102 sats \ 7 replies \ @kepford 14 Jan \ on: Can You Be A Libertarian Toxic Bitcoin Maximalist? bitcoin
I think some people think like libertines not libertarians. That's fine and sometimes there's overlap but in my mind a libertarian is most concerned with the states violations of rights. Negative rights. Not positive rights. I see no conflict between being a toxic maximalist and a libertarian. But as soon as you start advocating for the state to ban shitcoins or infringe on rights then you can't really call yourself a libertarian.
Also, the fact that I think most shitcoins are scams, that has nothing to do with free speech. We all have opinions. You and I do not have the ability to take people's free speech away with our words.
As far as territories and censorship that is also completely libertarian. Its property rights. If I control a web site I can censor or choose what I want and don't want. I own/control it. If you come to my house I have expectations about you conduct yourself. There is no difference here. Has nothing to do with being a libertarian.
My 2 sats.
I think some people think like libertines not libertarians. That's fine and sometimes there's overlap but in my mind a libertarian is most concerned with the states violations of rights.
Of course you're accurate. There's no doubt @k00b and his partners aren't government agents (am I being naive? That @ekzyis guy worries me). I meant basic principles, and not in a libertine, anything goes sense. I'm thinking about the pre- authoritarian ACLU defending Nazis marching in Skokie sense. Embracing the free market crucible of ideas where you're willing to debate people and opinions you disagree with, and even loathe.
reply
This double negation confuses me. And maybe I am a double agent. Or triple agent?
A triple agent is a spy who pretends to be a double agent for one side while they are truthfully a double agent for the other side. Unlike a re-doubled agent, who changes allegiance due to being compromised, a triple agent usually has always been loyal to their original side. It may also refer to a spy who works for three opposing sides, such that each side thinks the spy works for them alone.
— Wikipedia, Triple Agent
Okay, this confuses me even more.
reply
@siggy47 I hope you get my intention here. Appreciate you sharing this conflict you feel. I do not mean to belittle this feeling. Based on what you are saying you sound like a fair minded and logical person. Arguing and combating bad ideas is not anti-libertarian. Nor is muting people if you don't want to do that.
Here's what bothers me about some maxis (a very small number). They seem to want them to be banned by the state. They seem to believe that some day they will no longer exist. That some day everyone will be a maxi. I do not share these views. I want to live in a truly free world and in a truly free world people will do both dumb and evil things as they do today. The difference will be that a lot of these evil and dumb things will not be encouraged and protected from consequences by the state and their corporate partners.
I do not believe that even in 100 years everyone will be a bitcoin maxi. Think about the current world. Is everyone a fiat maxi? No. But fiat and the states that control it are dominant. Bitcoin will eventually have enough adoption and true believers to lead it to dominance but other views will exist. People will hate it.
People that live in largely free market nations like the US hate capitalism. Yet, they participate in it. They profit from it. We will never intellectually change all minds. We don't have to. Just a critical number. The masses will use what works.
Appreciate ya @siggy47
reply
I always appreciate your input. In fact, I usually wind up agreeing with you:) Especially with this reply.
So again the ACLU defended peoples rights against the government. As an individual I am under no obligation to waste my time listening to shitcoiners. That isn't anti libertarian of me or you. Just saying I don't think you should feel this conflict. Not if you are convinced in your mind of your position on a topic.
reply