An ad-hominem rant by \"Lazarus Long\", based on the presumption that his opponents use the same attack tactics he does. His most glaring double-speak is that he claims the arguments are strawmen, but he defends them anyway instead of disclaiming them. <\/p>\n
My normal policy is not to engage in ad-hominem pissing matches with libertarians, but Lazarus Long has been impugning me for quite a while now. So, I'd like to set the following straight, since it illustrates his debate style. Also, this can serve as an example of how argument with him can mire you endlessly, even when he is grossly wrong. <\/p>\n
In his FAS , he writes: Incidentally, even though this article was not written at the time of Huben's e-mail to me, he stated \"I'm hardly upset by your \"refutation\" or any of the other rather pathetic attempts (and yours is indeed the weakest by far.)\" In other words... although the refutation had not been written, Huben miraculously claims that it is the weakest by far. <\/p>\n
In an ad-hominem web page titled Who is Mike Huben , he writes: An example of his obsession, and lack of intellectual integrity can be seen by a visit to his \"Critique of Libertarianism\" site. He listed a link to my critique of his Non-Libertarian FAQ, before the critique had been written, along with a description of what was contained in the critique. A most impressive stunt, considering that the critique, not only was not on this site at the time, but hadn't been written. <\/p>\n
Now, I'm not known for my psychic powers: how could I have known about his document to criticize it or create a link to it? <\/p>\n
Very simple. He had posted it (or an early version) as Huben's FAS (Frequently Asserted Strawmen). in talk.politics.libertarian July 2, 1996. He wrote: This article will appear in full form on my webpage as http:\/\/vaxxine.com\/rational\/huben-bs-fas.htm<\/a> within the next few weeks. I criticized his post by email, and made a link to the URL he had announced. No magic involved: I was just responding to the information he made publicly available. I'd like to know how he construes this as \"obsession, and lack of intellectual integrity\". <\/p>\n Most of his attacks and his FAS can be similarly handled. However, responding to them just gives him more material to similarly misuse. He likes to misinterpret non-response as his own triumph over the cowardly, but I trust most readers can see that he's a legend in his own mind. <\/p>\n [4\/13\/99: \"Prince Lazarus\", age 67, given name Howard Turney, has been hit with an SEC restraining order for his New Utopia internet scam.] <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The rest is here:<\/p>\n Critiques Of Libertarianism: All links. - http:\/\/www.TheWorld.com<\/a> ...<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" An ad-hominem rant by \"Lazarus Long\", based on the presumption that his opponents use the same attack tactics he does. His most glaring double-speak is that he claims the arguments are strawmen, but he defends them anyway instead of disclaiming them. Continue reading