it is based on the false premises of political individualism, economic reductionism, and social contract theory. Catholics believe that the family is the basic social group, that man’s end is spiritual, that the state was created by God, and that it is obliged to profess Catholicism. Right off the bat we can see the incompatibility.

(2)   In practise, libertarianism would create a vacuum of power, which is of course unnatural and could not be maintained long except through external intervention (which would be an internal contradiction). My brother, who is basically an anarcho-capitalist, inadvertantly expressed this contradiction when he once said to me that in a libertarian society all children would have to be thoroughly educated in libertarianism in order to resist the tendency for power structures to 'ossify'. Human nature being what it is, I think that within a generation such a society would regroup into a primitive feudalism.

It might be objected that there are many different kinds of libertarianism, some of which might be compatible with Catholic teaching, etc. I’ve read Hans-Hermann Hoppe before, and his vision seemed somewhat conservative and appealing. Ultimately I think the social doctrine of the Church is best expressed in Christian Corporatism, as expressed in writings like Quadragesimo Anno, and that in terms of secular thought the perspectives of men like Karl Polanyi (The Great Transformation) or even Alisdair MacIntyre are more valuable than the Libertarians.

When I think of "libertarianism" I don't even think of its supposed theoretical basis, which seems so ridiculous.  Rather it seems to be a collection of attitudes, sometimes combined with "objectivism."

They have a horror of "might makes right" - yet they seem to substitute the principle that control over money and property justifies every use of it.  Which is rather comical - it is such a transparently self-interested "philosophy."

(or rather "self-interested" for those who imagine themselves rich in the future)

When I think of "libertarianism" I don't even think of its supposed theoretical basis, which seems so ridiculous.  Rather it seems to be a collection of attitudes, sometimes combined with "objectivism."

Yes, libertarians are often fanatical about it.

They have a horror of "might makes right" - yet they seem to substitute the principle that control over money and property justifies every use of it.  Which is rather comical - it is such a transparently self-interested "philosophy."

That hasn't been my experience, that sounds more like a republican attitude. The libertarians I've encountered tend to disparage the western plutocracy because it is socialist.

You know we really have no idea if this is Graham who has been answering these questions.

It could be anyone. Maybe roscoe.

Graham has been answering the questions. His writing style is hard to mistake.