this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
1099 points (97.8% liked)

Political Memes

5428 readers
2176 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] uis@lemm.ee 27 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I won't tell them to be consistent, because consistent liberterians are scary.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You don't like getting into very detailed conversations about age of consent laws and child pornography?

[–] uis@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

I'm not sure how it's related to bikes, but I did get into conversations about age of consent on lemmy few times. And it seemed that people I talked to didn't grasp concept of different countries having different laws.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

because consistent liberterians are scary.

Really you haven't lived until someone corners you at a party and explains how the Non-aggression principle applies to this stuff. It is deeply confusing and worrisome.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

What do laws have to do with morality?

[–] uis@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

very detailed conversations about age of consent laws

different countries having different laws.

Indeed, but nobody mentioned morality. Conversation was specifically about laws.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Downvotes show that many people calling libertarians bad words are unable to grasp such a simple difference.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Hey I didn't call libertarians any bad words, I mean obviously bad words. I called them all Republicans trying to have sex with a Democrat. That's it. I don't even know if it's any more of a lie than wearing makeup is. Since you know, everyone fucking knows the deal.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I called them all Republicans trying to have sex with a Democrat.

From the point of view of an actual libertarian Republicans and Democrats are much closer to each other than both are to libertarians.

But there's a weird kind of people in the New World thinking that libertarian is just something between the two, yes. Probably someone initially mixed up libertarian and libertine, and then it went out of control.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

actual libertarian

fact: all actual liberatarians live in Scotland. With the True Scotsmen.

Probably someone initially mixed up libertarian and libertine, and then it went out of control.

No one is paying you to talk that way. Just a fyi.

[–] cjk@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

actual libertarian

fact: all actual liberatarians live in Scotland. With the True Scotsmen.

I laughed so hard that coffee came out of my nose. You just made my day. Thank you.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

:) your welcome. Have a good day german-friend

[–] cjk@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

ok, I'm curious. How do you know I'm german? :-)

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] cjk@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 5 months ago

ah, right - didn't think about that. Thanks.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You are using the word "libertarian" wrong. Just a fyi. Otherwise you are a commie because Republicans would call you that.

Similar to elderly people in Soviet countries struggling to differentiate homosexuals and pedophiles.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

No. Using it correctly. You can have a pride parade about it if you want but I not calling you what you are not.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Consistent libertarians surprisingly get along well with unreformed Bolsheviks. They have a kinda similar picture of the universe, just mutually exclusive ways of dealing with it.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The libertarian-fascist pipeline is interesting to me. I can't decide if they start out fascist but dream of a world where the rules don't apply to them until they gradually get more honest or if they just have a very bad relationship with power so they can't imagine a situation where they aren't the one with the boot or the one being stomped on.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It happens another way usually - in libertarianism anything non-voluntary and any violence is bad. The ideal is a society with involuntary violent interactions being minimal.

First, just like with Bolsheviks, ends may justify the means (let's build a totalitarian state which will fight capitalism, imperialism, conquer all the world and then make communism).

Second, and more often, different kinds of violence are not so different for a libertarian. As in - a normie might agree that they owe something by social contract that they hadn't signed and can't refuse. For a libertarian that's bullshit, and the legal systems built by non-libertarians don't allow them to argue their point - somebody else decides for them and says they are obligated to obey. ("Sovereign citizens" are basically libertarians who believe in proving a libertarian position through normie laws, which is nonsense, you can't win by rules defined by your adversary.) So "if there's going to be violence, then let it be our violence to our ends".

From the libertarian point of view the world is fascist in general. So they (libertarians gone violent) are trying to change it to good, while playing by its rules. It's sort of a revolutionary logic, which, again, is similar to that of Bolsheviks.

so they can’t imagine a situation where they aren’t the one with the boot or the one being stomped on

They can imagine that pretty well, but from their point of view they sort of already are expected to be stomped on in a non-libertarian world.

I hope I've explained it well.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they want to live in a world where someone will sell them a girlfriend that the government won't make them put in a car seat.

Lolitarianism is full dog eats dog to an extent no government has ever tried. It promises to reduce every human relationship to transactional at best, brute force more likely. You aren't going to call the police on abusive parents when you know the children will be homeless as a result. A crushing nightmare where property holders know that all that want to eat need to go through them.

What kinda fascist wouldn't want that? Imagine the power they would hold, fully backed by the state.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 months ago

Maybe they want to live in a world where someone will sell them a girlfriend that the government won’t make them put in a car seat.

Maybe I'm a green dinosaur.

It promises to reduce every human relationship to transactional at best, brute force more likely.

One should learn about libertarian ideologies from people practicing them, and not from their circlejerk partners.

It obviously doesn't. It doesn't specify anything except voluntarism and use of force being taboo, thus it allows even ancom if those ancoms don't try to ancomify people who don't want to join their communes.

brute force more likely.

Brute force is the least acceptable thing in libertarianism, everything else has smaller priority, so obviously not.

You aren’t going to call the police on abusive parents when you know the children will be homeless as a result.

They'll be adopted or will live in an orphanage, of course, and not that.

A crushing nightmare where property holders know that all that want to eat need to go through them.

No. There's nothing to make zoning laws in ancap and other similar regulations allowing the weird real estate market some countries have.

What kinda fascist wouldn’t want that? Imagine the power they would hold, fully backed by the state.

I dunno, I don't see your visions because you didn't share the stuff.