|
|
|
|
|
|
by hackerman12345
3038 days ago
|
|
|
You are misreading his comments about women and democracy. He was simply saying that certain demographics aren't receptive to libertarians - he was not saying that women shouldn't have the right to vote and that democracy is bad. I daresay it's impossible to read his full writing in question and come to the conclusion one might get from simply reading an excerpt of two sentences that the Politico article wants you to see. " It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will
be taken away or that this would solve the political
problems that vex us." "I believe that politics is way too intense. That’s why
I’m a libertarian. Politics gets people angry, destroys
relationships, and polarizes peoples’ vision: the world
is us versus them; good people versus the other." |
|
|
His essay here is pretty blunt about how he is opposed to democracy. He outlines how to escape democracy (he calls it politics sometimes in the essay and uses the two words essentially interchangeably, because they are the same). He outlines ways to escape from democratic governments, seasteading, techno-libertarian cyberspace, etc, where capital can rule uninfringed by the desires, needs, interests, votes of its subjects.
I was incorrect about his views on women, though, thank you for the correction I retract that completely. He simply sees women voting as a problem because they don't vote the way he wants (they are not by and large wealthy and powerful so do not vote exclusively for the interests of these constituencies, like Thiel) -- and uses this as an excuse to throw out voting altogether. I'm not sure that that's better but my characterization was inaccurate.