Comments by "Peter deWolf" (@StoneShards) on "A Rebuttal to Nick Fuentes' Disdain for Libertarianism" video.

  1. Ah, yesss, -isms and the label game provide endless opportunities for distraction of the featureless sort. It's..."old tech" in ceaseless regurgitation. If you group a bunch of examples of government and label it "monarchism", does that mean all those examples are "the same"? Maybe some examples serve to illustrate other labels as well. Labels are handy handles by which to manipulate large ideas easily--but you lose detail/resolution in the process of generalization. Rules of thumb are useful, until they're not, when the inherent assumptions comprising the rule of thumb are violated. You can bandy about all manner of -isms in an attempt to organize the history of thought about the subject. But, once you've done that, you don't know anything you didn't know before, despite the subject being bandied about for the last two hundred years. At what point do you say: "This isn't getting us anywhere; maybe there's a different way to look at it." It's just possible that, while the labels of old you are working with do comprise a functional interpretive framework, there is a different framework that does a better, more accurate job of organizing the subject matter. The variously-shaded definitions of these -isms make subject-matter discussion unwieldy--like performing brain surgery with a hammer. Sure, compare and contrast to get the lay of the land, but be aware there's a limit the value of such an exercise.
    1