Z_Poster365

joined 2 years ago
[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 12 points 7 hours ago

thank god we didn't have the internet during WW2 or you people would be posting Nazi infographics and whining that Nazis have won

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 16 points 7 hours ago

jesus christ shut the fuck up

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 14 points 7 hours ago

hey seriously go log the fuck off, using the death of a martyr to score gotcha points and then embracing great man theory and israeli narratives.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

America did have a large problem with alcoholism at the time and needed some sort of intervention. The problem is with how it was implemented, with the feds deliberately poisoning batches of alcohol to trace where it went and mobs gaining control of everything. There was a way to get help for the huge portion of society that were antisocial violent and abusive drunkards without throwing them in jails or driving them into the arms of the mob.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 17 points 1 day ago

Plenty of places in the world where gambling industries are banned, and it works pretty well.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 13 points 1 day ago

citations needed don't miss

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

nah, any bookie or house or casino needs to go. There shouldn't be any "officials" allowed to take bets whatsoever, as this leads to gambling industry. Small scale bets between individuals is fine, but once a house is involved and taking a cut it's crossed the line

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I couldn't care less if someone wants to smoke themselves to death.

do you really truly believe this? would you say this about your parents or loved ones if they were smoking a pack a day and had emphysema and lung cancer? You wouldn't stage any kind of intervention to try and get them to quit and get them help? If they kept smoking, you wouldn't take their cigarettes away from them?

I extend the care that I feel towards my immediate loved ones to society at large. I am deeply saddened by deaths of despair, of millions of people killing themselves slowly with alcohol, tobacco and opiates. I don't think it's right to let them die without trying to help, just like I don't think it would be right to let someone you notice struggling to swim drown right next to you. We have obligations to love and help each other, and I would never let a loved one drink themselves to death if I could help it, so why would I let my fellow humanity do it just because I don't personally know them?

Libertarianism, individualism and voluntarism that you espouse completely ignores human interconnectivity and our obligations and duties. It pretends there is no obligation or duty to society.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

it's following your logic to its ends. If I have the right to drink myself to death then I also have the right to sell my body into slavery right?

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 11 points 1 day ago

it won't be "me"

it will be the democratic bodies of the working class. And yes, they will get to set rules and regulations and laws you have to follow

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

only idealists scream for consistency in everything. embrace living in contradictions and struggling with them

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

libertarian brain claims another victim

view more: next ›