this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
463 points (91.4% liked)
Technology
59366 readers
3990 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Libertarianism is properly a socialist philosophy, but it's been coopted by the far right in America who then started exporting their bullshit to the rest of the world. It's entirely possible for two people to call themselves "libertarian" and have next to nothing in common in their understanding of what that means.
Most libertarian support of unions in America is a bad joke. It's meaningless feel-good rhetoric that completely ignores the entire history of unions in America. Corporations have a million ways to crush unions and union organizers. Without government regulations requiring corporations to engage with unions, unions are next to impossible in reality. But that's just fine with the kind of people attracted to the Libertarian party, because they don't live in reality.
Libertarianism is a socialist philosophy - false. Or more precisely, meaningless. When people mean libertarianism, they mean primate of liberty. That at some point people in favor of it hugely intersected with socialists is a fact that doesn't necessarily invalidate libertarians who are not in any way socialist.
Libertarianism has nothing to do with the Libertarian party of the USA - true.
Without government regulations unions being powerless - false. Or more precisely, government regulations work the way governments want. Today's governments are working in favor of corporations, not sitting idle, so the reality confirms that centralizing power is a bad idea. Or maybe you are going to tell me how you are going to persuade power working against you to work for you.
Excerpts from the Wikipedia entry on libertarianism:
And
Don't feel too bad. Having no fucking idea what you are talking about just makes you a typical American style libertarian.
As for centralizing power, corporate personhood and broad deregulation are about the most radical systems for centralizing power that have ever existed. You are still ignoring the entire history of conflict between unions and corporations. Unions had their day using the "libertarian" model and all that came from it was disaster. It wasn't until the labor movement gained political power and had pro-union regulations put in place that unions had any real ability to negotiate with corporate power. But that's all reality so it's irrelevant I guess.
You should re-read the first paragraph of the comment you were answering.
Also you are writing nonsense exposing your ignorance of ... really everything, but you know that yourself, judging by it starting with an attempt to snatch the word "libertarianism" from under me instead of actually addressing what I say.
Also you should be more modest, drop that pretentious tone and not enter arguments with leftist moonspeak.
Arrogance is the only language that ever penetrates with people who think in platitudes. It's not my general attitude, it's a tool that sometimes wakes up zombies. American libertarians are always surprised to find someone more arrogant then themselves.
What you believe to be a political philosophy is nothing but empty rhetoric assembled by powerful elitists for the express purpose of consolidating and extending their power. It's intended from the outset to neuter actual libertarian movements. Wake the fuck up zombie.
You should have used the word "sheeple" to complete the impression from your second paragraph.
You don't know shit of what I believe to be a political philosophy in the first place.
You guys all spout the same platitudes constantly and ignore every reality based argument. It's not exactly opaque (or interesting).
What's not interesting is you offering your "reality-based arguments" (how about every socialist country in existence) to something you yourself imagined. Yes, I can believe that your imagination is the constant in all those conversations.
You are not being smart, and you are not being funny. Go away.
I'm not being smart or funny, but apparently I'm getting under your skin.
Say what you will about socialist beliefs, they are absolutely more nuanced, historically rooted, and varied than what you call libertarian. You also don't see super wealthy corporate oligarchs as thought leaders on the left. Your Ayn Rand inspired cult was entirely assembled by oligarch sponsored anarcho-capitalist think tanks.
I haven't argued for socialism of any kind here, and I won't. You have probably heard most of the reasons why your opinions on socialism are nonsense, and you have probably not really heard any of them. I'm not wasting my time on that.