Town Square

Post a New Topic

Rules? We don't need no stinking rules!

Original post made by Really!?, Downtown, on Aug 1, 2014

I would just like to thank the friends, fans, family and groupies of the Finding Stella's for making sure they all get a good nights sleep by setting out their blankets and staking claim to their patch of grass at 11:15 last night for the Concerts In The Park on Friday night. For the second year in a row you folks have managed to thumb your collective noses at the rules that the rest of the citizens of Pleasanton all seem to abide by and show your disregard for common courtesy, the rules of simple etiquette and what it simply means to be a Pleasantonian.

I hope you all have a GREAT time at the show tomorrow night and for all of our friends and neighbors who wonder why the entire middle of the field was already claimed before midnight tonight as you put your own blankets down at the far reaches of the field please take some time tomorrow to "Thank" the Stella's for their enthusiastic support of their beloved band.

Not cool folks, not cool at all.

Comments (9)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libertarian
a resident of Civic Square
on Aug 1, 2014 at 1:04 am

Rough rocks, Petunia. First come first served. Heard of Darwin's survival of the fittest? You lose, I win.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Registered Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 1, 2014 at 10:17 am

As a Libertarian I have to comment on the previous post...just because someone uses "libertarian" in their pen name, or just because someone is Libertarian in their political beliefs, doesn't mean they are jerks. "Libertarian"'s post above is simply rude and crude, and I ask the readers to not generalize Libertarians as jerks as a result.

The core of the Libertarian standpoint is that government's role is to protect the physical and economic rights of its citizens. First-come-first-served is a queuing algorithm, Darwin was a scientist, and you-lose-I-win is an example of a short-term gaming strategy. None of these have anything to do with Libertarians.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Nosy Neighbors
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Aug 1, 2014 at 11:40 am

Nosy Neighbors is a registered user.

Wow. sounds like somebody needs a mani-pedi-colonic in a bad way.

While there is a tendency within the true nature of a Libertarian to eschew overly restrictive and unnecessary laws imposed by an overbearing or corrupt government there is also a general and wholly prevailing theme of cooperation, a sense of community and above all else, just not being an big jerk to our fellow citizens.

I call Shenanigans on "Libertarian" and would contend that her attitude is more indicative of an entitled protected class liberal with a simple disdain for common courtesy and a sense of community.

Comfy shoes do not equal good karma.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libertarian
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 1, 2014 at 11:45 am

Yes, Joe, you've got that right: the role of government is "to protect the physical and economic rights of citizens." Civil rights? Not so much. Human rights? Nope. So, c'mon Joe, come out from behind your sheet.

Libertarians have always made the following kinds of arguments. "It's my lunch counter, I own it, and it's my Constitutional right to private property to not serve colored folks if I don't want to." "Nor do I have to rent out rooms to them at my privately owned hotel. Nor do I have to sell my home to someone who made change the complexion of the neighborhood."

Another: "If I want to hire white people instead of black people at the workplace that I own, my Constitutional right to private property lets me do so. If workers don't like the unhealthy and unsafe conditions of MY workplace, they can go work somewhere else. It's my property and I'll to with it what I want."

Both Pauls, Rand and his father, have been making variants of this argument for years.

On the libertarian view, selfish individualism is a virtue. Screw you. First come first served. Losers.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Registered Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 1, 2014 at 1:24 pm

Libertarian, I'll agree with you that people have been making what you called "lunch counter" claims, in fact for centuries, but I'll disagree that this is coming from a Libertarian philosophy.

You're really bringing up the topic of discrimination, which, in addition to being wrong, is economically harmful to the groups being discriminated against. So therefore it's government's job to prevent and protect.

Your other point is a mix of a couple of things: discrimination again, but this time in regards to hiring vs. providing a service; and workplace safety. Once again, discrimination is economic harm, and workplace safety is physical harm. In both cases government has the role of protector and preventer. So again, we have no conflict or argument about the Libertarian philosophy.

And yes, individualism is a virtue, absolutely. The Libertarian difference is that individualism can't be pursued at the expense of others. As an individual I'm free to follow my own pursuits as long as I don't impinge upon the personal or economic rights of others.

Rand Paul and his father, Ron Paul, have done a great job bringing various aspects of Libertarian philosophy to the forefront of politics for years. Not everybody agrees with the positions they hold. However, neither of them have ever advocated discrimination or unsafe workplaces. It's disingenuous for you to attach their names to problems which aren't of their creation, and which they have no part in maintaining.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Just Move them
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 1, 2014 at 2:15 pm

If these groupies cannot behave nicely then just go out there around midnight, roll up their blankets and leave them on the sidewalk.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libertarian
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 1, 2014 at 3:31 pm

No, Joe, I think it is disingenuous to tell people that libertarianism doesn't subordinate human and civil rights to individual property rights. Both Pauls, father and son, have spent much of their careers as southern politicians revisiting all that nasty civil rights legislation in the 60s which took so much economic liberty from white café owners and hoteliers.

These are human and civil rights we're talking about, not property rights, though I admire your libertarian attempt to minimize the former and to prioritize the latter. That is, after all, what libertarians do. They reduce humans, along with their civil and human rights, to economic units who seek to maximize their individual holdings. The libertarian idea of "individualism" is essentially a possessive individualism that holds property rights above such concerns as human dignity, human welfare, and the welfare of children.

Web Link

You and me, as libertarians, Joe, are a couple of greedy scumbags who only care about ourselves. Let's get to the park first and let those who come after cry about special entitlements.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libertarian
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 2, 2014 at 1:01 am

Well, Joe, your silence on this matter is not surprising to me. The liberals have their federalist Papers, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Cass Sunstein, and John Rawls. The social democrats have their Jean Jacques Rousseau, Karl Marx, GDH Cole and Jurgen Habermas.

But what intellectual heritage do we libertarians have to draw from, aside from the racist Paul family? Well, because you probably didn't understand the distinctions I was making above between possessive individualism v. real individualism, constitutionally specified rights v. universal rights (e.g., public education), I have taken the liberty of scouring the libertarian literature in response to what I stated.

Well, it all came down to the likes of Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Shawn Hannity, Anne Coulter, and of course the inimitable Sarah Palin who, as many of my good libertarian friends assure me, is the Aristotle of our time. Possessive individualists all; and deniers of the idea of universal human rights as emanates from Immanuel Kant's idea of individualism and extends throughout Western political thought.

So, here we are, Joe. Greedy, selfish, possessive individualists who refuse to acknowledge universal rights that are alleged to transcend such archaic notions as 18th century musket and property rights (e.g., promotion and continuation of slavery).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Aug 2, 2014 at 2:34 pm

If we don't need rules, then how come so many folks pay taxes?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Prop 46: Two Bridges Too Far
By Tom Cushing | 21 comments | 1,537 views

The valley loses a distinguished and humble leader
By Tim Hunt | 2 comments | 984 views

My secret identity is revealed!
By Roz Rogoff | 2 comments | 982 views