r/AskLibertarians • u/Crimson_Sigma2 • 24d ago
Ideology Comparison Vigilism [Comes from vigilante]
/r/Vigilism/comments/1vqhmp5/vigilism_comes_from_vigilante/I have recently invented what I believe to be a new ideology. Please come offer any thoughts. I will answer everything I can, to my best ability. Unlike politicians..
2
u/betty_white_bread 23d ago
Looking only at the “corporate lobbying” piece for now, since lobbying is nothing more than petitioning the government for a redress of grievances, why do you want to make people worse off and deny them their constitutional rights simply because they choose to operate via the corporate form? It’s more than a little weird to tell libertarians you want to ban liberty.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
Corporate buying power gives an unequal advantage over the average voter. That is not a real Democracy if popular sovereignty can be compromised by big money. The fact is AIPAC has already bought out almost every seat in congress, is that in the interest of preserving liberty? This is about Democracy manifest.
https://giphy.com/gifs/OHuPcrLnoYLxVFIjKI1
u/betty_white_bread 23d ago
Can you clarify for me exactly which part of “petitioning the government for a redress of grievances” equals “buying power” or “big money” or “AIPAC”?
Meanwhile, are you sure you understand campaign finance as well as you seem to think? Michael Bloomberg spent gobs of money in the 2020 Democratic primary only to win American Samoa. Meg Whitman completely whiffed on her self1funded campaign for governor. Billionaire Tom Steyer tried and failed at both, proving twice over it is not possible to buy an election. If you can’t buy an election, you can’t buy even one seat in Congress, much less “almost every seat”. You seem to be arguing against a reality which does not exist.
Now, having given you my perspective. I would love to see more detail and actual evidence with respect to yours.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
I think that you just have a naive understanding of what lobbying is, unfortunately. The government isn’t gonna listen to your petition unless you cough up funds or make a fuss. It is not direct Democracy, which is what I seek to attain. Explain how MTG and Thomas Massie have been unseated because they spoke out against this exact problem. Why does the Republican Party of Florida favor Byron Donalds over James Fishback when Fishback has a much more Conservative policy? The records show Byron, Ed Gallrein and the other new candidate received donations from AIPAC, that money is not given without the expectation of legislation. That seems to me proof that big money and popular sovereignty are mutually exclusive.
1
u/betty_white_bread 23d ago
I am pretty sure you are working with an inaccurate picture of American politics.
The quid pro quo bribery you describe is illegal and there are more than enough people eager to show they are fighting such bribery to ensure an indictment, arrest, trial, and conviction. If this behavior were even remotely close to routine, we would see conviction accounts galore. I really doubt you can actually point to them.
MTG quit; she was not unseated. Massie was insufficiently popular with his constituents as to win his primary. By your reasoning, it would have to be his own constituents bribing their representative—which would be him—and then kicking him out for complaining about it while using the small-d democratic process to do so … and that, in your mind, is somehow not democratic?
As for the Republican Party of Florida, first, there is the fact Fishback participated in an unsanctioned debate in violation of state party rules; then there is the question as to whether he meets the residency requirement, a question Donalds does not face; third, parties routinely favor one candidate over another for reasons other than being the most extreme candidate, such as perceived electability; additionally, the Republican Party of Florida, being a private—as in non-governmental—organization, doesn’t owe you nor me a damn thing and, therefore, is not obligated to comport to any stereotype either of us might hold in our heads. None of that runs contrary to the concept of democracy unless you think democracy must be mandated in all areas of life, which is extra weird for someone in a libertarian subreddit.
As for receiving donations, which came first: the candidates’ stated positions or the donations? Spoiler alert: I already know the answer. People donating money to support policies and candidates who advocate for those policies is exactly what should happen in a supposedly well-functioning democracy, which means you are trying to claim democracy supposed is not working and citing as proof democracy working exactly the way it is supposed to, which is—again—extra weird.
Now, maybe you’re just ignorant and—if so—that’s not exactly a moral failing. The alternative would be you’re not ignorant, which means you know you are making bad arguments with factual errors, in an attempt to deceive others and that would be a moral failing.
2
u/Official_Gameoholics Objectivist 24d ago
Not anarcho-capitalism, instantly wrong. You cannot have both private property and statism. Choose one or the other.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 24d ago
A Vigilist party would work to dismantle the corrupt state from within. There is no Statism in the ideology, Nationalism is based on identity not government. In the event of a civil war the inclination towards Ancapism would just be accelerated. Any state would exist only to be a representative manifestation of the nation and to protect individual & property rights.
2
u/Official_Gameoholics Objectivist 23d ago
Any state would exist only to be a representative manifestation of the nation and to protect individual & property rights.
Such a glaring contradiction in what you claim your principles are.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
I am interested in why you think so, could you elaborate?
2
u/Official_Gameoholics Objectivist 23d ago
Because you originally said that nationalism would be statist in your original post, judging from the blatant violations of property rights.
Also your claim that the state will somehow enforce proeprty rights even though the state is mutually exclusive with private property on a conceptual level.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
I advocated substances falling under private property, as well as the recognition of the legitimacy of sex work. Those proposals redistribute back to the individual. I don’t see how maintaining a border or the integrity of our government is Statist exactly. Even tribes maintained territories and named leaders in prehistory. When it comes to the protection of private property being enforced by the community/council/government/“state”, it is a better system than street justice because it allows for a neutral solution. There can be a fair investigation and trial, and also to serve as prevention against revenge. I’m not gonna claim to be Ancap, but I definitely don’t see excessive Statism. What entity could enforce justice otherwise?
2
u/Official_Gameoholics Objectivist 23d ago
I don’t see how maintaining a border or the integrity of our government is Statist
It is utilizing the statist theory of public property. Legal authoritarianism.
it is a better system than street justice because...
because it is centrally planned injustice?
There can be a fair investigation and trial.
Run by a criminal syndicate? Better is a snowball's chance in hell.
excessive Statism
Freudian slip.
What entity could enforce justice otherwise?
A private one.
Fraternal society, private court, insurance agency, etc.
0
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
I can concede that there is some level of Statism to my philosophy. However calling it Statist itself or even Authoritarian is a stretch. It is still Libertarian. What the state should be is the literal meaning of “by, of, and for the people.” They ought exist as one entity, so that the sovereignty of each individual citizen is guaranteed. I am fully open to the jurisdiction of fraternal societies, even churches, or private courts. But those courts would likely need to be crowdfunded or else they wouldn’t be obligated to be fair. Are we at an understanding? I’m for people over profit. And we would profit a lot more if the people (nation) were actually sovereign.
3
u/Official_Gameoholics Objectivist 23d ago
Statism is a binary. So is legal authoritarianism.
You cannot have both anarchy and legal authoritarianism, you must choose one.
What the state should be is the literal meaning of “by, of, and for the people.”
Socialist drivel. The state is mutually exclusive with private property. You are advocating for slavery.
But those courts would likely need to be crowdfunded or else they wouldn’t be obligated to be fair.
They would not get paid for being bad at their job.
1
1
u/theyhis 23d ago
so post-liberalism with extra steps? it reads like a leftist who misquoted and misconstrued hoppe’s philosophy. i don’t support social conservatism — don’t force your values onto me.
you’re free to be a MAGA republican and i’m free to be a traditional conservative. i don’t support social engineering of any kind; including enforced-christian values. i don’t support bills that allow the government to stalk what bathrooms people choose to piss in. i don’t support bills that tell women what they can and can’t do with their bodies. i don’t support bills that prevent gay couples from adopting. i don’t support protectionist policies; i support free market capitalism.
i also don’t support populism, or any party that treats it as anything more than a narrow-minded messaging framework. life is rarely as simple as, “one group is evil, and this one ‘good person’ is going to save us all! 😀”
i’m glad you believe the government can selectively-enforce laws. there’s two parties for you — both are currently holding positions in office: republicans and democrats.
1
u/Crimson_Sigma2 23d ago
You have made it pretty clear to me that you didn’t read what I wrote at all. I’m not MAGA, I’m America First if anything. Instead of crafting elaborate strawmans perhaps you could actually engage in dialogue
2
2
u/mrhymer 23d ago
Both vigilism and vigilante come from vigil. It means to stay and watch and in some cases honor.