1."Federal agencies have the authority to intervene in protests, picket signs, or blockades. The law is impartial: it must be enforced without exception."
2."Federal forces are not required to have judicial oversight for their actions."
3."Forces are not obligated to consider alternative entrances or pathways. If the main path is blocked, their duty is to clear it."
4."This action continues until the flow of traffic is fully restored."
5."To carry out these acts, forces will use the minimum necessary force, which is sufficient and proportional to the situation they are addressing."
6."Instigators and organizers of the protest will be identified."
7."Vehicles used in the protest will be identified and subjected to citations or penalties."
8."Data of the instigators, accomplices, participants, and organizers will be transmitted to the authorities through appropriate channels."
9."Notices will be sent to the judge in cases of damage, such as burning flags."
10."In cases involving minors, relevant authorities will be notified, and the guardians of these youths who bring them to these demonstrations will face sanctions and punishment."
11."The costs incurred by security operations will be borne by the responsible organizations or individuals. In cases involving foreigners with provisional residency, information will be forwarded to the National Directorate of Immigration."
12."A registry will be created for organizations that participate in these types of actions."
Wtf he can’t do that. That’s a violation of the NAP
That's just because you don't understand the NAP. When you're NAPping you're supposed to find the original instigating aggression. How do you find that? Easy, you take the side you don't like and point at something they did that hurt your feelings.
Tear gassing protesters is just a legitimate response to the initial aggression of blocking traffic. But wait, isn't the blocking of traffic a response to the aggression the government did by throwing the country into poverty overnight? No it's not. Why? Because it just isn't.
Place a pinkie on the wrong part of the lawn? That's a nuking (NAP also seems to ignore any concept of proportional response, at least from what I've seen)
Ah, ancaps are weird. Part of them actually likes Latin American dictatorships and this kind of thing exactly because of the state not pretending to have any mandate but force.
Source - I'm a libertarian (not culturally of that group of ancaps, cause they tend to be fans of something far away and not try and build a working system at least among themselves ; makes them similar to tankies in the sense of "we can't build our utopia without killing all the problematic people first").
Why the fuck would you ever admit this you fucking dork
I'm not a lawyer but I don't think Megan's Law applies to Lemmy, you don't need to say this
Your ignorance is so cute. You don't even know where you are or who you are talking to! You should stick around and read more about who "tankies" are, and maybe ask questions.
I know where I am, just enjoying my life which involves tickling kitties and making fun of tankies.
Checks out
Myself I prefer dogs but it seems our lives are rather analogous since I also like making fun of lolberts. You and I aren't too different you see.
And you appear to think that's a joke, while in fact one can't pick a better ideology to be smarter.
To learn to sing you have to sing, no other way.
It doesn't really matter where you start on that "political compass" or something, only the attitude.
Which is why saying I'm a libertarian was a bit stretched, I just fit there more by some formal traits. I had my moments of obsession with many other ideologies and I'll surely have those in future.
I didn't pick being a marxist and an ideology cannot be treated like a fashion statement as you've said. It also isn't something you can just pick and adhere to as if it's a club. And the "political compass" has always been a terrible "tool" (more so of a toy) to describe any leanings. You can't apply a label to yourself by yourself, someone else must do that for you by seeing you for who you are. I've been called a commie a few times, but most of the time people don't even know what a communist is or what they stand for. So I am able to talk commie to normal people (whatever a normal person is) without outright saying I'm a red and so I avoid their redscare conditioning and can have an engaging conversation.
You remind me of myself. I've been a "libertarian" too, not the popular type we like to make fun of here, but the guy you are describing as yourself. But I kept progressing in learning and educating myself, studying history and what existed in the real world, so applying dialectical materialism before even knowing what it was. It was until I've decided:
"Okay enough is enough, time to learn my enemy for who he is and what he stands for so that I may better combat him!"
And then after a while I've had my
I wonder where you will end up, but please never tell yourself you are going to avoid certain material or knowledge just because you dislike the people behind that. Hell I believe communists must be studying fascism to better understand what it is and how to defend ourselves against it. For example I dismiss Mein Kampf not because Hitler wrote it, but because it's a shit work with nonsense inside. Largely a waste of time that will not help in understanding Nazi germany, a better alternative would be study Lebensraum and how it parallels to Manifest Destiny and such.
Learning about this stuff can not only help you develop but also prosper. I have hope you won't side alongside fascism, seeing as you already dislike whatever the fuck Milei is doing.
Once you've realized that you can't join an ideology as if it's a club or fashion statement, you can't really adhere to it. You will stand out and be an outcast in said group, and among libertarians you are one. I know that because I've been that libertarian outcast too.
I wish you best, and I hope you stick around. Just be know the bears tend to be bullies as they've engaged with the talking points you might present a million times already. Hell most of us live in the imperial core, we engage with this shit on the daily. I suggest you engage in an earnest way to suck out genuine answers of who we are.
Well. I already don't have problems with putting myself in some unexpected kind of footwear. And it's even been ML.
Keep at it!
Eh I somewhat doubt that since you still engage in much of idealism in the commments of this post, some of the unfortunately being somewhat reactionary. Being ML is not just being around GenZedong or ChapoTrapHouse or their lemmyverse successors. It's studying history, theory and applying that in praxis. I can call myself a commie and others can call me too, but in reality I'm just a bookshelf for now. (
I've yet to engage in outright commie praxis due to art. 256 of the Polish penal codex, and I've yet to apply it, even if possibly unsuccessfully.
I suggest you engage with ML ideas yet again, but now more formally by reading theory, studying socialist history (avoid websites like cia.gov and anngothatistotallynotafrontforthecia.org) and checking out whatever the fuck the communists around you are up to. In Poland most of them are useless trots unfortunately so I'm very dissapointed on that, I've got more hope in unions independent from Solidarność getting traction since building up class consciousness would be the priority in this country.
There is one important question I have for you. Have you read these works?
The Principles of Communism by Frederick Engels
Socialism Utopian and Scientific also by Engels
Critique of the Gotha Programme by Karl Marx
Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Vladimir Lenin
If not please do so, and I could list some more and even tell you to read the first volume of Capital but I value your time so I chose these as they are rather short. However if you don't feel like reading all of these than I ask of you to just read the Principles. It's the shortest work and is easily digestible, Engels was a great writer in this regard.
I'm also not asking you to become or trying to make you a commie right away, that is something that just plain stupid. I just want you to learn and see what you can take from these works for yourself to be a better person and to learn more about who communists actually are. Knowledge is a tool after all. And in the end if you do end up a commie then lol, lmao you've got got xdddddddddd
Also if you are American, there is one key work I must say any American must read no matter who they are. The Civil Rights movement was one of the most important ones in that countries history that is now being whitewashed by DC and this struggle, the pain and suffering these people endured must not be forgotten.
Revolutionary Suicide by Huey P. Newton
My ML, eh, experience was more about Trotskyism and a bit of ansyn, coupled with reading Wiener's "Cybernetics" and some optimism about future.
I've read parts and excerpts of these, but none in one piece at one time, so - why not.
Not American, but thx.
I mean, they are OK, just too busy fighting each other and imagining solutions simpler than practical.
Pluralism in unions (I'd also say party organizations) - many times yes.
I'm returning just after reading some of your other comments under this post and I have to say I'm greatly disappointed. Much of your attitude was of statements and assertions, many of which are ahistorical and/or incorrect (or at the very least considered so by us). Also your attitude was very combative rather than discussionary. That is to say, that the bears weren't too good either, many of the combative as well but that also stems somewhat from your stubbornness (← what a weird word, three letter duos? wtf). Questions as well as calls for sources or books or claims for why you are getting insulted rather then replying with a "no u" type statement would have been so, so much better. Some modesty could've also helped...
Still, I have hope for you and a link that may interest you. It's about past socialist countries as well as the USSR and I do hope you read it as it's very good resource with plenty of citations:
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Mikhail-Gorbachev-seek-to-reform-the-Soviet-society/answer/Chuck-Garen
Please do better, because while fixing ignorance requires the help of others, to get that help you have to have a better attitude for them to consider a friendly conversation. Something that is much easier to address and remedy. You're lucky I'm in this comment section and that I'm a rather lenient and considerate person. I see potential in you, and I'm sad this potential was not realized by this comment section. Neither by you, nor by others.
Now to address the Hexbaristas; I'm really fucking dissappointed. You guys need some fucking
Lmao nah, this is an online shitposting website. You do not owe anyone a discussion or respect, most certainly not someone who clearly signals they're not interested in giving one themselves. A forum also functions much differently than a dialogue, since there is an argument. You are not trying to convince an individual, but a crowd. Mockery and derision are good tools for this.
In short:
I'm well aware of that fact and that is why I love this place. It's great at keeping my morale up and reading dunks on pretentious idiots is always a fun activity but I guess dunking myself was never something I was particularly good at. You and UlyssesT are shining examples of what good dunks are, containing useful information I can learn from. The crowd as you were mentioning.
That is correct, I have nothing else to add except one thing; I like to take initative and give a respectful discussion a singular try at maximum to see how it goes, if others in the comment section haven't tried that themselves. If I feel like I can exploit it, I will and will use it to possibly practice educating. Even if this place possibly isn't the best one to do so it's one that I can easily do so in. Otherwise :PIGPOOPBALLS:
Trying even for the sake of probing isn't be a bad idea and probably isn't too much to ask for I guess.
This website can be used in better ways as I've said, but what this website is for you is up to you. I'd just like to see that others engage in either something what I'm doing or at least in dunks of UlyssesT's quality. Rather than just posting :smuglord: and nothing else. An insult should be a spice not the main course, add even the tiniest bit of information to it and it's already miles better. A singular :smuglord: only works when nothing can be added.
As examples: Bad dunk and Good dunk
Yeah, It seems I forget this too often... Still newcomers could get attracted with a bit friendliness visible in the wild? I guess?
If whatever I do is a terrible way to practice I'll have to concede, but I've yet to see to that.
I agree, but I also think newcomers get attracted to a place that doesn't treat people with reverence they do not deserve. I disagree on "good v bad dunks" because I think one larger post supported by a bunch of drive-by
does a lot of good, and it allows people to be more active posters, since they do not have to constantly lend effort to people unwilling to learn.
In my personal experience, heterodox opinions get met amicably here, as long as they themselves act amicable, though of course there's thousands of users on this site, so some will be... too much, too hostile or whatever.
I don't think it's bad practice, I think it's good you met the user where they were at and conversed with them. I just also think it was good that the user was met with mockery and derision. I think both can be good.
It's liberal bullshit to immediately pivot conversation about what is best to do to a question of who "owes" what (or, more to the point, claiming you owe someone nothing, sidestepping the question of what you should do)
I used owe because it made sense to me, but I thought the argument was still on "what's best to do". I'm sorry I chose poor wording
When "no u" weighs the same as the original comment, it's exactly what should be answered.
About that link:
I've read more about USSR than I'd want to remember, and Gorbachev alone as a personality is just a part of the whole tendency. A face of a class, if you will.
The part about comparisons and currencies is simply illiterate - a fixed legally defined exchange rate doesn't mean that we can multiply USD of the time by that and get a correct representation, obviously.
It doesn't matter how much USSR produced of which on paper. It matters (probabilistically) which percentage of it was lost due to bad logistics, which percentage of it would be broken fresh from the factory, and how much would be given for it in a real market.
FFS, I'm not that much against the USSR, I like how some things (like technical education) were done there and I know that it wasn't some horde or an evil empire or even a dictatorship. But people here take such an amazingly arrogant, ignorant and sectarian approach to argument, that I find myself arguing against it by instinct.
Your posts on here just make me wonder what you've actually read. Quantity doesn't make up for quality. I could read lots of texts about Nazi Germany from David Irving too.
You yourself have answered what is basically "no u" several times in this thread. Stop being a crybaby about being treated the same as you treat others.
I've answered "no u" to something not warranting a response at all. I mean, that's all you post, so I'm stopping now.
Die fash Die
Well that does explain it
Wtf why can't I report my own comment for sectarianism?
I'll report your comments for you and ask the mods to ban/remove them as they see necessary
Reporter: Egon [they/them]
Reason: Snitching on me to the thought police___
Hey hey hey, don't lump me in with this fucking loser
Don't worry, he just used to be a trot.
My honest thought was just that this is very clearly a person that does not read past headlines, and trots are all about reading, so they know nothing of what they speak
Libertarianism is a joke because it's never cleared the low bar of it existing in a meaningful capacity in the real world. You can say whatever about gorillion dead 1984 Animal Farm and whatever tired cliches, at least there have been and continue to be ML states in the real world. The most libertarians have ever managed was one American town before they were overrun by bears.
That just means it's a less viral ideology. It's a different dimension of something being a joke or not.
"Tired cliche" is a characteristic of some art or amusement. Facts usually become more, not less solid over time.
Libertarianism is incredibly viral wtf are you talking about lol. A large swathe of us lawmakers, policymakers, senators and other officials are avowed libertarians. The ideology hasn't been implemented, because every implementation fails. Despite being vastly more represented, funded than any left-wing ideology, and despite being actively promoted by the states in the west, libertarianism is nowhere to be seen in practice, because it is a dog shit idealistic view of how the world functions, and as such, it always collapsed when confronted with material reality. It cannot even manage a single township in a prosperous and peaceful area. This is the best case scenario too, since it otherwise quickly decays into fascism, as we can (once again) see now with Argentina
No. Mentioning that word once or twice doesn't make one libertarian. And most of the time it's people who'd want to say "liberal" but want to seem smart, or "libertine" but don't know that word exists.
Real libertarianism has never been tried.
But it was tried. It resulted in a New England town being besieged by bears.
Ideal libertarianism hasn't been indeed. Just like ideal communism, which requires statelessness, lack of hierarchy (hence state, military etc) and so on.
As for less than ideal ones, one can claim Scandinavian countries just as well as socialists sometimes do that. Or maybe Netherlands.
It'll be just as good, simply libertarians are usually more modest.
Lmao the scandinavian countries aren't socialist or even approaching it. Neither is the Netherlands. How can you know this little?
What the scandinavian countries have is the (now remnants) of a somewhat powerful union movement. This organised labour force managed to negotiate consessions and to get those codified into law. Since the 90's the welfare state has been slowly eroded, and the quality drastically plummeting, as the current neoliberal regime gets more and more influential. You would know this if you cared to study the things you claim to have knowledge of.
This is how any ML can tell you were never an ML in any substantial sense. You couldn't even use "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" in a sentence
You are right, pursuing libertarian policies makes one libertarian, which these also do.
being this ignorant is a violation of the nap
so don't.
You really couldn't come up with anything better than "no you are"?
Truth suffices.
Keep praying loser
Turd surfaces
I too enjoy making fun of tankies but Im not usually so brazen as to come into their house to do it.
You're always welcome to give it a shot
That was unintentional, didn't see it's hexbear =)
Hmmmmmm
Didn't see that writing my first comment here.
Go back to r*ddit if you can't even figure out how to use lemmy.
How do you make that conclusion from not looking at the name of the instance?
Internet is hard, just like keeping our "free market" trains on the tracks
Libertarianism is not a coherent ideology based in political reality or science. It's an ad-hoc justification for why capitalism is incompatible with liberalism, that is the values of democracy, freedom, liberty, etc. There is no such thing as stateless capitalism. Capital depends on the state and will always increase state power as more capital is accumulated. They like the dictatorships because the state is acting purely in the interest of capital while embracing the ideological misdirection of bigotry. That is the dictatorship is free to grind workers into paste with the use of near unlimited state control and power while the wealthy and petite bourgeois explain it all with racism, sexism, xenophobia, and nationalism. It uses those things to nudge workers away from class consciousness. They're not actually hypocrites because ideological consistency is not the goal nor does it matter in the pursuit of power. They have the material edge and being hypocritical only helps them.
This is why we can't take you seriously. You're stuck on why your fellow libertarians are hypocritical, you don't understand what's actually happening. You're stuck in a world of ideology and abstractions away from the actual bare-bones model of society. Since your ideology has no explanatory power in the real world, your only recourse is clinging to models like the horseshoe theory. You don't have a deep understanding of your own ideology let alone that of tankies, they just exist as points on some graph of extremism in your world.
To further this point, the original libertarian theorists rejected the enlightenment's triplet of "equality, liberty and property" for a couplet of just "liberty and property". The basis of libertarian ideology is a rejection of equality as a fundamental value.
As for why actually existing libertarianism is indistinguishable from fascism/right wing authoritarianism in practice, it is because it is fundamentally not an ideology compatible with any concept of ethics. The core of libertarian thought is an abandonment of social, political , economic, and ultimately societal responsibility for others. However, without responsibility there can be no ethics. And without no ethics in an ultimate "might makes right" world where capital is in control and equality is abandoned as a fundamental value, what prevails? We all know what.
good response to a good response o7
Just like communism may mean ancom, ansyn, trotskyism in various kinds, stalinism in various kinds, libertarianism may mean minarchism, ancap, panarchism, georgeism and so on.
It's not. It's just voluntarism put over anything else. Hence age of consent arguments, for example.
It's actually the most coherent ideology, because any compromise for practicality would make it a part of some other existing one.
That's also the reason for very little of it existing in reality.
It's ok, I'm not taking your particularly seriously too, one really shouldn't, it's all a mix with pieces of gold very rare.
However, I'm not stuck in general.
There's no "actual" model, a model by definition is a simplification allowing you to analyze a phenomenon spending a fraction of energy needed to recreate it.
And that's the problem ML has - instead of producing one model after another, some for one use case, some for another, some being discarded, some being used further, ML just has one model based on Imperial Germany as a dogma and puts it over reality.
I don't need a deep understanding of something which may or may not fit. I don't even theoretically, potentially have access to source of any "deep understanding".
It's like algebraic solutions vs numeric ones.
Insane projection since Marxism-Leninism is to be adapted to one's conditions and not just an emulation of what happened in 1917 tsarist Russia. Lolbertarians on the other hand advocate for set in stone solutions like allowing "privatization", "free speech", "small government" and other assorted dogshit regardless of where and when it's being applied. Cut your losses short and stop making a fool out of yourself before you start spouting garbage about mud pies or "human nature" and instead go read marxist theory if you care to talk about it.
Stalinism isn't an ideology btw, Stalin was just a Marxist-Leninist.
That's the Stalinist point of view. Cults of personality, nationalist propaganda, banning abortions and so on are not exactly ML.
Oh okay, you're operating on a 9 year-old's epistemology
I bet you also believe the clapping story.
Heres the CIA saying you're wrong tho
I'm still stuck on this, this shit has me fucked up. So the people who supposedly are in a cult of personality...steadfastly refuse to give the subject of their adulation credit for being a theorist? This is the first I've ever heard of a personality cult where the orthodox view is "Nah, our guy didn't create anything particularly unique or worthy of deliniation."
Actually, I prefer it when my leaders are deeply unpopular.
...so why are you a libertarian? In your own words it doesn't exist because it does not actually address the practicalities of the world.
If I knew that my political ideology isn't compatible with the real world, I would find a better one.
No ideology is compatible with the real world.
And I'm not a libertarian. It's just the closest known point so I called myself that.
A distributist would be closer, just you are likely not aware of such a thing.
You do realize ideas are what governments use to rule, set laws, decide on ways to manage resources and the like? Right? And a set of ideas is an ideology? Just because libertarianism is disconnected from reality does not mean every ideology is incompatible with it, particularly marxism which grounds it's theory and practice in material reality. Hell even fascism is as dangerous as it is because it is something that exists within material reality of capitalism in crisis! Returning to the theme of the original post of Milei who is doing precisely what he is because his ideas are widely unpopular with the majority.
Also you are jumping from label to label, when you and I seem to have agreed that ideologies are not fashion statements. And so you can't really in all seriousness do that? It also seems you have been applying your original label to yourself by only yourself when really you don't even seem to agree with yourself whether or not it fits you. You seem very confused from my point of view.
What do distributists think about age of consent laws
It's basically a political ideology grown from Catholicism, so all the usual.
Voluntarism is capitalist apologia, yes. The very premise is that society is a collection of independent individuals, exactly the premise which is both prerequisite for and produced by capitalism. Voluntarism takes this state ideology and proclaims it as an eternal, natural truth which cannot be escaped; the only problem, claim the libertarians, is that the state is interfering with the free expression of this ideology — which is exactly the reverse causal direction.
“Truly, one must be destitute of all historical knowledge not to know that it is the sovereigns who in all ages have been subject to economic conditions, but they have never dictated laws to them. Legislation, whether political or civil, never does more than proclaim, express in words, the will of economic relations.”
You must rip out the idealism which has rotten your logic if you want it to have any connection to material reality. Start scientifically from the world as it really exists, and from history as it really unfolded, not from your abstract models of independent individual exchanges, which so happens to justify the status quo or an intensification thereof.
You need to investigate how society is in fact a web of interrelations and dependency; ie the very opposite of non-interacting isolated individuals. There is no society without dependency. A theory that starts with an assumption of independence is absolutely useless.
For your sake I really hope you're not legally allowed to buy booze yet
Tankies don’t even believe that. We would prefer to not kill anyone, but reactionaries (like yourself) always try to fight against us which is why you go into the pit. Also Utopianism is anti Marxist.
The revolution will only need to be as violent as the bourgeoisie will require it to be.
Exactly.
Low energy comrades: the CIA is very tricky. They might try to ingratiate themselves into our community and tear it apart. They're masters of deception
The CIA:
Rofl
We need more ASCII emoji