1
I guess even Elon has his limit
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26233 readers
249 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's what Libertarianism is. The same naming con also applies to the so-called Green Party. I don't know why we are so easily fooled by names of things, especially when we live in a country full of scams where people constantly try to fool you like this. You'd think we'd develop a tolerance considering it's a constant thing, but nope, we're still just as stupid and naive as we were decades ago. If anything, we've gotten more naive.
Words have meanings and definitions if I call myself a pacifist who is against violence but I go around punching people in the face. Are you going to change the definition of pacifist or are you going to call me a violent non-pacifist.
If they're not following the actual principles of libertarianism then call them what they truly are. Reactionaries, conservatives, trolls, etc
It becomes its own thing. Like if you hear the word "truther" out of context you wouldn't be blamed for thinking that it refers to someone who takes the truth very seriously. But in the context if a "9/11 truther" it means the opposite: someone who is completely dissociated from reality.
When a movement adopts a word as its name, it's like the word splits in two: one with the original meaning and one which refers to the group and means whatever that group stands for. Which one becomes dominant basically depends on what version the mainstream media uses more often. It's a zeitgeist thing.
If you and all of the other pacifist movement people are really violent then I'd say the same thing about your movement, you're running a naming scam.
In this particular case, it's difficult to even call libertarianism a set thing, because the "movement" spends much of its time discussing what is and isn't libertarianism, and I think that has a lot to do with the fact that individual liberty versus collective responsibility is largely a more difficult balance to strike than they're pretending, and there's no clear and fast way to cut it for every scenario. Pacifism, on the other hand, is much more straightforward to define.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle
If whoever you're talking to is openly engaging in behavior that encourages breaking of the nap, then yeah you're dealing with a non-libertarian. To put this in other terms, all the Christian denominations believe in Jesus. They believe different things about Jesus, but they all believe in this guy named Jesus. If some guy starts preaching about Bob the true Messiah and calling himself a Christian everybody's going to be very confused why he's calling himself a Christian.
Read the linked article, look at that verbiage: "considered by some". That's exactly my point. Nobody has the ability to define what exactly libertarianism is in this country because there are so many little feuding factions, and it's a 1-5% movement in the first place.
It's essentially a thing you can pretend to be when the Republican candidate is too repulsive to openly support and that's about it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism_in_the_United_States
The major libertarian party in the United States is the Libertarian Party. However, libertarians are also represented within the Democratic and Republican parties while others are independent. Gallup found that voters who identify as libertarians ranged from 17 to 23% of the American electorate.
Libertarianism includes anarchist and libertarian socialist tendencies, although they are not as widespread as in other countries. Murray Bookchin,[25] a libertarian within this socialist tradition, argued that anarchists, libertarian socialists and the left should reclaim libertarian as a term, suggesting these other self-declared libertarians to rename themselves propertarians instead.[26][27] Although all libertarians oppose government intervention, there is a division between those anarchist or socialist libertarians as well as anarcho-capitalists such as Rothbard and David D. Friedman who adhere to the anti-state position, viewing the state as an unnecessary evil; minarchists such as Nozick who recognize the necessary need for a minimal state, often referred to as a night-watchman state;[28] and classical liberals who support a minimized small government[29][30][31] and a major reversal of the welfare state.[32]
Personally i'm pretty much center on the left right spectrum and firmly minarchist.
If you have to type fifteen responses complete with diagrams about your ideology, then everything I'm saying about it not being straightforwardly definable is 100% correct and you're proving it right now.
Exactly, "identify as"...do you really think 17-23% of the American voting populace actually has consistent, definable meanings about what it means to be a libertarian? I'm willing to bet that they do not. Relatedly, I have never seen the Libertarian Party get 17-23% of the vote in my lifetime. So, sure, you have a bunch of people that "identify" as libertarian (as I once did in college despite always voting Democrat) but in reality, they are not part of the organized party at all. The Libertarian Party gets up to the low single digits in national elections which is a pathetic showing and is why they do not even get to debate the candidates of the two main parties.
They show up every couple of election cycles, take their "conscientious objector to the 'duopoly'" single digit voter percentage, cause spoiler effects, and then fuck off back into the wilderness.
American politics is akin to the aisles in the grocery stores here: lots and lots of different labels and colorful packaging, and very little actual choice.
Most of us vote for the candidate that best upholds our interests no matter the letter on the lapel. In a FPtP system you are correct not much choice in the national elections, thats a feature of FPtP not a bug. Don't mistake us as having no consistnacy while we are forced to strategically vote instead of using a ranked choice.
This also isn't true. Hypothetically, rational voters would vote their own self-interest or using other rationally explicable criteria, but those are hypothetical voters. Those "thought exercise" voters are just as hypothetical as the "invisible hand" that magically makes markets fair, or the hypothetical economic rational actor in the economy that always has perfect information and behaves rationally to maximize their own self-interest. They're more fictional than the "spherical cows" involved in introductory physics problems.
A lot (or maybe even most) of the people that vote Republican vote against their own interests. That's why Cory Doctorow talks about them being "turkeys voting for Christmas".
Farmers that vote Trump are voting against their own interests. People from small towns with decaying infrastructure and social security recipients that vote Trump are voting for a circus clown that will not do anything to improve their life a single iota.