• @lath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          No idea. Never met a libertarian.

          No realistic society can satisfy everyone, because when it comes to individual desires, “we the people” falls apart.

          • @grrgyle@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            16 months ago

            How about a society that isn’t predicated on the exploitation of others?

            Some societies are objectively more pleasant to humans than others, otherwise we wouldn’t strive at all

            • @lath@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              16 months ago

              Any society needs resources. In order for a society to grow or maintain itself, their consumption of resources must not exceed the production of it. Should we pursue a society that doesn’t depend on the heavy exploitation of resources, it would mean to severely limit the reproduction of its population within the society’s means of sustaining them. Our planet does not have the capability to sustain our current 8 billion population.

              Many of us will die and after that many would be restricted in their rights for procreation.

              As such, while those societies might be pleasant for some humans, the ones it needs to get rid of to achieve its desired status won’t be too happy with it needing them gone.

              • @grrgyle@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                16 months ago

                I think it’s doable. Sure we won’t have so much cheap crap in the north, but no one needs to starve.

                • @lath@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  26 months ago

                  It might be. Depends on the people really. Hopefully there will be a good example to follow.