or maybe that was just the far left in total

@pratel its just that my track record with loose organizations has been terrible, Gamergate didnt have a clearly defined goal and ended up encompasing everything under the sun, which in the end caused it to fracture when individual groups got what they wanted

FIRE is already doing some of that work tbh

a clear mission statement makes itclear to people what the end goal is

and cements peoples expectactions of what needs to be done to reach it

@boag I wouldn't be so sure. I think it's that it lost momentum and got the few solid goals it could ask for. Like awards for journalism.

they wanted body cams to catch bad cops. then it turned out "bad" cops were much more rare then they claimed, and it started proving that these "racist" cops were just doing their job catching crimes. So quickly body cams because racist

im pretty sure most of the lefts missions statements is destroy republicans

It's broader than that. It's to rebuild society.

not even

its just gain and maintain power by any means necessary

That implies there's a vision for replacement

Socialism?

It's mostly just a demolition plan

the lefts version of repeal and replace

One big distinguishing factor is that the left believes in unmitigated warfare against it's domestic opponents to reach it's aims. The right isn't nearly as ruthless. There's a brilliant slatestarcodex post which describes it as "the red tribe's outgroup is foreigners. The blue tribe's outgroup is the red tribe"

Socialism won't work when they're done either

step 1 remove
step 2 ?????
step 3 better world

anyways we need a solid fundamental goal in mind to form an unshakable foundation for the group

You guys need to see things from their point of view better @Beemann @Grenade123

so that petty arguments can be settle by just reminding them of the end goal

I'm not so sure @boag

I live in their territory

what point of view?

or which i should ask?

And actually, one BIG issue with libertarians is that we spend forever fighting over pointless principles and never talk strategy or tactics.

exactly

That's great @Beemann I'm basically in academia. I *live* in their territory

Grenade and I have both advocated specific action, it just wasnt the action you wanted

No you guys adovcated "killing social media" and not having any clue how to replace it.

"I live in their territory"
"No I do"
"Stupid libertarians won't stop arguing"
Methinks the lady doth protest too much

so if the mission statment is "Free Speech on Social media no matter how offensive it is" it would define the end goal and prevent any fracturing in the future

you assume it needs to be replaced

if i remove the atomic bomb, do i need to replace it?

I'm not so sure it's that easy. People tend to find disagreement and would fracture immediately over specifics like violence.

The goal in essence is to make free speech an unshakable principal in social media, no matter what the intermidiating costs

I have a good friend who's also a free speech absolutist. But we're not too hot on porn.

Preserving social media in its current form, government intervention or no, preserves the social dysfunction that comes with it

thats whty the fracturing takes place in the critical moment

I think that's a good goal, but it's also kinda vague.

cause its not discussed during the foundation and later on you discover you have fundamental differences