r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
83

https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/jlbc1g/superstimuli_and_the_collapse_of_western/

Libertarianism is appealing as a political philosophy for two reasons.

  1. It sounds principally just and high-minded. People are FREE, afforded dignity and respect independent of the existence of large political institutions, and it purports to support rules that would prevent many great historical injustices.

  2. It invokes simplistic intro-level microeconomics models and concepts to argue that the practical consequences of the philosophical and political conceptions in point A are positive, that voluntary association leads to good outcomes.

What then, to do with the facts of market failures - what to do about transactions wherein someone is being exploited despite the voluntary nature of agreements? What to do about acts nominally between two parties, but that affect those not party to the contracts - externalities?

When confronted with the facts of market failures that cannot be hand waved away (or with as in the link, market failures that personally affect the libertarian nerd community in a negative fashion), there are two possible responses.

  1. Huh well, I guess libertarianism isn’t right, I should probably support some level of reasonable restrictions on liberty.

OR

  1. If it turns out some problems can only be solved with state violence, that means the state using violence is good! Let’s have lots and lots of state violence. Since any regulation on anything is violence, just like the cops beating people with clubs is violence, and I like the former, I will support the latter because I am logically consistent rationalist man who must draw principled inferences from every act.

The cognitive dissonance in the Libertarian -> Fascist pipeline is resolved in manner 2.

This misses the elephant in the dog-cage (never mind living room): racism.

Libertarianism – an ideology native to the USA – appeals to those inclined towards white supremacism because it provides a perfect excuse for running society in a manner that doesn’t provide any kind of support for “those” people.

(That’s before we get into the whole “I am autonomous” -> “I own myself” -> “why can’t I (or someone else) sell myself?” -> “it’s okay to own people who sold themselves” -> “people are property” logical train-wreck that gives us the typical libertarian rationalization for why chattel slavery is reasonable, logical, rational, and (ultimately) good.)

And fascists have a natural affinity for racism because fascism is predicated on dividing people into an in-group (worthy/the master race) and an out-group (everyone else).

Ayup, this. On a wider level, it serves as a justification for existing power structures of all other sorts as well, largely via similar logical train-wrecks. It's a wonderfully effective ideology for supporting the status quo. (Also, I continually reference your quote about libertarianism being one of those ideologies that works best for "spherical humanoids of uniform density." Love it.)
>Libertarianism -- an ideology native to the USA “*Right*-libertarianism,” or more accurately, [propertarianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertarianism), is native to the United States. Libertarianism as a leftist ideology came first, and [originated in France](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Déjacque).
My gimmick on r_Libertarian is to copy and paste the Libertarianism article on Wikipedia that spells out how libertarianism was co-opted by Rothbard et al. from left-anarchists. It drives them nuts.
Libertarianism is a cover for all types of discrimination. 15 years ago, conservatives were calling themselves libertarians because the libertarian solution to marriage equality was to throw the entire concept of government recognized marriage out the window. They aren't bigots if they want to get rid of *all* marriage licenses. Similarly, it's a cover for people who want nothing more than for the Civil Rights Act to be dismantled so they can finally justify banning black people from their hypothetical businesses.
Huh very interesting. I remember reading stormfront post rationalizing why slavery was actually good for slaves and it was tons of sad cringe but now that you mention it I realized something. If you stripped away all mentally handicapped, bad faith apologetics and ideological bog from that piece to the very bone it would be somewhat still functional "people can be property if they agree and "benefit" from it" rant.

Libertarianism is ultimately a philosophy of freedom for property rather than people. And guess what it takes to maintain property as an institution?

I know this one! The NAP right?
That one got a genuine laugh from me.
That’s why I just call them [propertarians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertarianism). I refuse to legitimize “right-libertarianism” as an accurate or coherent construction.
the shit that happens when Rothbard reads ch 3 pt 1 of Kropotkin, misunderstands everything about it and ignores all context eh
A DRO with a strong nuclear triad.

Libertarianism for me, fascism for thee. Those who would use their liberty to despoil the free utopia must be exempted from society and subject to state violence.

To be fair, this critique can be leveled at any would-be government of ideals: the state reserves the right to do violence in defense of the ideals. If there’s a pipeline, it’s in presenting a conception of society so radically divorced from reality that state violence is the only imaginable way to sustain it.

Generally state violence is done in favor of institutions and material social relationships. Ideals too are built to defend these things. "Private property" is an idea, but more than that it's a system of economic control, control of real wealth and the lives of working people.
There is (evidently) nothing to stop someone from promoting "private property as an ideal" (and all it implies) as a universally desirable state for human existence, making state violence in defense of ideals indistinguishable from the more mundane variety in defense of property.
The classic line is “for my friends, everything. For my enemies... the law.”
Otherwise known as “champagne for my real friends, real pain for my sham friends”

Why would anyone need pornography when real women are available

The hetronormativety, the objectification of women, the stench of inceldom.

Fascists do indeed deliberately recruit libertarians, who are the easiest to “redpill”. They are very explicit about this strategy because they know how naive libertarians are. While libertarianism draws some good conclusions about certain things, it’s completely brain dead under the surface. It’s constructed to defend itself against arguments from the left but is totally internally inconsistent.

I argue with my older brother a lot, he’s kind of an edgelord, and he’s class jumped via a string of tech promotions, and he maintains that he’s just a centrist/libertarian who “just wants to grill.” But he’s on this alt-y sort of media diet, he apparently watches Tucker Carlson and Tim Pool and a lot of JRE. and I can’t figure out if he’s being coy about his actual beliefs or if he’s in this weird superposition of thinking that his lukewarm support of modern conservatism (including a lot of “both sides”ing) is at all consistent with libertarian beliefs; I challenge him on this a lot. Then the other day he says, “well maybe I kind of like the nationalism.” Son of a bitch, my own brother has been brainwashed.

You need to get your brother to stop watching Tim Pool. Tim Pool is literally cancerous misinformation 24/7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4W9Tss74GA makes it very clear how misinformed he is. Good luck!
Yes, there are no words to explain just how bad Tim Pool is. Imagine Sargon of Akkad, but with enough charisma to not make rape jokes, but even less informed and less willing to read (and so gullible, he even honestly asked Dave Rubin why he never has real leftwingers on his show, not realizing it is all a grift). (E: this isn't even the clip where Tim Pool uses thanos (yes from the superhero movies) as a valid point, which people made fun of him for. (There is a whole youtube cottage industry just dunking on the self-owns by Tim 'AOC will lose' Pool)
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. He is just awful. I remember a few years ago when he was starting out, and he put a lot more effort into pretending that he was some sort of neutral journalist who was just asking questions. A lot of my family in Sweden watched him because he took a trip to Sweden and spent many episodes "investigating" the situation there. So on their recommendation I watched and though he was much more subtle than he currently is, it was clear that he wanted to show that Sweden, the social democracy, Sweden the welfare state, Sweden the destination for immigrants from war torn countries, and Sweden, where criminals are reformed rather than punished, was failing. He would even explicitly say that he had no views on socialism on immigration, and that he just wanted to see what was happening. Yet, there were moments of candor that slipped through that made it clear that he loathed Sweden from the start, and only wanted to focus on the unseemly underbelly, and exaggerate the idea that there are "no go" zones, and that immigrants have taken over part of Sweden. And now flash forward to today. He still wears that stupid watchman's cap constantly, and he actively and overtly simps for fascists. Yes, his brother has been brainwashed if he watches and believes Tim Pool.
Libertarianism plays a similar role to IDW-adjacent people like Rogan and Pool in giving city dwelling white men a socially palatable excuse to vote Republican/Trump. If you are raised with a liberal background, it's very guilt inducing to vote for a guy like Trump. Convincing yourself that you are actually *more liberal* than the liberal-left helps to assuage that guilt. It's basically a higher brow version of "the left are the real racists". Or why the Republican convention had so many minorities this year. They are also both explicitly in favor of maintaining existing power structures, so the appeal to white men is pretty clear.

There’s something poetic about how half the guys LARPing as Jack Thompson in that thread were singing a very different tune six years ago.

The main issue with libertarianism, is that in reality we had it all - child labor, legal drugs, assassinations, all of it. And then people would look at this sorry state of affairs, and freely associate and group together and get rid of it and build the world we live in today. Hundreds of times around the globe, people decided they didn’t like it that way. Hundreds of times, the market wouldn’t allocate enough resources to preserve the libertopia.

This “free market” of theirs would require a malevolent god to maintain. Nothing short of a malevolent god would do - any person or group of people with enough power to maintain something like that, would just turn it into a dictatorship.

Libertarianism exists in 2 forms. People who just want to handicap majority of people’s power via propaganda (e.g. keep techies from unionizing). That is an attainable goal, there’s nothing inherently self contradictory about persuading suckers. And those who bought into this propaganda. There’s some overlap.

peter thiel lives in a society

or 3 if only we had the “right people” live in our society, then we wouldn’t have all these problems. Therefore we should round-up/exclude/gas “the wrong people.”

Don’t forget these other bad faith arguments:

  • deny the facts or attack the research(ers)
  • attack regulations, including ones that keep people safe
  • “need more free markets!” Or “the markets aren’t free enough” (a specific application of #2 but worth pointing out)

Garbage ideas from garbage people.

Being a libertarian in a country that enslaved and legally subjugated a group of people for centuries is pants on head retarded. “Hey, we’ve stopped kicking you in the balls now, so we’ll make this the ‘no kicking in the balls’ country and call it even?”

(Right) Libertarian literature is also silly btw, perhaps when your side writes up that your ideology allows child labor, which is good actually, you should have realized you made a mistake.

Yudkowsky targeted gamers.

Gamers.

We’re a group of people who will sit for hours, days, even weeks on end performing some of the hardest, most mentally demanding tasks. Over, and over, and over all for nothing more than a little digital token saying we did.

We’ll punish our selfs doing things others would consider torture, because we think it’s fun.

We’ll spend most if not all of our free time min maxing the stats of a fictional character all to draw out a single extra point of damage per second.

Many of us have made careers out of doing just these things: slogging through the grind, all day, the same quests over and over, hundreds of times to the point where we know evety little detail such that some have attained such gamer nirvana that they can literally play these games blindfolded.

Do these people have any idea how many controllers have been smashed, systems over heated, disks and carts destroyed 8n frustration? All to latter be referred to as bragging rights?

Yudkowsky honestly thinks this is a battle he can win? They take our media? We’re already building a new one without them. They take our devs? Gamers aren’t shy about throwing their money else where, or even making the games our selves. They think calling us racist, mysoginistic, rape apologists is going to change us? We’ve been called worse things by prepubescent 10 year olds with a shitty head set. They picked a fight against a group that’s already grown desensitized to their strategies and methods. Who enjoy the battle of attrition they’ve threatened us with. Who take it as a challange when they tell us we no longer matter. Our obsession with proving we can after being told we can’t is so deeply ingrained from years of dealing with big brothers/sisters and friends laughing at how pathetic we used to be that proving you people wrong has become a very real need; a honed reflex.

Gamers are competative, hard core, by nature. We love a challange. The worst thing you did in all of this was to challange us. You’re not special, you’re not original, you’re not the first; this is just another boss fight.

> Gamers are competative, hard core, by nature. We love a challange. The worst thing you did in all of this was to challange us. You're not special, you're not original, you're not the first; this is just another boss fight. If only he could have known what unholy retribution his little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon him, maybe he would have held his fucking tongue. But he couldn't, he didn't, and now he’s paying the price, the goddamn idiot. Gamers will shit fury all over him and he will drown in it. He’s fucking dead (in Minecraft).
So, Mr. Eliezer Yudkowsky. I hear you're offering ten-thousand dollars to charity if anyone makes your video game. Well I've got a proposal of my own. I have *ten* dollars here for anyone willing to make *my* game. Shall we see whose game gets made first? Here's my pitch: take control of the protagonist, *Yuliezer Edkowsky*, a HPMOR-whipped attention whore with one foot in the nursing home. Armed with his flapping gums of ridiculously low I.Q., Yuliezer declares war on video games. The goal of the game is to shift as much blame onto these games as possible. You get a bonus if you manage to blame *World War II* on video games. I know that "common sense" isn't part of your vocabulary, Eliezer. But I can get statistics and professional opinions just like you. "The numbers clearly show that Eliezer Yudkowsky eats paint chips. He also sodomizes giraffes." My name is Tim Buckley. I'm a twenty-four-year-old gamer. I've played every violent game in existence, and I have never killed anyone. There are *millions* of gamers just like me, and we're getting suck of people like you blaming your problems on us. Ignorance causes violence, not video games. Man up and take responsibility. We outnumber you, and the people that think like you. *Don't fuck with us.*
| || || |_
~~:.|:;~~
[wait, is this loss](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/loss)? (im just posting this so the non-veterans of the gamer posting wars can figure out what is going on)
1 2 2 50
> You get a bonus if you manage to blame World War II on video games. [Actually I'll take you up on that mr science man](https://www.reddit.com/r/BanVideoGames/comments/jm29dj/here_it_is_further_proof_that_video_gmes_were/)
> performing some of the hardest, most mentally demanding tasks Uhhhhhhhhhmm... this is a bit, how shall I put it... I guess “unbelievably sheltered” fits? A little perspective: https://futurism.com/the-byte/facebook-content-moderators-lawsuit-ptsd
Thank you for your service in correcting the gamers copypasta o7
Hadn't seen this one before. Serves me right I guess... I'm just very disillusioned right now with all kinds of asshats popping up absolutely everywhere, so it seemed plausible they're here as well
Just be glad you arent a veteran of the first gamer war. I just had flashbacks, the horror the horror.
It had me going for a bit as well, but it read too much like copypasta that I decided to search for phrases from it before scrolling through.
IS THIS SATIRE OR NOT? The world demands answers and your username just prompts further questions
It's copypasta.

Libertarianism is always encapsulated for me by the story of Grafton, NH. Bears don’t care about your freedoms XD

Culturally though, libertarianism also seems to draw a lot of…bunker types? People who prepare for the apocalypse by hoarding weapons and MREs instead of, you know, useful stuff like looms and beehives and farming equipment. There’s a persistent persecution fantasy there of the “Live free or die” persuasion that is constantly preparing for an armed standoff against The Government in the name of Freedom, and when you constantly put yourself in a wartime mentality, you open the door for a lot of fascistic thoughts and behaviors (see also America anytime we’re in a war, including the last 19-odd years of the ‘War on Terror’). Drops in patience and empathy, glorification of violence, suppression/rejection of dissenting speech, lashing out against visible representatives of the perceived enemy, ostentatious displays of loyalty and power…stop me when this starts to sound familiar.

Libertarianism as a door opener for fascism: When “bugs” are features

If you look around, there’s a lot of Libertarians who actually believe in market failures and externalities. Their solutions are different from others. Solutions range from pigouvian taxes, LVT, zoning reforms, NIT/UBI and a lot more. Not to mention a lot of Conservatives who don’t want to belong to Republican identity have started calling themselves Libertarians.