This is the key point I try to get across to pro-market libertarians. To be deeply pro-market is to be anticapitalist, by the original definition that the libertarian left use. We're all on the same side. Fighting for free economic association, and against any concentration of wealth and power used to impose economic rents.
It’s hard to tell with current usage of libertarian because that is yet another left-wing word that has been expropriated.
The consistent feature of a right wing version of libertarianism is the desire to shed all forms of control on the individual without companion requirement that one’s own behavior cannot coerce another.
It’s freedom for me and nothing for thee. They never get called on that second half and they need to be pressured with it.
How do you deal with the psychopaths?
(1/2)
@GhostOnTheHalfShell
> libertarian because that is yet another left-wing word that has been expropriated
100%. Just as the word "anarchist", which in the 19th century meant much the same thing as "democrat", was turned into a boogieman in the 20th. It's meaning seems to have been rehabilitated somewhat in the digital age, where there are many examples of systems with no central authority working at scale (eg net, web, fediverse).
(2/2)
The word "libertarian", like" freedom", is too important to give up without a fight, and I reckon they can be similarly rehabilitated.
@GhostOnTheHalfShell
> How do you deal with the psychopaths?
Don't build political-economies hierarchies that reward them with promotion (eg corporations, most political parties) at the expense of empaths, and don't let them accumulate unlimited wealth?
Statists are working hard to de-legitimise #anarchy as some sort of societal collapse.
All that means is that there is no oppressive regime to dictate what people do.
There are still laws, there is still order. Only it comes from the people, not from an arbitrary Moloch that is largely unrepresentative of the people.
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
