this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
1497 points (98.3% liked)

Memes

45741 readers
1506 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I sure hope so. Fuck libertarians and fuck Meta!

[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To be clear, don't actually fuck libertarians. That's how we get more of them.

[–] Entheon 14 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Honest question? Are libertarians that bad? I don't agree with their ideology but are they that bad at a personal level too?

[–] Darkard 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When your movement centers around not having "society" tell you whats right and wrong and you can do whatever you want, people who don't like being told the things they like are bad will be drawn to it.

[–] gsa32 39 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Most so-called "Libertarians" are Republicans who want to smoke weed

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

Republicans who know just a bit too much about state-by-state age of consent laws

Ftfy

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And employ people, even children, for the lowest wages possible.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But but but, those children should be able to choose whether or not they work for slave wages! If they were worth more than that the free market would pay them better anyway! It's an infringement of my sovereign citizenship to tell me I'm not allowed to scam and/or scare vulnerable minors into selling me their time and/or bodies!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That last bit very much grossed me out, and I'm confident you added it for a reason.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Probably because its accurate. They "think of the children", alright. Every. Damn. Night.

[–] synthy 16 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Not sure if this has anything to do with it, but Lemmy.ml is moderated by communists, and I don’t think they get along with libertarians.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

To be clear, "libertarian" originally referred to what we would now call anarchists, or anarcho-communists. But at this point, the word has been pretty completely coopted by those on the right tending toward the very different ideology of anarcho-capitalism. Statist communists and anarchist communists have their own internecine conflicts, but both hate the current right wing libertarians.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

They're pretty much polar opposite ideologies.

[–] Entheon 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah that would definitely cause an issue lol

[–] Bushwhack 1 points 1 year ago

Eh, fuck them too

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There are different ideologies that fall within the broad spectrum of "Libertarianism" as it is used in America. They are all bad, but some are "misguided but good at heart" (and better than, say, a Democratic-establishment Liberal) while others are "you have to be a literal sociopath to believe this". The latter tend to get signal-boosted more because they get funding from right-wing foundations and think-tanks.

Most ordinary people who identify as "Libertarians" would be Socialists of some sort but have been brainwashed by Capitalist propaganda that Socialism is bad and evil and is also when the government does stuff, and the government is bad, so Socialism is bad.

The logical extreme of Libertarian thought is Anarcho-Capitalism: the belief in the Non-Aggression Principle (that no-one should ever restrict another's freedoms, including their freedom to use their private property as they see fit), that coercion does not exist, contracts are sacrosanct, and that people have an absolute right to control what happens with the things that they own. This of course runs contrary to things like "Worker's Rights" or "Anti-Discrimination Laws"; and is also where a lot of the Pedophilia stuff comes from, since children are either (1). property of their parents (in which case the parents, as their owners, should be allowed to abuse or prostitute them) or (2). free actors in society (in which case they should be allowed to give consent or prostitute themselves). The ultimate issue with Anarcho-Capitalism is that its logical endpoint is Neo-Feudalism: if you own land, you have the right to dictate what the people living on that land are allowed to do while living there; there are no Tenant's Rights (in fact, like I said before, the only right you have under Anarcho-Capitalism is your freedom to act as you please on your own property, with your own property, without interference from others). Thus, Landlords become a new sort of feudal government, with complete power over their fiefdoms.

There's also Randian Objectivism, which is a rationalist philosophy whose main influence on modern Libertarianism is the Randian Ubermensch: living your life independently, to the pursuit of your own happiness (and only your own happiness), without care for the social rules of society at large. Batman's creators have cited Randian Objectivism as a major influence; Batman is the archetypical Randian Ubermensch: wealthy, white, egotistical, and living outside of society and its rules and laws (while benefiting from them).

There are more moderate forms of Libertarianism that believe in things like Net Neutrality (that the internet, like a public service, should treat all traffic through it equally, not giving preference to certain sites or companies) or the Right to Repair (the right to repair something you own personally, rather than having to take it to a licensed repairman). It's important to note that both of these run contrary to Anarcho-Capitalism: under Anarcho-Capitalism, an ISP has a right to treat traffic through its tubes however it sees fit; and a company can lease its products with whatever anti-repair clauses it wishes. There's also Right to Roam, which is very popular in Europe (but less so in the states), the idea that you should be allowed to travel through private land, as long as you do not mistreat it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Some are just young and/or naive. If you don't think past the surface it makes sense. It's (American) conservativism with less hate. And it's another tool to manipulate people into supporting lower taxes on the rich.

It's appealing at a glance because the first thing kids notice about it is that you don't have to hate gays for no reason.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

They are fine with removing regulations because "the market" will balance it out

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I dont think there is a requirement for them to be "bad" but theres a lot of them who are and the ideolog kinda supports being a douche.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

It's hard to answer this question because libertarians and socialists are like water and oil. That said, things like the end of intellectual property and abolition of the police are points that I see both sides agreeing (there might be more points, but I can't remember right now).

The problem is that aside from a few of the original writers (like Mises or Hayek, examples from the top of my head), most libertarians out there on par, or even more than tankies in their fanatism. But maybe that's a problem with most big movements anyway.

[–] IronDonkey 2 points 1 year ago

No. Most people are decent people, even the people with dumb political ideas.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Not really. Internet has distorted the reality. I have talked with lots of them in person and online outside of social network that are all day talking about politics and nothing to do what memes make it seem. Also if you look at right wing memes you will find they are accusing left wing people to be pedos(but same applies). In resume, memes like that don't represent reality, its just a "cultural war" that is used to throw shit against the "other side".