this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
939 points (97.3% liked)

196

17163 readers
1712 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You contradict yourself in the first paragraph.

It is a spectrum, which is why "anybody who isn't an authoritarian is a libertarian" is not true.

[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I don't understand why you think that is a contradiction. You both agree there's a spectrum between the two. Technically, if you're not 100% authoritarian you have a greater-than-zero alignment with libertarianism.

Now, if you're trying to say landing somewhere in the middle of the spectrum means you're neither, then I tend to agree with you (labels suck). However, I'd take it a step further and say that nobody is going to be the 100% perfect embodiment of either end of the spectrum, and therefore, no true authoritarian or libertarian exists. I think, to say either one of you is wrong is just arguing semantics.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Any assertion in chart form must be true!

Edit: ok now that I'm getting downvotes I feel I need to explain: the conventional usage of the word libertarian is not commensurate with it covering such a wide range of the political spectrum. Usually we mean people who favour mildly anarchistic views (minimal governmental institutions, low taxation, low intervention). Representing that niche as half of the political spectrum is highly disingenuous

[–] Forester@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

the word libertarian literally does mean what I'm telling you though . What your experiencing is that your personal definition is not matching up with everyone else's reality. You've just been misinformed and have only been exposed to a subset of libertarian ideals . To put this in an analogy it's like if I said truck and you assumed I was talking about a Ford F-350 when in fact I'm referring to all trucks. From tiny k trucks to 18 wheeler big rigs

[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

No, what I'm experiencing is the conventional meaning of the term as used by people in normal language not matching up with a technical definition that you favour. It's fine that you prefer to use the word that way, you just can't expect everyone else to

[–] Forester@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago

Well you seem to be in the minority here so it would appear that the majority of people understand my definition as correct since that's the definition as defined in multiple dictionaries.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Lol at that person's reply: "No, but the chart says it's true!"

These people have some desperate need for neat little boxes, each with their own designation, to put themselves and others into, and that's just not how the world works.

[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Lol, most of the axis didn't even have labels. The reductionism is obviously silly, but presenting the classic 2D model as if that was actually how words are used is genuinely hilarious

[–] Forester@pawb.social 1 points 1 month ago

My guy I'm not arguing for neat little boxes. I'm saying that each of the little green boxes and neat little yellow boxes are all their own separate views and opinions, but all fall under the collective branch of libertarianism. And in that same breath I will tell you that Russia, China the United States Great Britain, Germany, etc can all be classified as authoritarian states.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm aware of the chart. You are saying that only the two very extremes exist. That's silly.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You either like authority or you don't. That's binary. How much you like or dislike it is the spectrum.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Do you not understand what a spectrum is? It cannot be both binary AND a spectrum. Those two things are mutually exclusive. Bimodal perhaps (though I don't think it is in this case), but not binary.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Numbers are negative or positive unless they are zero

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Gender is also a spectrum, do you agree? So are you saying that means that if you're not a man, then you're a woman?

[–] Forester@pawb.social 1 points 1 month ago

I think you have gender and sex confused. I also think that you're an authoritarian in denial spiraling and reaching for any straw to grasp or goal post to change to. Gender is not binary. It's fluid. But what would I know I'm just, the bisexual furry that you're responding to.

[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Or you appreciate authority in some matters, but reject it in others. That's the point in the spectrum that rejects the simple binary.

Edit: just realised both my last posts were responding to you. I'm not stalking or weird shit I swear! It just happened I woke up with more opinions!

[–] Forester@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago

If you appreciate authority, you're an authoritarian...