Stamets@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 1 year agonot hard rulelemmy.worldimagemessage-square288linkfedilinkarrow-up1455arrow-down10
arrow-up1455arrow-down1imagenot hard rulelemmy.worldStamets@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square288linkfedilink
minus-squareabbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up19·1 year agoLibertarian on its own means nothing. Am I left libertarian (anarchist) or right libertarian (ancap)?
minus-squarevzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up19·1 year agoAncaps are just boot lickers that smoke weed.
minus-squareabbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·1 year ago…when their boss lets them have a break.
minus-squareAatube@kbin.melroy.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoLibertarian on its own it just means opposition to authority; both have a similar chance of believing in what you said
minus-squareazolus@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up18·edit-21 year agoLibertarian on its own means nothing. AnCaps are perfectly fine with a “tyranny of corporations” and are therefore not anti-authoritarian. The concept of private property necessitates an authority to enforce property rights.
minus-squareabbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 year agoThis ia the correct opinion. Have an upvote.
minus-squareAatube@kbin.melroy.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoTrue, but they’ll agree with the “legal \neq moral” statement regardless because they think it won’t bite at them.
minus-squareiii@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year agoWhy would it mean nothing, just because it doesn’t fit the left-right false dichotomy?
Libertarian
Libertarian on its own means nothing. Am I left libertarian (anarchist) or right libertarian (ancap)?
Ancaps are just boot lickers that smoke weed.
…when their boss lets them have a break.
Libertarian
on its own it just means opposition to authority; both have a similar chance of believing in what you said
Libertarian on its own means nothing. AnCaps are perfectly fine with a “tyranny of corporations” and are therefore not anti-authoritarian. The concept of private property necessitates an authority to enforce property rights.
This ia the correct opinion. Have an upvote.
True, but they’ll agree with the “legal \neq moral” statement regardless because they think it won’t bite at them.
Why would it mean nothing, just because it doesn’t fit the left-right false dichotomy?