Ask the reformed peaguy something.

[Jack]

I'm a minarchist.

Interesting. How does that philosophy apply to federally regulated health and safety organization such as the FDA and OSHA? Nothing read seems to speak to public safety outside of physical and legal protection from aggression. Also, is that philosophy only specific to the federal government, or is it also opposed an individual state or municipality's responsibility to provide education and social services to those who might not otherwise afford them?

[Dirty Big Yoke]

incel is unoriginal too so I was just keeping things dumbed down you your level. And GOD have you become fucking dumb as shit nowadays. It's to be expected when you become "woke".

Not really making a joke by saying you're an incel, but okay. 

I feel sorry for you and your left hand. How many times do you wank off to Ayn Rand before you go to bed?

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

MGTOWs are generally misogynistic losers. As is most of the manosphere. A bookstore near where I work had to put up signs to ward off PUAs (one of the dodgiest parts of the manosphere) because it was near a PUA "school".

Black pill incels mostly hate themselves rather than women.

I don't think Pappy is an incel, it's more a case of needing to be secretive about his preferences.

[Walkie]

Brexit was the best thing the UK has done in recent years.

The EU has become the 4th Reich.

Excellent contribution, Scrap. What's next, muslims are bad?

Predictable fash cunt. 

FFS. Scrap might be a fascist,

In which alternate universe am I a fascist?? 

I've been an advocate of individual freedom and liberty since day 1.

Many people on this board are fascists compared to me because they advocate collectivist policies and mindset.

I'm a minarchist.

Don't ask me Scrap.  I was just challenging wretch to present some actual evidence for that propoposition. And  if he did, I failed to notice.  I dunno what it means in your neck of the woods, but  "might"" means  "maybe" on my side of the pond.  Which means I didn't feel inclined to venture an opinion. I'll let the pair of you get back to your fight , now.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

Scrap is guzzling the libertarian kool aid. Which is peddled by corporate funded groups which are well served by the "government bad" agenda, when in reality they want government to serve their interests (which governments increasingly do) while keeping the masses misinformed and tamed.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

The only non-cringe variant is libertarian socialism 

(I'm more of a demsoc doe)

[Jack]

the libertarian kool aid.

Gave up some time ago trying to understand by reading what libertarian even is. There's too many schools of thought spanning across the political spectrum to ever feel like really getting it. Although encounters with people who claim to be libertarian is different, because what actually seemed important to them was personal liberty based in freedom from government controls which basically protect people from themselves. That's hard to argue against.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

The difference is the likes of minarchists/ancaps want to be anally raped by corporations with minimal to no government control, while the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

I'd say I'm more demsoc as I still feel some level of government is needed to ensure a working democratic system, but married with socialist ideals. It also needs to go through a social democracy stage to "wean" society off capitalism. This is the complete opposite to what is seen in the previous USSR, China etc. as they are authoritarian and state capitalist at best.

[Jack]

the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

That's a bit vague, so similar question as given to Scrap. What government control over the means of production? How does that apply to things like federal Environmental Protection Agency standards, or the Department of Labor standards for worker health and safety, minimum wages, and unemployment insurance?

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

That's a bit vague, so similar question as given to Scrap. What government control over the means of production? How does that apply to things like federal Environmental Protection Agency standards, or the Department of Labor standards for worker health and safety, minimum wages, and unemployment insurance?

If the government controls the means of production then it's not socialism. It's state capitalism. The USSR was state capitalism.

Environmental and safety regulations are regulations, not control. Wages and unemployment insurance are not an issue when workers own and control the means of production for the benefit of workers rather than for the benefit of a wealthy few.

That's ^ the actual leftist view. I'm more a centrist, like Bernie Sanders.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

the libertarian kool aid.

Gave up some time ago trying to understand by reading what libertarian even is. There's too many schools of thought spanning across the political spectrum to ever feel like really getting it. Although encounters with people who claim to be libertarian is different, because what actually seemed important to them was personal liberty based in freedom from government controls which basically protect people from themselves. That's hard to argue against.

libertarianism sounds good (to some) in principle, but it's actually a just  s Trojan horse for oligarchy in practise.

[Jack]

the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

That's a bit vague, so similar question as given to Scrap. What government control over the means of production? How does that apply to things like federal Environmental Protection Agency standards, or the Department of Labor standards for worker health and safety, minimum wages, and unemployment insurance?

If the government controls the means of production then it's not socialism. It's state capitalism. The USSR was state capitalism.

Environmental and safety regulations are regulations, not control. Wages and unemployment insurance are not an issue when workers own and control the means of production for the benefit of workers rather than for the benefit of a wealthy few.

That's ^ the actual leftist view. I'm more a centrist, like Bernie Sanders.

I know, but my whole life on the internet people keep bringing it up as if they live in a country where the government controls the means of production. It's hard to know what they're even promoting or advocating. What government control then? 

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

That's a bit vague, so similar question as given to Scrap. What government control over the means of production? How does that apply to things like federal Environmental Protection Agency standards, or the Department of Labor standards for worker health and safety, minimum wages, and unemployment insurance?

If the government controls the means of production then it's not socialism. It's state capitalism. The USSR was state capitalism.

Environmental and safety regulations are regulations, not control. Wages and unemployment insurance are not an issue when workers own and control the means of production for the benefit of workers rather than for the benefit of a wealthy few.

That's ^ the actual leftist view. I'm more a centrist, like Bernie Sanders.

I know, but my whole life on the internet people keep bringing it up as if they live in a country where the government controls the means of production. It's hard to know what they're even promoting or advocating. What government control then? 

In reality, crony capitalism means th sat those who own the means of production effectively control both major parties in a typical 2 party system. Not the other way around.

[Jack]

the likes of libertarian socialists are more into worker co-ops, handing over the means of production to workers etc. with minimal to no government control.

That's a bit vague, so similar question as given to Scrap. What government control over the means of production? How does that apply to things like federal Environmental Protection Agency standards, or the Department of Labor standards for worker health and safety, minimum wages, and unemployment insurance?

If the government controls the means of production then it's not socialism. It's state capitalism. The USSR was state capitalism.

Environmental and safety regulations are regulations, not control. Wages and unemployment insurance are not an issue when workers own and control the means of production for the benefit of workers rather than for the benefit of a wealthy few.

That's ^ the actual leftist view. I'm more a centrist, like Bernie Sanders.

I know, but my whole life on the internet people keep bringing it up as if they live in a country where the government controls the means of production. It's hard to know what they're even promoting or advocating. What government control then? 

In reality, crony capitalism means th sat those who own the means of production effectively control both major parties in a typical 2 party system. Not the other way around.

Yes, but the fundamental basis of libertarian seems based in minimizing government control; they don't all agree on capitalism but do seem to agree on that. It's hard to understand what any position along the libertarian spectrum means by government control. The biker opposed to local helmet laws I completely get, but when it comes to bigger issues it's all very vague to me.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

In a libsoc system, stuff like wages, workers rights etc. are determined by the workers themselves rather than a centralised government. They could even appoint representatives to enable this on a larger scale, but it's always done in the interests of the workers. I personally think this may not work very well unless it was a long term goal, hence my desire to keep a government in place to ensure a democratic system and to help enforce standards in workers rights etc.

They would also all share part of what company they're working for - there would be no "boss" so to speak hence the co-op aspect, meaning they all get a direct say and slice of whatever the company makes in terms of money. It's basically democracy down to an industrial level.

Worker co-ops already exist and have been fairly successful so far (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation). They're much less likely to go bankrupt/close down, more resilient to economic problems and income can be on average higher. Pay inequality is much lower too.