@sculd
Human societies have periodically tried Plutocracy. It never ends well, usually ended in warlord periods, famines, servility for the masses, and mass slavery.
No society should accept billionaires. There are so many other people who are in dire need. It makes zero difference if they have a billion or a 100 million.
The only libertarian I personally know is anti-LGBT+, just not as rabidly outspoken about it as a “regular” conservative. He’s the sort who’d be happy with gay people being murdered on the streets as long as he doesn’t have to do it himself
That is my observation as well. When it really comes to personal liberty they don’t really care. Remember that libertarian tech bro like Peter Thiel (who is gay btw) somehow thought the world is “too woke” and continues to fund conservative politicians taking away gay rights.
Of course “libertarian” here is code for “oligarchy”, because they know modern libertarians in the US are aggressively apathetic, will let them get away with anything, and thus form a perfect base to appeal to and dominate.
Perhaps they can take all the asshole Republicans (leaving the reasonable ones…I know, not many left) with them and we can be left with a society that doesn’t suck and is instead filled with leadership that may have opposing viewpoints, but are willing to compromise — like, you know, mature, scientific, educated adults would.
I feel like they are more dangerous than oligarchs.
Look at Russian oligarchs. They don’t try to change the world. They know they are not welcomed so just buy properties at London, buy yachts, etc. and then enjoy what they have.
Tech libertarians seem to view themselves as savior of the world and attempts to change it (for the worse).
Add that whiff of eugenics from the pronatalism mixed with the longtermism and, if they get what they want, we have something closer to good old blue blood monarchs.
Srinivasan has floated the car-free Culdesac private community in Tempe and the Peter Thiel-backed Próspera in Honduras as examples of currently-existing proto-Network States.
“Suppose you found a new startup society like Culdesac on the basis of car-free living…which is an innovation in parallel transportation.
Maybe in a twisted thought process: privatized public transport for the masses, and because the rich have no actual restrictions in reality, I’m sure they can drive a car if they want to.
The basic idea is that the West has declined irrevocably, beginning with what Srinivisan calls the birth of the centralized state that disempowered wealthy industrialists with antitrust laws, securities regulation, central banking, and adversarial journalism. Now, the thinking goes, we’re on the backswing with wealthy individuals reclaiming their power over supposedly corrupt public institutions, and we have the internet and its currency—Bitcoin—to lead us out of the darkness.
So the billionaire techbros feel powerless (wtf) and are offended by criticism (oof) so they want their own techbro dictatorship with no free press. Also please no peasant to support, only exploit. Got it.
I pull the same quotes you bolded to rip into that. They’re about to rediscover things like pricing cartels, company script, and child labor. Either they all pool all of their money together and collaborate to take advantage of everything together or they fall apart as they get fucked by each other and start reinventing the same rules we’ve made over the last several centuries. I kinda feel like the latter is more likely given how much ego all these coffin dodgers have and how close pooling resources + working together for the common good is to nasty things like socialism.
vice.com
Newest