Liberal vs. Anarchist

[Meh Gerbil]

Well, I'm obviously not an expert on US law (or Finnish law for that matter), but wouldn't that be an example of manslaughter, rather than murder?

It could go either way.

For example: If a white guy accidently killed a black guy in a bar fight it would be pre-meditated murder, and even worse, a hate crime. However, if a gang of black guys conspire to ambush a white cop, torture him for two days before killing him and dumping his body in the Ohio river it would be man slaughter, or perhaps an accident, depending on whether or not they could maintain the fiction that their hands were up at the time the cop died. The only time killing a black guy isn't murder is if you're a cop with connections. It is also murder if you leave an attractive nuisance on your property, such as an open well that a kid falls into and dies; however, if you're the government and leave an open border as an attractive nuisance and hundreds of kids die a year trying to cross it you are 'open minded'. If you want to close the border to save lives you're a racist which is worse than murder, but I digress. Some times murder is necessary, for instance, to be a democrat candidate for President you have to first lure a staffer to a park with promises of sex and murder him with a gun and then you can run for President unless you're first murdered by the electoral college which is probably the worse murder imaginable.

[Darth Executor]

So in your opinion there isn't an honest, law-abiding liberal who would want to enact law through legal channels and then follow that law even if it was personally unpopular.

There is some degree of uncertainty as to whether they exist but if they do they seem to be completely irrelevant.

[Terraceth]

The far left and the an-cap crowd seem to be the main promoters of anarchism, which I've always found amusing because their ideologies are practically the opposite otherwise.

[Sparko]

I think hypocrisy is the best for which one could hope.
I suspect the approach isn't hypocrisy as much as it is a mode of operation.

I've a distinction to be made here that is important but I'm having a hard time putting it into words.

If a man gets into a fight in a bar and accidently kills another man that is murder.
If a man builds a furnace in the backyard and spends 40 years throwing children into it that is murder.

In both cases the word murder is accurate but in one case it is a passionate, heat of the moment, perhaps even self-defense act that the murderer would find regrettable. In the second case the murder isn't just murder but a standard, intellectually accepted mode of operation that is in-line with some underlying purpose. In the first case the death is the end result whereas in the second case the death is part of a larger enterprise.

I think for some the casting off of the law is part of a more sinister and subversive enterprise.
It goes beyond hypocrisy - the term is accurate, but it doesn't capture the scale of what is happening.

in the case of liberals and conservatives who want justice when it is the other guy and forgiveness when it is their own guy, that is pretty much the story of human nature. we all do that. some of us try to recognize it and be fair, but some don't. cognitive dissonance. they (or their guy) is "good at heart" so deserves forgiveness, but the other guy is evil and deserves punishment.

[Meh Gerbil]

in the case of liberals and conservatives who want justice when it is the other guy and forgiveness when it is their own guy, that is pretty much the story of human nature. we all do that. some of us try to recognize it and be fair, but some don't. cognitive dissonance. they (or their guy) is "good at heart" so deserves forgiveness, but the other guy is evil and deserves punishment.

An understandable sentiment, for sure, but at some point you have to grudgingly admit that the rule of law must prevail.
People who don't come back to the rule of law are anarchists at heart.

[37818]

Liberal wanting more government (less liberty). Anarchist wanting no government. They are not alike.

[Meh Gerbil]

Liberal wanting more government (less liberty). Anarchist wanting no government. They are not alike.

The point was that some here have been labeled liberals when they're anarchists.
Yes, I understand there is a ideological difference if not a functional difference.

[Sparko]

An understandable sentiment, for sure, but at some point you have to grudgingly admit that the rule of law must prevail.
People who don't come back to the rule of law are anarchists at heart.

I don't think they are saying the law doesn't apply to their guy. they have just rationalized that their guy is innocent despite the evidence, or that there were extenuating circumstances (e.g. Hillary was ignorant so she didn't break the law on purpose so she cant be held accountable)

[Starlight]

"Anarchism" is actually the name of a political position that is quite different to the common usage of the term "anarchy". "Anarchism" comes from the Greek word for 'leaderless' and refers to a "power to the people" political view that seeks to abolish hierarchical top-down leadership and put power in the hands of the people. So as a political term it refers to leaderless and bottom-up controlled societies, not lawless ones.

As far as the OP goes, it seems it's a giant whinge about Hillary not been prosecuted, and has zero to do with liberalism or anarchism, and is just the right being their usual cry-babies when they don't get their way. Do you want a tissue, snowflakes?

[Starlight]

Liberal wanting more government (less liberty).

No. Liberals stand for freedom.

[Darth Executor]

"As far as the OP goes, it seems it's a giant whinge about Hillary not been prosecuted, and has zero to do with liberalism or anarchism, and is just the right being their usual cry-babies when they don't get their way. Do you want a tissue, snowflakes?

The snowflake rhetoric doesn't play well when you're bragging about how one of your leaders got away with criminal behavior unprosecuted. In fact it's the kind of thing that tends to guarantee the guillotine when the revolution comes.

[Meh Gerbil]

As far as the OP goes, it seems it's a giant whinge about Hillary not been prosecuted, and has zero to do with liberalism or anarchism, and is just the right being their usual cry-babies when they don't get their way. Do you want a tissue, snowflakes?

I'm for politicians of any stripe being prosecuted when they've been proven to be criminals.
Can you or Tassman say the same?

It's called the rule of law - equal treatment under the law is something worth getting upset about.
You'll note that an appeal to that standard is something entirely different than your partisan/tool/fanboi politics.

[Meh Gerbil]

No. Liberals stand for freedom.

Liberals stand for irresponsibility.
There is a difference.

[Starlight]

I'm for politicians of any stripe being prosecuted when they've been proven to be criminals.
Can you or Tassman say the same?

Given we come from countries where politics is about 2 orders of magnitude less corrupt than the US and where politicians don't get away with illegal stuff, it's safe to assume that we're problem more zealous than you in wanting to see politicians prosecuted if they're found to be criminals and that we expect that to happen as a matter of course.

[Meh Gerbil]

Given we come from countries where politics is about 2 orders of magnitude less corrupt than the US and where politicians don't get away with illegal stuff, it's safe to assume that we're problem more zealous than you in wanting to see politicians prosecuted if they're found to be criminals and that we expect that to happen as a matter of course.

This is good.

Now to be honest with you, and to set aside the 'liberal is EVIL' hyperbole for a bit, given your opposition to corruption why would you (ostensibly) be against Hillary Clinton's prosecution for lying to the FBI and the obvious conflicts of interest she had with her multi-million dollar slush fund (Clinton Charity) and her position as Secretary of State. She's obviously very corrupt - why wouldn't you want her prosecuted?