I don’t think libertarians really see wage slavery as the worst thing.
I think the fundamental difference is that libertarians don’t care about outcomes. Or, at least they don’t think that they do as long as they have food in their stomach and a barrier against the cold.
In their minds, it’s all about them not being compelled to partake in anything they don’t want to. If that means starving, fine (so they say, and I’m very suspicious of this claim), but at least there was no authority over them.
Most sane people strike a balance between valuing good practical outcomes, and more abstract notions like liberty and justice.
Full authoritarians say that only outcomes are important, that abstract notions like freedom are impediments to the greatest good, and you end up with things like the USSR.
So you’re right that there wouldn’t be a minimum wage… But you’re wrong to appeal to the concept of wage slavery because it presupposes a libertarian values satisfactory outcomes. They don’t.
Honestly there is no talking down a libertarian without first convincing them their lives are worth more than some definition of liberty.
Roads? Slave labor. Taxes? Slave labor. Taxes that fund the police? Somehow not slave labor.
Like you’re not wrong, democrats do advocate slave labor in the form of supporting the prison-industrial complex, but I know you’re not talking about that.
Libertarian thinks he can subsist without utilizing any public infrastructure.
Democrat advocating for slave labor. Nothing new for the past 200 years.
If libertarians had their way, there wouldn’t be a minimum wage and wage slavery would be even worse.
They’d bring back company script.
And then get eaten by bears.
I don’t think libertarians really see wage slavery as the worst thing.
I think the fundamental difference is that libertarians don’t care about outcomes. Or, at least they don’t think that they do as long as they have food in their stomach and a barrier against the cold.
In their minds, it’s all about them not being compelled to partake in anything they don’t want to. If that means starving, fine (so they say, and I’m very suspicious of this claim), but at least there was no authority over them.
Most sane people strike a balance between valuing good practical outcomes, and more abstract notions like liberty and justice.
Full authoritarians say that only outcomes are important, that abstract notions like freedom are impediments to the greatest good, and you end up with things like the USSR.
So you’re right that there wouldn’t be a minimum wage… But you’re wrong to appeal to the concept of wage slavery because it presupposes a libertarian values satisfactory outcomes. They don’t.
Honestly there is no talking down a libertarian without first convincing them their lives are worth more than some definition of liberty.
don’t even get them started on ‘age of consent’ laws, they always seem to bring those up too
Roads? Slave labor. Taxes? Slave labor. Taxes that fund the police? Somehow not slave labor.
Like you’re not wrong, democrats do advocate slave labor in the form of supporting the prison-industrial complex, but I know you’re not talking about that.
I am. ACAB
But you understand that cops, above all else, exist to protect the institution of property correct?
Do they really though with policies like qualified immunity and civil asset forfeiture?
They protect the institution of private property, not any individual’s personal property.
Wut
https://youtu.be/pkEDz2T4GSI
you hate the fire department? you hate representional democracy?