TreadOnMe [none/use name]

Yes let’s go talk to ‘Cubans’ (are you really Cuban if you haven’t lived there in 60 years?) in Florida, who have completely mythologized their actions and suffering at this point.

Also, dude literally has an American flag in the background of his picture, very not serious person

Look, all I’m saying is they missed a PRIME chibi in a giant hat moment, and I am incredibly disappointed.

What you are asking for is a vastly different thing than ‘I want the government to stay out of my business unless I am harming someone’. Every worker council constitutes an aspect of government, and if their judgements are legally binding, an element of the state. All of those determinations can and should be made by the workers directly involved in their production, however enforcement of those decisions and arbitration of those conflicts may require the use of the state apparatus.

Mostly you just seem confused.

Not to dogpile further, but you are, like most liberals (of which a libertarian is just yet another flavor of), getting into the weeds of policy without even figuring out the basics of even simplistic political philosophy, because so much of it has been taken for granted in your life.

Let’s take this seemly simple statement “I want the government to generally leave me alone as long as I am not doing anything to harm anybody.”

This is impossible, the statement of an idealist constitutionalist, which has no bearing on reality whatsoever. Why is this? Well, because someone has to define what constitutes ‘harm’. If it is not you, then someone else will, which means that you can’t leave government to passively sit. Well then, who can dictate what constitutes ‘harm’? Of course the people who agree to the constitutional contract. Ok then, at what point do you get to decide your constitutional contract? What happens if two different constitutional agreements definitions of ‘harm’ are at odds with each other? Who is the arbiter then? How is that arbiter decided? What if there is a disagreement with the arbiter? How is that conflict settled? Even this seemingly simple statement is fraught with issues.

These are things that can and have been argued and in some cases ‘solved’ by liberal bourgeoisie democracy for centuries to decades at this point. However libertarians, especially ‘leftist’ libertarians, get so caught up in policy that they have no structure for actually figuring out very real basic political and social science issues. I’m not saying ML theory has it ‘solved’ but it’s foundations, such as “The state apparatus exists to monopolize violence, all other aspects of it are secondary, the key is appropriate that violence for the betterment of the industrial working class, the only class that can hope to transition us out of the necessity of states as it is the only class that is likely to effectively replicate the means of production and bring about an ideology, culture and production basis for universal post-scarcity, which will dissolve the need for a state to monopolize violence” has a better understanding of what the state does, how it actually functions, and what is likely necessary in order to dissolve it as a human institution.

There are tech libertarians that also believe their ideology and technology will bring about this post scarcity society as well, but they, as a bourgeoisie class, do not actually replicate the means of production, and have far more material incentive to engage in and profligate M-M market conditions which do not lead to lessening of global poverty, post scarcity and the withering of the state, which is why despite being nominally ‘progressive’ they are prone to strong ideological reactionary backlash.

It’s because nobody is anything at 14. It’s quite literally politics as aesthetic. Literally never trust teenagers to be consistently principled on anything going into the future, because those principles are purely ideal.

Dedededededededede

This is Ben Garrison’s wife, they were never going to vote Democrat. Fucking learn some context before making stupid assumptions and maybe you will actually learn something someday.

No, as long as it doesn’t keep happening no one will give a shit (ho ho).

The Irish literally weren’t ‘white’ until the 1970’s, dunce.

Jesus Christ I’m probably whiter than you, stop whinging you cracker.

No, they are dealing with rational actors, it’s just there is no rational reason for the U.S. to actually negotiate in good faith, because they never suffer consequences for their actions. They just aren’t humane actors.

It’s because Americans have been trained to think fascism is spectacular (a myth pushed by fascists themselves) so the mundane nature of everyday fascism doesn’t really affect them.

Look, I get you. I just think you are making the classic blunder of assuming people are literally born prone to being angry at the new neighbor.

What I am saying is that they are not, it is an enculturated behavior, that is again, rewarded and enforced through your life in this society. All culture, including right-wing culture, is learned and shared behavior, it just seems ‘more natural’ because it is what is rewarded in this society, and most people’s are far more interested in material outcomes than anything else. That is why that person went back to believing in shit, a single day of conversation is not going to change years of learned and reinforced behavior. Otherwise talk therapists would literally be miracle workers. It takes conscious effort for some people in this society to be leftwing. Some people just are like that. Again, facts may be a shield, but they are a weak shield, they may provide solace and comfort, but they do not provide a way to power or effective negotiation with it.

You can have facts, but obsession with facts shouldn’t define you, imo focusing instead on rewarding good social behavior around you, being open to communication and trustworthy is worth more than any single fact you can offer someone. We don’t fight anti-social behavior with facts, we fight it with demonstrating the real rewards, both mentally and emotionally, of pro-social behavior. I don’t know if this is revolutionary behavior, but I do think that, and patience helps a lot.

You are wildly over-estimating the role that things like ‘appeals to emotion’ have on the right. Most people I know who are on the left are on the left because of their emotional investment into concepts such as ‘justice’. The reason the right is in control is because the controllers of the means of production monetarily rewards right-wing (including right-wing liberal obviously) behaviors and ideology. The problem is fundamentally more complex than ‘fact-checking’, ‘ceding ground’ and ‘appeals to emotion’. Thinking that these ideological methods and arguments are the base or basis for revolution is part of the liberal ideology that we swim in on a regular basis. Not that I have a better solution at this point, mind, just that I know that these things very much do not matter in the long run.

Well, as the song goes, the models will have children, we’ll get a divorce, find some more models, everything must run it’s course.

Providing maximum profit for minimum services!

Not even a juicer. A small juice bag refrigerator.

I know several people who have said that this is the first election they aren’t voting in. Idk if it’s going to matter, but these are dem voters in a swing state.

I knew he was sus when Behind the Bastards was in my Spotify recommended. He is incredibly coded as manufactured dissent.

You see my values haven’t changed! I value being elected, and being your leader so much!