I've come to the conclusion that the only way for an individual to truly claim allegiance to a nation is to protect the rights of the private individuals that make up said nation. This is because, as you all know, a nation is simply an amalgamation of individuals, and thus does not exist outside of those individuals and their natural liberties. What do you all think of my assesment?

https://preview.redd.it/7gbn1dsp07bh1.png?width=1340&format=png&auto=webp&s=da349b6ce283e179ca20b06480dd8ae04df55341

https://fightchatcontrol.eu/es/#contact-tool

This shit is complete madness. We'd already be at China's level in mass control. If we add the digital euro to that, we'd have the perfect recipe for the Soviet European Union.

I’ve been doing some reading on the philosophy of liberty and free expression and there is one question I have become increasingly interested in: Why are libertarian concerns regarding free speech almost exclusively focused on the external restriction of expression and almost never on the proactive improvement of the internal ability to excercise this freedom?

This is not a matter of someone deciding what is good and bad expression, but just an observation that a society of legally free but mentally degraded people is not a very free society in any meaningful sense.

JS Mill talks about the development of individuality, human capability and how society is made richer by the diverse experiments of life. But that this can only be done well when the mental faculties and core human abilities are well developed. This is why he believed a strong education was essential in a healthy liberal society.

Further, I believe today, there are a certain set of issues brought on by new technology that makes threats to the internal ability to exercise freedom of expression more pressing. Just to note a few:

• News and social media driving a habituation of emotional reactivity over thoughtful discussion and evaluation of issues.
• The increasingly concerning trend of people outsourcing critical thinking and the ability to articulate thoughts to LLMs.
• The damage to attention span and ability to concentrate as a result of extended consumption of short form content.

I see these as threats to human creativity, critical thinking and originality - the core ability to effectively exercise free action both at a personal and societal level. Perhaps I’m imagining these issues to be more significant than they are, but issues like them related to poor education, growing mental health issues, the weakening or corrupting of human faculties through unhealthy habits - why are these not at least equally as offensive to a libertarian as outside restriction?

What is the libertarian solution here?

Never took the pulse on what this sub as a whole might think of him as a politician. Never seen much about him in any post, comment, etc. I'm well aware of the policies and values in general of Libertarians and how much it conflicts with the economic views of Bernie... even conflicting with a lot of my own. BUT. How does everyone in this sub personally view him?

I myself think highly of him as a diplomat and an "outsider" of sorts. Even voted for him in the primaries against Joe in 2020. Comparatively, he's one of the better officials of our generation. I'd love to see him in a presidential debate against say a Thomas Massie/Rand (or) Ron Paul/Ross Perot/Jesse Ventura type

The post-9/11 security state used fear to normalize surveillance, informants, secrecy, and warrantless access to Americans’ records. Mueller’s record deserves scrutiny, not praise.

its been on my mind lately, i personally dont agree with 'not everyone deserves to live', everybody does, after all its a human right, but the point is, i see my friends claiming they are a libertarian and then agree with things like that.

im not sure what to think anymore