Message from @Weaboo Kempeitai
Discord ID: 655472535676387394
Love you bro
No homo
That dosen't even apply to me because I've never had that avi
We must follow suit
@BasedChris This quote is mostly taken out of context.
<:really:640412966008913940>
<:Yes:639977935209627658>
Here, Rothbard is discussing the different potential perspectives on children's rights and their conclusions.
He is asserting that a moral obligation to the parents not to agress against their children is not the same as a positive obligation for them to feed and take care of them. He is essentially making a reductio ad absurdum argument.
His preferred perspective was that the parents become 'trustee-owners' of children which inherently comes with the obligation to take care of the child until that child demonstrates the ability to take care of itself by leaving home, which is when Rothbard beleives the child becomes an adult, able to consent to things adults are typically able to consent to.
You can disagree, which is fair, but Rothbard didn't beleive what you think he beleived.
Still think selling kids is okay, though.
@BasedChris
He literally says
You don’t have yo feed your child
How can you misinterpret that?
Tell me
That was an excerpt from The Ethics of Liberty. There's an entire chapter on children's rights. The book is totally free on the Mises Institute website. Maybe go read it?
Some Libertarians beleive that by birthing a child, you put that child in a position of vulnerability, which comes with an obligation to care for it.
For example: If I take you for a ride in my car, and were going at high speeds, and I command you to get out, does my right to ownership over my car obligate you to kill yourself, bailing out of my car when I'm going 70mph? No. I'm obligated to slow down, and let you out safely.
If *I* put you in position of vulnerability, such as if I pushed you into a lake, I'd be obligated to fish you out, lest I be held liable for your death. I, as a random bystander, am not obligated to put my life at risk to save you, I can't be held liable for your death.
Such a stupid way to think of each other in a group tbh
You ensure your safety by taking care of everyone else but yourself
High trust society time
The libertarian position what you said is very similar to what Ching chongs are doing
It’s so disgusting tbh
You know when you're on an airplane, and they fell you to fix your own oxygen mask before helping others? You beleive in the reverse of that. But do you know why they tell you to not be a hero and help yourself before you help others? Because you can't help anyone when suffocating to death.
A person who isn't a qualified lifeguard shouldn't risk their life trying to fish out sombody, when they can't swim as well as a lifeguard could.
There's being altruistic, then there's just being an idiot. That sort of disregard your own wellbeing is what brings a collective down.
You take what I say so incredibly autisticly, OFC you don’t put yourself in a position which you’ll be unable to help more people with, that’s lack of long term thinking
Bro, philosophy is pretty autistic. But yeah, collectivism is the default. Doolittle is right about property being a familial institution. A society based on property wouldn't be one dominated by Sargonite individualists.
Why would you base your society on property instead of your people?
Isn't having the requirement of having an oxygen mask on a plane a positive obligation though?
@Angry. A society based on people is a society based on property. People make property.
Not really. It's not as if anyone is forcing you, they advise you to do it, for obvious reasons. @imozzietrash
I'm meaning that in an autistically libertarian society airline companies could just not have oxygeon masks
Would that be breaking the NAP or some other tenant?
Depends. Consumers make dumb decisions imo, even in today's regulated markets. They fly on planes with designs that have already proven faulty because they just don't know any better.
But yeah, the market bends to the will of the consumers. Consumers will eat soup that has literally been simmering for 4 decades. Who are you to judge? If they want oxygen masks, they'll get them if they want them.
I personally have my reservations. People are dumb, afterall. But I don't think the government is any better in a lot of cases.