LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

I generally lean towards left-libertarianism though I think it is important to maintain a strong socialist security system in the beginning to defend the people from anti-revolution forces both outside and within. That may require making difficult decisions on occasion.

Congratulations, you founded the Soviet Union 2.0

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Congratulations, you founded the Soviet Union 2.0

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

I have an effective idea to respond.

[Conserative Morality]

Congratulations, you founded the Soviet Union 2.0

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Nice phrase, but I prefer MAD.

[Hammer Britannia]

To be fair, You didn't convince me. You, more or less, just got the ball rolling.

Also, in my defense, I was talking about the people LARPing as pagans not Pagans themselves.

Is there any difference between the two? :^))))

Actual religious people are crazy enough to believe in sky fairies

/s

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

Is there any difference between the two? :^))))

Actual religious people are crazy enough to believe in sky fairies

/s

I still don't get why people think it's reasonable to believe in a deity which rules over the universe, let alone why it's considered reasonable, whilst calling the idea that perhaps we shouldn't bomb countries for oil absolutely absurd, dissident and traitorous.

[Yusseria]

Congratulations, you founded the Soviet Union 2.0

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

Kind of reminds me of mixing egalitarianism and fanatic militarism in Stellaris.

[First American Empire]

The world shall know of our peaceful ways BY FORCE!

Kind of reminds me of mixing egalitarianism and fanatic militarism in Stellaris.

AKA my favorite way to play Stellaris.

[Free African Union]

I generally lean towards left-libertarianism though I think it is important to maintain a strong socialist security system in the beginning to defend the people from anti-revolution forces both outside and within. That may require making difficult decisions on occasion.

Congratulations, you founded the Soviet Union 2.0

The Soviet Union was an authoritarian (and at times totalitarian) anti-worker entity that also practiced imperialism. This stands in contrast to what I stand for. Supporting a security apparatus for the revolution is no different than a capitalist supporting the existence of the FBI, MI6, etc.

[Sovaal]

I generally lean towards left-libertarianism though I think it is important to maintain a strong socialist security system in the beginning to defend the people from anti-revolution forces both outside and within. That may require making difficult decisions on occasion.

Sounds like a good way to get a police state.

[Free African Union]

I generally lean towards left-libertarianism though I think it is important to maintain a strong socialist security system in the beginning to defend the people from anti-revolution forces both outside and within. That may require making difficult decisions on occasion.

Sounds like a good way to get a police state.

You can argue that for any society then. The revolution will need to be protected and that requires people and institutions that are responsible for that.

[Catochristoferson]

I still don't think it's justified to kill a bunch of civilians just because they live under a shitty regime.

Most civilian deaths were from disease, not warfare.

And again, the diseases were almost entirely unintentional.

We were talking about one specific case though, the slaughter of the Aztecs by the Spanish.

[Pasong Tirad]

Sounds like a good way to get a police state.

You can argue that for any society then. The revolution will need to be protected and that requires people and institutions that are responsible for that.

But one of the main things that draw people towards left-libertarianism is their disdain for the monopoly on violence held by states. Imposing another monopoly on violence on a society that may lean socialist does sound marginally better, but it is still a stratifying monopoly and should be opposed if you are as left-libertarian as you claim to be.

[Ostroeuropa]

You can argue that for any society then. The revolution will need to be protected and that requires people and institutions that are responsible for that.

But one of the main things that draw people towards left-libertarianism is their disdain for the monopoly on violence held by states. Imposing another monopoly on violence on a society that may lean socialist does sound marginally better, but it is still a stratifying monopoly and should be opposed if you are as left-libertarian as you claim to be.

I don't mind the monopoly on violence held by states and view it positively. My problem is that it defends the economy and property while the ownership of those things is concentrated. A market socialist economy could fund a state that would push social democracy and have a monopoly on violence and would not inherently be against the publics interest because it would draw its cash from socialist corporations.

The current system is broadly fine and fit for purpose, except the ownership of corporations by capitalists rather than workers at those corporations. The concentrations of wealth the capitalist system produces means that the state doing its job and defending the interests of wealth and property pits it against basic social democratic systems.

If workers owned their corporations we wouldn't see billions spend on trying to gaslight the public into hating free healthcare and so on. They'd get together and broadly agree that yes, if all of us pool our resources together we can ensure a system of education, healthcare, and so on, because even if I am still entitled to a higher share of wealth because I work for a more profitable company, we're still not billionaires capable of buying our own hospital.

I'm left-libertarian because I don't trust the state to handle the economy, nor to meddle in the personal lives of the public.

The worst the system could produce is a kind of Producerism snobbery against the disabled and unemployed where they all go against the state and say fuck all of you we're going to have our own corporate hospitals and schools which you can't join in on. But the thing is, if you're already funding those things and making them high quality for 90% of the population (The workers), there's not actually much benefit to excluding the rest. Compare/contrast "Well we can exclude 99% of the public because we're the Owner class.".

Corporate hospitals and schools would rapidly give way to shared hospital/school agreements between corporations because its simply cheaper and more effective, and at that point, why not?

The level of income would also mean the workers can't effectively segregate themselves in ivory towers and gated communities and would be forced to live in broadly the same area as their victims.

While it's plausible that such a system could be minarchistic market socialism, I think it would naturally tend toward social democracy, and elections would primarily revolve around foreign policy, cultural and social matters, and just what things we think the collective should be funding. (Imagine elections between competing social democratic parties with different priorities, some with a view that education and healthcare are the most important because reasons, some with a view that actually science, energy, and water are, and so on.).

We'd see a new type of political spectrum emerge and new political philosophies and frameworks emphasizing different things for min-maxing society. You might get some who are more keen on land-value tax because they're "Modernists" who want everything tall and centralized because it's more efficient, convenient, and the old land can be returned to the environment, who are hell bent on science and tech, VS "Humanists", social democrats of a different flavor who note the detrimental impact on psychology dense population environments cause, and so on.

[Free African Union]

You can argue that for any society then. The revolution will need to be protected and that requires people and institutions that are responsible for that.

But one of the main things that draw people towards left-libertarianism is their disdain for the monopoly on violence held by states. Imposing another monopoly on violence on a society that may lean socialist does sound marginally better, but it is still a stratifying monopoly and should be opposed if you are as left-libertarian as you claim to be.

A misplaced disdain. I'm not in favor of a totalitarian state or one that seeks to oppress workers like a lot of communist party run states have been. I'm also in favor of arming most of the population to not only defend from foreign aggression but also to prevent tyrants that would seek to use the ideals of socialism to engorge themselves (Lenin, Stalin, etc). However that doesn't mean I am naive in believing that the revolution would be able to whether the storm from international imperialism if it had no means to secure itself from spies and insurgents.

[Torrocca]

On the topic of centrism, since that's a pretty trash "ideology", or lack thereof.

[Greater Westralia]

On the topic of centrism, since that's a pretty trash "ideology", or lack thereof.

Oh boy, more center-bashing from the radical left. Even better, citing reddit.

Why do lefties feel the need to try piss on centrism? Are they jealous that moderation can achieve social changes and better working conditions?

[Kowani]

On the topic of centrism, since that's a pretty trash "ideology", or lack thereof.

Oh boy, more center-bashing from the radical left. Even better, citing reddit.

Why do lefties feel the need to try piss on centrism? Are they jealous that moderation can achieve social changes and better working conditions?

Perhaps it might be that centrism on certain issues almost always involves inherently supporting one side-usually the conservative one.

[Torrocca]

On the topic of centrism, since that's a pretty trash "ideology", or lack thereof.

Oh boy, more center-bashing from the radical left. Even better, citing reddit.

Why do lefties feel the need to try piss on centrism? Are they jealous that moderation can achieve social changes and better working conditions?

Even MLK Jr., a famed Socialist, Christian preacher, lambasted you centrists.

[Hanafuridake]

Kind of reminds me of mixing egalitarianism and fanatic militarism in Stellaris.

AKA my favorite way to play Stellaris.

I always played as a militaristic divine monarchy with an entrenched aristocracy.

You are all barbarians.

[Greater Westralia]

Even MLK Jr., a famed Socialist, Christian preacher, lambasted you centrists.

Good for him.

[Torrocca]

Even MLK Jr., a famed Socialist, Christian preacher, lambasted you centrists.

Good for him.

Yup, especially since he was right about that.

Fence-sitting on the issue of human rights as if it's the reasonable thing to do is absolutely fucking stupid dogmatism.

[Greater Westralia]

Yup, especially since he was right about that.

Fence-sitting on the issue of human rights as if it's the reasonable thing to do is absolutely fucking stupid dogmatism.

Imagine my surprise when the leftist throws out ignorant characterisations of centrism as "fence-sitting". Really quite original.

You do realise that being centrist doesn't mean you sit in the middle of every fucking issue, right?

[Torrocca]

Yup, especially since he was right about that.

Fence-sitting on the issue of human rights as if it's the reasonable thing to do is absolutely fucking stupid dogmatism.

Imagine my surprise when the leftist throws out ignorant characterisations of centrism as "fence-sitting". Really quite original.

You do realise that being centrist doesn't mean you sit in the middle of every fucking issue, right?

I'm gonna take the word of the leaders of civil rights movements worldwide who've recognized centrism as a major problem to the very concept of civil rights, such as MLK Jr. or Desmond Tutu, over your word on this, chief.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Imagine my surprise when the leftist throws out ignorant characterisations of centrism as "fence-sitting". Really quite original.

You do realise that being centrist doesn't mean you sit in the middle of every fucking issue, right?

I'm gonna take the word of the leaders of civil rights movements worldwide who've recognized centrism as a major problem to the very concept of civil rights, such as MLK Jr. or Desmond Tutu, over your word on this, chief.

So centrism bad, got it.