From Gold is money:
I’ve managed to isolate the three most powerful arguments commonly used, but in endless variation, against 100% backing.
They go like this:
I’VE SUDDENLY, OUT OF THE BLUE BECOME AN ANARCHO-CAPITALIST AND THIS REPRESENTS AN INITIATION OF FORCE.
The sudden transformation taken by the dishonest bastard who puts this one forward never lasts more then a few seconds at a time.
If your antagonist is NOT AUTHENTICALLY AN ANARCHO-CAPITALIST this must be greeted with powerful abuse and derision.
The next argument is really just a lie and a distraction/filibuster.
It goes like this: YOU ARE CONFUSING CREDIT WITH MONEY.
This is said when you have never done any such thing once.
The third argument is the response that comes some time after it is been explained to the Macromancer that fractional reserve begins in fraud and embezzlement. That under capitalist conditions it would not normally begin as an open and honest IOU+Redemption Promise but that instead it starts in fraud and by a sort of Greshams-Law process becomes locked into the system.
Now one would hope that after giving such a complex explanation the Macromancer would ask questions and try and understand what you are saying.
But he will not do so for yea you have trespassed upon his religion.
What he’ll do is he’ll wait.
And then maybe a thousand times interspersed with the other two arguments he’ll say……. But fractional reserve ISN’T fraud.
Notice that I’ve high-lighted the word which means ITS THE PRESENT TENSE we are talking about. So this argument is actually a blatant false accusation. And is really a purposeful means of trying to mislead third parties by the Macromancer pretending that you said that the banks AS WE SPEAK, coddled as they are, are in standing violation of the laws of fraud.
Which of course they aren’t since what we have now is socialism. With the printing press at the ready to bail all these guys out should things look shaky.
But anyway. Thats the three arguments. Other then the more standard distractions, lying and filibustering thats their whole case.
Here’s an example from my own blog. Now it might be that it seems I’m being nasty to these guys. But two out of three of them were people I’ve already gone round and round in this circling bullshit of theirs for 100’s of 1000’s of words.
And I’d even been over this a number of times with Terge as well. Though objectively speaking I was probably a bit rude with him.
Having only covered the same ground with him maybe FIVE EFFIN TIMES rather then fifty-five or more.
They never come up with new stuff.
And their dishonesty never bottoms out.
We just have to accept that when the topic turns to money even our near-libertarian friends can take on all the hateful qualities of left-wingers.
One day this will excite the interest of medical researchers no doubt.
Until then be aware of the three nonsense arguments and try and pre-empt them if you can.
But wearing steel-caps that look like sneekers and kicking them in the shins might be more worthwhile and satisfying.