• yboutros@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        My ideals are left lib, and I hope that social structure becomes feasible beyond small populations in the future. That said, leftism is centralized economics. And if you centralize that, you wind up with authoritarianism.

        I hope trustless and decentralized protocols make up for the inefficiencies in the long run, we’re just starting to see technology catch up to make up for the inefficiencies of decentralized economics

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That said, leftism is centralized economics.

          <john cena> Are you sure about that? </john cena>

          You should tell that to the Democratic Socialists, or the Social Democrats, or Marxists, or actual Libertarians, or anarchists, or communists. Literally I think the only group on the left. That is significantly centrally organized are Marxist Leninist. Every group on the right however depends on a central authority to make their economy fesable.

          Either this is projection, or you don’t know what left is. Which if you are a fellow American is absolutely understandable. They did a lot to dumb us down and make us afraid to look to any groups that weren’t capitalist or fascist. To help us meet our needs. That red scare shit is still prevalent to this day. Though the Marxist Leninist did hand them the talking point on a platter post world war II. The rest of the left just got smeared with it unduly.

    • Wojwo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Libertarianism is for the philosophically lazy,or people born into a super conservative family and can’t handle the cognitive dissonance caused by realizing that liberalism is the more Christian political ideology. Source: I’m from UT.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s just a smokescreen for selfish/embarrassed economic liberals. This was the man that coined and defined Libertarianism. Right wingers need not apply. The modern “libertarian” party is a necrophilic oxymoron.

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Been banned from there. Basically only right-lib or ancap views are allowed there, left-lib (me) need not apply.

  • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yeah, american libertarians call themselves the wrong thing. The more correct term I find would be anarcho-capitalist, which is just all around a completely non-viable economic and governance system.

  • Artyom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The first time I heard the phrase “become ungovernable”, I assumed it was about home gardening and biking and reducing consumer waste. Imagine my disappointment when I found out it was actually about perpetuating institutional inequality and “fuck you, got mine.”

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s just another thing right libertarians stole from anarchists. I’m pretty sure Emma Goldman was the originator of the whole “become ungovernable” thing (could be totally wrong about that so take it with a bucket of salt) and she definitely meant it haha. Part of that is gardening and various other community building acts, but the other part is very “seize the means of production” and assassinating authority figures. Less “fuck you, got mine” and more “give everybody everything or die”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Whoever posted that doesn’t understand libertarians.

    If there were no government regulations, they would have nothing to complain about and their lives would be ruined.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      If there were no government regulations, they would have nothing to complain about

      I promise you that if you put a libertarian into a place without government regulation, they will still insist that there is a secret government regulation responsible for their lives being shit.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Sadly, I think you’re probably right. I used to tell them to go to Rwanda if they wanted to live in a tax-free utopia, but Rwanda has taxation now what with it having a more or less functional government now.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    it’s the libertarians… you should’ve said the bicycle lowers the age of consent or something.

  • uis@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

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

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yeah and if not a bicycle then a Libertarian should at least go with an EV.

    Gasoline requires requires far away refineries supplied with crude oil that comes even further away. The government needs to maintain a large military to secure foreign oil to keep the global oil prices down because that’s the rate everyone has to pay in a capitalist system. Even then oilt prices are subject to regulation by OPEC, which is an international organization that we don’t have any say in.

    Meanwhile an EV can be charged by a wind turbine in your home town or even a solar panel on your roof. I suppose the lithium for the battery comes for further away, but once you own that battery you own it. You aren’t dependent of oil coming from very far away every week. Sure you’ll eventually have to replace that battery, but it’s way less frequent than having to gas up. And if it came down to it you could probably produce a battery more locally without lithium if you’re willing to sacrifice range.

    The fact is a libertarian utopia simply isn’t possible with a dependence on oil. Oil is the most international business in the world and requires the most support form the government to function. But with EVs it may be possible to have everything needed for a society to function within a small region. You need big government to get a reliable supply of oil, but with EVs and renewable energy, big government isn’t as necessary.

    And yeah bicycles are even better than EV in terms of libertarian ideals.

    • DogWater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The sentiment is nice, but you can replace all the issues with oil you stated with lithium and cobalt as well. The replacement is like once every 10 or 15 years, but it costs 20k for a battery.

      If we can invent new, scalable chemistries that don’t rely on a scarce mineral that lives deep down in specific parts of the earth it wouldn’t be as easily translatable. But alas…not yet.

      I’m a big phev proponent, and battery production is still better than oil production when comparing pollution, but there would be a lithium cartel just like OPEC if oil didn’t exist and it had been batteries powering cars since WWII.