On 11/22/2016 02:39 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:35:00AM +0000, jim bell wrote:

 From: Razer <rayzer@riseup.net>

THIS!"Libertarians see absolutely nothing wrong with the very rich
"gaming the system" for personal advantage in every way that having a
lot of money to spend makes possible. "

WRONG! This libertarian, and I suspect most libertarians, object to
the EXISTENCE of a "game-able" system,

"non game-able system" - there's an excellent term to contemplate on!

one that employs something
called a "government", to take "personal advantage" over others.

"a government", in particular USA govt, is an artificial entity, created
by the people at referendum (wait wait!) ...

The
existing gameable system was not constructed by libertarians. It was
constructed, in America, by Republicans and Democrats.

BUT, it was designed by empowered men to appease 'the regular folks" and
to be game-able by those powerful men ('forefathers").

Libertarians,
in America, have to operate within the existing system.

No, they have to start from the existing system, and existing programmed
humans, when considering appropriate future changes and the propaganda
required to get those "existing programmed humans" to that future.
(This is probably what you meant - "to operate" didn't sound right to
me.)

You want change? You have to become an absolute heretic to the system you seek to change.

Period.

But libertarians... Typically comfortable middle class white people, aren't going to kill the 'goose' while it's still laying 'eggs'. That's only good business sense.

Ps. Just so you know OzBoi, AFAICT there is little or no difference between an AMERICAN "Libertarian", a right winger, and a fascist ... except for recruitment tactics. It may be different where YOU live but that's not here in the belly of the murderous gollum-populated beast.

Rr