US representative democracy may be a failed system, but it was designed in the 18th century when travel and long range communications was time consuming. Needs a major revamp for the digital world, and we are getting to the point where that could be possible (technology, at least).
Comment on 4chan and Kiwi Farms Sue the UK Over its Age Verification Law
AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 1 month agoHe’s the philosopher of choice for people like Peter Thiel and JD Vance. He advocates for moving to a neofeudalist system, arguing that democracy is a failed project. Beyond this, he holds some truly repugnant views that are woven throughout his ideology
Simulation6@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
JD Vance unironically believes in a Neo Feudalist?!
Who’s Peter Thiel
DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Peter Thiel
A right-wing billionaire who is responsible for a lot modern evils, but he sometimes likes to pull the “I’m not evil or racist, I am gay, so I can’t be”.
You may have heard of Facebook, or Palantir, or JD Vance.
QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Ah Milo Yiannapolous tried similar shit
I have not heard of Palantir
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 month ago
As an ancap whose views have been called repugnant too, I say you could be more specific and say he’s racist, misogynist and mixes up social prowess, intelligence and wisdom, while these are three different things.
scintilla@crust.piefed.social 1 month ago
I still can't believe ancaps are real lmao. It's the most obviously flawed ideology o have ever seen.
Just look outside and see that this but worse is a terrible idea.
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 month ago
It’s the exact opposite. It’s the only one incorporating all the basic necessary principles.
Which is why Cato institute is the only ideological authority which I can read without starting to curse.
And I’m certain you don’t know shit about ancap just like every other person I’ve met saying this. Maybe you should LYAO over how you repeat one and the same statement on it never providing arguments. Laugh over yourself, you know.
It’s the point which all decent ideologies approach. Left or right, doesn’t matter.
If you don’t have private property, then you have group property, which in human nature means group leader’s property (and also decisions made in a group don’t make anything better, might read about Khmer Rouge, they didn’t have such a strict vertical hierarchy, the results were not nicer from that). If you don’t have non-aggression as a principle, then you make it acceptable to attack those you (or your group) decide to be wrong people (say, suppose you’re a white supremacist commune), and forfeit any moral justification of tolerance to your own ideology. If you don’t have natural law as a principle, then your ideology is self-contradictory and you’ll have violence as the main justification anyway (also see USA as a nation, all liberal and moralist around except when it’s about natives’ rights). If you don’t have personal responsibility and freedom of choice as a principle, then you erode any idea of obligation and decency, since obligations and decisions will be imposed by various jerks upon you left and right and you’ll learn to discard them. And if you compare imaginary heaven of some ideology to today’s real world and think that the result of such a comparison is an indicator of anything, you should see a therapist.
This doesn’t mean anything. I pity you if it does for you.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
I ain’t readin all that
Free Palestine
scintilla@crust.piefed.social 1 month ago
Your large paragraph has so many fallacies I genuinely don't think you're being serious.