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

You're rallying around a malfunctioning process

The key thing is to form concrete actions and gains.

you cant form them without an end goal, because everyone is going to delimit what they are willing to do for the end goal

say someone asks fro violence or mobbing tactics, many will disagree

@Beemann You *still* haven't proposed anything. We get in this fight every time we talk. You talk a good game of how social media is bad (no real disagreement) but there's millions of people who want it and it's too useful to just die.

and the whole movement will get shaken

Right. That's a key thing.

That's why the left has "diversity of tactics"

its not "useful", its addictive.

But more importantly, there's specific actions they want.

Like, almost the entire left wants to see McInnes go away.