93
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
93 points (95.1% liked)
Asklemmy
42502 readers
1426 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I am libertarian.
Less government. Less rules. Less restrictions.
I don't give a rats ass if you want to smoke pot, get abortions. etc. I support individual rights and freedoms.
What's your opinion on regulations for companies?
I don't follow the 100% libertarian approach, which basically says, companies can do whatever the hell they want. (And, consumers vote with their pockets.. etc....)
If- that is what you were hinting at.
Yeah that, it's the one libertarian standpoint that I really disagree with so I was just curious
Another, of the viewpoints I don't agree with-
Pure libertarianism- means no federal government at all. No military. If people wanted a military, they would pay a company for it, etc.
I also don't agree with that.
I retain my ability for self-thinking, and also, conclude none of the popular ideologies are perfect. They all have faults.
I view freedom more about living without fear rather than doing what you want, which often leads down the don't give a rats ass as long as you aren't terrifying others over it.
Maybe someday libertarians will increase in the upcoming decades ๐
That would be nice.
BUT... everyone is all too busy picking sides (between the left, and the right, ie, liberal / conservative)... despite both sides eroding away freedoms, and blaming the other side for all of their problems.
I appreciate your point of view, where you didn't do the common thing of strawmanning the left, especially on gun rights, in an effort to put yourself "in the middle".
I believe in all those things you do (for a certain definition of "less government"), as well as gun ownership, but I consider myself a Marxist. There's something really admirable about "old-school libertarians".
I think things like Right to Repair and Net Neutrality are the line between Libertarians who are good at heart, and the nut jobs. To an Anarcho-Capitalist, a company has the right to license their products under whatever conditions they want; an ISP can give preferential bandwidth to big companies. But a real Libertarian believes that not even companies and contracts can limit a person's freedoms.
When you look at it from an external point of view- neither side is actually helping the gun rights segment.
Both repubs and democrats are slowly whittling away rights and freedoms, including gun rights.
I agree completely. Reagan passed the first gun control legislation in American history, after the Black Panthers armed themselves in California.
The status quo of gun control being a local issue benefits Reactionaries. Communities of color (and other left-leaning urban communities) elect Democrat governments who limit firearms. Republican communities elect Republicans who do not. The end result is effectively minorities and liberals voting to disarm themselves while Republicans do not face the same restrictions.