Tom Flanagan is okay with child pornography

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by SebC

Tom Flanagan's ideas, reprehensible as you may find them, have a far, far greater logical validity than Allan Hunsperger's.

I can agree with that.

Hunsperger's is based on fairy tales and Flanagan's deal with real live victims.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by icecube

Tom Flanagan was a joke amongst academics outside bigotville long before this debacle. It's a shame that it is only now that everyone realizes how clueless and offensive this guy is.

Have you read anything he has published in the last 25 years? And are you educated enough to evaluate it properly?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you read anything he has published in the last 25 years? And are you educated enough to evaluate it properly?

Oh snap guys.

Check your privilege, we're on forum.AlbertaAcademicsOnly.com/TenuredPoliticalAnalysts/index.html for a reason.

Oh no wait, this is forum.TheCalgarySchool.com/FraserInstituteCirclejerk/index.html , and you must have -this- many published essays on early Canadian colonialism to comment.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Oh snap guys.

Check your privilege, we're on forum.AlbertaAcademicsOnly.com/TenuredPoliticalAnalysts/index.html for a reason.

Oh no wait, this is forum.TheCalgarySchool.com/FraserInstituteCirclejerk/index.html , and you must have -this- many published essays on early Canadian colonialism to comment.

You really haven't read any of his aboriginal stuff, have you? Like, you really haven't even bothered. None of it advocates anything close to assimilation. In fact, his latest book argues that bands should be allowed to free themselves from the Indian Act through popular vote, and gain ownership of the land that they currently live on. It's the most moderate proposal for property rights reform that you could imagine.

By the way, how is Austrian economics in the least bit authoritarian, in regards to the free market? That is an incredible oxymoron.

[Roughneck]

"Excuse me Mr. Flanagan, why don't you take a seat."

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by peter12

You really haven't read any of his aboriginal stuff, have you? Like, you really haven't even bothered. None of it advocates anything close to assimilation. In fact, his latest book argues that bands should be allowed to free themselves from the Indian Act through popular vote, and gain ownership of the land that they currently live on. It's the most moderate proposal for property rights reform that you could imagine.

"European civilization was several thousand years more advanced than the Aboriginal cultures of North America both in technology and social organization". Sounds very enlightened. Literally a thin veneer on "they were savages who were lucky to have the white man come and liberate them from their idiocy".

Originally Posted by peter12

By the way, how is Austrian economics in the least bit authoritarian, in regards to the free market? That is an incredible oxymoron.

You are obviously not stupid, so don't pretend that the claimed "classical liberalism" Hayek subscribed to doesn't have a Venn-overlap with modern conservative ideals, especially in regards to a free market. What I'm getting at is that Hayek's ideas fell more in line the Modern Conservatism than Libertarianism. Modern Conservatism is Authoritarian.

[peter12]

"European civilization was several thousand years more advanced than the Aboriginal cultures of North America both in technology and social organization". Sounds very enlightened. Literally a thin veneer on "they were savages who were lucky to have the white man come and liberate them from their idiocy".

That is a pretty standard mainstream perspective in current streams of anthropology, and geography. Flanagan was always big on cross-disciplinary approaches. Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel" was pretty inspirational to his stuff in "First Nations. Second Thoughts" and "Beyond the Indian Act."

You are obviously not stupid, so don't pretend that the claimed "classical liberalism" Hayek subscribed to doesn't have a Venn-overlap with modern conservative ideals, especially in regards to a free market. What I'm getting at is that Hayek's ideas fell more in line the Modern Conservatism than Libertarianism. Modern Conservatism is Authoritarian.

http://www.cato.org/doc-download/sit...nservative.pdf

Also, Road to Serfdom, and Constitution of Liberty are explicitly anti-conservative. In fact, as a Hayekan, I consider traditional conservatives to be as great ideological enemies of liberty as I do socialists!

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you read anything he has published in the last 25 years? And are you educated enough to evaluate it properly?

LOL. You can't be serious?

You're a real piece of work P12.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

LOL. You can't be serious?

You're a real piece of work P12.

Well, are you? There is such a high degree of egalitarian nonsense from some posters on this board, it is absolutely appalling. If you want to evaluate the ideas of someone like Tom Flanagan, you better be trained to a high enough standard. So many morons in this thread are throwing ideas like "bigoted" or "racist" around without any pre-knowledge of his writings, or an understanding of political science methods.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, are you? There is such a high degree of egalitarian nonsense from some posters on this board, it is absolutely appalling. If you want to evaluate the ideas of someone like Tom Flanagan, you better be trained to a high enough standard. So many morons in this thread are throwing ideas like "bigoted" or "racist" around without any pre-knowledge of his writings, or an understanding of political science methods.

That's hilarious. I have a poli sci degree and that particular part made me laugh! I've read a lot of Flanagan although who knows whether I would qualify as trained to a high enough standard to comment?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you read anything he has published in the last 25 years? And are you educated enough to evaluate it properly?

Condescending much?

I'm not "educated"; I have read some of his books.

I agree with many of his ideas on First Nations. I've interacted with him on political campaign strategy. This doesn't equate to me automatically accepting that everything that comes out of his mouth is worthy of discussion.

Call me crazy, but I draw the line at the notion that the consumption child pornography is a victimless crime.

I have no doubt you are more educated and better read than I. However your social skills of interacting with individuals on this forum (insulting Icecube, Longsuffering and others) seem to be lacking.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Condescending much?

I'm not "educated"; I have read some of his books.

I agree with many of his ideas on First Nations. I've interacted with him on political campaign strategy. This doesn't equate to me automatically accepting that everything that comes out of his mouth is worthy of discussion.

Call me crazy, but I draw the line at the notion that the consumption child pornography is a victimless crime.

I have no doubt you are more educated and better read than I. However your social skills of interacting with individuals on this forum (insulting Icecube, Longsuffering and others) seem to be lacking.

Whether you agree with someone or not is completely besides the point. The fact is, attacking someone's character or whatever based on things they say without understanding the intellectual context, or background is plainly ignorant.

Education is not about degrees obtained, but the standard by which one believes ideas should be discussed. The insertion of opinion into logical discussions of policy, or scientific evidence or whatever is unacceptable, and a personal affront.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Slava

That's hilarious. I have a poli sci degree and that particular part made me laugh! I've read a lot of Flanagan although who knows whether I would qualify as trained to a high enough standard to comment?

There is a lot of evidence that suggests that most graduates of a baccalaureate program have gained almost nothing in terms of ability to critically analyze complex problems.

[Minnie]

Oh, go sew some patches on the elbows of your tweed jackets. Holy full of it.

[peter12]

This is a good treatment of the issue, itself.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...ifferent-ways/

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by peter12

The fact is, attacking someone's character or whatever based on things they say without understanding the intellectual context, or background is plainly ignorant.

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you read anything he has published in the last 25 years? And are you educated enough to evaluate it properly?

Originally Posted by peter12

There is such a high degree of egalitarian nonsense from some posters on this board, it is absolutely appalling. If you want to evaluate the ideas of someone like Tom Flanagan, you better be trained to a high enough standard. So many morons in this thread ...

Originally Posted by peter12

There is a lot of evidence that suggests that most graduates of a baccalaureate program have gained almost nothing in terms of ability to critically analyze complex problems.

Wow.

[Tinordi]

Looks like Peter is having his regularly scheduled maintenance meltdown.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by peter12

There is a lot of evidence that suggests that most graduates of a baccalaureate program have gained almost nothing in terms of ability to critically analyze complex problems.

There is probably just as much 'evidence' to show that people who are condescending and pompous have no clue what they're talking about either.