1.“Federal agencies have the authority to intervene in protests, picket signs, or blockades. The law is impartial: it must be enforced without exception.”

2.“Federal forces are not required to have judicial oversight for their actions.”

3.“Forces are not obligated to consider alternative entrances or pathways. If the main path is blocked, their duty is to clear it.”

4.“This action continues until the flow of traffic is fully restored.”

5.“To carry out these acts, forces will use the minimum necessary force, which is sufficient and proportional to the situation they are addressing.”

6.“Instigators and organizers of the protest will be identified.”

7.“Vehicles used in the protest will be identified and subjected to citations or penalties.”

8.“Data of the instigators, accomplices, participants, and organizers will be transmitted to the authorities through appropriate channels.”

9.“Notices will be sent to the judge in cases of damage, such as burning flags.”

10.“In cases involving minors, relevant authorities will be notified, and the guardians of these youths who bring them to these demonstrations will face sanctions and punishment.”

11.“The costs incurred by security operations will be borne by the responsible organizations or individuals. In cases involving foreigners with provisional residency, information will be forwarded to the National Directorate of Immigration.”

12.“A registry will be created for organizations that participate in these types of actions.”

  • LeopardShepherd [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Gee, really interesting how libertarian reforms are extremely unpopular and can only be maintained by brutal state violence. Luckily they’re a democracy and not authoritarian communists where the people have no say!

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.

      Libertarianism is about individual independence.

      I just have doubts over how any libertarian would explain these events in particular, so going to search for some amusement in the few ancap TG channels I remember.

      • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.

        Libertarian uses fascist argument shocked-pikachu

        unapologetic, but peaceful and harmless Japan

        History of fascist apologism I see hitler-detector

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          History of fascist apologism I see

          That was in a comment comparing Japan to Turkey, so either you really failed to read anything else or you are expecting others to just believe you. In any case you are a clown.

          • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            What you said is meaningless. Japan isn’t just unapologetic, they’re actively denying that they committed war crimes. They’re also governed by fascists who actively want to build the military back up, so “peaceful and harmless” for now maybe.

      • UmbraVivi [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Individual independence is a nonsensical concept in this context because humans are not independent from one another.

        Private property as a concept is incompatible with individual independence, because its existence is itself dependent on some form of collective agreement. “Ownership” only exists when a group of people agrees that it does and sees a need to enforce it.

        Libertarianism, in practice, is entirely aware of the dependencies between individuals, and what it really is about is tipping the scales in favor of property owners, maximizing the power of the strong over the weak by removing the state’s role as an equalizer and instead turning it into a sole enforcer of private property, at which point it is functionally indistinguishable from fascism.

        • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.netM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Private property as a concept is incompatible with individual independence, because its existence is itself dependent on some form of collective agreement. “Ownership” only exists when a group of people agrees that it does and sees a need to enforce it.

          I get a feeling that person doesn’t know the distinction between personal property and private property.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well, politics are like this. “Stability and anti-fascism” in Russia, “democratic” North Korea, and now a “libertarian” police state in Argentina. Names matter very little.

          Can’t avoid touching on the subject of this instance:

          USSR was also:

          “socialist” (with only state-controlled unions and job appointment for 5 years by distribution you couldn’t refuse after university),

          “Soviet” (with Soviets controlling maybe some local funds and a bit of logistics at best)

          and a “union of republics” (which broke apart the moment its central government allowed some autonomy to those),

          and half those “republics” are still governed by the same people\families\clans 30 years after.

      • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.

        lmao so basically admitting your ideology is predicated on tyranny and the dispossession of individuals for the benefit of a powerful few

        I just have doubts over how any libertarian would explain these events in particular

        Translation: You don’t know how to flower up your disgusting anti-individual rhetoric without rightly coming across as a hypocrite and sociopath lmao

      • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        All taxes ultimate came from the working class who is the one that produce everything. The rich people getting a bigger tax break,on the rare cases this happens, is just a small correction from all the surplus value they capture.

      • iie [they/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation

        on a basic moral level this is an evil thing to want to happen.