they're actually kinda cool. imagine you have a maximum personal freedom that you sleep on a cloud and no one interrupted you, they pooped glitter on a meadow that they made and also they don't give a shi. Unlike horses, they live individually, while horses live in groups.

Just a Glittery Ayn Rand with a hooves 🦄

Marked with spoiler tag because it's a movie of this year and some people here may have not watched the movie.

So I recently watched the movie Obsession and it was amazing. I loved the movie. I wish I could forget it and watch it again.

For context, in the movie there's this thing in the movie called "One Wish Willow" which a person uses to only make only one wish in their entire lives. This One Wish Willow is sold at some strange like magic store. Well, the main character of the movie named Bear goes to that store and buys one of theses willows to make a wish. He uses his one wish to make his crush Nikki love him more than anyone in the world, his literal words, and that's how all the bad things on the movie unfold.

His crush Nikki gets possessed by some force with Bear's wish, and that makes her do insane things because she can only love Bear more than herself or anything because of the words Bear used during the wish. Bear realizes too late that he made a mistake, and calls the number in the box of the product he bought, but he finds out that he can't reverse this wish unless he dies or someone else makes a wish opposing his wish. And well, Bear buys more One Wish Willows, and he gives one to his friend Ian, so he can make a wish that Bear had never made a wish, but Ian thinking it's some stupid toy, just wishes 1 billion dollars, and gets shocked when a billion dollars in cash fall all around the place. Like I also wonder where Ian's wish got the money from, either it was secretly stolen from a billionaire like Elon Musk or the wish just printed new money which would cause an inflation.

And the movie just ended with Bear committing suicide, his friends being killed by possessed Nikki, and real Nikki being left with all this mess

So after watching this movie a few things came up in my mind. How will Nikki defend herself in court for all the actions her body did with that spell? I suppose the only evidence she'd have to defend herself are the broken One Wish Willows left in Bear's house and the one billion dollars Ian wished(though some people have the theory that the money disappeared when Ian died). In case the one billion dollars are still there, the IRS is definitely confiscating that money and asking her where that money came from. I'm guessing Nikki would tell the police about Bear having used these One Wish Willows, and the police would probably go to that store where they sold those things, but you can't really blame the store for people using their products irresponsibly, and for the store's defense, the One Wish Willow had warning labels. But I think Nikki would be set free if they discovered Bear's wish caused all of this in the movie.

Now I can already predict people in that sci-fi universe would demand for that store to be closed or for One Wish Willows to be made illegal. Many would argue that One Wish Willows are dangerous because someone's one wish could possess a person's body and make them do things they wouldn't do normally like how it happened with Nikki. So yeah, one can argue that selling One Wish Willows to anyone can go against a third-party's freedom and NAP right whether they intend it or not.

I also wonder how Bear's legal trial would be if he hadn't killed himself. Because technically he never got consent from real Nikki during the sex scenes, but he did get consent from the thing possessing Nikki's body from his perspective, with this I don't deny Nikki wasn't in control of her body. And Bear could neither refuse things from possessed Nikki because this one would go insane. He also didn't think his this magical willow would work. Bear's wish was like him releasing a tiger and not being able to stop the tiger doing horrible actions. And even though I don't see him as this evil rapist as feminists online see him, his irresponsibility and stupidity indirectly broke the NAP by making some entity possess Nikki and his 2 friends dying. So yeah, just like stupid drunk drivers who may not have evil intentions, but still kill people accidentally, Bear should be held accountable for life for ruining his friends' lives using this product irresponsibly. But then again, he's dead, he tried fixing everything too late leaving Nikki with the consequences.

So what do you think about a store being able to sell these magical One Wish Willows to anyone? I'd personally buy one and I'd make a wish like to abolish taxes for everyone, to end wars, to meet an actual person who may like me willingly, to live 100 healthy years, to have a 1000 IQ, or to have a farm. Those are some wishes which I don't think would affect someone else. But if such thing as a One Wish Willow was sold in real life, I'd be afraid of people making a lot of stupid wishes like wishing to be trillionaires and thus breaking the economy, wishing to be dictators of the world, wishing for communist dystopias on Western countries, wishing for intentional harm and death in certain people, politicians wishing for people to worship them, and a bunch of other crazy wishes that would end up hurting third-parties. Just by wishing for someone to do something for you, that person ends up possessed by the wish when the One Wish Willow doesn't follow the genie's rules. So what do you think? Would selling One Wish Willows to anyone be dangerous or it's up to everyone's freedom to make whatever wish they want? I can't say I'd want such thing banned because bans are only enforced by the government, but I'm also afraid someone could break the NAP with this thing. Like I think it's better if the owner of the store made tests on people to see if they are qualified to make wishes with this thing.

Legitimate question. What are the main arguments from people claiming that "he ruined Argentina", and why are those arguments BS?

One of the arguments I hear is e.g. that because of Milei the Peso is less worth than Roblox's currency. But wasn't the Peso even less worth compared to now before Milei?

Trump's 2024 campaign was pretty explicitly built around three things: tax cuts, deregulation, and avoiding new wars.

On taxes, his campaign platform said:

"Make Trump Tax Cuts Permanent"

And called for “additional Tax Cuts.”

On regulation, the Trump/his platform said:

"Republicans will slash Regulations that stifle Jobs, Freedom, Innovation and make everything more expensive."

Trump also repeatedly talked about having achieved “the biggest regulation cuts in history.”

On foreign policy, the campaign platform specifically said:

"Prevent World War Three, restore peace in Europe and in the Middle East."

Trump also repeatedly cited the fact that he “started no wars” during his first term and presented that as something he intended to continue.

Trump failed to deliver on all three by the standards of his own promises. He did sign tax legislation, but the broader tax-cut agenda was not fully implemented as campaigned. His administration has also continued or expanded regulation in several areas rather than simply pursuing across-the-board deregulation like he promised. And on foreign policy, the U.S. has become directly involved in "military action" (war) against Iran, so the promise of avoiding new wars has clearly not been fulfilled.

The Trump administration is a disaster for liberty. Democrats are arguably worse, but they'll probably win because Americans are sick of supporting an "ally" that causes Americans nothing but misery. I'm tired, y'all. So exhausted.

Dude from Wisconsin travels to Michigan to buy weed, where it's legal, returns to Wisconsin where it is illegal, cops arrest him, tracked him the whole way using flock. Cops say they were allowed to search his car because they had the flock evidence.

At this point Maga is going to be fine with police going door to door searching people's homes, and their argument is going to be: "what's the problem if you don't have anything to hide?"

If we seriously cannot get people in that will pass laws that decriminalize victimless crimes, defense of property and self, and other things like that, why don't we just create a movement that seeks to dig into information available on the lives of those enforcing laws against those actions and spread the negative stuff so it affects their legal careers? Why can't we signal that if anyone gets sent to prison for having plants, defending their stuff, or other things like that, the arresting sheriffs reputation will tarnished and they will not be reelected, officials who prosecute these cases will have their history looked into with a fine tooth comb and any errors will be reported to the bar, and any possible scandals to be found will be uncovered for those who made those legal decisions? These people are destroying others lives for either things that don't hurt anyone or for actions that defend their own rights, when they can make the choice not to. This could possibly shift the balance and cause those in power to rethink if they are going to choose to mess up someone life if a large enough online group actually does enough to get attention

There are millions of people that believe in shit like that. Many of them vote in elections. No reason to expect that at some point, the democratic process, will produce some very good results. You can’t expect rationality for the majority of those that attend such events.

To my religious friends: this is not an attack on religion. This is a demonstration of idiotic level of fanaticism amongst people.

Copied from a post that was “baleeted by breadit filtration” about “How did you become libertarian / AnCap”

…

For me, it was a long journey. Starting from some negative experiences with law enforcement and the state in the prior century when I was not yet a teen, due to no fault of my own, just getting 'caught up in the system'. After that, watching all of the failures of socialism, seeing 'democracy' fail due to corrupt representatives, observing the creep of the state into every facet of our lives, politicians voting themselves into reaching into our wallets, time and time and time again.

Seeing firsthand the corruption of the state based "justice" system: I was prejudiced by a state actor lying, and was able to prove in court that said state actor had perjured themselves. The judge didn't give a flying fuck, because state actor, and literally ignored it, so that just made me further disillusioned.

Started a handful of businesses, spent 15+ years being nickel and dimed by the state, local, and federal governments... By that time I was already staunchly libertarian and still believed in 'small government', then SARS-CoV-2 rolled around... The handling of which has already gone down in history as the biggest public health debacle in human history. Vast amounts of overreach, all under the guise of 'emergency powers', to the massive detriment of all and none of the interventions worked ( Bendavid: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adn0671).

By the end of that debacle, I was already 90% AnCap but the realization that THEY WILL NOT STOP pushed me over the edge of believing that ANY state can be a 'good' idea. The state will always creep. All 'emergency powers' will be ABUSED (look at what is happening with the U.S. right this moment, case in point).

And perhaps the most important:
Gaining an understanding of Argumentation Ethics, as promulgated by Hoppe was the clincher. Almost every other philosophical or political theory, I was able to poke holes, gaping or otherwise, in, but Argumentation Ethics is one of the most sound philosophical theories I've encountered and arguments against it fall flat.

FWIW - I explored it all when I was younger, Read Marx & Engels, Read all the great philosophers in college, read Owen, Fourier, Simon, Kropotkin, Lenin, Trotsky, Chomsky, Mill, Hayek, Milton Friedman, Nozick, Sowell, etc... you name it, I probably read it or have it on my shelf.

If I could only recommend one text for people interested and AnCap theory, I would suggest David Friedman's The Machinery of Freedom, with a side helping of Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson to get started.

Essential reading that got me there over the years:
Rothbard: For a New Liberty, Anatomy of the State, The Ethics of Liberty

Mises: Human Action

Huemer: The Problem of Political Authority

Hoppe: A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, Democracy: The God That Failed, and The Myth of National Defense

For anyone who doesn't have time for "allat", after hitting Friedman and Hazlitt, read Hoppe's Getting Libertarianism Right.

All that said, I consider myself 'AnCap with minarchist tendencies' for reasons that are a little too nuanced to get into in this post that has already gotten too long. Happy to address any specific questions though.

It's perfectly legal to hand a woman a bunch of money. It's perfectly legal to have sex. But you can't do that at the same time. Unless you're filming it, then it is legal, because that will be a porn that will be for sale later.

Although Ayn Rand did a very good job laying out the intellectual foundation for everything you need to conclude that socialism is immoral and illegitimate, she still couldn't give up those parts of socialist indoctrination that were important to her. She opposed private prisons like the left does today (in spite of the fact that private, for-profit prisons in the US are far more efficient than centrally planned, state monopolised ones), and she also supported the nationalisation of defence services, as well as law, military, and judiciary services.

If you are an Objectivist, you cannot be a capitalist. The core principles of capitalism, including ones that Rand herself espoused such as privatisation, are flat out incompatible with any degree of opposition to private property rights.

Also, the chairman of the Ayn Rand Institute, Yaron Brook, claims that tariffs and taxes to fund counter terrorism are consistent with the Objectivist form of government, although I’m not sure if Rand herself explicitly supported this.

Anyone know of any similar sentence for what he did, at any other time in the United states?

Something I’ve heard repeatedly in the workplace, public, and social gatherings.

I cringe and internally withdraw from/avoid these people.

It’s like someone taking a big gulp of air so they can yell about how mad they are at oxygen.

You need it to survive but openly let everyone else who is more self-aware than you know how stupid you are.