The libertarian movement is now irrelevant

adolf512

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
822
#1
They only advocate for freedoms that doesnt matters such as being allowed to take drugs, they have no issues with psychietry of the AoC. I do not remember any instsnce where a libertarian has opposed CPS.

They are really focused on economic issues that doesn't matter that much anyway.



Why are libertarians so pro-drugging?
 
Last edited:

mathmet

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
372
#2
Microeconomics seems to be an exercise in resource allocation, which at a minimal level can be solved by some linear programming calculations (in principle).

Though the big problem is that attempting to do linear programming calculations, is that it generally scales exponentially with the number of variables. So it's basically a waste of time trying to do the calculation if the number of variables is large.

In the case of libertarian style economic theories, it seems like the belief is that the "free market" can solve this mathmatical resource allocation problem completely and definitively.


On the other side of the coin in communist/marxist style economic theories, it appears they simply ignore (or outright disbelieve) this exponential scaling issue in mathematical resource allocation. Every time I asked a hardcore marxist (offline) about this particular issue, most have a blank stare on their faces and have no idea what I'm asking about. The few hardcore marxists/communists who have a mathematics background to whom I asked about this issue, their response was that they believed that P=NP is true and that this exponential scaling is a non issue.

P versus NP problem - Wikipedia
 

adolf512

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
822
#3
Microeconomics seems to be an exercise in resource allocation, which at a minimal level can be solved by some linear programming calculations (in principle).

Though the big problem is that attempting to do linear programming calculations, is that it generally scales exponentially with the number of variables. So it's basically a waste of time trying to do the calculation if the number of variables is large.

In the case of libertarian style economic theories, it seems like the belief is that the "free market" can solve this mathmatical resource allocation problem completely and definitively.


On the other side of the coin in communist/marxist style economic theories, it appears they simply ignore (or outright disbelieve) this exponential scaling issue in mathematical resource allocation. Every time I asked a hardcore marxist (offline) about this particular issue, most have a blank stare on their faces and have no idea what I'm asking about. The few hardcore marxists/communists who have a mathematics background to whom I asked about this issue, their response was that they believed that P=NP is true and that this exponential scaling is a non issue.

P versus NP problem - Wikipedia
The free market is just a form of elite rule (companies governed according to some rules) and survival of the fittest (unprofitable companies go bankrupt).

Often there will be a single company dominating the market for a long time(facebook, mictrosoft, google, etc).
 

Leucosticte

Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Dec 18, 2018
Messages
954
#4
There are still a couple (mostly) uncucked libertarians like Pete Eyre and Adam Kokesh.
 

mathmet

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
372
#5
The free market is just a form of elite rule (companies governed according to some rules) and survival of the fittest (unprofitable companies go bankrupt).

Often there will be a single company dominating the market for a long time(facebook, mictrosoft, google, etc).
In the extreme case of one company owning and running everything in a country, it would be very similar to a communist country when it comes to resource allocation. Instead of a Stalin or Tito, somebody like a Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates would be the supreme leader or dictator.

In terms of the mathematical linear programming problem, these extreme cases of one company owning/running everything in a country and a communist country, would significantly reduce the number of variables in the resource allocation calculation.
 

yman

New member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
26
#7
The main problem is philosophical myopia and maybe the survivorship bias.
They are an off-shoot of the British Enlightenment. The only category of hierarchical opression they can think about is that of the state versus the individiual. They also claim that they can measure and order the world by their empiricist science and synthetic logic. They're tone deaf to the developments of continental European thought for the last 300 or so years (idealism then egsistentialism and the various anarchisms and marxisms). With all due respect to the Anglos on the board, libertarians are only a tolerated group because English-speaking people still rule the Earth and have the leisure to be lazy in thought. This ties in to the second thing, the survivorship bias. Just because libertarian thinking worked for British immigrants to North America in the 18th to 20th centuries doesn't mean that it will keep working in the future but nonetheless that's how humans function they keep repeating what worked in the past.
 
Top