4 ms·

I don't think most of them are that naive, honestly. It's pretty clear that restricting the power of the state doesn't in itself make individuals more free. It

I don't think most of them are that naive, honestly. It's pretty clear that restricting the power of the state doesn't in itself make individuals more free. It does give private power holders more latitude to express their power though. The people advocating for these things simply are, or believe they are, more powerful than most of the individuals around them. It only "falls apart" from the perspective of the less powerful. If you're an incredibly wealthy individual or a large corporation who often finds the state getting in the way of the things you want to do to people, it can work out just fine for you. It's been a while since I read it but the people in the article are mostly a mix of bought into it when they weren't actually in the private power holder group, or just misjudged the situation, misunderstood their ability to maintain some of the truly necessary fixtures of the state. Funny this time but doesn't mean future attempts will be as slapstick and self-contained as this one was.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
It takes a massive amount of ignorance to run one's mouth in this manner. Do you seriously not have first or second hand experience with what it's like to be in the cross-hairs of local government? It's f-ing terrible. And it's not Karen and her ilk that they go after. It's the guy who's running a side business out of his garage (aka the "mixed use" HN fawns over). It's the guy who's neighbors don't like the look of his project sailboat. It's the elderly couple that can't afford the 20k price tag to get off of septic and onto the sewer. Getting government out of the business of mediating these sorts of petty matters doesn't necessarily result in more freedom as they already had it but it results in a hell of a lot less stress for the people who were getting abused for exercising it. While dismantling the state at higher levels can cause some bad stuff (19th century robber barons selling people heorin over the counter, industry dumping hazmat, stuff like that) I find it very, very hard to argue against "more than the bare minimum to keep things running" at the local level. Edit: And I'm not a libertarian. I think there's a laundry list of things government should be involved in providing and facilitating that no true libertarian would agree with. I however, don't think the government should be meddling in the bulk of the "enforcing standards of personal behavior and commerce" stuff that a lot of people here want.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  Yeah actually I was homeless for years and once had the police destroy my entire possessions in front of me, another time beat me senseless then arrest me and refuse me medical treatment for the broken teeth and ribs they caused. The judge made it clear if he saw me again I was going to jail for years. I was 17. And you know what it wasn't the power of the state that let them do that shit either. It was a rural area where those people held all the meaningful power there was, and the libertarian dream is that we all live like that and call it freedom. Run my mouth where I want to about this I earned it with the gaps in my teeth you'll see while I do.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    Woo thank you. Initially I was afraid someone who has been homeless had been duped into buying into into our neoliberal status quo wet dream. Only blaming the govt. Thankfully that’s not the case.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    The reason those cops and judges got to do those things is because of state authority. We all just kinda "agree" that the state is the only entity that gets to use violence to enforce its rules. When normal people do that shit we call it vigilante justice at best or a street gang at worst. (And then we send the state after those people). Would your dental situation not be better in a society where the locals did not consider <whatever your transgression was> worthy of using state resources to punish? Would you not have been better off in a society where the cops didn't have the resources at their disposal to respond to such petty manners? Would you not have been better off had they just left you the f alone? If you weren't actively harming anyone agents of the state never should have been involved in your business let alone arrested you.
    - giraffe_lady 4y ago
      No, do you have first hand experience with deep rural areas? If those men hadn't been agents of the state they would have found another way to do those or similar things, because that is what they wanted to do and they sought out the power that would allow them to do it. I do support abolishing the police and all forms of carceral justice, for what it's worth. Possibly the state too, sure, eventually. But I do not accept, right now that diminishing all forms of the state in favor of elevating personal and corporate power is a reasonable path.
WheelsAtLarge 4y ago
That's actually a really good point. The people with the power or perceived power are mostly the ones that advocate liberalism. If I have enough power and money I can create a dream world around me without giving a damn about everyone else. Whatever I want I can just buy. If things fall apart I can just build a fort around me.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago

It takes a massive amount of ignorance to run one's mouth in this manner. Do you seriously not have first or second hand experience with what it's like to be in the cross-hairs of local government? It's f-ing terrible. And it's not Karen and her ilk that they go after. It's the guy who's running a side business out of his garage (aka the "mixed use" HN fawns over). It's the guy who's neighbors don't like the look of his project sailboat. It's the elderly couple that can't afford the 20k price tag to get off of septic and onto the sewer. Getting government out of the business of mediating these sorts of petty matters doesn't necessarily result in more freedom as they already had it but it results in a hell of a lot less stress for the people who were getting abused for exercising it. While dismantling the state at higher levels can cause some bad stuff (19th century robber barons selling people heorin over the counter, industry dumping hazmat, stuff like that) I find it very, very hard to argue against "more than the bare minimum to keep things running" at the local level. Edit: And I'm not a libertarian. I think there's a laundry list of things government should be involved in providing and facilitating that no true libertarian would agree with. I however, don't think the government should be meddling in the bulk of the "enforcing standards of personal behavior and commerce" stuff that a lot of people here want.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
Yeah actually I was homeless for years and once had the police destroy my entire possessions in front of me, another time beat me senseless then arrest me and refuse me medical treatment for the broken teeth and ribs they caused. The judge made it clear if he saw me again I was going to jail for years. I was 17. And you know what it wasn't the power of the state that let them do that shit either. It was a rural area where those people held all the meaningful power there was, and the libertarian dream is that we all live like that and call it freedom. Run my mouth where I want to about this I earned it with the gaps in my teeth you'll see while I do.
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  Woo thank you. Initially I was afraid someone who has been homeless had been duped into buying into into our neoliberal status quo wet dream. Only blaming the govt. Thankfully that’s not the case.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  The reason those cops and judges got to do those things is because of state authority. We all just kinda "agree" that the state is the only entity that gets to use violence to enforce its rules. When normal people do that shit we call it vigilante justice at best or a street gang at worst. (And then we send the state after those people). Would your dental situation not be better in a society where the locals did not consider <whatever your transgression was> worthy of using state resources to punish? Would you not have been better off in a society where the cops didn't have the resources at their disposal to respond to such petty manners? Would you not have been better off had they just left you the f alone? If you weren't actively harming anyone agents of the state never should have been involved in your business let alone arrested you.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    No, do you have first hand experience with deep rural areas? If those men hadn't been agents of the state they would have found another way to do those or similar things, because that is what they wanted to do and they sought out the power that would allow them to do it. I do support abolishing the police and all forms of carceral justice, for what it's worth. Possibly the state too, sure, eventually. But I do not accept, right now that diminishing all forms of the state in favor of elevating personal and corporate power is a reasonable path.

WheelsAtLarge 4y ago

That's actually a really good point. The people with the power or perceived power are mostly the ones that advocate liberalism. If I have enough power and money I can create a dream world around me without giving a damn about everyone else. Whatever I want I can just buy. If things fall apart I can just build a fort around me.