|
Liquid Communism posted:Thankfully we aren't a Libertopia., so those street owners have chosen poorly. All they've really got ownership of is the common spaces that came with the property, as the road itself being the only way into a decades old neighborhood means that the residents will effectively be granted easements to traverse it despite the ownership change. Oh, they can traverse it, sure, but the couple's plan is to charge them for the right to park on the street.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
Keeshhound posted:Oh, they can traverse it, sure, but the couple's plan is to charge them for the right to park on the street. Also to remove the gate and let anyone park on the street.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
I think that's the possibility that's got the residents hyperventilating the most.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Just another reminder for anyone feeling sympathy for the homeowners:quote:There’s a bit of irony in the couple’s purchase. Until a 1948 U.S. Supreme Court ruling banning the enforcement of racial covenants, homes in Presidio Terrace could be purchased only by whites. I'll grant that the possibility exists that everyone who now owns a house in that community is %100 opposed to racial discrimination in housing, but given that they're already trying to literally gate themselves off from the rest of the city, I cannot help but be dubious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
So a friend of a friend is apparently a real life ancap. I don't have any contact with this person, but my girlfriend does. She is vaguely left leaning but not enormously politically informed, so I'm having all sorts of fun suggesting topics of discussion between them. I kind of want to meet her, I've never seen a real ancap before, they're rare in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
I posted this in the Trump thread, but apparently everyone's a bit more concerned about the whole possible nuclear annihilation thing... So...before I just read the cliffnotes version of this dude's memo, but now I read the whole thing. This dude seems to go out of his way to cover his rear end, consistently saying that he's not against diversity, that White people certainly have not had a harder time dealing with life than minorities, and such. But his "solutions" are basically to...eliminate all the current programs Google has for diversifying its workforce. There seems to be some bizarre, twisted logic where he seems to be arguing that removing these programs that promote diversity will some end up increasing diversity, which was his whole loving problem in the first place. And this is the main thing I don't get about this stupid conversation we're having. Google's decision to hire more women and minorities wasn't the result of government policies. This was Google management making a decision based on what they felt was the direction they wanted to take the company. Whether they did it because they legitimately think it's a noble thing to do, or if they did it just to get good PR, the fundamental result is the same. What this nimrod seems to be arguing is that Google is somehow being compelled to do this by some outside force. We've already established that this outside force is not the government, which means that the only thing this force must be is...holy poo poo, the FREE MARKET! Yet, if you read this clown's memo/manifesto, he makes it sound like that's not the case. That they're still being compelled by non-free market forces, and by somehow being more free market (which again, how the gently caress is this supposed to work?) everything will be hunky dory because supposedly more minorities will be hired because they're actually qualified, as opposed to the ones that are there right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Well obviously it's devious non free market statist men with guns forces which are promoting the absurd idea that diversity is good and google is having to go along with that in order to survive! The market can only be free if google also got to set the market mood! The free-est market possible is one where the market membership has 100% control over the conditions of the market without any pesky "consumers" or "society" or "competing advertisers" interfering with it!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:So a friend of a friend is apparently a real life ancap. I don't have any contact with this person, but my girlfriend does. She is vaguely left leaning but not enormously politically informed, so I'm having all sorts of fun suggesting topics of discussion between them. Wait, not just a brit ancap, but a woman too? You've found a unicorn, OwlFancier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:So a friend of a friend is apparently a real life ancap. I don't have any contact with this person, but my girlfriend does. She is vaguely left leaning but not enormously politically informed, so I'm having all sorts of fun suggesting topics of discussion between them. True ancaps are rare in the US as well. Their natural habitat is the internet, and they're hard to find anywhere else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Wait, not just a brit ancap, but a woman too? You've found a unicorn, OwlFancier. are women ancaps rarer? only ancap i know is a super edgy hacker hipster lady
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:are women ancaps rarer? only ancap i know is a super edgy hacker hipster lady Libertarians are overwhelmingly male. Ancaps are basically extremist Libertarians, so I assumed that held true. Though I admit I haven't seen any sort of demographic survey done of people who identify as an-cap. I'd be surprised if that information exists, considering they're a small minority within a small minority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:I posted this in the Trump thread, but apparently everyone's a bit more concerned about the whole possible nuclear annihilation thing... I've edited your statement in such a way that it should answer your question.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:. This was Google management making a decision based on what they felt was the direction they wanted to take the company. Whether they did it because they legitimately think it's a noble thing to do, or if they did it just to get good PR, Or maybe they did it because having a diverse staff is good for business 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Wait, not just a brit ancap, but a woman too? You've found a unicorn, OwlFancier. A brit, ancap, transwoman. Which on the one hand I can see why a transperson might hate the UK government with its lovely approach to transitioning but on the other hand I would think that might raise some concerns with stuff like the private police she's advocating for. She is also a massive techbro though, highly paid and works in IT. Supposedly she thinks Dubai is the model society and the UK could be like that "if only we didn't keep voting left" I'm not sure what she's been doing the past ten years or whether she's aware that the City of London exists but there you go. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 12:07 on Aug 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 12:00
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:A brit, ancap, transwoman. I would say you'd met Justine Tunney but she's not British.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
I always wonder if like, LGBT or minority libertarians or far-righties expect their wealth or "one of the good ones" status to save them or if they realize the liberal consensus (in all senses of the term politically) are why they can be open about who they aredivabot posted:I would say you'd met Justine Tunney but she's not British. Has she weighed in on Damore's firing yet Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Aug 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
She is a fair bit younger than me so I guess to her maybe the current level of LGBT acceptance is all she's ever known? It's easy to universalize things like that. Or maybe she just thinks that she can live in an enclave that is perfectly to her tastes and nobody will bother them because of the non aggression principle or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 12:33
|
|
|
I went down the "physical removal" rabbit hole today. Coincidentally that subreddit was just banned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ5zOEkD2Lg quote:Ill give a go at explaining it. Its mostly taken from Ancap author Hans-Hermann Hoppe. An extremely valuable member of the Libertarian community, especially regarding his text "The Economics and Ethics of Private Property". Renowned as one of the most clear and concise theories of Private Property ever put forward. But none the less. The only difference between Joesph Stalin and Hans Herman Hoppe is that Hoppe believes in private property. As far as I can tell there is no difference between anarcho-capitalism and totalitarian fascism. Dmitri-9 fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Aug 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:The only difference between Joesph Stalin and Hans Herman Hoppe is that Hoppe believes in private property. As far as I can tell there is no difference between anarcho-capitalism and totalitarian fascism. Pretty much, also most monarchies didn't try to improve their lands, they just tried to extract more wealth. And they went into lots of debt too, like you wouldn't believe. Philip II of Spain declared bankruptcy four times during his reign. Running a massive deficit was standard operating procedure for most of European history.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
quote:Of course the Pinochet Worship is mostly a Joke, "gently caress 'em if they can't take (mostly) a Joke," my death squads justifiably reassure each other as they push pregnant women and my political enemies out of in-flight airplanes to their gruesome deaths thousands of feet below. "It's just a prank, bros!" I reasonably laugh while torturing and killing untold tens of thousands. "Where's your sense of humor?" I logically ask, suffering nothing beyond house arrest before dying in 2006 without ever having been convicted or punished for ...And what do you call your act, Mr. u/TrueDilTom?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
White Coke posted:Pretty much, also most monarchies didn't try to improve their lands, they just tried to extract more wealth. And they went into lots of debt too, like you wouldn't believe. Philip II of Spain declared bankruptcy four times during his reign. Running a massive deficit was standard operating procedure for most of European history. Yeah kinda astonishing when they declare literal tenant/landlord relationships were Ownership And Not Rentiership.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
quote:While in contrast, the monarchist government or other privately owned governments have a single owner who is forever responsible for the land he governs, hence they have to pick up debts while also reaping the values of production. So such a government will tend to reward production and punish parasitism. Its essentially the difference between renting and owning. Owners (Monarchism and Private Government) will act to maximise the value of what they own in order to fulfil their self interests, while renters (Democracy and Public Government) won’t have any concept of costs, and will enact many of them in order to fulfil their self interest. I love this paragraph specifically because it could only be written by someone who is totally unfamiliar with the actual power dynamics and MO's of the actual recorded monarchies and autocracies throughout history and in the present day. Like not familiar at even the most basic level of how things were done. It's just so blatantly obvious that HHH pulled all information presented in his writings from the very depths of his rear end, he didn't bother to study a single loving thing he was spouting off about, and that the conclusions he reached are based on dick all besides "what HHH thinks we ought to do with all the [insert racial and/or religious slurs here]".
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
ah but you see your historical examples and facts are nothing compared to the bullshitting power of praxeology
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:It's just so blatantly obvious that HHH pulled all information presented in his writings from the very depths of his rear end, he didn't bother to study a single loving thing he was spouting off about, and that the conclusions he reached are based on dick all besides "what HHH thinks we ought to do with all the [insert racial and/or religious slurs here]". I think he actually admits as much, basically saying this is "theoretical history" derived from logical deduction from first principles more than things like "sources" or "existing scholarly insights."
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 12:33
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:I love this paragraph specifically because it could only be written by someone who is totally unfamiliar with the actual power dynamics and MO's of the actual recorded monarchies and autocracies throughout history and in the present day. Like not familiar at even the most basic level of how things were done. It's been a while since anyone's busted out this old thread classic: "On the other hand, all of recorded history."
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
What kind of libertarian is Gary Johnson? Based on that essay he wrote he's practically a centrist Democrat https://thejacknews.com/commentary/gary-johnson-wake-charlottesville-lets-look-solutions-not-blame/
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
quote:While in contrast, the monarchist government or other privately owned governments have a single owner who is forever responsible for the land he governs, hence they have to pick up debts while also reaping the values of production. So such a government will tend to reward production and punish parasitism. Its essentially the difference between renting and owning. Owners (Monarchism and Private Government) will act to maximise the value of what they own in order to fulfil their self interests, while renters (Democracy and Public Government) won’t have any concept of costs, and will enact many of them in order to fulfil their self interest. paragon1 posted:I love this paragraph specifically because it could only be written by someone who is totally unfamiliar with the actual power dynamics and MO's of the actual recorded monarchies and autocracies throughout history and in the present day. Like not familiar at even the most basic level of how things were done. This idea of Hoppe's was the seed of Neoreaction, as originally presented by Mencius Moldbug (Curtis Yarvin), c.f. this essay, which is one of his early ones so it's only 1600 words and not his usual 20,000.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:What kind of libertarian is Gary Johnson? Based on that essay he wrote he's practically a centrist Democrat https://reason.com/archives/1977/12/01/how-to-win-converts-left-and-r
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
So basically an old school pre-Hoppean who is trying to come off reasonable instead of as an unhinged nut?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:So basically an old school pre-Hoppean who is trying to come off reasonable instead of as an unhinged nut? Well I'm really just saying "sounding like something other than a libertarian" is a tactic they consciously cultivate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
(Tunney)Lightning Lord posted:Has she weighed in on Damore's firing yet Not that I can find. She's been real quiet lately, or at least hasn't been loudly and publicly making GBS threads the bed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
this was dumb and i needed coffee :v
Ormi fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Aug 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Holy poo poo is every vaguely libertarian leaning person in the entire world having to pipe up with their opinion that nazi's are bad but let's not forget that communists are just as bad and the alt-right is to the nazi's as a modern university democratic socialist group is to the soviet union. Totally the same things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
quote not edit fug
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
ethnic cleansing is exactly the same as opposing ethnic cleansing
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:ethnic cleansing is exactly the same as opposing ethnic cleansing I've felt the urge to post this a lot more recently, but it does fit!  Seriously tho people shouldn't take a fuckin @dril tweet as genuine advice, god drat
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Holy poo poo is every vaguely libertarian leaning person in the entire world having to pipe up with their opinion that nazi's are bad but let's not forget that communists are just as bad and the alt-right is to the nazi's as a modern university democratic socialist group is to the soviet union. Totally the same things. one of these days i'm going to learn how to make browser plug-ins and make one that converts all occurrences of libertarian to idiot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 06:11
|
|
|
So I was talking to some guy on Facebook, and he's really, really adamant that American college is so expensive because government intervention is 'distorting' the market for college, encouraging less well off people to enter college with assistance and throwing off the natural capitalist balance as a result since Colleges will just rack up fees thanks to the government giving out some money for it. His tone is typically lovely, I'm sure the intrinsic classism is obvious but he also keeps on making dismissive remarks on things like Gender Studies or general arts degrees in the usual STEMlord fashion(college should only be for getting well paying jobs, not wasting time and money on such trivialities!) and saying that the government assistance for stuff like racial minorities is part of the problem. Ugh, I'm trying to counter this, so far I've mostly just pointed to my experience going to college in Europe and how it was much cheaper than what I would have had to deal with in America, but I really don't like leaving the intrinsic assumptions of his arguments about the integrity of capitalism unfettered by government intervention unchallenged, anybody have any thoughts and maybe data on the reasons for America's college costs and how the typical libertarian arguments around this are a crock of poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:So I was talking to some guy on Facebook, and he's really, really adamant that American college is so expensive because government intervention is 'distorting' the market for college, encouraging less well off people to enter college with assistance and throwing off the natural capitalist balance as a result since Colleges will just rack up fees thanks to the government giving out some money for it. His tone is typically lovely, I'm sure the intrinsic classism is obvious but he also keeps on making dismissive remarks on things like Gender Studies or general arts degrees in the usual STEMlord fashion(college should only be for getting well paying jobs, not wasting time and money on such trivialities!) and saying that the government assistance for stuff like racial minorities is part of the problem. For his dumb STEM masturbation, there's always the easy pointer to the reality of wealthy families choosing to send their kids to great liberal arts schools whenever possible. Because while it's cool to be a decent STEM worker, it's way cooler to have a comprehensive, holistic, and adaptable critical thought and lit skill set with a well rounded body of knowledge. More money = Better than, according to most libertarians. So why are the Romneys of the world bothering with all that ivy league hoopla? Tell the guy to go persuade Warren Buffet or Bill Gates that education is only about a good job, SPOILER: he can't. He's using trade school logic to attack the concept of a university, so the libertarian is likely unable to approach or appreciate the nature and purpose of his target.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:21 |
|
|
khwarezm posted:So I was talking to some guy on Facebook, and he's really, really adamant that American college is so expensive because government intervention is 'distorting' the market for college, encouraging less well off people to enter college with assistance and throwing off the natural capitalist balance as a result since Colleges will just rack up fees thanks to the government giving out some money for it. His tone is typically lovely, I'm sure the intrinsic classism is obvious but he also keeps on making dismissive remarks on things like Gender Studies or general arts degrees in the usual STEMlord fashion(college should only be for getting well paying jobs, not wasting time and money on such trivialities!) and saying that the government assistance for stuff like racial minorities is part of the problem. For the 'government assistance causing tuition to go up', an article on FiveThirtyEight talks about how decreasing state funding per student is correlated with increasing tuition and there is no single cause of the tuition boom. It does not mention much about federal student loans, which is likely what the guy is thinking about in terms of government assistance. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fancy-dorms-arent-the-main-reason-tuition-is-skyrocketing/ As for the the other remarks on 'useless majors', another article from the same site points out that most students at your typical college pick practical majors. It is more often the well-off students at selective places that choose a 'useless major' and go to get graduate degrees which allow them to do well in the long-term. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/students-at-most-colleges-dont-pick-useless-majors/
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 04:36
|
|
