Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Criminally rich - libertarian ideolgy plays out as individual opression.

Posted 1 month ago on April 27, 2020, 1:59 p.m. EST by elf3 (4135)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Some people believe it is their inherent right to do the wrong thing, as long as there is profit to be made.

The problem with libertarians:

  • is you can't make people behave with morality or ethics - so if you wipe away the ability to regulate - presuming some idea that they will do the right thing in spite of the glaring repeated evidence that no they do not - then you have given sociopaths with money carte blanche to hurt others. (On the other hand poor sociopaths who can't hide behind a corporate entity or board generally find themselves in jail for crimes and the harm they cause).

Wealthy sociopaths change laws to make murder legal and avoid responsibility for harm by removing themselves directly and employing others to do their dirty work.

The ability to swing your fists ends at my nose. So if you pollute water, air, horde resources like oil, and land and having to much wealth is the cause - then that wealth absolutely MUST BE REGULATED. If those with to much wealth are using it to oppress and harm others including to bribe and lobby to change laws to their own benefit so that they receive legislation which allows them to swing their giant fists into our faces - then we MUST REGULATE AND STOP IT. WE MUST REGULATE WEALTH.

Those who are too wealthy have proven time and time again they will use that wealth to monopolize markets, harm the public (air, water, pollution), horde resources, REMEMBER EPI-PENS? and all around make life difficult for the ordinary people - we must REGULATE WEALTH. What is more if that they have had more than 30 years to prove that somehow they would fix everything with their de-regulation trickle down philosophy.

Everything has become much worse and the INDIVIDUAL has been far more restricted under their policies. DEREGULATION IS A FAILED EXPERIMENT AND AN UTTER DISASTER FOR THE INDIVIDUAL. The wealthy one percent has turned their money into a bureaucratic machine as powerful and corrupt as any Communist Regime in history - I would wager to say it is WORSE - because the hands of multi-national conglomerates have the power to reach their hand of control into every government across the world.

While deregulation has turned their wealth into unimaginable gains - they have not used this wealth to do good for the meek of this world. While they focus on rocket ships to the moon - they have not used their gains to make individuals more free or cure the ills of society - but to create fewer and fewer options for survival or upward mobility. Their control of markets and resources and increasing shares have made it impossible for an individual to possibly compete against them. This de-regulation of wealth has proven an utter disaster for the individual. When these powerful entities swing their fists into our faces - we individuals are left with no recourse and no choice but to become cogs in the ever growing corporate bureaucracies and individual crushing machine that seeks to enslave us the same as any corrupt communistic system.

Regulation and oversight keep corruption in check as does a free press. Regulated Regulation is the enemy of Corruption. Anytime you de-regulate oversight - then corruption blooms - whether in government or in markets, or with resources. Without oversight any system is vulnerable to corruption. And what do we mean by oversight? We mean protecting the rights and freedoms of the individual against systems that may bully or oppress their freedoms - it DOES NOT MEAN ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO BULLY OR OPRESS THE FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS OF OTHERS.

As it is playing out we are now in this neo-libertarianism meant to work for the benefit and greater good of a few elite one percent who control us - who control our governments - and who limit our choices and options - THIS IS THE OPPOSITE OF FREEDOM IT IS OPRESSION BY ANOTHER NAME (LIBERTARIANISM). As far as innovation? I see not one iota of innovation coming out of any of these nouveaux riche. Blindness, paralysis, starvation, pollution, cancer, birth defects, poverty, have not only not been solved but increased exponentially - what has any of their wealth brought us but war and misery, less choices, and less beauty. The narcissists of the world literally can not see beyond their own gains to live in the shoes and lives of the average person. Their concierge healthcare, their endless choices, the caged beauty they have for themselves - is out of reach to regular people. They stole the world - and they haven't a clue as they drown on the idea of their own grandiosity in the false meritocracy of their dumb luck and built in silver spoon safety nets - and TIME. Time that has been stolen from our lives, beauty that has been stolen from us - and TAKEN by the rich.

Who among us may cure cancer? Be the next Mozart? Or Shakespeare? We will never know they are too busy working two jobs to pay rent to landiers and working 12 hour days at Amazon and ever increasing shares of their income to pay for overpriced resources.

Being rich isn't a crime ...or maybe these days... it is?



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by elf3 (4135) 1 month ago

We also live in an age when a corporation can fire someone because of their views. For those fans of Ayn Rand out there - how does this mesh with your ideology? Are liberals somehow behind data mining and media monitoring? When a person is being REGULATED by those who employ them - and there are fewer and fewer places one can work, due to deregulation, then I can't see how this system favors the individual. The same companies preaching and lobbying for deregulation are regulating the individual to a degree which we have never seen. Not only can your job check to see which books you read and what you are looking up - they can fire you if they don't like it. And somehow people have been duped into believing this control is being driven by the left? By organizations like the ACLU who protect free speech and the individual? We are deregulating corporations and government and basically giving them unprecedented power to control and regulate individuals. This is the opposite of liberation.

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 1 month ago

''We’ve reached a level of dystopia that I’m not sure even Margaret Atwood could have imagined''

by Arwa Mahdawi - and with no latin I actually know able to fully reflect the state of U$A during this time!

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23233) 1 month ago

"Do these protesters not understand the irony here? Do they not understand how hypocritical it is to fight against a woman’s right to choose while simultaneously fighting for their own right to do whatever they like? Do they not understand how you can not possibly be “pro-life” if you’re flouting lockdown laws to participate in dense protests that could cause a surge in coronavirus cases?"

"Rightwing protesters in handmaid’s costumes are taking gaslighting to a new level" says Mahdawi from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/25/trump-handmaids-tale-coronavirus

I believe she is speaking about the protestors who want the right to NOT wear a mask as if that is such a big deal, and thereby have the right to make other people sick with COVID19. But, respect for life, yeah!

[-] 2 points by elf3 (4135) 1 month ago

OMG - TOTALLY!!!! This point really needs to be its own forum post. "Send people back to work" (to die !!) from - the same people who claim to be pro-life. What they really are is pro-control. This insane cult needs to go. The problem is crazy people have endless stamina. They don't get tired. This real sickness in our country isn't pandemic - it's the mental illness of the Trump CULT of NARCISSISM. They ignore science in order to adopt beliefs being preached to them which are also designed to manipulate them into a dogma which is serving the greedy. They don't really want to look at abortion science - they believe the science community lies about fetus development, (they think fake pictures showing giant aborted babies are what really goes on) they believe they lie about global warming, now about pandemic. The refusal to educate themselves or objectively look at facts. In the meanwhile they don't get that taking birth control pauses a woman's cycle and equate this as murder? But they have no problem with GMO's and chemical pollution that can cause miscarriage? You call them on the hypocrazy -They twist facts to suit their beliefs - and stupidity of not understanding how they are being manipulated as pawns to serve the one percent - it boggles the mind. First off - please bring back the Rocky films and working class hero - because when the hell did people start loving their abusive underpaid jobs enough to beg and demand from government to go back and risk being infected with a deadly virus? What a bunch of BOOBS. We wonder why employment sucks in this country, maybe it's because these people have their boot-licking noses stuck so far up their companies asses - that they can now get away with whatever they want to? Since When was being a patriot about - licking the boot? It truly disgusts me. Stand up and fight for your right to a dignified life where the quality of life matters more than consuming cheap crap. or I guess go back to work and die for the ceo shareholders and rich politicians but maybe the pro-deathers should be exempt from treatment when they get sick then so society can be freed from the idiots.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23233) 1 month ago

"Stand up and fight for your right to a dignified life." BINGO! NOT, stand up and fight to keep your low wages and to enrich someone else so you can work, work, work for nothing that benefits you. WTFU people!

We're killing ourselves and the planet in the process of the "profit for the few", "poverty for the rest of us," formula! As you say the manipulation into a dogma that serves only the greedy is a cult! It can be nothing other than a cult.

The lack of self awareness of the hypocrisy of being anti-abortion and yet also anti-children having enough food to eat, anti-spreading COVID19 etc shows that they are mind-managed! And people who fight against their own interests and are that mind-managed must be in a cult of some sort even if it is just ideological.

My only hope now is that the aftermath of COVID19 exposes all the cracks in our system and how sick our society is from it's very core.

Materialism and consumption and working for nothing to grasp at those things that we can never have but that are dangled and worshiped and lionized while we forsake our children and loved ones and a more decent mission on this earth, is making us and our planet very very sick.

Watch "Planet of the Humans" to get a real perspective on how it is the for-profit system that requires consumption and the ever growing economy, an infinitely growing economy, on a FINITE Earth that is the real problem.

Working our asses off, even to our deaths in dangerous jobs, to make profit for the wealthy and corporations via capitalism, the financialization of everything, banking, fiat money, are all a part of this complete sham against the human race. We have to wake ourselves up to the fact that none of this work for nothing and consumption truly benefits us the way they have tried to portray to us that it does.

Here's a link to the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE

[-] 0 points by grapes (5232) 1 month ago

Abortion right is a very long persisting controversial issue. I wrestled with it almost forty years ago. First question which I wanted everyone to answer is whether they believe in the human right to life. If they don't believe in that, there is no controversy because the right to abort a potential human being cannot encounter any limit as the Red Communists and Socialists believe. They abort viable independently existing human beings like so many flies.

Christianity teaches that all human beings are the Children of God and are therefore endowed with God-given rights. Although people may argue with me about me being a Christian or not ( I may have too many "non-Christian" cultural mutations, ) I absolutely agree with Christianity. All human beings have human rights, chief among these being the right to life.

Now the exercise of this right to life hinges upon the definition of a "human being." Is a developing fetus a human being? I say that the right to life unconditionally exists if the human being has life. If the fetus has human life, its right to life unconditionally exists. We know how to determine whether a dying person still has human life or not so we should also know how to determine in principle whether a fetus has human life or not before aborting it. Is there a heartbeat? Is there brainwave? Is there breathing? Is there a pulse?

Our empirical observations of many fetuses after about ten weeks of gestation show that they most often have all of these attributes. Hence, we should generally agree with the right-to-life camp that fetal lives be protected by the state just as any other human lives.

I don't consider people using birth controls prior to the fetuses having human lives as being contrary to the notion that the fetuses are "the Children of God." If the fetuses are not "children" yet, how can they be the "Children of God?"

It's clear to me that the state has a duty to protect the human lives of fetuses from about ten weeks onwards. Prior to that the fetuses are merely human tissues with the potential for attaining human lives. Most societies don't punish women who menstruate to extrude human ova and human tissues with the potential for attaining human lives. Neither are there many societies which force their women to be fertilized between every menstrual period by their men in order to protect possible new human lives. There are certainly customary limits as to how far anyone carries this protection of possible human lives.

Now the thorny enforcement question comes up next. To know the ten weeks demarcation has been passed or not often requires the cooperation of the pregnant woman so the demarcation is fuzzy at best. Do we go to the same length to ascertain whether life exists in a fetus as in an end-of-life human being? Generally not because of the technical difficulty of doing so.

I therefore agree that fetuses should generally have state protection from being aborted in order to avoid aborting human lives. However, we also have a federal government which within the limits stipulated in the Constitution can supersede what the states do or don't. The states cannot arbitrarily take back what powers they have delegated to the federal government. It's clear ever since the early 1970s that women's right to abortion is indeed supported by the constitutionally sanctioned legal process so women can have safe abortions. I agree with this provision of safety. I see it in a similar light as that being applied to the drinking of alcohol. Ideally no one should drink alcohol because it's toxic in larger quantities and kills and maims people if the drinkers drive automobiles and other vehicles. Alone by itself among the modern states, the U.S. tried banning alcohol ( yeah, it wasn't even a religion like Islam ! the U.S. also brewed up the eugenics movement which Adolf Hitler was fond of and adopted into practice, much to the horror of the World ) but it helped create the "U.S. Federal Reserve," bred bootlegging, organized crimes, speakeasys, and greatly swelled the population of "devout Church-goers." All right, what did Jesus say regarding drinking vintage? "Drink this in remembrance of me" was his command at the Last Supper so alcohol was certainly blessed. I also suspect that on the crucifix before he died, he had asked for wine to drink, not the vinegar the Roman soldiers offered him ( to insult him ).

My position is therefore no women should be prosecuted for having an abortion, in line with the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. However, in practice women should not take the matter of abortion lightly and use that as a form of birth control. I generally side with women in making the decision to abort ( of course, her doctor should be involved for technical and empirical reasons ) because they carry the fetuses and are required by the state to provide for the fetuses upon their births. Men who impregnate women generally don't have the same level of investments into the caring of the fetuses and the resultant children as the mothers-to-be or mothers do so their involvement in the decision to abort should reflect just that.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (4135) 1 month ago

To get caught up in the abortion issue - It's kind of hard for women to reconcile that people care so much what happens to the undeveloped tissue which has not yet developed a full brain - inside of a uterus - while ignoring the plight of conscious walking starving children eating off of garbage piles in this world, or while sending bombs that fall on them. It seems clear that at issue is not out of concern - but for control. The declaration of a woman's uterus as a vessel of God as though it belongs to the human race instead of part of her private personhood doesn't seem appropriate. Giving women the decision is in and of itself strange if you think about it - why do women need to be "granted consent" to decide what is right for their individual bodies and lives. Because if people would think in these terms - is the law going to start deciding women's uteruses should not be allowed to sit empty when they could be put to use creating life? What's next - mandatory pregnancy? Should the law demand we rent them out to less fertile women? Or Maybe we can start harvesting tissue in there for pharmaceutical research? My point is our bodies do not belong to the state, religions, or others and until a fetus can live on it's own outside of us - it is still a part of our bodies and not yet a separate entity. And laws reflect that as well - by limiting the point at which one can have an abortion. And even if you want to wax poetic or lament over the loss of the future potential person in there - unfortunately for a fetus - "God" or nature - made us beings dependent upon the body of a woman who has the ability to make a choice on if we get to be expressed or not. And then too all of this from a country which still lacks PAID maternity leave, adequate healthcare for said fetus, or adequate pay to properly feed, house, and provide for family.

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 1 month ago

I don't believe they care. It's easy for anyone to hold a moral view that forces others to sacrifice. When they're asked to sacrifice the rationalizing begins. It's no longer about the the sanctity of life, now it's about MY rights. Of course it's hypocritical, but the selfish individual doesn't care, and as you can see there are far too many selfish individuals out there.

The pandemic is a world wide problem that needs a cooperative effort and sacrifice to solve. Unfortunately there is a large number of people that don't care. Their interests don't go beyond themselves. It's a flaw in human nature it simply isn't possible to force people to think the same way and agree on a common action.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23233) 3 weeks ago

Can we develop a collectivist attitude after COVID 19?

Will we find out that the countries that performed the best during the pandemic are the ones that worked together for harmonious lockdowns?

Is it that our "rugged individualism" in America is actually our own worst enemy? I think, in times of crisis, it certainly is. A me, me, me attitude only harms others.

We are social animals and only by caring about one another can we thrive, imho anyway.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (4135) 1 month ago

If libertarians judge freedom by their bank accounts - then do they find it strange only one percent of society is "free"? They are also fond of the term "relative wealth"...meaning they don't view themselves as wealthy in comparison to Jeff Bezos or others they aspire to emulate - therefore they are part of "the struggle". Delusional spoiled rich brats. As far as the other average libertarian people duped into believing taxes are the problem - don't apparently realize corporations have an algorithm for what they charge. You could keep all your tax money and they would take the difference. The idea that their lives would improve is a lie designed to hijack their focus from the real problem of deregulation and corporate conglomerate tyranny and ownership. They also need to realize the beneficiaries of their tax money is the one percent. All of it ends up back in their coffers.

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 1 month ago

RW Libertarians are, "Delusional spoiled rich brats. As far as the other average libertarian people duped into believing taxes are the problem - don't apparently realize (that) corporations have an algorithm for what they charge.You could keep all your tax money and they would (still) take the difference. The idea that their lives would improve is a lie designed to hijack their focus from the real problem of ... Deregulation and Corporate Conglomerate Tyranny and Ownership. They also need to realize that the beneficiaries of their tax money is the one percent. All of it ends up back in their coffers." - Because your words warrant repeating! Also fyi, elf - please also consider ...

e tenebris, lux?!

(from darkness, light?!)