Avatar
Scoundrel
a87b402ac081c8849b9d5bd4e39f2287f25709d3e3f79e784af1e8b38fefbdf1
I don't care what you think of me, only how you came to think it.
Replying to Avatar vic

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq4pa5q2kqs8ygfxuat02w88ezsle9wzwnu0meu7z2785t8rl0hhcsahhd4m nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqxgtlsdpkzvu3n3wn607yhd2hny32g7ep8c20a4r9qgujukssmamq0mr70d It's both, and that's the trick.

A banned book is one your bookstore won't carry.

A "banned" book is one your bookstore will say is banned while placing that very book on prominent display to be sold.

For instance, you won't find a new copy of Camp of the Saints for sale anywhere, and used copies are very expensive (fortunately it's freely available in PDF form with a simple search).

On the other hand, the "banned" book "This Book is Gay" is widely available for sale.

I'm talking about "your local school/bookstore/library's 'banned books' list."

Which definition were you using there?

Sorry, I was at a Christmas party. Also, I like to take time to think of good responses. No guaruntees.

Not really. Most of the time it's just irrelevant. Most of the time Libertarianism isn't relevant. Libertarianism can't make you a good and responsible human being. All it can do is prevent you from being evil. Plenty of Libertarians are ethically neutral pathetic moochers. A Libertarian philosophy isn't enough to explain those losers.

Replying to Avatar vic

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq4pa5q2kqs8ygfxuat02w88ezsle9wzwnu0meu7z2785t8rl0hhcsahhd4m nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqxgtlsdpkzvu3n3wn607yhd2hny32g7ep8c20a4r9qgujukssmamq0mr70d You missed the point. Bookstores like to have display shelves of "banned books" to entice people to read them, thinking that there's something they're not supposed to know, but in reality those shelves of "banned" books serve only to corrupt and debase them.

For example, see this list of "banned books" from Columbia University's somewhat recent article on the topic: https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2023/september/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-book-bans-sweeping-the-us/

Also, it's "discretion," not "disgression."

?name=dutNhrhQf30h9A.png

Fuck... I think I even looked it up too 😫

So... is a banned book list a list of books in your library labelled "banned", or is it a list of books that are banned from your library?

The minimum required to stop them and the maximum that their victims permit me to do.

If I depend on a victim's help in order to catch the perpetrator and if I use that to go beyond what the victim permits, then I would just be stealing the victims right to retribution for myself, and I would be just another person violating some kid's right.

And if I take more action against the perpetrator then what is necessary in order to prevent them from abusing more children, then I'd just be uniquely dependent on the continued existence of child abusers when furthering my goals.

As a Libertarian, the way I see it is that respecting the rights of everyone involved is absolutely essential for figuring out what kind of responses are appropriate, and what kinds of responses would make me into just another sick human being.

What about you? If a misguided child is being abused, would you ever look for ways to exploit and manipulate that child if it might let you get at the abuser?

And do you think that the possibility of torturing or obtaining retribution against abusers creates a kind of goodness that wouldn't exist in a world without abuse?

Shit man, I call myself a Libertarian and I think all drugs are evil. Just because you think someone should be allowed to do something doesn't mean you believe that it's good if they actually do it. It's perfectly consistent to think people should be allowed to say whatever they want, and that they should also be ignored the moment they do so.

Oh, I'm sorry. So what does Libertarianism have to do with this then? As a self-identified Libertarian, do you believe that I respect the kind of hedonism that involves violating others' rights?

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq4pa5q2kqs8ygfxuat02w88ezsle9wzwnu0meu7z2785t8rl0hhcsahhd4m nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqau5ea8kup6utzyfxqjyh233ndzxzde02wqzcqvagawse3yxszztsz9l9qk nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqm8d6pcrjhke48hasqgx7zkgjdt68u60px04frw753697mcmnyr3qdm9w7h nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq04wpju4ltlzknfcdwqeuh6yt9fjcvvg6jaj4jhtehl97fwcxd0wsv0qwdf

> Pah, one can have a productive argument with any person who disagrees and wants to respond.

You must be new. There's a ubiquitous personality on fedi (which you can pretty much cut/paste as though they were poorly constructed AI bots) that just goes into random threads, calls everyone some racial slur (eg. nigger, street shitter, (((whatever))), etc), lobs some ad hominems or other personal attacks, often addressed to their fellow fuckwits instead of the person being spoken of, and then declares it a win without ever even addressing the argument or attempting to understand there's nuance beyond their own existing halfwit bigotry. Their culture is to move around in gangs to show up in a thread so they can bukkake all over the discussion as they wank each other off to the sounds of their own self congratulatory hurr durr's. Hence the term "Don't feed the trolls."

You can try to talk sense with these types of people, but you'll just end up wasting your time as they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

?name=7i5S8At0xqZXGw.jpg

Excuse yourself, nostr:nprofile1qqsdnkaqupetmv6nm7cqyr0ptyfx4ar7d8sn8653h02gazldudejpcsppamhxue69uhh5cts9emkzarrdqq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwd4hhxarj9ec82cspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdu3fkjgm is a fine resident of our Nostr utopia in progress, ActivityPub users such as yourself have to content yourself with getting our posts over the bridge.

I've been around this culture plenty. Funnyjunk.com is not too dissimilar by my judgement, and I was arguing with people there for years. I have been called plenty of meaningless slurs, but I've also been called more personal and well thought out slurs too.

I have plenty of experience arguing on that level. I could probably translate back and forth between any philosophical argument and its equivalent crude personal insult.

Also she(?) is not trolling! Trolling involves making ironic posts in an attempt to measure people's reactions. That's very different from making abrasive posts and generally provoking people. Or even just good old posting controversial thoughts and beliefs, which is what I suspect is going on here.

Pah, one can have a productive argument with any person who disagrees and wants to respond.

I'm not so insecure in my beliefs that I need anyone to change their mind or "admit they lost." Asking questions can be just as satisfying as a good rant. Er, "explanation."

Testing if my post will appear in a community after joining it. By the way, I do not consider myself an Anarchist. I consider myself a Libertarian. I just want to talk.

I have a few questions for Nostr anarchists. What are the requirements in order for something to be considered a government?

My client seems to think I'm posting in /n/Anarchists, but my post doesn't actually appear there. I'm going to consider that a failure until further notice. Trying something else.