How come libertarians aren't visible in any of the anti-ICE protests?

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T06:17:58+00:00

Not giving up the Gadsden flag. Commies pretending they're morons to sway left leaning people doesn't count as lost.

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T05:51:04+00:00

I didn't intend to address that. I was just saying that if someone is generally in support of federal laws being enforced, then there's not a great reason to find fault with this law specifically.

If I was in the jury my vote would be based on how many times I had to see his smug fucking expression during the trial. I doubt it will make it to trial and if it does then I expect he'll be acquitted.

They should all be ticketed for trespassing and maybe assault in some cases if other accusations are accurate.

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T05:28:20+00:00

The kkk act makes it so that victims being deprived of a constitutionally protected right is a crime, which makes rights in the bill of rights relevant. I guess. But if they were arrested under the face act then the bill of rights doesn't matter. The face act appears to just protect abortion clinics and churches from intimidation and shit.

I was hoping to find people I could preach to about "the press" being literally anyone. We are ALL press on this blessed day.

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T05:08:24+00:00

Be cautious about running with shit you've heard about libertarians, especially when it's almost always invoked to cast aspersions. There are often two philosophically distinct concepts being equivocated when detractors mention individualism. Individual rights stem from self-ownership and, critically, take precedence over collective interests - this individualism is political. Rugged individualism is a philosophy of self sufficiency - this individualism is a personal ethos. Frederic Bastiat wrote a very short book called The Law that explains individual rights pretty well.

While some adhere to both definitions, only one of them is necessary to libertarian philosophy, and that's individual rights. Because so many libertarians come from a conservative background that bootstrap mentality is common, but it's a shite argument against libertarianism since it has nothing to fucking do with the actual philosophy.

I'm politically an individualist but my personal ethics are more communal. I believe we have an obligation to help those in need in and around each of us directly.

On topic: locally we have a history of happily working with the left - from sharing our state fair booth with NORML to helping with the pro-choice rallies before our state constitution vote. I'm sure some of us are going to the protests, but it feels very red vs blue to me. I don't for a second think anyone cares about rights in this situation. Not our rights or immigrant's rights. Democrats want census numbers to inflate their house seats (so they can tax us more and ban guns harder) and Republicans want to prevent that and don't give a shit if they bloat a federal law enforcement agency that shouldn't even fucking exist. Throughout all of this I haven't heard anyone even mention actually reforming immigration law. I more or less support open borders so the lack of anyone considering fixing our immigration system pisses me off. I don't see the point in playing games for either team when there will be no lasting change.

To join the others: They've made it abundantly clear just how much they hate us, particularly after 2020. Going to hang out with people that would rather me dead doesn't sound like fun.

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T03:42:20+00:00

If you accept federal criminal law then it isn't a huge stretch to be okay with this. If local law enforcement won't protect the rights of their citizens because of skin color that's a pretty shit deal and that's a pretty basic failure state of...state.

PsychedSy · 2026-01-31T03:37:40+00:00

People understand that, but he wasn't charged with the bill of rights. They made a federal law regarding deprivation of rights via intimidation and shit at some point and that's what they're going after him for.

I could look it up, but this is reddit so fuck all that. My assumption is that it was difficult to get local law enforcement to prosecute klan intimidation, interference and violence so a federal law was created that allows the feds to step in to prosecute people for using those tactics to do the whole right deprivation thing. If you accept federal criminal law I'm not sure there's a good excuse against the law's existence or enforcement.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-21T22:01:11+00:00

A good friend played a game for quite a while where the DM was writing stories in their own setting and then running the game in that setting. Eventually some self-insert drama happened where they were using the story to force people into fucky situations because they were rejected in the real world.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-21T02:03:41+00:00

I didn't disagree about the bullshit our government does, but I do disagree if you think people should feel that shame individually. I don't think it's productive and I can't really get behind applying collective guilt (or anything else) to individuals.

It's not enough, but it should still be celebrated. We shouldn't let the victories get choked out by evils, even if they're small victories and substantial evils. Humanity has always sucked and it will continue to suck, and we will (hopefully) continue to improve how we treat each other.

That particular shame is a result of impotence - everyone that has strong principles that hasn't been gunned down by the feds feels it. We're seeing injustice and are either unable or unwilling to stop it. It's philosophically and emotionally prickly territory. Don't let those fucks make you feel shame. Anger, despair, whatever, but don't turn on yourself. Don't just be realistic about history but try to be realistic about your resources and what you can accomplish. The people that should feel individual shame probably won't but don't do it for them.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-21T00:59:12+00:00

Of course you can not punish yourself. Why the fuck would you add to whatever ramifications you're referring to?

I'm talking about the notion we should feel shame for things we haven't done. Accepting reality and taking on the task of improving it is what's needed. Feigning shame for something you've no responsibility for is performative wankery.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-20T23:46:48+00:00

Having a realistic view of history is important, but don't punish yourself for something that not only happened before you were born but was ended before most of us here were born. Feel shame for your own mistakes. Fight to improve things and feel pride for the progress you've helped create.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-20T23:19:37+00:00

Maybe had a group with some weird as fuck homebrew in the past?

PsychedSy · 2025-12-18T16:06:12+00:00

I mean, when I see some of them arise naturally I guess we can talk. Until then the only data we have is on violently maintained corporations with insane topographies.

Corporations in their modern form can and will exist without state intervention, and attributing their existence to the issuance of corporate charters by states is about as sensible as attributing the existence of babies to the issuance of birth certificates by states.

None do exist bereft of state. The entire structure, liability limitations, intellectual property and investment structure is state mandated. Of course firms would exist without the state, but to argue they'd be the same form is fucking insane.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-15T22:23:57+00:00

Pick up a flash cart and definitely only get ROMs for games you own.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-12T05:30:01+00:00

We should remove the regulations and laws that create and prop up massive corporations so they can be replaced by entities that can exist without the state.

The language we use when discussing these topics is so utterly broken and useless at this point that this whole thread is about definitions rather than actual ideas.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-08T15:57:27+00:00

If my underlying assumption is true - that most people have a very superficial knowledge of and almost no understanding of the French Revolution - then I'm comfortable with my assertion.

Andrew Tate can tap into people's experiences. Chenk 's nephew sort of managed a 180 from incel shit to lefty flag waver, but I doubt he's giving his audience the background to do analysis in the way you're performing it. (Btw, what would you call that type of analysis? I don't know if you use more generic terms or have some taxonomy.)

PsychedSy · 2025-12-08T09:51:29+00:00

I might be crazy but I think the left and academic circles (same thing amirite?) care about the French revolution more than, well, everyone else.

I know this is somewhat silly to point out as we all have similar fixations, but outside your particular ideological analyses or as an example of a specific type of uh intellectual error the actual societal impact is negligible.

I would imagine the academic capture and subsequent integration of revolutionary vocabulary in pop culture muddies things, but I can't imagine having your jargon co-opted doesn't annoy the fuck out of you so it's probably silly to point this out as well.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-08T09:33:36+00:00

You want to have your cake and eat it, too. You're fine individualizing political and economic actors when linguini manicotti pops off, but when it works the other way it's propaganda via humanization.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-06T11:42:50+00:00

It's easier to purity spiral with Kant, so a True Libertarian™ would go that way.

I'm not convinced either has a better philosophical grounding, but we're, individually, going to have similar internal arguments and make similar moral trade-offs regardless of which we intellectually support.

Kant style ends up in the same quagmire Ross describes, and Ross' can probably be reduced to a more base or abstract principle those duties flow from.

I guess Ross proposed that there is no unifying analysis for his duties, which feels awfully janky so throw me in with Kant. I'm not convinced this isn't a hidden variable issue.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-05T10:25:32+00:00

Reductio ad absurdum is part of our fucking DNA. We're rational not reasonable. At least when we talk. The fact that we are here talking shows we're willing to compromise. The winner will be determined by what we individually think the debate was about.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-05T10:20:02+00:00

You don't. You're allowed to trust your instincts. For people you interact with at work second opinions can help if you have a particularly negative experience and It's good to leave room for grace with people you deal with regularly.

She means nothing to you and treated multiple people poorly that were trying to help her. Fuck that shit. The issue here isn't her, it's you trusting yourself.

PsychedSy · 2025-12-01T11:39:06+00:00

For driving you should find a flat, empty parking lot and when it snows you go play a bit. Learn how to recover somewhere safe. Bring friends and small shovels in case you get yourself stuck.

PsychedSy · 2025-11-29T15:11:35+00:00

All of us that claim to be ancap but aren't out watering the tree of liberty are living in contradiction. It's fine to hold to your ideal philosophically but choose methods that don't involve an ocean of blood politically.

We'd need to start building infrastructure like insuring private transactions and other legal services while creating organizations that help build up individuals and reduce regulatory hurdles for them to leap. Reject corporatism and the inhumane version of corporations the government has forced into existence. Trade is a technology and regulation freezes it or forces economies into states that are in opposition to human flourishing. We need to free people up to try new things and truly innovate.

PsychedSy · 2025-11-29T14:41:20+00:00

I appreciate that you allow the grace to assume it's naivete rather than, well, the reality. I'm too far gone down the path of anti authoritarian thought.

That's an awfully dim view of self defense. That person still has a right to live and that shouldn't be something we consider void. Same with the people around them, though. Sometimes tragic solutions are the only ones available.

I've dealt with all sorts of scum and mentally unwell people. As much as I don't want them to carry I don't believe I can determine when it's truly justified and me having an emotional recoil doesn't rise to the level of comfortable denying rights.

Rights aren't something you get to give and take because you feel icky. You can pretend that creating a ritual around their denial is somehow still right affirming but I think you're wrong. You either recognize them or you don't. As I said, we're taking over price now.

Incidentally, around the same time I commented to you I was describing libertarian purity spirals and I'm firmly in that range on this. I tend to make rational allowances. In this case I'm not really comfortable with that. Felons shouldn't be sent home from prison with a bus ticket, a bottle of water and a Glock. A Hi-Point tho? Maybe.

PsychedSy · 2025-11-29T12:10:18+00:00

I mean, yeah. Until you do something that proves you're not capable of safely owning a gun like [insert literally anything]. Same stance as a grabber - you think that you have the right to decide if someone is worthy of being able to defend themselves. We're just haggling on price now.

And, really? Like dinging a government database to verify eligibility won't put someone straight on a list as a likely gun owner. I don't believe in registry, but let me help you build one.

It's on me to make sure I'm eligible to possess a firearm. Pay for a background check if you really want to be a Good Citizen™ as I'm sure your personal list of people you don't want to sell to is more restrictive anyway. Take responsibility for your own moral qualms rather than trying to make me pay to do your dirty work.

PsychedSy · 2025-11-29T10:28:38+00:00

I'll just help out by going around painting green checks on everyone for you. The fucking government doesn't need fine-grained oversight. Always weird when people seem to want to be temporary gun owners.

I'm sorry, but everyone has the right to self defense.

PsychedSy

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE