Create account

1148d · Politics
Claiming to be a libertarian but making exceptions for a pandemic is like claiming to be a vegan but making exceptions for mealtimes. Your politics in challenging times *is* your politics.
replied 1147d
Very well put.. I like it
Dr. Uther 17Xudk
replied 1148d
What if the Pandemic was really bad and 100 million die, sounds like I just exploded your logic.
replied 1148d
Nonaggression when there is a highly transmissive asymptomatic disease that often maims or kills means getting tested regularly or vaccinated... else, wearing a mask.
replied 1148d
Libertarians and gun rights people understand that keeping arms means not brandishing them into a crowd while blindfolded and no idea if the gun is loaded.
replied 1148d
Guns: an apt analogy. Here in UK, almost no one advocates for gun rights. Doing so in front of my colleagues would likely make me a pariah.
replied 1148d
Their reasoning is simple /guns kill people, end of. Doesn’t matter about ‘muh rights’, guns are contagious, and eventually that means death for someone/
replied 1143d
Is it okay if slaves own guns? I am guessing your answer is no lol....
replied 1142d
Your reading comprehension whooshes
replied 1142d
What do you mean?
replied 1142d
plural noun: whooshes

a sudden movement accompanied by a rushing sound.
replied 1148d
The moral to the story is that everyone draws the lines of safety vs freedom differently. One states responsible citizen is another states reckless idiot.
replied 1148d
Yes. And each of us should be free to associate with those who we feel are not reckless idiots, and to remove reckless idiots from any property we own.
replied 1148d
Agreed. Whether masks vs no-masks or pull-down-the-offensive-statues vs don’t-pull-down-the-offensive-statues, ‘public spaces’ are an endless source of division.
replied 1148d
Exactly.
replied 1148d
Interesting position. I agree there is a big danger in conformity due to fake pandemics like Cov19, but if it had been a real danger, I am not so sure what to think.
replied 1148d
> fake pandemics like Cov19

More dead in USA than the country lost in combat in WWI,WWII,Korea,and Vietnam

This is why I am muting you. Darwin will take care of the rest of the task.
replied 1147d
I usually try not to get hung up in words like I did there, as there is always another guy with another definition that he will fight for to his death. And different definitions of
replied 1147d
words will impact the whole meanings of statements. Cov19 is not a serious danger to mankind, but some definitions of "pandemic" seems to fit, like "disease that spans the whole world"
replied 1147d
That said, I do not regret being inaccurate in an informal conversation on the internet, this is not an appology, I have simply clarified my position on the matter.
replied 1148d
There’s a philosophically consistent minarchist position where the State only intervenes in times of crisis. I think this was the default for a lot of societies historically...
replied 1148d
My objection is to some (e.g. Peter McCormack) who claim to be statists only in a pandemic. I don't think this is a consistent position.
replied 1148d
Peter McCormack is a larper and cannot be taken seriously on any matter. In fact the irony is that in many ways he is like Craig Wright. Irony because they are in a legal battle.
replied 1148d
I don't know exactly what you mean. Suppose a real superbug appeared, one which only like 1% of the population survived, and super contagious. Would that not be a crisis?
replied 1148d
Yes. But if you believe gov is the right solution to such a crisis this belief would make you technically a statist, irrespective of what you advocated the rest of the time.
replied 1148d
To be clear, it is a valid position to take, but not a libertarian one...
replied 1148d
I have seen a lot of fair-weather libertarians preach anti-state when something is required of them yet been pro-state when they think they need help.
replied 1148d
So I have heard many different definitions of "libertarian" I believe, I don't know which one you like. But either way, do you really think the majority of libertarians are 100% blind
replied 1148d
|followers of the doctrine? Like I give them 2 choices, you can follow your doctrine and die, or follow another doctrine and live, they would choose to die?
replied 1148d
I don’t necessarily think it’s about following a doctrine, because if X had rejected the state entirely then X would no longer even have the option of a statist solution.
replied 1148d
The choice would not be made in a life or death situation, but years beforehand in deciding how you wanted to live, and accepting any risk/reward that such a life would entail.
replied 1148d
I understand this perspective, but at the moment, the state controls a lot of things in a way that other entities cannot. Society is set up for the state to do some things.
replied 1148d
An accurate assessment.
replied 1148d
You are right that there are perhaps too many definitions of 'libertarian' to use the term w/o further explanation. Perhaps I should have gone with 'non-statist'.
replied 1148d
I think there's no difference between libertarian statists and left/right wing ones.
replied 1148d
The problem if you are not absolutist is of course that you have to know when breaking the rules is OK, and that is usually quite difficult, but that seems to me better still.