|
What kind of living conditions were the women living in? If they were living in the same kind of arrangement then yeah, it's a double standard. But if they put in more effort at the same point in their life then it is a valid complaint to see other people just coasting in life. And, just generalizing here, but a lot of adult men that still live with their parents often do little around the house, compared to adult women in the same household who often end up as caretakers for everyone - expected to babysit nieces she nephews, drive their parents to doctor appointments, cook stuff for parties, etc.
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2019 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I find it very interesting that the Vikings are held up as paragons of manliness when they were actually cleaner than typical for their time but also loved poetry and had way more gender equality than you'd expect of medieval Europe. Didn't they take domestic violence super seriously? I thought I heard somewhere that an abusive husband would get up and shanked if word went around he was slapping his wife.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Yeah well regulations are for statists, apparently.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2019 07:11
|
|
|
Are there a lot of Native American Libertarians? Because if there were a group of people with a grudge against the government and a desire to do things their way without outside interference, it would be indigenous people.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
Libertarians are scared of taxes because they think men with guns are going to come and black bag them for not paying taxes. Imagine how much more revenue the IRS would be bringing in if they had the resources and political will to actually do this to rich people.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
I often wonder if a libertarians attitude about the state are out of fear or envy (perhaps both?) because it often seems like they just want to leverage the same kind of power for themselves. They like to treat the government as this boogeyman that will black bag them for not paying their income tax. I bet they are just projecting their own power fantasies about what they would do to people that anger them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2019 06:29
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:I like how labor was so powerful Ayn loving Rand took up the power of the strike, but for her favored class. Let’s rewrite it instead where Tagamet steel moves to China in order to pay his workers 25 cents and hour and the government doesn’t care if he pour coal and slag into the nearest river. Libertarians on Facebook have claimed that organizing a labor union is a violation of the NAP because you are forcing the employer to negotiate with a collective bargaining unit. It's rather baffling to me because I thought libertarians love stuff like contracts.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
I wonder how willing libertarians are to the idea that they may be on the receiving end of the policies they support. Are they going to be sitting in their leased dumpster after being blackballed from every job because nobody is going to hire a 5' 2" manlet, thinking, "Yes, this is fine" Somehow I doubt the people who obsess about meritocracies think about how it will be when they come up... short in a lot of aspects.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
Right, which is the irony of cheerleading for powerful rich people who have no need to pander to them. In a way its almost like a weird religion where the Captains of Industry are a pantheon of gods and Libertarians think if they worship hard enough the gods will listen and bestow upon them the privileges of the elite. But I guess that connects to how obsessed they are with Ayn Rand.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Anubis posted:The libertarian solution is, of course, no commons. Privatize everything and the smart people will properly manage their grounds and never overgraze because that would be stupid. And then even if they do, they deserve to starve and be forced to sell their land to survive because of their stupidity and this is just the free market at work making sure that only smart people have access to resources. And please don't try to apply this to water, rivers and air pollution because they don't have an easy answer for that. Exactly. They think there's some kind of darwinism at play. The polluting companies will inevitably fail because people won't do business with them and talented workers will shirk unethical companies. Libertarians don't seem to grasp the concept of privilege or failing upwards. Existence is some black box where effort tokens are inserted and success gets spit out.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 06:23
|
|
|
They hate being forced to do anything. They were the kid that went nuclear over their parents making them put the cap back on the toothpaste tube. It's probably also why they are so laser focused on their pet issues (weed, guns, and sex with minors)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:https://twitter.com/maxgAIER/status/1159280373265772547 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
Mulloy posted:My problem with libertarians is that they pay lip service to wanting freedom and equality but they have absolutely no policy to enforce anything beyond their weird NAP. I fail to see how it would do anything beyond create warlords or recreate the system they're pissed about now.  Not to mention the NAP itself is wildly inconsistent, since they could use it to rationalize banning abortion (they consider it a violation of the embryos NAP) going after a guy for Child Support, organizing a union, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
When the topic of roads get brought up they like to point out when Domino's covered up potholes, as though this magically proves that private businesses are better at maintaining roads than the govt. They also tend to be in favor of strong borders which ironically would put a major damper on interstate commerce. Why should the government be allowed to build up their own DMZ stifling your markets with your neighbors? Why should you care if people immigrate to set up their own businesses, purchase their own property, and provide their own labor to your markets?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
Is it really crypto fascism? I just assumed they were narcissistic and used the government as an excuse for any of their failings.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2019 03:53
|
|
|
The Libertarians I argue with always claim the asset the owner brings to the table is 'risk'. It never occurs to them that a worker or a tenant also has risk, such as unemployment or homelessness, oh no, it's the prefer that has it bad since he's got the fact that his workers, customers, and renters are free to go somewhere else. They act like risk is the goddamn sword of damocles hanging over their head, and that is why they deserve the lions share. They also tend to assume all the equipment and property is wholly owned by the owner themselves, so it is as if they are doing the workers a big favor by providing all this stuff. I guess in their libertarian fantasy there are no middlemen or other bad agents acting parasitically, nope they own everything 100 percent 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:My biggest complaint about libertarians is their failure to acknowledge class struggle. Arguably the most important Marxist criticism of capitalism has nothing to do with public vs private, but boss vs. worker. Start your own business and be your own boss?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Would Libertarians voluntarily live in a perfectly libertarian society, or would we have to violate their NAP to have them put their money where their mouth is?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2020 23:11
|
|
|
Libertarian: "Have I gotten out of touch? No, it's the statists that must be wrong."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
So how does Galt's Gulch handle a pandemic?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2020 06:46
|
|
|
The claim I'm seeing from libertarians now is that regulations are just slowing down responses to the Coronavirus and rumors that the CDC has tons of masks and other equipment that isn't getting distributed because of buerocratic hurdles.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2020 15:46
|
|
|
Pretty interesting that the same types of people that floated the idea of seasteading are suddenly aghast at the idea of an autonomous zone. You'd think they'd be enthusiastic about the notion of being a captain of industry in a place free from the police.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
Can we talk about how inconsistent Libertarians are about the concept of 'force'? I will read them talk about how they're conceptually fine with XYZ as long as they're not forced to do those things. From what I gather, here's the distinction they make : Force: -Taxation is the main one. Don't pay taxes and men with guns will take your things and imprison you. Of course they never seem willing to challenge this ; only the most diehard of sovcits are willing to go to prison out of principle. Which makes me question how much force there really is then. Because it still seems like they're voluntarily paying taxes. I never hear for them calling for a 'tax strike' the same way people call for labor or rent strikes either. For something so forceful and opressive they are awfully complacent about its existence. -Anything to do with guns pretty much. Guns are the be all end all so any restrictions or limitations are like chopping their arms off. They don't seem to question the notion that violence as the final word is a pretty dire mindset and played out would result in a pretty pyrrhic existence. They like to think an armed society is a polite society buuuut it seems like it would be the opposite; if everyone has guns and is willing to use them then they have no deterrence. There's no escalation in conflicts when people will just crank things up to 11 knowing the other person is equally capable - why trust them when nobody is forcing them to comply anyway? -Recognizing unions and strikes. Companies should never have to employ people who form collective bargaining units or refuse to work due to conflicts. Yet of course libertarians would find it perfectly reasonable for the opposite to be true - of course they would refuse to render services if they didn't get compensated. Force in this context seems to be about resisting the idea that a worker and employer are equal parties. -Cancel culture. Libertarians get freaked out about things being canceled for being problematic. They get annoyingly vague about how force gets applied in this situation, but just that some companies and creators are utterly at the mercy of the woke mob's wrath. This often comes with the right wing hypocrisy about freeze peach. They see it as this oruboros that will eventually turn on itself, but if they really believed woke mobs will consume themselves then why worry so much? Why not wait it out? If it's so stupid and faddish to Cancel things then why validate its existence? It's like that weak/strong threat fascists need. Cancel culture is simultaneously stupid and pointless yet carries enough clout to force choke you out of making big tiddy anime rape jokes 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
Not force : -Anything involving employment. Working for someone is a completely voluntary endeavor and they don't seem to see any coercion whatsoever. The problem will always lie with the employee, much like blaming a domestic violence victim for having terrible taste in men. If you have a crappy job, get a better one or start your own business. If you think about it, they treat workers much like they treat property. Nobody should be forced to have to treat workers equally to their employer, a terrible employer never needs to change, and an employer never needs to be held as accountable as a worker. Landlords also fall under this category too, it's all voluntary, you're using their property (and chillingly, by being a tenant you are an extension of their property ). -By extension, submitting surplus labor is always seen as voluntary. Taxation is theft but pretty much any other method of labor or wealth extraction is voluntary. This makes it easy for them to ignore other problems, like wage theft. -Poverty is seen as completely voluntary. Libertarians talk a big game about self determination and independence but are hilariously conformist as to what that entails. Poverty and success are narrowly defined which makes it convenient for them to cherry pick for their own narrative. Taxation is theft but most don't suggest the reason people are homeless is that they couldn't keep up with property /income tax debt. It's selective ignorance, being forced to pay taxes is bad even though that's not what makes people destitute, societal factors perpetuating actual poverty however are always self inflicted. -Voluntaryism is King. Some Libertarians will muddy the waters with leftists by insisting that yeah, things like mutual aid, providing food and medical care to the needy, and keeping streets and environment clean are good things. They just don't want to be forced to do it. Which makes the whole effort seem like a bad faith gesture. If I wanted to try to undermine environmentalists, I might make a big show of sweeping up garbage in the wake of their marches and protests. I would try and signal boost that message, not to more serious and organized activists, but to people that are opposed to environmentalism, so that chuds could point to me and say "see? This Millennial gets it!". That's what I see with libertarians and Voluntaryism. It never feels like doing a good thing for its own sake but to advance a narrative to undermine mutual aid by focusing the dialogue about how our money should never be FORCED to keep people housed, the people who care enough will take it upon themselves to do it on their own.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:To me, it always seemed like the obvious conclusion of Liberalism, including the entire ideology existing as justification for authoritarianism. So it's full on projection? They try to frame their beliefs as 'everyone should mind their own business' and started using a porcupine? as a newer mascot. I hear libertarians treat leftists as authoritarians, because they support a big government and want to force people to pay taxes and not be racist. OwlFancier posted:I mean it makes perfect sense if you just look at it as "things I don't like are terrifying statist and/or socialist fascism" This is true. Some Libertarians are more pragmatic than others. Like I demonstrated, some will not be opposed to the existence of aid and services so long as they aren't on the hook for it. But sometimes I do wonder how true that really is too. Like imagine some Twilight Zone episode where a libertarian got transported to a Full Gay Space Communist America. In this fever dream he was never forced to pay taxes or even contribute at all ;he could Tiger King it up on his own little mud pit while everyone else engaged in mutual aid and worked collectively. Would he be happy that they left him alone? Is it REALLY about "Force" for Libertarians?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean the whole concept of voluntaryism is kinda daft. At least as an absolute principle. Because human life isn't voluntary, like you literally start out being involuntarily brought into existence and are dumped into an environment you didn't ask for and relationships that go on to form your entire concept of relationships they are so dominant in your life, and by the time you're old enough to have views about it on your own you're already involved with a place and people and a society that you can't just opt out of. Voluntaryism in this context is giving to charity vs paying taxes for the same thing. Libertarians insinuate the compulsory nature of it is unecessary and counterproductive.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Why do Libertarians have a hate-on for Alexander Hamilton?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
This seems to touch on another thing about Libertarians- a lack of class solidarity. The people opposing them are this mindless mob who are a threat to them, the rugged individualists. But they as a group don't have a lot going on to link them to each other. Everything with Libertarians seems transactional (even their voluntaryism feels performative) so it seems like they wouldn't support each other out of pure empathy. It also kind of explains why they often talk a big game but don't seem to back it up with direct action.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2020 17:24
|
|
|
Libertarian concepts pop up a lot in science fiction, and I'm curious about the reasons why. My own best guess is that their fantasies about small governnent and free markets are so far fetched they have to come up with this fictional premise to allow such a system to actually work.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Do they? I thought sci fi would generally portray either hypercapitalism as dystopian or society as being post scarcity to the point it doesn't really make a lot of sense. Maybe I'm generalizing too much then. But I thought a lot of SF authors like Heinlein and Orson Scott Card had a rather Libertarian bent to their stories. VictualSquid posted:I think it is mostly from a historical correlation. The kind of people who are interested in sf (speculative fiction in general) are also the primary demographic for libertarianism. Outside of the cold war west, libertarianism is actually not that common in sf.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
I don't see most Libertarians as that deep or philosophical, just two overlapping circles of 'Taxation is theft' and 'communism is bad'. There's a few funny variations in there. Like some of them are fine paying taxes on things that directly benefit them and only them. They have this Ferengi like attitude where Profit is everything and only value things that enrich them, but they're willing to be really inconsistent to if it benefits them personally. Then the other overlapping circle is all the Libertarians that aren't so much Libertarian as they are anti socialism, freak out about anything they interpret as 'Communist'. These are the ones that bring up Venezuela a lot and how many bajillion people died under communism. The only thing they seem charitable and selfless about is stopping communism. I find it ironic that they'll always have a lot of examples to show how they think communism is bad and doesn't work, but get rather pedantic when you ask them about all the large successful minarchist nations compared to communist ones. They also don't give a poo poo about the NAP but perhaps because they don't see people who support socialism as deserving of existence. OH, and of course all the lay scholars of the constitution who think the document is perfect to be taken entirely literally, and any kind of interpretation outside their narrow view of it is heresy. I've often wondered about the idea of an alternate reality where Thomas Jefferson from earth 214 fills the constition with all sorts of genuinely progressive language and protections like ensuring everyone on us soil gets universal access to Healthcare and education etc. Would they still defend the document as this absolute and ironclad covenant if it wasn't all about guns and poo poo? Because ultimately they interpret the document like an rear end in a top hat sibling saying poo poo like "Dad told me it's okay for me to punch you in the arm, he totally said it!" self serving nonsense.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
I mean lol they threw in 'alcohol is illegal' then 'uh you know what nevermind' in this binding ironclad document. But then it gets propped up as some arbitrary excuse for why we can't have universal health care, why taxes are illegal and minimum wage is bad
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:Capitalists want nothing more than, well, "more", and they will do anything, literally anything, to achieve that. If more government means more money, fine. If less means more, that's fine too. They want government to build roads that they can do commerce on because more, but they don't want to pay taxes to build those roads because that means less. They want government to construct universities to train their future wage slaves, but they aren't going to cover tuition unless it's some thinly-veiled "scholarship" that is 99% PR bid. They are fine with killing to open up new profit opportunities, as long as they don't pay for it. Libertarians, at least the true believer hate government on principle types, are the apex of what I call "freedom fetishism", of which there is a ton in the US and it's absolutely terrifying. "Free" has almost become a triggr word for me because, whenever someone uses it, it's basically the same as saying "big government" - it means that someone wants to do something incredibly selfish and/or incredibly damaging and they are pissed off that someone is trying to stop them. You just reminded me of another contradiction they have. They hate the idea of 'free' stuff- first, because they don't feel like something given freely has any value, second, because they believe labor /wealth has to be 'stolen' from some people to make it 'free' for others. Yet at the same time, they love the idea of being free to do what they want. None of their will or desires ever needs to be transactional the same way they think other 'free stuff' is. You see this in how they don't think they should need the government's permission to do anything. When I point out this contradiction to Libertarians they start splitting hairs about Liberty and Freedom. They'll go on and on about 'Natural rights' which feels like sovcit nonsense to me.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I'm pretty sure the totality of Ayn Rand's beliefs can be pretty quickly summed up as arbitrary contrarianism to communism as somebody whose family lost a lot to the Soviet Union combined with the obsessive self-centered confidence of a cult leader having sex with her loyal followers. That's what I had figured.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2020 06:21
|
|
|
So the same as all the weird Mormon poo poo then?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
deep space nein posted:They lack the sense of humor necessary to be able to fully take part in society I think a lot of people, especially young men, want to feel like we are hot poo poo and the master of our domain. Libertarian concepts seem to really feed into this by putting emphasis on the individual and taking away any external social obligations that would hold back individual success. I was an antisocial kid and a mediocre student so it was really easy for me to convince myself that things would magically be better if we just lived in a true meritocracy where I didn't have to be ashamed for being a cishet male. Instead of introspection and taking feedback better I just created this world of make believe fantasy in my head. I guess Libertarians never really grow out of that attitude. Funny enough, the point in which many people think leftists get more conservative over time had the opposite effect; I would say joining a labor union was what really radicalized me into leftism.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2020 05:55
|
|
|
If other online game social experiments are any indication, there seems to be a strong tendency for these types to go mad with power and flame out. Plsnetside 2 had a few armchair Warlord- generals and I've heard similar stories of WoW guilds run with an iron fist.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
One of the things that always gives away their game is that it isn't enough for them to want some free market /minimal government, they want to destroy socialism utterly. Like to some of them it seems like they hate socialism far more than they love the free market. Someone upthread suggested there's a great deal of narcissism in their beliefs to the extent they wouldn't be willing to coexist in a socialist society, even if they weren't under any obligation to contribute. So on one hand they want to be some sort of FYGM island but on the other they'd prefer if every other landmass sunk into the ocean as well. Another pattern I observed arguing with Libertarians online is what I call 'Heisenbergs' Libertarian; that at any given time an observer cannot know the exact position, role and size of an ideal Governnent to a Libertarian. If you point out government is needed to protect private property and enforce contracts, they'll concede that if course they want enough governnent for that. But when you remind them that the same power can turn the jackboots on them eventually they deny that it could simultaneously have enough power to keep others under their heel without oppressing them in other ways. I've learned that horseshoe theory isn't real but it's a funny coincidence that a lot of core principles many libertarians espouse (the freedom to do whatever they want, having the means to maintain a secure well being and level playing field) are directly contradictory to an actual free market, and much more aligned with socialism in my opinion. Maybe this is because they are making a lot of bad faith claims as fascists are prone to doing?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2021 17:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:You just have to keep seceding until every Great Man has his own plantation-state. Something something the smallest minority is the individual
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 20:31
|
|