I've always been more of a reader and theory nerd than anything. I have protested in the past through groups like YDSA but ultimately I wasn't as active as I should and could have been. Protests, canvassing and mutual aid are probably not enough.

I'm a recent college grad so I did that stuff at my school. I'm back home now but I don't know any activist orgs in my area cause all my friends were through uni lol.

I did some looking and it seems that groups like Food Not Bombs aren't particularly active? I tried signing up but the latest their schedule went was March 2024.

I'd like to get more involved with libsocs or mutual aid organizations in my area and start organizing. I don't know that many lib socs here and I'd like that to change. Community is more important than ever.

So if anyone is in Chicagoland (I don't want to be more specific on the internet, especially given recent events), I'd love to connect.

Hell I'd love to do a theory reading circle or something if nothing else. But a 2nd trump term is going to be bad. And I want to be part of the move to help people when shit hits the fan.

Hey all, so I know you've probably seen me here & there. I got banned from 2 other Libertarian subs, r/Libertarian, & r/LibertarianMemes or whatever they're called. I've considered myself a centrist Libertarian up to this point, leaning capitalist. The moment my mom told me I had until December 31st to find a new place to live, I began to panic. I don't have money to afford rent. I don't have any capital worth more than 200 dollars total. Then the election came. I'm a Trans Woman in one of the two states that didn't have a single blue county, Oklahoma, so you can imagine how I felt once Pennsylvania got called. I work 2 jobs & only get 400 dollars after all car bills are paid, & that normally goes to rent. I've been looking into land in rural areas of blue states into building a shared income shared debt commune based around an adapted form of Mutualism. Now, as I said prior, I've considered myself a capitalist Libertarian up to this point. Mostly a live & let live, get the government out of my life, & any business that wants to take my rights away, take away it's existence. This form of Mutualism that I've processed seems best for me now

• Each person gets land. Personal property to do whatever with. Living, leisure, doesn't matter, nobody gets a say except the person in charge of the land

• People are encouraged to develop their own businesses & keep them self sustained. Selling outside the community to aid funds

• 100% of all checks are deposited into a bank or safe, where every single transaction is made public, so it's be digital payments, to keep a trail

• All bills are paid for the citizens. Shared income, shared debt

• Each citizen would be given a weekly budget best for wherever the commune is

• Citizens can buy private property, but with a supermajority agreement, so can the commune for public use

• Everything leftover is repaid to citizens fairly, but the commune keeps 5% of leftover funds to keep Everything running. Roads, and the such

There's likely other things about how it would run, but that's the basic bits I remember

Stay safe Americans. These next 4 years will be rough

Now that trump is planning to put rfk jr in charge of medicine my anxiety has skyrocketed to inhuman levels, even though my psychiatrist told me that his policy is only going to focus on food, I'm still worried he's going to try and ban adhd meds (I take adderall) and he'll try to get us to go to these wellness farms, why are people saying this is a good thing when it's very obviously unconstitutional?!

'First they came for the socialists'.....aw fuck!

Project 2025 is coming.

- What if the Nazis had social media where we all self-identify?

We make is easy for them. We don't wear Maga hats, we post our hats online instead. Go back ten years and some of my tweets could be considered seditious. These would not go well at trial...and even worse at one organized by patriotic kangaroos.

I believe we're fucked if we think 'leftism as usual' is gonna cut it.

Debate club is over, for me at least.

The existential threat is now very real.

If you're not thinking of self-defense scenarios that let you legally walk away, then I think you may be underestimating the threat that is coming. Remember to record incidents with your phone...bring all the evidence of your innocence you can.

My plan remains:

- give $1,000 in Bitcoin to the ACLU on Jan 6th

- buying a sailboat and piss off for the next four years in the Caribbean. I'm retired and can do it, so I will. I was planning to go sailing anyway, this just puts a hard GTFO date - Jan 6th 2025.

In the meantime, this leftist and non-believer is going dark.

Good luck...but we both know it ain't about luck, it's about planning and executing to the plan.

See you in the FEMA camps if this all goes wrong.

I don't understand this stupid idea that "leftists are back because of the infighting they're having in their circles,". I've heard this thesis SO many times, in anti-leftist and even leftist circles. But no one asked a question, do we actually need a "leftist unity"? What I'm saying is that these people imagine Libertarian Leftists (basically actual leftists) going hand-in-hand with tankies, authoritarian "communists" who call for gulags and praise dictators. Like, for what reason are we SUPPOSED to be in "unity" with them. I totally see eg more Reformist (Democratic Socialists, Liberal Socialists) leftists collaborating with Libertarian Socialists (Anarchists), Council Communists, and similar, to achieve the common goal while also remaining diverse. The ideas of "Authoritarian left" are alien to us, they want a police state with a dictatorship, they're trying to justify genocide, and economically aren't even socialist (What do they have is State Capitalism). When I explain this to the "leftist infighting"-people, they are saying to me "sEe WhAt i MeAn?!?! INFIGHTING!". This is a completely braindead take. Like, No one has ever said the same shit about rightists. Where's the Rightist Unity? Why are you constantly infighting? Why are liberals not in unity with fascists? Sounds weird? It sounds similarly weird for a leftists when one talks shit about some mythical Leftist unity, without elaborating why is it even SUPPOSED to be a thing.

It baffles my mind, who the fuck even started this idea of a leftist (or to be more accurate leftist & tankie) unity? Why is it presupposed that we should go hand-in-hand with those self-decribed "leftists", who advocate for red tyranny? Is it a burden for us leftists, to be forever associated and tied with them? It is clear that they want to institute oppressive regime, and Libertarian leftists (usually) advocate for freedom, without the state, capital, the police, be it under the rule of fascists, liberals, or tankies. What unity are we even talking about? I would take a step further and say they aren't leftists at all! So, of course we need a leftist unity, but as the tankies aren't leftists, they're not in our team. And anyone who is going to talk shit about the "Leftist unity/infighting" let think with their head. This term, "the Left", is used to refer to almost any kind of ideologies, even liberals, according to Americans for example, are leftists. And those who call for Leftist unity oftentimes include tankies under that label. And the other point is, the Right is not united as well. Even this Trump vs Harris beef is a perfect example of rightist infighting. It works either way, people are different, people have various political views, not all of them are similarly okay, it is a known fact.

Rant over :)

I consider myself a leftist, but also I believe that religion should be fought against by the government. I think this mainly because I consider the act of spreading religious belief by parents to children, who are biologically incapable of rational and independent thinking, coercive and extremely immoral. I think this is such an important problem that it should be addressed with government policy aimed at fully preventing it, which would in practice means a complete prohibition of child baptisms, taking children to church, religious clothing, text and symbols worn and displayed at home and attempts at convincing children that religion is true.

Is such policy compatible with libertarianism considering that even though it is an infringement pm some freedoms it's preventing a very immoral act?

I've made a post about this before on r/Anarchy101, asking about the difference between true anarchy and direct democracy, and the answers seemed helpful—but after thinking about it for some time, I can't help but believe even stronger that the difference is semantic. Or rather, that anarchy necessarily becomes direct democracy in practice.

The explanation I got was that direct democracy doesn't truly get rid of the state, that tyranny of majority is still tyranny—while anarchy is truly free.

In direct democracy, people vote on what should be binding to others, while in anarchy people just do what they want. Direct Democracy has laws, Anarchy doesn't.

Simple and defined difference, right? I'm not so sure.

When I asked what happens in an anarchist society when someone murders or rapes or something, I received the answer that—while there are no laws to stop or punish these things, there is also nothing to stop the people from voluntarily fighting back against the (for lack of a better word) criminal.

Sure, but how is that any different from a direct democracy?

In a direct democratic community, let's say most people agree rape isn't allowed. A small minority of people disagree, so they do it, and people come together and punish them for it.

In an anarchist community, let's say most people agree rape isn't allowed. A small minority of people disagree, so they do it, and people come together and punish them for it.

Tyranny of majority applies just the same under anarchy as it does under direct democracy, as "the majority" will always be the most powerful group.

Where do you draw the line between the two, and why?

Full disclosure up front: if you want to vote for Harris because you don't want Trump back in office, do it. Don't let a redditor stop you. That's your choice, and I can not blame you for making it. That said, we do need to bear in mind that the Democratic Party is awful. When you stop using Republicans as the only metric to compare them to, there is no metric by which they are anything resembling any form of leftism or libertarianism.

Of course, the bit there about comparing them to Republicans is pertinent to an election where they're the only two viable choices. But I think my point is best summed up in the following question: if the Democratic vote is guaranteed because the opposition is worse, what reason do they have to improve?

Now, I don't think that they'd dare getting any worse. If they get any worse, it won't be such an obvious choice to vote for them for harm reduction. However, their current model is not sustainable. It isn't sustainable for them to keep ignoring renewable energy, or public transport, or police reform, or the wellbeing of workers, or not giving Israel military aid, or any of the other bad shit they're already doing. And if the only thing they have to do to get voted in is keep doing all that while Republicans do all that and more, they will never stop doing it. I simply propose that harm reduction, for enabling these practices, is not sustainable in the long term.

So, I'm American for context, and an ex straight up libertarian. But I found them too optimistic about the private sector's ability to create change in some areas. So, I'm extremely diehard civil libertarian, I wanna bring the government's overall power way down, and I want them to do less things, namely protecting people from violations of rights. But I also believe that labor rights are among those, as in a market economy, businesses are also a massive center of power and hold direct sway over a person's livelihood and so they should be mandated to act ethically towards workers. So I believe in strong strong labor protections. The government's one other job to me, is to have a competent welfare state (in instances where doing so would be an improvement over market forces) that is as robust as circumstances will allow in order to ensure the highest standard of living. I also would like to see businesses over a certain size be run by workers. Is this left libertarian, and is there more of a specific term for this? Property wise, I have no real issue with the current state of private property, except i do believe that the government or society should scrutinize landlords. Idk how yet though.

Petition for the removal and arrest of Governor Mike Parson for his role in the death of Marcellus Williams. Ignoring the lack of evidence of William’s involvement in the death of Lisha Gayle and the pleas from Lisha’s family and the persecutor to spare his life must not go unpunished.

Here’s the Petition

I listen to Cool People Doing Cool Stuff. Margaret Killjoy examines history from an anarchist perspective. Entertaining. Margaret hates tankies (for good reason, history) and so do I.

Looking for more.

Can you help me out?

Thanks in advance.