Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
shazow
@shazow.eth
While I don't share Erik's world view, I do enjoy his takes and how hard he tries at being internally consistent. Some fun discussion under this one: https://x.com/ErikVoorhees/status/1835019215381627309
4 replies
6 recasts
18 reactions
links 🏴
@links
Honestly sometimes I think the problem is everyone trying to be consistent.
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
cqb
@cqb
I didn't read the whole tweet but I think you can further decompose the 2d graph into a 4d hyper volume. The left right axis seems like it's actually two separate axes for social and economic policy compressed into one. While the authoritarian - libertarian axis could be unravelled into a structure - unstructured axis and a hierarchal - anarchic axis
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Chainleft
@chainleft
Putting Mao/Stalin/Hitler on the same point is insane tho
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Thumbs Up
@thumbsup.eth
Yeah that’s how I feel about Erik too. He often says things that are easy to recognize as half-baked thoughts, already argued expertly in past debates. He doesn’t seem to be looking to solutions outside of the rationale that there should absolutely no authority outside of the inivisoble hand of the market. When challenged about how those markets might already be biased, subsidized, or coerced by the forces of money and of power (not just government, but financial and social) he has no good answers. He doesn’t recognize even in this post the way that both groups he names are capable of both types of coercion he identifies. He reminds me a lot of Dan in this way. Falling into tropes and simplifications about what any given term means whenever he chooses to use it.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
