2 ms·

I agree that we don't want more racist, sexist and anti-democracy people here. I don't believe Thiel is. But rich people I have nothing against, I welcome weal

by xupybd 10y ago

I agree that we don't want more racist, sexist and anti-democracy people here. I don't believe Thiel is. But rich people I have nothing against, I welcome wealth coming into the country. And suing a private company, well let the case stand on its merits, I don't take issue with that.

owenwil 10y ago
Peter Thiel openly wrote that he thought it might have been better for democracy if women didn't vote. I don't think that's a great place to start.
- strken 10y ago
  If we're talking about the same piece, what he wrote is more nuanced: Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.[0] This seems similar to the claim "if white people didn't vote, Trump would have lost in a landslide", which almost nobody takes to mean white people shouldn't vote. [0] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
- defen 10y ago
  No, he wrote: > Since 1920 the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. If you read the original essay[1] you will see that he is making a descriptive and not a proscriptive point. He is not saying "we should not let women vote, because then we could have capitalist democracy". He is saying "women are not attracted to libertarian politics, and they have the franchise, therefore capitalist democracy is not going to happen. Therefore, we should go beyond politics to make it happen". He suggests three ways of making it happen: Cyberspace, outerspace, seasteading. [1] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by xupybd 10y ago

owenwil 10y ago

Peter Thiel openly wrote that he thought it might have been better for democracy if women didn't vote. I don't think that's a great place to start.

strken 10y ago
If we're talking about the same piece, what he wrote is more nuanced: Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.[0] This seems similar to the claim "if white people didn't vote, Trump would have lost in a landslide", which almost nobody takes to mean white people shouldn't vote. [0] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
defen 10y ago
No, he wrote: > Since 1920 the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. If you read the original essay[1] you will see that he is making a descriptive and not a proscriptive point. He is not saying "we should not let women vote, because then we could have capitalist democracy". He is saying "women are not attracted to libertarian politics, and they have the franchise, therefore capitalist democracy is not going to happen. Therefore, we should go beyond politics to make it happen". He suggests three ways of making it happen: Cyberspace, outerspace, seasteading. [1] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]