moo

I'm kinda curious about this notion that the Nazis were cool with trans people.

Is the theory that they believed in the ubermensch, and thus that if a man couldn't aspire to that, he might ought to become a woman instead?

Or something else?

Maybe something involving the transformation and improvement of man?

Good evening bitches

There are women on this sever?

:)

So I've just gone down a super weird time sink of twitter. From a beagle-themed conservative account to a more serious right-leaning legal scholar to Stonetoss to some kind of anime-Bible crossover thing. I think the multiverse theory is correct and we're careening towards some sort of singularity...🤡 🌐

Or just people with a lot of time on their hands (which isn't a bad thing).

Equally possible. It's just such a eclectic spiderweb of somewhat related things that I don't fully recall what point I started with. The anime thing probably threw me the most.

I joked in years past about how the next generation would rebel against the previous generation and now I'm seeing it in real time via twitter, memes, and crudely drawn frogs.

It's wild.

@everyone I wrote a few blog posts defending closed borders, thoughts? https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/02/17/closed-borders-a-rights-based-defense/

I mean, I agree with it but I know most libertarians hate the idea of the social contract so I don't know how well it will be received

I'm having trouble getting any coherent criticisms, trying to ask around to other audiences..

right I knew there would be people with a gut negative reaction having something to do with "social contract", i just can't seem to get any coherent reasoning on the problem here

I've gotten a lot of positive feedback though, so I'm not sure if they just can't mount a reasonable attack on this or what

Well, it's because libertarians don't have good arguments against the social contract beyond "I did not sign it reeee"

and it's not like I disagree with that argument, of course there should be a signed contract. for a government like the US, it was intended to be voluntary and contractual, and this idea of birthright citizenship is a huge mistake in the implementation, we need to correct it

but on the other hand, these whiney, victim-mentality arguments that you're being subjected to things against your will, are totally BS. you *can* still opt out, you are totally free to do that at any time by renouncing your citizenship. I really don't want to hear you whine about how "taxation is theft"

I'm led to believe that renouncing US citizenship is itself a pretty lengthy and expensive legal process, which seems ironic. But it may in fact be the case that you actually can't opt out of the contract as it exists today.

it shouldn't be lengthy or expensive, that's another flaw with our current system

As far as the border argument, I haven't read yours yet, but it seems to me that the open-border argument is usually advocating for freedom of movement as a fundamental right (or something similar) but I think that also clashes with the idea of owning land and property rights and how those rights play out on the larger scale.

And now I see you already included that in your blog, literally the first quote.

I think you've made a pretty solid argument. If I were going to try and refute it, I'd probably go after something you already brought up where you've consented to be part of a system that in turn creates a law you consider unjust. Would I have to literally take my land and secede from the country to resolve that disagreement?

Would the country continue to recognize my right to that land in such a case?

@BeefSupreme just become an ISIL bride

Boom

Problem solved

@C1PHER that would be a legitimate option if it came down to it. ideally it's something that could be worked out through the system. and yes a rights-respecting limited government would have to recognize the right of any citizen to opt out, for any state to secede, and for their rights to be respected so long as they aren't some kind of aggressive threat to its citizens

Not sure how that would play out if my property is surrounded by the state

Yeah, being land-locked sounds like a pain.

Hopefully I'm not strawmanning, but I get the feeling that most pro-immigration folks aren't exactly offering up their own personal property for the cause. So this line of thinking might be lost on them.

Yeah a lot of people don't even really have personal property, which is another problem I see with that system

I feel like a strict property rights system would have worked better back when people could go West and stake out a plot of land for themselves, I'm not really sure what you do with people living in an apartment in NYC in terms of voluntary participation in a state

you conscript them

another related point here...

"libertarianism" = "liberty"-ism

"liberty" is not radical autonomy, it's freedom from force, it's respect for individual rights.

People need to stop talking about "moral libertarianism", what you're thinking of is "moral anarchism".

Some people fear Stalin. Some fear hitler. But I have seen the devil, and I have looked her in the eye. She didn't weild a sickle and a hammer, nor had a swatistza adoring her arm. No, instead she had a potbelly, a buzzcut, and a pair tit of tits forty years removed from a bra. Behold, Gloria Steinem, the destroyer of worlds.

How are libertarians opposed to a social contract? Isn't that exactly what their beloved NAP is?