What are your thoughts on Geolibertarianism? - The Power of Land: Georgism 101

https://youtu.be/smi_iIoKybg

Geolibertarianism is a form of Georgist libertarianism. The basic idea behind Georgism is that land and natural resources are not the fruits of anyone's labor, so no one has a natural right to it. Georgism proposes based on this that collective ownership arrangements be applied to such resources. Geolibertarianism supports full private property rights in the products of labor.
@libertarianism

Hello everyone.

I wanted to share this one thought with you that I really became aware of just recently. Libertarianism, at its core, is all about personal freedom. It is therefore the highest good worth protecting. But how exactly should it be protected and by whom?

It is obvious that a society writes its core values into its constitution and affirm them by law, but it becomes more complicated when it comes to adhering to these common values. Who ensures that these rules are followed? Who punishes violations?

Whether it is the state or a private company, in all cases you are dependent on the reliability of a third party. How this third party deals with the task it has been entrusted with is, however, its responsibility. As long as this third party is not controlled by another third party, it can act with the trust as it sees fit, not always to the benefit of the client.

That bings up the question why we should ever rely on the state or any private company to protect our values. In the end, we are all on our own. Whether freedom, privacy or security, we cannot afford to become dependent on others. We have to find ways to do it ourselves and these ways exist. I don't want to rule out that third parties may be given the task of protectiing them but I think that we need a technically independent safeguard. Encryption, privacy tools or self-defense devices are just few examples of this.

Hey fellow libertarians,

I'm writing this post because I really got annoyed by the recent increase of low effort and often also low information posts shared in this community. When I tried formulating the rules when creating this community, my main focus was to create a culture of civil and constructive discussion.

There are a lot of possible ways to contribute to this goal and I don't want to exclude any type of content in any way. But to prevent meaningless spam, I thought about adjusting the 3d rule to better align with the aforementioned goals.

Lemmy offers the great opportunity to share an image or a link together with some text to explain it. Based on this, I'd add something like: "the context and relevance of otherwise textless or shared content should be explained in words by it's contributor." or "the information of shared/remote types of content should be evident from the post itself without the need of visiting the source." Also, we could start requiring a TLDR for shared news posts.

What do you guys think?

• Wallace, M. "Interview with Ayn Rand". (1959 February 25). The Mike Wallace Interview.

On the morning of Thursday, September 21, a private company acting on behalf of the Croatian Forests (Hrvatske Šume d.o.o.) accompanied by police made an unannounced extraterritorial incursion into Liberland and demolished and removed Liberland property. Liberlanders living on the land were threatened with arrest if they interfered. An unspecified number of Liberlanders were arrested under the vague charges of “failure to comply with a lawful order.”

Croatian police escorted the demolition crews who committed this act of indiscriminate destruction. This assault was committed without warning and without the forest company or police issuing any reasons or justification.

Persons present were not given any time to gather their own personal belongings, much less their equipment. Thankfully, no one was injured, but [..] property was damaged and confiscated.

Hey dear freedom lovers

The other day I was thinking about my journey of becoming a libertarian and would like to share my thoughts with you. To start with the reason: It was minimalism. Let me explain.

Ever since I was a child, I have had the habit of collecting my possessions around me, organising them and occupying myself with them. In the beginning, I wanted to have as much as possible and hoard everything around me in my small "kingdom". Over time, I realised that this was a very tedious task. At the latest when my parents admonished me to finally tidy up my things, I clearly felt the burden of owning so many things.

As a reaction to this, I decided to give away everything I didn't really need. Everything that I wouldn't use very often or that I had a particularly strong emotional attachment to, I cleared out with my parents about once a year and took it to a collection centre.

This ritual has accompanied me through my life ever since and is by far no longer limited to real objects. It is now much more about software tools, ideologies or even political principles. The latter raises the question for me: What does it really take for a society to function well? What is the core, what is the essence that is sufficient to enable everyone to live the best possible life?

For me, the answer is clear: if everyone has the absolute freedom to do with their lives what they think is right without interfering with the freedom of others, then the prerequisites for a good life together are given. Everything else can be deduced from this and can safely go to the collection centre.

A federal judge for the second time overturned California’s ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 bullets, ruling Friday that it lacked a historical basis and is therefore unconstitutional.