Libertarian Discussion

337 readers

1 users here now

Place for discussion from a Libertarian perspective, meaning less top-down control and more individual liberty. In general, the intent is discussion about issues and not a discussion on libertarianism itself or any of its branches.

Be sure to respect the instance rules, and please keep discussion civil and backed by high quality sources where possible.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works

-1

Key Concepts of Libertarianism (www.cato.org)

submitted 1 week ago by EndlessApollo@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org to c/libertarian@sh.itjust.works

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Does should mean will?

No, one of the core tenets of libertarianism is that freedom means dealing with the freedoms of others. People will use their freedom in ways you don't like, and that could be sieg hieling they way down the street or publishing a nazi newspaper, but exercising that right does not restrict yours. A popular saying in libertarian circles is, "your rights end where mine begin," and that goes both ways.

I strongly disagree that allowing someone to exercise their freedom of speech harms anyone else, outside of extreme cases like yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Speaking filth doesn't itself harm others, the harm to others comes from what others do in response to that speech.

calling pointed questions “gotchas” is also a conservative tactic

It was a pretty extreme question given the context, and that's frequently a type of "gotcha" question. It's a form of reducto ad absurdum, which means arguing the most extreme logical end (i.e. "I support free speech" -> "So you support Nazi newspapers?"). Whatever the intent, it looked like a "gotcha" question.

you outright invited modern fascists to the table

I didn't say anything to that extent. Saying someone should have the freedom to say what they want isn't "inviting them to the table." Inviting them to the table means having them on a popular TV network to discuss their views or something, inviting them into the bar is like having their newspapers on display at your store. What I'm talking about is just not kicking them out of your city for having bad ideas.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 minutes ago

Speaking filth doesn’t itself harm others, the harm to others comes from what others do in response to that speech.

Yet harm is done. People die because of speech. How do you weigh the right to live, versus the right to speak? Are they equally important? Speech, moreso? Or are we simply pretending that the predictable outcomes of blood libel are disconnected from that blameless act of merely saying words?

(i.e. “I support free speech” -> “So you support Nazi newspapers?”)

When the answer is YES, this complaint doesn't work. I expected a no! I was looking for common ground!

I didn’t say anything to that extent.

if Lemmy is going to be an actual competitor to Reddit, it needs to attract people from all ends of the political spectrum, with the caveat that bad behavior is not tolerated. I don’t care if someone is from the left wing, the right wing, or some other wing, they should have a seat at the table as long as they’re respectful and bring evidence to support their assertions when in communities that expect that.

Response: "Nobody needs 'all ends of the political spectrum,' when that includes Nazis."

But we do. Nazism was a popular movement, and we need people to understand it or we’re doomed to repeat that era of history. If we hide it, people will forget why it was so bad and it’ll fester until it gains enough power to cause problems.

Not only did you absolutely say that, you seem to think we need nazis around in order to know that nazis are bad. (How can we teach about the evils of slavery, unless there's still slaveholders?) Obviously we should let people sincerely push scientific racism, with whatever evidence bolsters their intolerable bigotry.... unless they're interpersonally impolite. Telling someone to fuck a rake, well now, that's not free speech.

And that was over mere federation. How could that be any closer to having their newspapers display at our store?