Response and Notes to “Why Libertarianism is Nonsense - Deconstructing Freedom”

[Extreme Z7]

34 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

Everyone is self-centered, there are people who are willing to admit it and others who are lying to themselves

This is actually a point AGAINST Libertarianism lol. Isn't the whole point of Libertarianism to take down central authorities and give the responsibility of judgement to individual people? If everyone is selfish, we need a higher authority to arbitrate between right and wrong because the Libertarian alternative is too just let people fight each other in the streets. (Not that there would be any streets in Libertarian fantasy world)

There are people who are willing to think and others who are lying to themselves.

[IJB063]

@Extreme Z7

1 minute ago, Extreme Z7 said:

we need a higher authority to arbitrate between right and wrong because the Libertarian alternative is too just let people fight each other in the streets.

That higher authority is even more subject to human biases 

Look at history and government, look at whose in charge of these governments, the higher authority, the Czars, kings, dictators, fuhrers

You can’t escape your nature

[IJB063]

@Gidiot

28 minutes ago, Gidiot said:

“You don’t owe this world anything and this world doesn’t owe you anything. “

That sounds nice to say but as Sadhguru would say half of your lungs are up in the trees. 
 

We actually need bees and other species of animals and plants to exist to survive, we do at least owe them proliferation. 
 

the fuck everyone but myself attitude has been tried by every 16 year old ever and it usually fails.

 

29 minutes ago, Gidiot said:

That sounds nice to say but as Sadhguru would say half of your lungs are up in the trees. 

I like that quote

Still doesn’t take away from the fact that you’re not entitled to it just because you need it 

29 minutes ago, Gidiot said:

the fuck everyone but myself attitude has been

Yeah of course that attitude fails, what I said and this are two different things, people won’t associate with you or help you in a free society if you tell them to go fuck themselves 

obviously 

you can only get away with that when you force people to do business or help you, or bail you out of your mistakes 

[IJB063]

@louhad

28 minutes ago, louhad said:

 

An animal is only as free as its relative position on the food chain allows them to be. 

The point I was making is Leo uses a different definition of freedom from what libertarians use in this video, he takes the definition of freedom to an absurd and philosophical place that no libertarian argues for

No libertarian believes in transcending the mortal material realm 

What libertarians believe in is in the fucking name

Liberty 

the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behaviour, or political views.

It’s not freedom from the material restraints of reality

Its freedom from the mob, the group, the pitchfork torch waving white eyed peon masses, freedom from the jack boots and the kings

You can’t be free from metaphysics or your own nature otherwise what would be the point of politics

Thats all we want

[IJB063]

30:40 Freedom is the freedom to oppress

What an oxymoronic statement 

Libertarians aren’t talking about absolute freedom

Edited July 16, 2020 by IJB063

[TrustTheProcess]

8 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

@Extreme Z7

That higher authority is even more subject to human biases 

Look at history and government, look at whose in charge of these governments, the higher authority, the Czars, kings, dictators, fuhrers

You can’t escape your nature

yeah sure... without government enforcing subjective standards though,

Who is to stop corporations from putting literal poison in infant formula?

Who is to stop monopolies from being formed?

Who is to stop price gauging for life saving medication?

who is to stop Leo from kidnapping your kids? lol

 

Also, I thought your phone was on 1%... I would like some hearty libertarian answers to the problems I addressed earlier. 

[IJB063]

@louhad

2 minutes ago, louhad said:

yeah sure... without government enforcing subjective standards though,

Who is to stop corporations from putting literal poison in infant formula?

Who is to stop monopolies from being formed?

Who is to stop price gauging for life saving medication?

who is to stop Leo from kidnapping your kids? lol

 

Also, I thought your phone was on 1%... I would like some hearty libertarian answers to the problems I addressed earlier. 

Don’t you worry bud I will, my phone is on low and it’s currently charging but my charger is messed up so I have to hold it as it in place as itcharges

its currently 11:48pm in Britain so I’m  calling it quits until tomorrow 

 

[Extreme Z7]

6 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

That higher authority is even more subject to human biases 

Look at history and government, look at whose in charge of these governments, the higher authority, the Czars, kings, dictators, fuhrers

You can’t escape your nature

Human biases of centralized authorities are held more accountable than random people. Especially in populations of millions, an individual person can essentially become invisible making it easier for ego to thrive.

I also find it telling that you basically just list higher authorities that have vaguely negative connotations and just leave it at that. This is a child's understanding of history and government. I feel like I'm talking to a literal 8-year old.

Dictators and Kings existed for good reason. People actually wanted to be lead by an authoritative government to forcefully stamp out chaos and impose order. Even democracy was too radical for their level of development at the time. If you proposed democracy to them, you would be laughed at.

As for Nazi Germany, you forget that The Allied forces were not Libertarian societies. And there's a reason why we even use the terms "Axis" vs "Allied". The Allied worked together for a common good but The Axis only agreed that they were against The Allies but weren't exactly organized with each other.

[Leo Gura]

58 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

@Leo Gura

I got a question 

Would you consider a wild animal free?

At 26:17 you talk about the myth of freedom and that it’s counterintuitive by its nature because one can never be truly free, are animals not free?

EVERYTHING is always free. Including slavery, murder, rape, genocide, war, oppression, etc. Those are all perfectly free things.

When a dictator oppresses you, that's total freedom at work.

The problem is, you don't want actual freedom. You want security and comfort.

You are just confused about what you want.

54 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

@Leo Gura

I’m 19.

That explains it.

[commie]

7 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Now I’m not sure about absolute morality, if there is a true good or bad.

But most people act as though there is and if they didn’t we’d all functionally be sociopathic to act completely morally relativistic.

There is more to life than value judgements. If you quit babbling for a minute you'd see why healthy folks don't need morals to act like they're not sick.

7 hours ago, IJB063 said:

A communist would hold equality, equity to be their absolute goods.

*facepalm*

[commie]

3 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Liberty 

the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behaviour, or political views.

It’s not freedom from the material restraints of reality

Its freedom from the mob, the group, the pitchfork torch waving white eyed peon masses, freedom from the jack boots and the kings

You can’t be free from metaphysics or your own nature otherwise what would be the point of politics

Thats all we want

You have just described liberalism.