How libertarian leaning is this forum?
-
I wonder what your thoughts are on drug legalization, prostitution, pornography, food and supplement regulations and raw milk legalization? Are you for a larger oversight on what people decide to spend their money on or are you more for the free market? Do you believe their should be universal morality and or a universal set of laws?
●○ ANTI-SOL BRAH ● ANTI-TRAD WIFE ○●
☆ N I E T Z S C H E A N ★ -
@Sugar completely support people in their rights to do anything that does not hurt others. Drugs prostitution etc all should be legal completely.
-
@Sugar I "identify" as libertarian. The government should be continuously forced to justify the scope of existence, particularly in any non-voluntary policies. The best laws are the ones which are simply codification of the norms of the land. Freedom to exit is perhaps the most critical factor in preserving freedom.
That being said, I'd love to live in a land where the norms, and laws, disallow prostitution, and the distribution of downers, opiates, amphetamines, and punish violators with exile. -
@Sugar said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
I wonder what your thoughts are on drug legalization, prostitution, pornography, food and supplement regulations and raw milk legalization? Are you for a larger oversight on what people decide to spend their money on or are you more for the free market? Do you believe their should be universal morality and or a universal set of laws?
Recreational drugs are foolish and ruin lives.
Prositution and pornography are wicked and ruin lives.
Current FDA employees and heads should be lined up to the gallows.
Raw milk should be readily available in grocery stores so I don't have to drive 30 minutes to the farmer who sells it.
I believe more rules of what is and isn't available to the people could be made.
There is a universal law and the more a society adheres to it, the better off it is. -
"Those who identify as libertarian are often the most gullible" - Ray Peat
-
Libertarianism is the final (bad) argument for the existence of the state
-
@jens @Hando-Jin Are libertarians actually looking at most people today and thinking, "These people are capable of self-governing"?
-
@Kilgore libertarianism might work fine if everyone is 130 iq and living homogeneously. People right now are dumber and sicker than they have ever been. To think anything good would come from "letting the reigns loose" on people who are so fundamentally sick that they are literally cancerous tumors walking around in a semi-hibernation state is quite foolish I must say.
-
@jens national selection lol
-
@jens said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Kilgore libertarianism might work fine if everyone is 130 iq and living homogeneously. People right now are dumber and sicker than they have ever been. To think anything good would come from "letting the reigns loose" on people who are so fundamentally sick that they are literally cancerous tumors walking around in a semi-hibernation state is quite foolish I must say.
I disagree. I think that's exactly what they need.
Much of the sickness is caused by the current social order. Meaningless work being chief among them. I don't think the answer to sickness caused by authoritarianism is going to be having them live under somebody else's idea of a better authority.
-
@Hando-Jin said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
current social order
I think the dreadful social order is mostly a result of poor biological health, the social order then reinforces sickness. Healthy people will produce a healthy social order. Libertarianism is a critique of highly regulatory governments. That being said, what about government regulation is preventing people from creating healthy communities, social structure, and engaging in meaningful work? We both agree on the drawbacks of authoritarianism, but I am skeptical of the idea that our authoritarian social orders biggest driver is government regulation. Aside from taxation, social disorder and authoritarianism seems to be a product of a lack of governmental control not an excess. Big pharma and mega corporations sell poison to everyone, not the government Mass migration is a problem, and the government lets them do so. We live in one of the most libertarian times in recent history, and the social order has never been worse. The government allows the federal reserve to exist, which is a private institution. And inflation is behind many problems behind the current social order, don't we wish the government would step in and end the federal reserve?
-
@Kilgore said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@jens @Hando-Jin Are libertarians actually looking at most people today and thinking, "These people are capable of self-governing"?
That is precisely the fatal error in libertarianism. It is projection of one's perceived self-sufficiency on the population at large. Worse, often this perception of self-sufficiency is not even justified.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Sugar completely support people in their rights to do anything that does not hurt others. Drugs prostitution etc all should be legal completely.
How could engaging in drugs and prostitution not hurt others?
-
@TheSir why would it hurt others? If I take a drug now, you have no idea and it’s not your business. It’s never anyone else’s business what a person does or takes into his body. The only thing that is other people’s business is aggressions against them. Taking a drug or practicing some type of sex that others find objectionable is nobody’s business.
I believe in freedom from coercion and compulsion. I suggest you read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, and perhaps The Road to Serfdom by Hayek. Anything bu Murray Rothbard as he was a fantastic historian and a very good writer and storyteller.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster Though we abide by individualism, as individuals we do not exist in absolute isolation nor can our actions be separated from the living fabric of the society. Where the 'fine until it harms somebody' line of reasoning falls short is in not acknowledging that the behaviors justified by such rhetoric more often than not characteristically lower the individual's potential to positively contribute to the surrounding society. Since deliberately diminishing the growth potential of an entity is almost universally regarded as harmful, it would be fair to assert that letting the individual harm themselves in the name of pleasure will be indirectly harmful to everyone in the society by lowering the individual's ability to contribute to societal growth. In other words, in 'fine until it hurts somebody', the somebody has to not merely refer to bystanders, but the subject himself too, if we are to truly be mindful of the harmful consequences of our choices. The question thus becomes: why should the society harm itself by allowing its inhabitants to harm themselves?
-
BTW There is already a similar thread https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/730/why-is-the-ray-peat-community-so-far-right/
-
@Kvirion that isn't anyone else's business. My contribution to society is my business and nobody else's. There is no such thing as "society". There are ONLY individuals. Society is just another concept used to justify coercion and compulsion.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
There is no such thing as "society". There are ONLY individuals.
LOL! This statement above is against all valid scientific knowledge...
-
Humans act to achieve desired ends. That is all society is, acting individuals. A distinction between isolate and collective activities are a bit redundant to the matter, unless we're talking about forced collectivization...which means humans are no longer free to act in the pursuit to achieve desired ends.
-
I recommend reading Ludwig von Mises's Human Action. It's an indispensable read for anyone wanting to understand the subjective nature of humans.
