Message from @Vannevariable
Discord ID: 540837355255496724
Fascist!
```It is rarely remembered now that socialism in its beginnings was frankly authoritarian. The French writers who laid the foundations of modern socialism had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government. To them socialism meant an attempt to "terminate the revolution" by a deliberate reorganisation of society on hierarchical lines, and the imposition of a coercive "spiritual power". Where freedom was concerned, the founders of socialism made no bones about their intentions. Freedom of thought they regarded as the root-evil of nineteenth-century society, and the first of modern planners, Saint-Simon, even predicted that those who did not obey his proposed planning boards would be "treated as cattle".
-F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom.```
I don't think Republicans are anywhere near as bad as Democrats
Just putting this here. The sci-fi book community is kinda small, and this is only the latest in the horrid incursion. I am reminded that this literature stoked the dreams that is the actual world we live in now.
http://monsterhunternation.com/2019/01/31/to-the-book-community-go-fuck-yourself-an-anti-apology/
In general, left and "right" are just as bad as each other in all modern two party states, especially in terms of liberty and the growth of state power.
I lean right myself, but it's plainly obvious either extreme will fail on their own. Total lack of regs leads to corporate oligarchies and total regulation leads to tyranny and market colapse out of apathy. Social programs are good... but a distant government body prone to corruption is not the optimum way to ensure that social safety net. Local nonprodits or at least state-level entities and more investment and acaccountabili in the people they help.
IMHO anyway.
Regulation have generally always been lobbied for by the biggest corporations in each industry.
Big government and big business are the same thing.
On the political compass, left/right and up/down are the same thing.
All coherent and practically achievable political ideologies are contained on a diagonal line from the top left to the bottom right.
I'm on the fence about bitcoin but jesus titty fucking christ these are some bad arguments against it. Basically an ad *for* bitcoin.
https://youtu.be/zHU298wcLGw
Had a really offensive thought and had to talk to someone about it, but if you think about it transgender people who have fully transitioned should be classified as neutered since they have their sexual reproductive capabilities removed.
Even if they don't fully transition, hormone therapy makes them effectively unable to reproduce.
They should be free to identify as male and female, but they are physically incapable of reproducing.
Just wanted to voice that out, have a good day, everybody.
Transitioning is sexist because it reinforces gender sterotypes.
I would say to some extent they exist for a reason, but that's biological stuff. As for the sterilization thing... I'm all for it. You want to be a gender other than your birth one? Put your money where your genitals are and go all they way. If you are willing to give up your biological ability to reproduce according to the sex you were born, more power to you. Just don't tell me you're a woman when you still have the manmeat. IDC as long as you look and sexually ARE the part, or at least don't have the opposite parts.
Get ready for the next leap in the culture war
Transgenders vs gays
The culture war annoys the hell out of me. It also makes me insanely angry because progressive advocates are going TOO FAR by any metric.
Traps *are* gay.
Yep
extremists gonna extreme
...
There's a blatant line. When you call for the erasure of history (take down a historical picture of coalminers because muh blackface) and advocate for a bill that is literally legallizing both infanticide and the GOVERNMENT CONTROL of the decision to kill the child, not that of the parents'?
Fuck that.
FUCK that that should be criminal
The state is a terrorist organization.
Everything it does is criminal. It's very existence is criminal.
Let's discuss that
The state uses force to enforce laws, but without laws, warlords will run rampant
A community can only grow so much until a government is eventually formed
Not at all. Private law and litigation is something that has been done for centuries on many countries. From Brehon Law to Maritime Law, to Medieval Iceland to even English Common Law.
The idea that without laws warlords would run rampant is just not true. The lawlessness experienced in African nations is much more due to the extent and scope of corruption as well as the incentives present there. Simply put, it's much more a matter of the state distorting the interactions between peoples as well as the colonial imposition of a central power than the absence of the enforcement of laws.
I didn't refer to african warlords per-se, just speaking in general terms, referring to warlords as individuals who have the means to attain resources via violence.
How is it untrue? Doesn't it all ultimately boil down into a contest of the guy with the bigger stick setting up a government?
Am I missing something here?