this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
399 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3130 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who defines whose property is whose?

[–] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's pretty standard private property ideas. Most are still kind of stuck in the (leftist definition) capitalist version of property where you kind of assume everything is already owned by someone and we toil for property.

I don't think it's necessary to go down that path, but I'm sort of neutral on how society chooses to handle it. I prefer the more homestead/robust abandonment types.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Current standard property ideas require a robust central government to catalogue who owns what and enforce everyone's rights. Is that permissible under libertarianism?

[–] Forester@yiffit.net 3 points 5 months ago

Depends what flavor you endorse. I don't know the exact numbers but I would wager about half of us are minarchists. So the catalog part would be out the window but in theory, there would still be a strong legal system based on contracts upheld by basic government to hold a court system for disputes.

[–] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago

Depends heavily on the libertarian. Big tent and all. I'd consider most libertarians minarchists that are willing to accept some government for things they don't feel can be handled voluntarily. Usually property, defense, police, fire and most court shit.

For ancaps/voluntarists check out poly-centric law.

There are quite a few ideas mostly based on how people think we can least coerce others with violence and how imaginative they are.

Trade is a technology that has to be developed. If you freeze it then you halt progress. The best we can think of now may not be the best way tomorrow.