@darkling @Nickiquote YES. From now on, whenever the idea of the "marketplace of ideas" comes up, I'm referring to it as The Intellectual Dark Tesco (or in USian, the Intellectual Dark Walmart).
RE: https://toot.cat/@woozle/115838646450389133
tired: "marketplace of ideas"
wired: Intellectual Dark Walmart
@woozle the "marketplace of ideas" people sure like to forget that marketplaces also have rules and regulations
like, in markets, we tend to have anti-trust rules to make sure there's competition, laws against predatory pricing so a company can't squeeze out competitors by temporarily selling things at a loss, important sectors are subsidized or even have state-owned participants...
different countries decide on different sets of rules for both domestic and foreign trade, of course, and negotiate them during trade talks with other countries, but nobody is ever as hands-off on trade as the hardcore libertarians want
sometimes lack of free trade constricts a nation's economic growth and causes it to reinvent the wheel
sometimes too much free trade lets hucksters undercut competition and leaves vital sectors of the economy open to manipulation
@rnd Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Whenever someone claims that marketplaces function best without regulation, my counter is that you can't have a marketplace without regulation -- because it just becomes a might-makes-right battlefield (which, of course, is what the core proponents of laissez-faire actually want but won't admit they want).
@woozle and private marketplaces have their own rules, amazon and ebay's terms of service don't say "just make sure the transaction is legal in the united states and/or the jurisdictions where the seller and buyer live"
even blatantly illegal marketplaces, such as the "silk road", had rules
in my experience if someone says "i want to build something with minimal rules", they eventually end up establishing their own rules after all -- and, sadly, among the libertarian-minded people who claim that i've seen way more wannabe-feudalists who want total control than democratic-minded free-thinkers who actually go a step further and ask "how do i set up a system where the rules that have to be followed will be fair and agreeable* by all or most participants?"
* in both the "pleasant" and "something that one would naturally agree with" senses
@rnd Once again, the ambiguity between "hasn't really thought it through" vs. "has malicious intent and hopes you haven't thought it through" rears its Heisenbergian head.
@woozle sadly, people who want others to suffer and/or die have gotten really good at disguising their ideas as more of a "these people should just find other ways of supporting themselves" thing (while also hoping these other ways won't exist or work for them) ever since actually stating their idea outright became really /unfas[ch]ionable/ right about the year 1945
that's why i personally tend to keep on the side of "in my ideal world, i want even the worst person imaginable to still be able to live a full life" -- perhaps a life of near-total social isolation, but still one where their basic needs are met in one way or another and where they have the opportunity to eventually redeem themselves
