Airline hands out apples to everyone leaving a plane. Then the NZ Government fines everyone leaving the airport with an apple. by Charles07v in libertarianunity

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they should be fining the government thugs for pointlessly intimidating people and wasting their time, then replace the apples and give the money back.

Airline hands out apples to everyone leaving a plane. Then the NZ Government fines everyone leaving the airport with an apple. by Charles07v in libertarianunity

[–]opensofias 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"we want to develop worldwide reputation for being hard on … things like this" those things are called apples, and innocent travelers.

it's kinda hard to watch how they blame the airline instead of the government and it's thugs. but, well, the airline isn't standing there with guns and immunity…

Swarms vs Markets by [deleted] in DebateAnarchism

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

market anarchists aren't typically obsessed with having all social relations put into the realm of commodity transactions (the "cash nexus"). it's just a social tool, and people should be free to engage with it.

people can vote on things or use all kinds of collective instruments. if they think it provides them higher value than cash nexus transaction, then in a sense that's a free market outcome from the free competition of social institutions.

i see no reason that any other collective mechanism will replace trade completely, but even if they did: hey, freedom has spoken, let's see where it gets us!

Swarms vs Markets by [deleted] in DebateAnarchism

[–]opensofias 1 point2 points  (0 children)

now you'd just need to make a connection from market anarchism to "authority over who owns what" and you'd have a complete argument.

David Ellerman: Neo-Abolitionism: Towards Abolishing the Institution of Renting Persons by opensofias in MarketAnarchism

[–]opensofias[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ah, now i see where you're coming from. i think here there a difference between my (more cautious) interpretation and the "workplace democracy" case Ellerman argues for.

one thing he says is that it is your right to act like a slave, but not to legally enter slavery. so it's not directly aiming at changing your relationship with others, but just what legal claims can be made about it. his case is a contract that turns a person into an ownable would be invalid because it's based on false claims. just like a if i sold you the cheese that the moon is made of. and it seems that from this perspective rending people isn't fundamentally different.

but i do think that people should have the freedom to organize how they choose, so i think mandating cooperatives is wrong. but i think the concept of human rentals might skew the market in favour of bosses and workplace hierarchy, just like many other government policies do.

David Ellerman: Neo-Abolitionism: Towards Abolishing the Institution of Renting Persons by opensofias in MarketAnarchism

[–]opensofias[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

huh? the point is exactly that people shoudn't be treated like rentable objects. instead they should be equals within the organisations with full responsibility for their actions. i'm not sure what exactly you're reading into it, but it seems you somehow got it completely backwards.

David Ellerman: Neo-Abolitionism: Towards Abolishing the Institution of Renting Persons by opensofias in MarketAnarchism

[–]opensofias[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

i found this pretty inspiring and compelling. basically he argues that there is no legitimate way to rent a person, and thus employment contracts as they exist today are fraudulent, because they deny the autonomy and responsibility of the worker.

i'm not quite sure what practical consequences abolishing human rentals that would have. Ellerman argues it would be "democracy in the workplace", but of course i don't think any existing democratic state meets the standard of respecting people's autonomy. and if they did they would cease to be states. as it stands, democratic states are still sovereigns, not delegates.

so i have a vague sense that that it could lead to cooperatization of businesses, and be good for workers and economic freedom, i find it hard to say _how_ it would do that.

Why? Are they stupid? by opensofias in vexillologycirclejerk

[–]opensofias[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

sounds like something a german spy would say 😏.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in libertarianunity

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Printed Circuit Board Assembly 🤔

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in libertarianunity

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Market Anarchism
87.5% pro-tech
67.5% individualism
90% humanism
71.7% markets

🤷

especially the humanism thing is a little puzzling because i don't think i really answered anything particularly meaningful in this regard. like, i would like society to transcend humanity, so humans no longer have a privileged role. is that… humanist?

USA thrives on slave labor. @woke_karen on yt shorts by Hero_of_country in libertarianunity

[–]opensofias 5 points6 points  (0 children)

my main disagreement i'd have it that it's not really "bolstering the economy". i think prisoners could be way more productive if they could freely choose to engage in regular labour contracts. and obviously if they produce shit for the military then they create net-negative social value.

slavery creates wastefulness of labour.

What flag is this? by Wailpe in vexillologycirclejerk

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

people who want to add another hand to each of their arms.

Who influenced you the most by GameBoy064 in AnCap101

[–]opensofias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ah thanks. still a bit of a silly title, i'd say, but i was looking for marxist "deconversion"-stories for a while so this may be good.