Quote from: AyeYo on September 29, 2011, 06:20:54 PM

Quote from: bitcoin2cash on September 29, 2011, 06:17:09 PM

Quote from: AyeYo on September 29, 2011, 05:59:53 PM

Quote from: bitcoin2cash on September 29, 2011, 05:52:59 PM

Quote from: AyeYo on September 29, 2011, 05:45:31 PM

the fact that the system is flawed doesn't mean it needs to be totally cast out

You mean like your fantasy objections to libertarianism?

There's a difference between fixable flaws cropping up in implimentation (due to human nature) and inherent, systemic flaws in the idealogy itself.

You mean like concentrating power in the hands of a few people and hoping the bad guys won't make a grab for it and abuse it?

No, I mean like having a system based on a principle that doesn't allow you to impliment your system unless 100% of the population is 100% in agreement (thus an impossibility) otherwise making the system completely contradictory, hypocritical, and arbitrary.

I mean like having a system based on non-aggression and no coercion, even though aggression and coercion are facts of life simply because 100% of the people will not agree on 100% of the issues 100% of the time.

That's an inherently flawed system that CANNOT exist in the real world, not just because I don't want it to, but because it's a physical impossibility.

So we better get to work on improving what we have.

You're only demonstrating that you don't understand libertarianism. You don't need 100% agreement on a single issue much less all of the issues for it to be implemented.