Left - Right : Epiphany

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You need some Hans-Hermann Hoppe in your life. In short its libertarian minarchism with a strong emphasis on physically removing leftist subverters from society. I personally dont see that coming about though without an authoritarian period to enforce the "purge" . I was with you up until "I actually agree with Alarti". Alarti is the type that if he had any power he would be HRC.

My point on HRC is that she is a corporatist (good or bad, that is a position on the right) and does not substantially differ from any of the republican candidates (except Trump) in that regard. It wasn't an endorsement just an acknowledgement that on an economic scale she's not very left. She is however more authoritarian than the others, because she's corrupt a hell. She has no desire to reign in banks/Wall Street (leftist policy) because she's for sale. The astonishing thing is that most on the left either don't notice or don't care.

[fash]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

corporatist (good or bad, that is a position on the right)

It's a stretch to call corporatism a position of the right. Capitalism, sure, but not corporatism. Bank and fiat regulations that select for crony capitalism and socializing risks for too-big-to-fail banks/Wall Street fall on the left side of economic freedoms.

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, I'd prefer things to just stay as they are actually, but in an environment of increasing authoritarianism, no, I would not want a shift further to the right because then that just results in a super corporation controlling all wealth and using the formidable arm of government to destroy opposition.

My point there was that in the context of a large government that the left can control, it's unreasonable to expect things to stay as they are. A shift toward larger government is the outcome in that context. A "massive shift to the left" is jumping out of the frying pan & into the fire.

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No it isn't ^^ I'm not talking about the American political party, I'm talking about Libertarianism as the antithesis of Authoritarianism. Here's an example of what I was talking about: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

I wasn't talking about US's Libertarian party either. I was referring to left libertarianism e.g. libertarian socialism, anarcho-communism (libertarian communism), anarcho-collectivism, anarcho-syndicalism.. any of those non-vanguardist collective doctrines or egalitarian ideologies that don't understand economics.

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ive thought it would be interesting to have as your government a class of people who are not allowed to own property or amass wealth but have all of their needs taken care of by the state. It could be a possible hedge against the ability to buy influence. This is similar to Platos idea of the silver class of auxiliaries but not quite or some could even say party members in 1984 unlike the proles who were allowed to be degenerates.

Interesting, but does this do anything besides save you some time in a democratic government? When they want more gibs, they'll burn down cities. When they want to vote, they'll martyr for publicity and plant bombs.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by fash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Interesting, but does this do anything besides save you some time in a democratic government? When they want more gibs, they'll burn down cities. When they want to vote, they'll martyr for publicity and plant bombs.

No it just removes the power of bureaucrats to grant favors. Its just a thought I mull over from time to time. I just find it kind of self defeating that we have these "citizen" leaders. No term limits combined with the "right" to pursue your own interest as a politician is kind of bullshit. Civil service/politicians should have to enter into a system they can not rig or profit from. This would draw only those with a genuine interest in efficient and just operation of that system toward it to begin with. In Plato's version children are tested to see if they fit into this class and are then raised by a family belonging to that class so as to instill those values.

If we have to use democratic methods the way you avoid "gibs" and riots is you use a timocratic method to decide voter eligibility. Then you create a way for those who desire to do so to progress into the timocracy based on some system of merit. Heinlein the sci-fi author and libertarian had proposed limiting citizenship and its rights to only those who served in the military. So something along those lines could be adopted.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No it just removes the power of bureaucrats to grant favors. Its just a thought I mull over from time to time. I just find it kind of self defeating that we have these "citizen" leaders. No term limits combined with the "right" to pursue your own interest as a politician is kind of bullshit. Civil service/politicians should have to enter into a system they can not rig or profit from. This would draw only those with a genuine interest in efficient and just operation of that system toward it to begin with. In Plato's version children are tested to see if they fit into this class and are then raised by a family belonging to that class so as to instill those values.

If we have to use democratic methods the way you avoid "gibs" and riots is you use a timocratic method to decide voter eligibility. Then you create a way for those who desire to do so to progress into the timocracy based on some system of merit. Heinlein the sci-fi author and libertarian had proposed limiting citizenship and its rights to only those who served in the military. So something along those lines could be adopted.

The government model in Starship Troopers is an interesting format that I lean towards. Civil service for civil rewards in some fashion gives an incentive that is currently lacking in most governments. Also, I think term limits in all elected offices and courts, even appointed positions, would have a net positive on how government functions within the US.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The government model in Starship Troopers is an interesting format that I lean towards. Civil service for civil rewards in some fashion gives an incentive that is currently lacking in most governments. Also, I think term limits in all elected offices and courts, even appointed positions, would have a net positive on how government functions within the US.

I have always been on the fence with term limits and change my mind on the issue often. The negative associated with term limits is it forces you to discard people when they are doing a good job. I have been thinking lately a better system is no limits but have regular reviews or some such in which the power can be revoked. Its supposed to sort of work like this currently in the US but the problem is we have cliques of politicians who seldom enforce these options against their own buddies therefore it should fall to an outside body or be up for a kind of general vote of confidence. Which is similar to just having an election. The problem is the voters dont want to run the country or keep up with how the politicians are doing. Thus the auxiliary class idea again rears its head.

[Nibblewitz]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The government model in Starship Troopers is an interesting format that I lean towards. Civil service for civil rewards in some fashion gives an incentive that is currently lacking in most governments. Also, I think term limits in all elected offices and courts, even appointed positions, would have a net positive on how government functions within the US.

You make a good point, and I think civil motivation is a major role of government. I would hate to see the world continue in its feudal system of wage-slavery, and I don't see the free market producing an advocate for human advancement. Our current systems have fostered personal gain over collective gain, and a freer market would do the same with more intensity.

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Nibblewitz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You make a good point, and I think civil motivation is a major role of government. I would hate to see the world continue in its feudal system of wage-slavery, and I don't see the free market producing an advocate for human advancement. Our current systems have fostered personal gain over collective gain, and a freer market would do the same with more intensity.

guess i dont get the premise... all i hear is how freedom is bad because fake freedom isn't working... sry friends