• Entheon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honest question? Are libertarians that bad? I don’t agree with their ideology but are they that bad at a personal level too?

        • Darkard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          58
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          When your movement centers around not having “society” tell you whats right and wrong and you can do whatever you want, people who don’t like being told the things they like are bad will be drawn to it.

          • Emanresu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah, libertarians are just a fascist co-option of an old anarchist movement which distorted into pure capitalist totalitarianism. Exactly the same as ancaps.

            Pretty much any legit group that’s against capitalism will be distorted to be pro-capitalism and a few suckers will participate.

        • gsa32@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          41
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most so-called “Libertarians” are Republicans who want to smoke weed

          • buckykat@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Republicans who know just a bit too much about state-by-state age of consent laws

            Ftfy

          • xerazal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            And employ people, even children, for the lowest wages possible.

            • shuzuko@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              But but but, those children should be able to choose whether or not they work for slave wages! If they were worth more than that the free market would pay them better anyway! It’s an infringement of my sovereign citizenship to tell me I’m not allowed to scam and/or scare vulnerable minors into selling me their time and/or bodies!

              • Zoot@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                That last bit very much grossed me out, and I’m confident you added it for a reason.

                • xerazal@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Probably because its accurate. They “think of the children”, alright. Every. Damn. Night.

        • synthy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not sure if this has anything to do with it, but Lemmy.ml is moderated by communists, and I don’t think they get along with libertarians.

          • buckykat@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            1 year ago

            To be clear, “libertarian” originally referred to what we would now call anarchists, or anarcho-communists. But at this point, the word has been pretty completely coopted by those on the right tending toward the very different ideology of anarcho-capitalism. Statist communists and anarchist communists have their own internecine conflicts, but both hate the current right wing libertarians.

        • ghost_laptop@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Libertarians will tell you this is not an anarcho-capitalist example because it obviously failed, but look up Kowloon Walled city for a good example of how an anarcho-capitalist society looks like.

          • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            To what degree is that like my mom saying “look at Venezuela for a good example of socialism”?

            I agree that libertarianism is often short sighted, but I’m under the impression that your average libertarian believes that there should be a government with just enough power and responsibility to ensure that the citizens don’t infringe on each other’s “liberties”. I don’t think that’s at all guaranteed in an anarcho-capitalist society, but I could be wrong.

            I don’t agree with libertarianism because it doesn’t attempt to solve the tragedy of the commons whatsoever. Which is why I believe the fediverse can only be maintained through a culture of cooperation of its users.

            • ghost_laptop@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well, one argument that could be used is that for example Venezuela is not the Marxist variant of socialism, but it is their own thing called Bolivarian Socialism based on ideas of La Patria Grande and Simón Bolivar, a good comparison is that of Gadaffi’s Arab Socialism, which picks up ideas of Marxism (Bolivarian Socialism does this too, of course), Islam and Pan-Africanism/Pan-Arabism. So in that case it doesn’t strickly follow the rules of what some people would call orthodox scientific Marxism, since both incorporate ideas that might not be 100% coherent with dialectical materialist analysis of certain issues. Besides, both Venezuela and Libya suffered from great US meddling (both countries suffered coup d’Etats, Venezuela suffered two if I recall correctly, and embargoes), and specifically for Venezuela the embargo was pretty harsh since their economy depended a lot on crude oil export, which they could not carry out as they should. Still, if you look at the numbers, Venezuela has greatly improved in the last couple years even though it still has insane amounts of inflation, it went from 438.12 on 2017 to 65,374.08 and in October of last year it was of 1,588.0, so as you can see going from 65,000 to 1,500 is a huge success, even if it’s still extremely high in comparison with other countries.

              Regarding Kowloon, I’m sure you can find some excuse, but to put it simply, it was a place of a really small area (2.6 ha (6.4 acres)) but with a really high density (50,000 people and 1,923,000/km2) but at the end of the day was a perfect place for such experiment since you don’t have the complicated macroeconomics of not even a small country. The place was ignored by the English government (it was during the Hong Kong colonial time) but at the same time prohibited the Chinese government of the mainland from taking it to its own due to its closed proximity with Hong Kong, and furthermore it was not some place that was, for example, a CIA funded place to destabilise a region. In simple words it was ignored by pretty much any type of governmental entity and left to be as it could. You could argue, though, that the place started as a poor place, without access to basic needs, but if anything after its anarcho-capitalist existence it should have improved, not get worse. Construction was done without any type of care for regulations, medical care was done by whomever who had access to some tools, and life was even worse than stuff like Latinamerican Villas or Favelas, since even stuff like sunlight was not accessible for people living in the lower strata, since due to its small area housing needed to be built vertically. I’m sure people will find excuses, but to me it’s a perfect example, funnily enough I’ve met some an-caps who wholeheartedly saw that place a desirable thing. There is a book by a photographer that has some of the best photos of that place at the time called City of Darkness, I think it was available at LibGen, and also the place was shown in the film Bloodsport featuring Jean-Claude Van Damme.

              • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s a lot of really interesting info, but I don’t think it addressed my question. My question was, does an “an-cap” society really align with libertarianism, because from what I know of libertarianism, it doesn’t. Libertarians aren’t anarchists, they believe in a minimal govt that prevents people from infringing on each other’s freedoms.

                Your points about lack of construction or medical regulation are good, though. I don’t think a libertarian would endorse those types of regulations, but innocent people will die in completely avoidable ways without them.

        • Serinus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some are just young and/or naive. If you don’t think past the surface it makes sense. It’s (American) conservativism with less hate. And it’s another tool to manipulate people into supporting lower taxes on the rich.

          It’s appealing at a glance because the first thing kids notice about it is that you don’t have to hate gays for no reason.

        • djstini@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I dont think there is a requirement for them to be “bad” but theres a lot of them who are and the ideolog kinda supports being a douche.

        • tricoro@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s hard to answer this question because libertarians and socialists are like water and oil. That said, things like the end of intellectual property and abolition of the police are points that I see both sides agreeing (there might be more points, but I can’t remember right now).

          The problem is that aside from a few of the original writers (like Mises or Hayek, examples from the top of my head), most libertarians out there on par, or even more than tankies in their fanatism. But maybe that’s a problem with most big movements anyway.

          • Entheon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t make assumptions like that usually. There are some groups that have lots of corruption within, just didn’t know if I missed the memo on libertarians.

        • G234323@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not really. Internet has distorted the reality. I have talked with lots of them in person and online outside of social network that are all day talking about politics and nothing to do what memes make it seem. Also if you look at right wing memes you will find they are accusing left wing people to be pedos(but same applies). In resume, memes like that don’t represent reality, its just a “cultural war” that is used to throw shit against the “other side”.

  • Kosta554@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Good thing it is banned in the EU or at least in the Netherlands 🇳🇱

    EDIT: It is not banned it needs to be approved by GDPR

    • Steeve@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It isn’t banned, they just haven’t gone through GDPR approval yet

        • jd3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Thank you for this integrity and wisdom. You win the Internet from long ago today! Lol

          • Kosta554@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No point in fighting if my sources are not correct or It must be a Dutch thing that we must correct ourselves haha.

        • Steeve@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup pretty much, they wouldn’t have made the regulatory requirements, so they chose not to release in the EU yet (i.e. not blocked in the EU). GDPR “approval” might not be the best term, but that’s how I’ve seen it represented in tech articles so far.

          The thing holding them back is sharing data cross app from what I’ve heard. Since Threads runs off Instagram accounts right now, but it’s still it’s own app, it’s sort of in a legal gray area, and given that they want to extend it to non-Instagram users as well it probably makes more sense to go for that first and then move for the EU release after they’ve made it fully GDPR compliant.

          • BattBoi244@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They already don’t comply with it with FB lol, they have just got away with it for so long, believe it was mainly the the Irish regulators fault who is either some form of captured, anti-privacy or being bribed.

            But it went to the EU level board, not sure how all that works, who finally hit then with a $1.2 billion fine and the demand they come into compliance. So maybe it’s off the back of that as well has gave them some pause

            • Steeve@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              So I work in Canadian tech as a Data Engineer and have some experience there and the 1.2B fine they got hit with is actually a lot more nuanced than it’s been represented and pretty problematic in general.

              Probably going to get downvoted for even linking it, but their response is unfortunately the only write-up I’ve seen that actually goes into detail:

              https://about.fb.com/news/2023/05/our-response-to-the-decision-on-facebooks-eu-us-data-transfers/

              The TLDR is that the Court of Justice of the EU invalidated the original form of data transfer for data from the EU to US, so everyone switched over to SCCs knowing there was legal uncertainty there, but with promises from the EU and US that they’d “figure it out” and come up with a joint decision on how to transfer data safely. The GDPR jumped the gun for a reason that nobody really knows, and slapped Meta with a fine that’s making thousands of companies who are basically forced to do the same thing (since no actual legal option exists) shit their pants.

    • BattBoi244@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Seeing some articles reference the Digital Market Act, which seems to be around large platforms online, which seems to be more akin to competition law.

      They did launch it in the UK, which still has all the GDPR laws/principles, just outside the EU context. Then again maybe that means any enforcement activities by the UK would start from scratch. Or maybe the lack of recent UK enforcement activity encouraged them

  • Televise@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Threads when isolated from this community: GOOD.

    Threads when federated with this community: NOT GOOD.

    It is your choice whether to use it or not. The Fediverse is like the Linux of social media, I like it more here and on other fedi apps than on the corporate social media.

    • jkure2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The amount of people who believe themselves and their interests safe from the totalizing influence of these companies really breaks my mind.

      Threads when isolated from this community: STILL NOT GOOD

      • SneakyWaffles@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Am I the only one who’s confused why it’s such a bad thing for Threads to federate?

        It’s just essentially be a really big instance. People can turn it off or go to instances that defederate from threads if they hate it.

        My potentially controversial (at least here) take is that the Fediverse needs a few mainstream players like Threads to flourish long-term. It’ll be some serious mainstream attention on what federated services offer, and also a shallow end of the pool that normal people can start their Fediverse journey in

        • Digester@mastodon.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          @SneakyWaffles @jkure2 let them federate. I have nothing against that because it doesn’t take away the possibility to block them either on a federal level or to an individual level. If you don’t wanna see Thread’s content you can opt out at any time.

          I like how versatile the fediverse is and I welcome other platforms.

    • RoadieRich@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Threads is Meta’s (Facebook/Instagram’s) Twitter replacement, which they want to connect to the Fediverse, but most of the Ferdiverse doesn’t want them to.

      • 5SpeedDeasil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Interesting. So I assume it’s suppose to be going up against Mastadon then? I honestly would be fine with it as long as they open source there server code but let’s be real, they won’t

        • Matt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Against” isn’t really the right word, as you don’t really compete on the fediverse.

          All the platforms on the fediverse work together by design, the introduction of more micro blogs is good for Mastodon and the rest; there’s already so many of them and you can talk to them through Mastodon, which is the way it should be.