Pants-of-dog wrote:So, after being inspired by certain Octavia Butler novels, i would say that the ultimate goal of my ideology is the complete abolition of hierarchies and other oppressive power dynamics.
Do you understand that private ownership of natural resources, especially land, is an inherently oppressive power dynamic, while private ownership of the fruits of one's labor is not?
Rei Murasame wrote:What is the purpose of being a libertarian in your view?
EU rope wrote:Well, to acquire liberty, of course. To be free. :)
Well, Rei might claim your liberty would include being free to enslave others...
Most feudal "libertarians" claim a right to enslave others by forcibly removing their liberty to sustain their own lives using what nature provided for all (i.e., a right to private property in land).
So, what does, "to be free" mean to you? The kind of freedom the American Founding Fathers -- landowners to a one, and most of them slave owners -- had in mind?
Crantag wrote:I believe in local sovereignty and abolishment of nation-states, the concept of which is inherently phony, and which has been one of the biggest barriers to peace in the modern world (ironically, they were created in Westphalia to prevent wars).
What makes a nation-state not "local"? How big can a state be without being not-local?
In reality, there is nothing at all "phony" about the nation-state. States reliably beat non-states in inter-societal competition, and big states reliably beat small ones. Some artificial multi-ethnic nation-states like Yugoslavia, India, etc. are problematic to govern, but that doesn't mean they are phony or necessarily unworkable or unpeaceful, as Switzerland shows.