MyMindIsLikeAnOcean

Interesting…all of it? I’m in Ontario but my hub/ISP is in Quebec so all my random advertising is in French.

Somehow it knows to target advertising to you in English…maybe you need to work on your privacy?

Heh. I’m in Ontario, but I guess my DNS is outta Quebec…so most of my banner/insert advertising is in French. It’s fucking awesome because I have no idea what they’re saying or advertising to me most of the time. Highly recommend.

Welp, now I’m off to XHamster. Thank a ton >B|

I mean…I’m sure Che said that tho…

You’re just not accurately describing American libertarianism…it does, indeed, have wealthy people behind it, because American libertarians also loves a strong state that can fix regulations in their favour. Peter Thiel and some of the Koch’s are “libertarians”, ffs. “Freedom for me but not thee”, etc. American libertarianism is synonymous with hypocritical.

I think what’s happening here is you’re describing the Dave Smith party/partisan type libertarians, and not the movement at large. The niche that runs a presidential candidate and puts small business owners on stage at the convention is a “boutique” brand of libertarianism, and doesn’t represent the much larger group of people who, for example, Donald Trump shows up and tries to woo: yeah, he got bood in the building…but he was talking to the broader libertarian movement, some of whom were threatening to abandon his coalition - and it appears to have worked.

I mean…I stand by what I said…your definitions weren’t accurate…but knowing that you’re a Marxist now means this is likely just an “academic” issue. Your leftist definition was confusing without that context. I don’t call myself a Marxist because I don’t look at Marxism as a template for a political system, but rather an effective way to moderate capitalism. But I also think everybody who talks about economics is a Marxist to one degree or another. I’m likely preaching to the choir here…but the genius of Marx isn’t that he outlined a functioning communist state…but rather that he gave us a philosophical foundation for why capitalism cannot work, and how socialism can - full stop, end of story.

I don’t care for anarchists, really…even tho I occasionally caucus with them. I used to hate them as much as right libertarians - horse shoe theory and all - but I’ve softened because it’s time to coalesce…strategy almost doesn’t matter any more…we need action. I am super thankful they haven’t been polluting “our” protests to the degree they used to.

“…minimum state intervention…” isn’t part of the definition. That’s a value judgement and a concept that gets thrown around by the idealists. The concept of libertarianism was invented to moderate a necessary and ubiquitous state, and can’t exist without one.

You defined classical libertarianism or right libertarianism, which grew up to be what we see as The Libertarian Party in the USA today, for example. It was “rebranded” specifically to add the notion of “minimal state intervention” - to make themselves distinct from libertarians (who functionally existed, at that time). Much like classical liberals, classical libertarians are antithetical to the definition of their namesake.

I mean…that says it all.

Sure, the seemingly benevolent small business owners feature heavily at the conventions…but behind the curtains it’s really a coalition of rich guys, gun nuts, NAMBLAs, zoophiles, etc. in a stuffed cheap suit.

I have to push back a bit that the core of the proper definition of libertarianism is freedom from the state. It’s isn’t/wasn’t. The state plays an essential role in functional libertarianism, for what should be obvious reasons: libertarianism requires a mechanism, aside from power, to resolve tension between competing freedoms.

See The first “definition” doesn’t fit the group you’re trying to define. If you’re talking about American (using the US as shorthand)…they are by no means restricted to or feature small business owners, that’s but a small (albeit with outsized power) enclave in the “coalition”. ie you can’t mention small business owners without also mentioning that the largest business owners also may be “libertarians”. Their policy ideologically and thus empirically opposes the working class.

There’s no left wing version of the word, or rather, the proper definition is leftist. What you’re describing seems to be an ideological axe you have to grind with Marxism, or socialism something. Actual libertarianism is simply a school of thought - a collection of philosophies - that prioritize individual liberty (freedom). In other words…it’s a criticism - a way to moderate - a necessary capitalist system. Generally these philosophies aren’t related to American libertarianism/freedom…it’s more of a freedom from rather than a freedom to thing…to oversimplify: leftist (real) libertarians believe power structures shouldn’t impede the (not obstructive and lawful) acts of the people - it’s very conscious of power differentials, while American libertarians believe in an absolute right to individual freedom that may or may not conflict with other peoples’ freedoms - after that point of tension it comes down to functional power (thus it’s antithetical to the proper definition and why the prioritization of power pairs so well with - rather than moderates - capitalism and even fascism). Some of the groups that American libertarians welcome into their coalition are grotesque perversions of the concept - even if they put the small business owners on stage at the convention.

It’s depends on what you mean…it’s a fraught term, to say the least.

Actual definition of the word…or the Ron Paul (etc) nuts?

Yeh. The strategy seems to be to wait for their “turn” and make it look like the care while they watch everything they claim to stand for be destroyed.

Meh, I guess that could have been it…but I think in order to think that’s what he meant you have to be reverse engineering the meme. I just took it to mean “these look like Imperial blaster burns…they’re from better weapons”.

I also went and checked…yes he said that…but he wasn’t referring to the precision of the targeting…how would he be able to judge that? In my mind he was referring to the type of blaster bolts. Or…in my mind when I was 12 or whenever I saw it.

Yes…there’s many many examples of poor writing and inconsistency.

…but this is just a joke and it stretches the meaning of the ANH scene to make an inaccurate meme. In the first film the point of Obi Wans comments, in my mind, was to highlight the type of weapons used. It’s more of a “parsec” situation. He was trying to describe the actual impact of the weapon and we’re being distracted by the use of the word precise. He should have said “impact spread”, or something else that wouldn’t have made sense to viewers at the time.

I don’t remember the dialogue like that. I’m sure my brain has been polluted by decades of nonsense…but I remember the point of that scene being that Imperials had better weapons, not aim.

Right?

When “malignant” progressives like Kyle Kulinski are still fucking addicted to Twitter - they ultimately do more harm than good.

Our “liberal” government is indistinguishable from 80s/90s conservatives.

Thanks a ton. I was really struggling with the transition when using a few of the above mentioned apps…before I settled on Blorp.

Way more grammar and spelling aholes, lol. About 50% are false positive because I have large hands and shit eyes…but the other half are appreciated.

This was the first thing that threw me off: people here tend to comment in good faith. I’m so used to people begging the question and generally having iron clad closed minds…from Reddit.

…but here conservations have often come to conclusion where I and another user agree to disagree amicably, or one of us moves towards the other in light of new information or a logical argument.

it’s really weird…but I hope it stays like that so I can get used to it.