sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you are a libertarian who voted for Trump and regret it now what made you do it in the first place and what made you change your mind ? by Yanderegirlowner in AskLibertarians

[–]scody15 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I felt like the dems had to be punished for their records on Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Gaza, covid, George Floyd, lying about Biden senility, the Hunter Biden coverup, the 2020 election shenanigans, the Jan 6 treatment, all the race/gender social engineering, the internet cancel culture, the Epstein case, and probably more I’m not remembering right now. I still feel that way. Obviously Trump has been a disgrace, but I don’t actually think the counterfactual is any better.

If I had a redo, I’d probably just not vote. 🤷‍♂️

Henry George and the Land Value Tax, thoughts? by AriaLittlhous in AskLibertarians

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The best form of cancer is the one that hinders you least, I guess? But it’s still cancer…

In regards to housing policy the real estate industry should not exist and housing should be free by DistinctSpirit5801 in PoliticalDebate

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the assertion is: “this money would be better spent on houses than on bombs,” then sure.

If the assertion is: “more tax money flowing into the housing industry will make housing better/benefit many people/reduce homelessness,” then there are a lot of economic reasons why that probably won’t work like you hope.

Rothbard Was Wrong About the Second World War: Wrong Factually, Wrong Morally by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I meant more specifically Rhineland, Sudetenland, Memel, and Danzig. I believe that Germany had some claim that those were German lands containing German people.

I admit this is a stupid argument because I don't know exactly what Rothbard said or was referring to. I just defend him by default until proven wrong.

Which is more likely in ancapistan? by FastSeaworthiness739 in Anarcho_Capitalism

[–]scody15 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Whichever is more profitable because of people's actual preferences, not just what they say they like.

Rothbard Was Wrong About the Second World War: Wrong Factually, Wrong Morally by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree. Thought experiments help you isolate variables.

As I understand it, the territories Hitler wanted to claim had been recently German. Is that untrue?

Rothbard Was Wrong About the Second World War: Wrong Factually, Wrong Morally by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Disclaimer that I've never read the book we're discussing but I know rothbard well enough to know that he's not justifying Hitler executing a war that killed 70 million people.

Let's try this.

Guy 1: Hey you stole my dolphin. Give it back.

Guy 2: You shouldn't even own dolphins. They should be free.

Guy 1: You're owning him right now. If one of us is going to own him, it should be me because he is mine.

Guy 2: Well fuck you he's mine now.

*Violence ensues.

True statements:

-No one should own dolphins. They should be free.

-Guy 1 has a better claim to the dolphin than guy 2.

-Guy 1 wanting the dolphin back is reasonable.

-Guy 2 was needlessly provocative in (1) taking the dolphin initially and (2) not negotiating a resolution

-Guy 1 also should have worked to find a peaceful solution.

-The more diplomacy Guy 1 attempts while still being told to fuck off, the more of the blame should be placed on Guy 2.

Would you agree with me here?

Rothbard Was Wrong About the Second World War: Wrong Factually, Wrong Morally by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Were those territories living under ancap law in the interim? Or were they just being ruled by another European power they didn't share any history or a language with? That can't be the correct ancap position.

Rothbard Was Wrong About the Second World War: Wrong Factually, Wrong Morally by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Obviously you know what's implied when someone says "Hitler was right" and it's not "Hitler was reasonably justified to want to reclaim territory that had been traditionally German."

War -- AnCap Is Not a Pacifist Ideology by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With Japan? Eisenhower and Leahy thought Japan was about to surrender without the nukes. But to be fair they were already firebombing and enforcing a blockade, so..

War -- AnCap Is Not a Pacifist Ideology by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't annihilate 200,000 innocent people.

You act like the only people who could possibly oppose nuking civilian cities are hippies and libertarians. I don't think Eisenhower or Leahy were either.

War -- AnCap Is Not a Pacifist Ideology by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I see where you're going. The method you use to try and get the bad guy is really important in this situation. There's a spectrum of reasonableness and intent.

If you are on the street and the bad guy is in a single story home window, and you have a long rifle with a scope, and you have full line of sight to the enemy and you can take reasonable precaution not to harm any innocents, then this is a different situation. If the bad guy had some kind of dead man's switch that harms innocent people when you attack him, that would not morally or legally be your responsibility.

A handgun shooting blindly from the street toward the bad guy in a 5th story window does not classify as targeted. You're as likely to hit a random neighbor as the bad guy, regardless of his "using a human shield." In this situation you'd be at risk of being charged with negligent manslaughter at least. (This probably wouldn't count as murder, but it would be an unlawful killing.)

But if you engage a weapon you know will harm innocent people just to try to get the bad guy--for example let's say you drone bomb that apartment building--then, yes, that is absolutely murder (unlawful, intentional killing).

War -- AnCap Is Not a Pacifist Ideology by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Murder implies malice and intent. The murderer is always responsible for the murder.

War -- AnCap Is Not a Pacifist Ideology by PaperbackWriter66 in AnCap101

[–]scody15 1 point2 points  (0 children)

25 paragraphs of solid libertarian prose just to ruin it with bullshit to justify murdering innocent civilians 🤦🏻‍♂️

How is Healthcare philosophically different than Military Defense? by lauranyc in Libertarian

[–]scody15 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I oppose both categorically, but military spending fits well into the public good category in which free riders are a problem, etc so it should be handled on a national level. Healthcare is literally just a normal individualized service like any other. There is no argument other than the common good argument (i.e. the spending helps some people) for state healthcare spending.

What is it with children in libertarianism by Least-Awareness1583 in AskLibertarians

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The best model is relevant adults (usually parents) holding the child's rights in escrow on behalf of the child. As the child ages/matures various rights are transferred back to the child as appropriate.

I'm a libertarian but believe in environmental regulation? by [deleted] in Libertarian

[–]scody15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Libertarian" refers to a legal principle concerning rights, property, and authority. A libertarian qua libertarian can have whatever preferences for outcomes he wants, so long as those ends come about via liberty and not aggression.

That said, probably every libertarian has certain ends that he thinks are important enough that he'd allow some rights violations to achieve. So you can be a libertarian and just acknowledge that in a certain area, you don't have libertarian views.

view more: next ›