this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
126 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

40828 readers
725 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You realize that libertarianism is not a left right spectrum of the political orientation, correct?

For example Stalin was an authoritarian based in leftist ideology. Hitler is an authoritarian based in right-wing ideology.

Notice that while their economic goals are at complete odds with one another, they are both authoritarians.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

You realize that libertarianism is not a left right spectrum of the political orientation, correct?

For example Stalin was an authoritarian based in leftist ideology. Hitler was an authoritarian based in right-wing ideology.

Notice that while their economic goals are at complete odds with one another, they are both authoritarians.

I'm libertarian because I believe in freedom of choice. I'm not a conservative because the only things I care about conserving are the oceans and the forests.

I hope that in the future we can stop using the worst monsters and strawmen from our peers chosen political affiliation to color our view of those peers.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

You can't be both a libertarian and pretend to care about parks and forests. Pick one.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's not true. I'm pretty sure most people don't 100% agree with The strictest definition of their chosen label.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not even that it's that they are deciding what the definition of the idealogy is based only on the most unhinged thoughts of the obnoxious voices of that ideology.

But I'm sure that .ml represents all Communists and socialists correct? It's totally an accurate representation because they call themselves those words

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It wouldn't kill you to read

But based on your username, that may not be in your skill set

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Maybe you should refer to yourself as a geolibertarian instead of just as a libertarian. It would prevent some misunderstandings.

That's an interesting read. It's quite a bit different than what I'm used to people who call themselves libertarians talking about. I still think it would unwind and would be ruined by human nature, but it would be interesting to see such a system in action.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not entirely sure about what are the reasoning behind your comment, but i see it as : llibertarian implies no state + parks and forest require state = incompatibility. I'd disagree on the parks and forest require state, i thinl they only need organization, meaning one or more NGO could handle it. Accepting this, not that much incompatibility between libertarian and forest remains (accepting libertarian as left wing meaning that does not imply private property)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In a purely libertarian society, parks wouldn't last long. They would either become prohibitely expensive and yet another thing only for the rich, or they would be harvested and the land mined.

Making them public is the only way to ensure they remain as they are.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Conversely, I shouldn't have to spell out my beliefs in order to be treated as a person

I'm certain that you're aware that words like communism, socialism and Marxism have a plethora of negative propaganda associated with them. Likewise, terms like libertarian are also dragged through the mud routinely.

I hope that in the future we can stop using the worst monsters and strawmen from our peers chosen political affiliation to color our view of those peers.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Annnnnnnd what? When did I dehumanize you? Human nature is precisely why I think a libertarian system would be a disaster.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I agree.

Whenever I see discussions about Libertarians, I always think about that town, Grafton, that got overrun with libertarians. Human nature indeed.

https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project

The book is a very nice read.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Your comment is so lacking depth of understanding that it hurts.

Whenever I see discussions about Communists, I always think about the gulags and death camps in the USSR. Russia was an empire before it was overrun with Communists. Human nature indeed. /S

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Oh yeah, right wing libertarian (based on private property) seems a bad thing for forest, without specific system. I was talking about left wing libertarianism (without private property).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You’re about one “and I think healthcare is a human right” from being a progressive/dem soc.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I like the Democratic socialists. I don't like it when they seize power that will be upsurped by the next administration in powerand used to oppress people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

you forgot to switch alts to argue with yourself

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You seem very confused I edited a comment and it posted to itself. It's the same fucking comment should I have deleted the tree and collapsed the thread?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Notice that while their economic goals are at complete odds with one another, they are both authoritarians.

You're thinking of the political compass there, which has two axes, one being the economic one (left/right) and the other being the Authoritarian (top) vs Libertarian (bottom) axis.

But the left/right most people use is a one-dimensional system which puts everything on that one axis. It's based on how the French parliament used to be set up between the radical left and the aristocratic right.

The point being, the two left/right axes aren't equivalent. I personally also think in the political compass, that's the system we learnt in school, so I'm unclear on what falls where on the basic left/right axis. But Wikipedia has this to say:

While communism and socialism are usually regarded internationally as being on the left, conservatism and reactionism are generally regarded as being on the right.[1] Liberalism can mean different things in different contexts, being sometimes on the left (social liberalism) and other times on the right (conservative liberalism or classical liberalism). Those with an intermediate outlook are sometimes classified as centrists.