|
Panfilo posted:That's true. Since they believe taxation is theft, any govt windfall is just "balancing the score". It's not that they mind theft on principle, they mind people stealing from them.
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2024 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:It's not that they mind theft on principle, they mind people stealing from them. Yah they want the government to enforce contracts, unless it benefits them then gently caress the government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2024 22:01
|
|
|
Notably they also don't want to pay for a court system to adjudicate contracts, nor any enforcement arm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 08:32
|
|
|
Is there a term for when people never want to be on the receiving end of the ideology they promote? We could be pedantic and argue that EVERY political ideology is like this to some extent, but libertarians are pretty notorious for it in this regard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 12:21
|
|
|
Pretty sure there's a name for the bias where you never imagine yourself as being on the losing end of some proposal. So you're much more in favor of harsh punishments, etc, because you assume it will never happen to you or anyone you know. But I can't remember what it's called.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 12:43
|
|
|
Face eating leopard syndrome?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 12:54
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Pretty sure there's a name for the bias where you never imagine yourself as being on the losing end of some proposal. So you're much more in favor of harsh punishments, etc, because you assume it will never happen to you or anyone you know. But I can't remember what it's called. Is it related to John Rawls' "veil of ignorance"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 13:05
|
|
|
It was mentioned before, but the Penn Jilette full quote on leaving libertarianism is actually pretty funny.Penn Jilette posted:My idea of libertarianism was responsibility for others. That was the most important part. I wanted to trust people to take care of each other and not use force. Libertarianism from my point of view was almost a pathological optimism and a love for people. It was complete and utter lack of cynicism. I am not a cynical person. I am crazily optimistic, and I saw people using that same word, "libertarian," to mean I don't care about other people, I don't have responsibility. People who cannot see the difference between "I don't want to wear a seat belt," which I can make an argument for, you should have that right, and "I'm going to drive drunk," which I don't think anybody can make an argument for that you have that right‑‑and when masks came along‑‑I mean, there was actually a moment. I mean, I‑‑actually a moment that happened, which is during the lockdown, I get an email from someone in the libertarian movement that said, "We're doing anti‑mask rallies in Vegas, and of course, we assume you'll be leading them." Libertarian finally acquires third brain cell and becomes Socialist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 13:34
|
|
|
hooman posted:It was mentioned before, but the Penn Jilette full quote on leaving libertarianism is actually pretty funny. He finally realized most of the other libertarians were just racist contrarians. Libertarianism got hollowed out during the sagebrush period through Obama admin. It transformed from a loose coalition of groups mostly premised around the idea government power magnified and legitimized social ills to one mostly centered on guns, Jesus, and racism. Mostly this happened because those were the subcultures that could raise funds, get lobbyist backing, or simply refuse to leave. It was a very slow process to go from dozens of flavors of "something is deeply wrong with this country" to the leopards eating faces party in a guy fawkes mask. Everyone who didn't fit got pushed out and mostly went to the more anarchist forms of socialism or just the mainstream version of their subgroup. Right libertarianism is very much a US invention and a relatively recent one. I don't blame anyone who legitimately is more old school in the thinking and still understands the difference between skepticism and contrarianism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 14:45
|
|
|
Huh. I'm no expert, but I did have a longtime libertarian friend (as in, family of emigrés from Stalin's Russia, grown up hating school lunches as the first step toward the gulags) who thankfully got better since. And according to her, the Obama years were the heigh of libertarianism. You had a brown "Affirmative Action" president in power to be mad about, could look down on regular conservatives because they failed to stop Obama and Ron Paul would totally have done it if he had 2% more support, they could even pretend to be antiwar and rail against drone strikes, just being cool dissidents all the time. As she described it, Trump was the big hollowing out. Just entirely dropping the mealy-mouthed "uh, we want freedom for EVERYONE" and endless Reason Magazine paeans to explain how poll taxes are actually True Democracy if you think about it, and going full nativist, build-the-wall, annoy the libs, pure id. MAGA rammed its hand inside the chest of libertarianism, found its three-sizes-too-small heart, tore it out and ate it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 15:50
|
|
|
Wasn't the iron cross stripper in the 2016 libertarian convention?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 16:19
|
|
|
Do maga people have a position on the age of consent?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:Do maga people have a position on the age of consent? 18+ for everyone but conservatives in which case it's the will of christ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 16:24
|
|
|
I like that Libertarians pushed Penn Jilette away by going both literally and metaphorically mask off, it's pretty fitting. I AM GRANDO posted:Do maga people have a position on the age of consent? They're working on and have succeeded in lowering the age for marriage (and thus consent if you go through that process) to as low as 12 in some states.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Wasn't the iron cross stripper in the 2016 libertarian convention? Yep. Also featured was a man in an ill-fitting suit losing his mind over driver's licenses, and the crowd booing not selling heroin to children.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2024 20:33
|
|
|
The quickest way to discredit libertarian PR is interacting with actual Libertarians. PR: "of course we don't want our town ripped apart by bears, we just don't think we need a big government nanny state law forcing people not to feed the bears! Nobody would do that, statists just want to scare you so they can grab power!" Reality: running from angry bears on the hunt for their next sugar high because people kept feeding them glazed doughnuts to piss off the neighbors
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 16:11
|
|
|
A lot of this comes down to libertarian ideology being fairly shallow and kinda weak, so a lot of the people who just drift into the movement when there's not much they care about aside from getting around regulations, and the shallow sandbar of libertarianism is easily washed over by big right wing movements conjuring the passions of the aimless drifters in ways contrary to the supposed values of libertarianism. Anybody who clings to the nominal ideology and rhetoric behind it over the political forces entirely perpendicular to the party will presumably eventually clambor away if they really care about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 19:06
|
|
|
To be fair to libertarians, it is the same thing with any ideology that adheres to theory 100% over empiricism. Libertarians are just one of the top groups who really love first principles and theory to paper over any actual issues. It's the same thing as hard Marxists who think corruption or greed will go away and an enlightened class of rulers will always be in charge or fascists who are convinced that everyone will rally to their cause and internal divisions will be ended once the right strong person rallies the people. That all works great in theory, but what happens when those things don't happen exactly as theorized? Usually, the answer is just that they didn't stick to first principles enough and have no idea what to do next. The only difference is that libertarianism exists in a weird halfway state where it is more popular and socially acceptable than those other ideologies, but also not popular enough that it ever has enough power to actually put all of their first principles into practice on the scale they say is required for everything to start working correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 20:25
|
|
|
I think you've misunderstood fascism; the unity happens when and as the unfitting are violently purged. If it didn't work, shoot more people. It's a simple, iterative process.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 20:37
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:I think you've misunderstood fascism; the unity happens when and as the unfitting are violently purged. If it didn't work, shoot more people. It's a simple, iterative process. Right, but that's the exact point. It never really works out as the first principles of fascism assume it will. It's just a never-ending series of purging and resentment to maintain order instead of the actual unity they say will happen. In the fascist first principles version, there's 90% of the population who is just dying for a strong leader, national purpose, and unity that will rise up as soon as they have someone to follow and get rid of the 10% of the population that are saboteurs. Most of that 90% doesn't initially realize it, but they will fall in line when the vision is presented.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 20:43
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:I think you've misunderstood fascism; the unity happens when and as the unfitting are violently purged. If it didn't work, shoot more people. It's a simple, iterative process. Even that can't bring unity under fascism because fascism is predicated on eternal conflict and endless struggle lest the master race become soft. If they somehow managed to purge all the untermenschen, they'd just create new categories of subhuman enemies of the Volk who must be exterminated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 20:44
|
|
|
Hard Times creating Strong Men and all that I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 21:08
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Right, but that's the exact point. It never really works out as the first principles of fascism assume it will. It's just a never-ending series of purging and resentment to maintain order instead of the actual unity they say will happen. Your percentage points seem off, but I am assuming their source is unmentionable anyway. But what remained of the German "volk" post-purges let's say '35 onwards was frustratingly compliant and or complacent with Hitler's rule, just read some of the underground SPD reports and their despair. Obviously the reality on the ground isn't one of a unified, single-minded people, so the first principles are wrong-headed in that sense, but there's another debate on what constitute "first principles" in an ideology as incoherent and self-contradictory as fascism. (I'm writing about the Nazi variant since I'm most familiar with it, I suppose the Italian fascists had more of a 'theoretical' beginning but they were entirely side-lined in the real world anyway) Captain_Maclaine posted:Even that can't bring unity under fascism because fascism is predicated on eternal conflict and endless struggle lest the master race become soft. If they somehow managed to purge all the untermenschen, they'd just create new categories of subhuman enemies of the Volk who must be exterminated. Right, and fascism isn't a thought-out ideology to begin with. If we believe the 'table talks', and why wouldn't we?, Hitler envisioned a perpetual battle ground around the Urals to teach each generation how I guess I just wouldn't lump libertarianism right into the same slot as fascism, since they're wrong for different reasons. Or due to different types of logical fallacies? Praxeology explicitly rejects reality, whereas fascism wanted to mold it in its own image, though I doubt even Heidegger envisioned anyone distilling will into rays to use like x-rays in crystallography.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 21:29
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Right, and fascism isn't a thought-out ideology to begin with. If we believe the 'table talks', and why wouldn't we?, Hitler envisioned a perpetual battle ground around the Urals to teach each generation how He talks about it in his unpublished second book as well. quote:I guess I just wouldn't lump libertarianism right into the same slot as fascism, since they're wrong for different reasons. Or due to different types of logical fallacies? Praxeology explicitly rejects reality, whereas fascism wanted to mold it in its own image, though I doubt even Heidegger envisioned anyone distilling will into rays to use like x-rays in crystallography. I'd say they both reject reality, in the libertarian case because praxeology trumps it and fascism insists that will and blood does. And honestly? In America at least right libertarians and out-and-out fascist have precious little light between them these days, see also the NH Libertarians paraphrasing the fourteen words.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 22:15
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Notably they also don't want to pay for a court system to adjudicate contracts, nor any enforcement arm. reminded of that ideological brick wall that all the ultrapsycho libertarians and objectivists loved to hit for whole decades where there's a question of how they're supposed to prosecute and prevent force and fraud at first they would lie to themselves, the world, and god by saying "there will be enough purely voluntary funding of an accountability system" afterwards they would start hypothesizing that maybe you could have courts funding themselves with state-run lotteries and scratch tickets
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2024 23:35
|
|
|
Fascism tends to not even really be an ideology, or at least it takes up the opposite side of brain space from the things that traditional ideology is composed of like rhetoric or principles. It's not about having a coherent logic or reasoning from one idea to another, it's about riling up its followers' base emotions of fear and hate. It works through vibes and feelings, not philosophy or facts, so the actual words being said become immaterial and incoherent if you try to follow them too closely. Many proper ideologies may try to work on the feelings of people as well, but they usually strive for an internal consistency that fascism just doesn't. That also means that fascism feelings can leak into the brains of people who do try to follow a proper ideology and coexist since they operate on a different wavelength, at least up until circumstances force the person to decide on one or the other. And I think that's why you see some people make really dramatic turns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 02:04
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Fascism tends to not even really be an ideology, or at least it takes up the opposite side of brain space from the things that traditional ideology is composed of like rhetoric or principles. It's not about having a coherent logic or reasoning from one idea to another, it's about riling up its followers' base emotions of fear and hate. There's a reason that fascist "thinkers" end up incoherent and contradicting themselves when they try to hammer out the specifics of their thoughts, in those infrequent instances they're honest about what they want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 04:09
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:There's a reason that fascist "thinkers" end up incoherent and contradicting themselves when they try to hammer out the specifics of their thoughts, in those infrequent instances they're honest about what they want. Now that's not fair; Carl Schmitt was mostly coherent, his writing just reads like a bad villain speech, the stereotype of evil itself.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 04:25
|
|
|
How awful do you have to be to get kicked out of the Libertarian Party? https://twitter.com/scotthortonshow/status/1752617090123514032?t=VAQ-R0jgvTn0P2pnRvkJHg&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 20:56
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:How awful do you have to be to get kicked out of the Libertarian Party? The article is wild. They list off all these crazy statements he has made to show how he used to be a "good" libertarian and then the thing that caused them to kick him out was that he was expressing thought that could be ideological justification for collectivism. It's not even about Israel specifically and somehow it leads to concerns that support for the existence of a Jewish state could provide ideological justification for slavery reparations in America (the ultimate worst-case scenario)? His argument is essentially that the idea of a racial or ethnic homeland is collectivist thinking and destroys the very foundation of libertarian thought because it "abandons the methodological individualism underlying and characteristic of all libertarian thought." Advocating for creating a market for child porn? Morally fine individualist principle. Advocating for collective organization of an ethnic group? This is one step away from advocating for reparations for slavery, which is the ultimate form of theft by genetic lottery! Cast out the collectivist! quote:Instead, you must adopt some form of collectivism that allows for such notions as group or tribal property and property rights, collective responsibility and collective guilt. quote:Just consider: Jews lived for hundreds of years in Egypt and when they finally reached their “promised land” this was by no means empty. According to Deuteronomy and Joshua quite a bit of killing, pillaging and raping had to be done before taking over the land. Ancient Jews were not just homesteaders, they were also perpetrators, and there had been already plenty of ethnic mixing with other people of other tribes, with Egyptians, Greeks and all sorts of other people around the Mediterranean, long before the Romans arrived and took over, and this genetic admixture, later also with Arabs, continued up to the present day. Any genetic linking of present-day Jews to ancient Jews, then, becomes an impossible task. There are contemporary Jews that show no genetic traces to ancient Jews, and there are plenty of Gentiles who do show such traces; and in any case, the genetic similarities to be found between the ancient and the present Jews will be one of countless variations and degrees. How to decide then who of the contemporaries is entitled to what part or portion of the holy land? (Interestingly, it appears that the closest genetic similarity to ancient Jews could be found among indigenous Christian Palestinians.) Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jan 31, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 21:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:t's not even about Israel specifically and somehow it leads to concerns that support for the existence of a Jewish state could provide ideological justification for slavery reparations in America (the ultimate worst-case scenario)? Libertarian stance on slavery was for me what the masks were for Penn. They claim to be opposed to use of force, in favor of money for damages, and in favor of lawsuits to right wrongs, but they don't treat slavery as abhorrent and consider people who profited from slavery having to pay damages to people who suffered from it as 'ultimate worst-case scenario' material. If you're going to name your philosophy or political affiliation after "Liberty", enslaving other people should be absolute anathema, as should letting someone keep the profits of such gross and blatant violation of the non-aggression principle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 21:45
|
|
|
Selling your children into slavery so you can cover your debts to the local
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:How awful do you have to be to get kicked out of the Libertarian Party? I will never be able to reconcile the fact that Hans Hermann Hoppe is a living person and not someone who died skimping for the robber barons in the mid 50s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 01:31
|
|
|
I still like to imagine he's the same person as the wrestler.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 01:43
|
|
|
 https://twitter.com/jdcmedlock/status/1751987541665038473?t=lKsc27tTy-ipEYB_DPB6Kg&s=19
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 05:26
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:How awful do you have to be to get kicked out of the Libertarian Party? Being inflexible on the matter of half your age plus seven.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 05:45
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:
https://x.com/ettingermentum/status/1752897835861708846?s=20 wasn't Lew Rockwell the "fleet footed urban youths" Ron Paul newsletter guy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 05:51
|
|
|
uber_stoat posted:wasn't Lew Rockwell the "fleet footed urban youths" Ron Paul newsletter guy? Correct. If I had to lay money down I'd bet that Block was booted because he wasn't the right kind of antisemitic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2024 09:03
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:Libertarian stance on slavery was for me what the masks were for Penn. They claim to be opposed to use of force, in favor of money for damages, and in favor of lawsuits to right wrongs, but they don't treat slavery as abhorrent and consider people who profited from slavery having to pay damages to people who suffered from it as 'ultimate worst-case scenario' material. If you're going to name your philosophy or political affiliation after "Liberty", enslaving other people should be absolute anathema, as should letting someone keep the profits of such gross and blatant violation of the non-aggression principle. Slavery is irreconcilable with the NAP, if you're being remotely intellectually honest. Slavery is at base using the threat of violence to force someone to obey and perform work for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2024 10:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Slavery is irreconcilable with the NAP, if you're being remotely intellectually honest. Slavery is at base using the threat of violence to force someone to obey and perform work for you. but but but what if I pre-agree to it!?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2024 15:38
|
|
