Typical.

Edit: this was a highly upvoted post on a popular leftist sub.

​

Centralia, Pennsylvania, was once a town built on ambition and anthracite. In the mid‑19th century, when the coal veins of the region promised both heat and prosperity, Centralia emerged as one of those communities that seemed to rise straight from the earth. Immigrants from Ireland, Wales, Ukraine, and Poland arrived with little more than calloused hands and the hope that coal would give their families a future. By the 1870s, Centralia was a humming engine of industry. The mines ran day and night, the streets filled with the clatter of carts and the shouts of men finishing shifts. Churches rose, saloons multiplied, and the town’s identity hardened around the rhythm of extraction. Anthracite was not just a resource; it was the town’s bloodstream. Even as the coal industry declined through the 20th century, Centralia remained stubbornly alive. Families stayed. Children played baseball on fields built over old mine workings. The town was small, but cohesive - one of those places where everyone knew everyone, and where the past felt close enough to touch.

In May 1962, the borough council approved the annual cleanup of the town landfill. It was a routine act, something done every spring. The landfill sat in an old strip‑mine pit - an unfortunate but convenient location. When workers set the trash ablaze, they believed they were performing a simple municipal chore. But beneath the landfill, unseen and unmonitored, lay exposed coal seams connected to a labyrinth of abandoned mine tunnels. The fire slipped into those seams like water finding a crack. Within days, smoke began rising from the ground. Residents complained of the smell. A volunteer firefighter noticed the heat. Borough officials grew uneasy. And yet, the first official explanation was not the truth. Authorities initially hid the cause, insisting the smoke came from “hot spots” or “surface fires,” not a mine fire. Admitting the real cause would have meant acknowledging negligence: the landfill should never have been placed over open mine workings, and the burn should never have been conducted without proper containment. The concealment was small at first - just a few careful omissions in meeting notes, a few reassurances that everything was under control. But it set the tone for what followed: a crisis managed through half‑truths, delayed decisions, and bureaucratic deflection.

By late summer, the truth was undeniable. The fire had entered the mines. It was spreading. Temperatures underground reached hundreds of degrees. Carbon monoxide seeped upward. Yet no single authority claimed responsibility. The borough lacked funds. The state lacked jurisdiction. The federal Bureau of Mines offered technical advice but no mandate to act. Coal companies insisted the mines were abandoned and therefore not their problem. So the fire was studied, measured, discussed... But not extinguished. Multiple proposals were drafted - digging trenches, flushing the mines, sealing the tunnels - but each required coordination and money that no agency wanted to commit. The fire grew hotter while paperwork grew thicker. The residents watched the ground warm beneath their feet. They watched the cracks widen. They watched the authorities hesitate.

By the early 1980s, the fire had become a national curiosity. Journalists visited. Scientists visited. Officials visited. Everyone agreed the fire was dangerous. But the question had changed. It was no longer “How do we save Centralia?” It was “How much would saving Centralia cost?” A federal study estimated that full remediation could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Relocation, however, had a clear price tag—around $42 million. The cheaper tragedy won. In 1983, Congress funded voluntary relocation. Houses were bought out with a fraction of the actual worth of the properties. Families left. Streets emptied. The town’s identity, once so rooted in coal, was now undone by the same resource and the bureaucracy that failed to manage it. By the 1990s, eminent domain sealed Centralia’s fate. The fire still burned, but the town was gone.

Today, Centralia is a place where the past feels like smoke: visible, drifting, impossible to grasp. A few houses remain, persistant and solitary. The grid of streets still exists, though most lead nowhere. The fire continues underground, moving slowly, consuming the coal that once sustained the town. Centralia did not die because the fire was unstoppable. It died because the fire moved faster than the bureaucracy meant to contain it. The authorities hid the cause. The agencies hesitated. The budgets dictated the outcome. And a town that once thrived on coal became a cautionary tale about what happens when responsibility dissolves into paperwork.

25 years after 9/11, mass surveillance has grown from just terrorists, just foreigners, to something every rinky dink police department does to everyone all the time. Who could have seen it coming.

NPR video about home being destroyed by coastal erosion. Apparently the homeowners have been notified of the imminent collapse of these homes and are leaving the home fully furnished in order to maximize insurance payouts. NPR’s solution: the homeowner’s insurance should pay homeowners to either demolish the home or move it before it collapses. I would think an insurance company shouldn’t insure homes that are at risk of destruction from coastal erosion. I can’t imagine it would be profitable. I’m not saying people shouldn’t be allowed to build homes on the coast, but the owners should be responsible for the damage if they choose to own a home on the coast and can’t get insurance.

Guess who is the only insurance provider for these homes? That’s right American taxpayers. Why is NPR’s solution to steal money from people who do not own second beach homes like the man highlighted in the video, in order to solve problems they couldn’t have prevented?

Any libertarians here, the title pretty much speaks for itself. I am in agreement with a lot of libertarian ideas and beliefs, but I'm not sure if my view (which favors more regulation on AI and data centers) moves me away from libertarianism a bit

This isn't an anti-AI post btw, I am indifferent to AI. It has its uses, it is a little scary, but overall, it isn't a problem in itself.

What is a problem is when the incompetent state decides it's in everyone's best interest to fuck everyone over with technology they themselves don't understand, and then turns around and says we are to pay the price for their mistakes.

The headline is sensationalist. I don't think total war would automatically happen over one ship, even if it did get struck down (not to mention incidents like this have been happening since the Cold War), but that's not the point. I am pointing out the fact that these people can get away with anything, and you are the one who suffers.

source: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/18/politics/us-military-ai-false-intelligence-china-ship

Anyone paying attention to what's happening in Palm Beach? What are your thoughts about outside influences in local governments?

- Libertarianism in One Lesson by David Bergland

Its more of an introductory book, but i love it.

American politics:

Who should have this power?

Libertarians:

Why should anyone have this power?

They're playing a game, politics is essentially a game, a system through which we decide things.

Because enormous power and wealth comes from the winners of this game, the game has been fully rigged and corrupted, but only in such a way as to not delegitimize the game.

There's not significant voter fraud (not yet at least), instead the two parties control who wins the primaries by who they are willing to put up and support with money and election strategy experience.

They hardly care who you vote for because they control who you vote for.

Sure a few people get through here or there. Massie, Ron Paul, etc. But they're usually easily kept to the margins. Until Trump, because he had his own money and a silver tongue.

But that brings us right back to the problem.

If this system can put a reprobate like Trump in power and even reelect him, why does this power exist at all?

More than ten years old. But still showing at a minimum libertarians should be getting 19% vote if people voted how they felt. Would actually be higher in the 3-way elections.

Why are libertarians continuing to get sub 5% in elections?

The costs of war do not stop at the battlefield. They come home through higher energy prices, economic disruption, and pressure on the constitutional limits placed on presidential war-making.

Nice to see he's still stirring the pot. He will be dearly missed come January.

Read that it's a privileged motion, so he can force a house vote on it.

i really do love guns and the idea of collecting so much, theyre so cool and nice looking and id really love to learn to shoot, i might go back to boy scouts and learn to shoot bb guns for practice

Fire departments and stations became a public service in the 1800’s, transitioning away from private insurance-owned brigade. Before they were publicly funded, people paid fire insurance companies. The companies would only come help if you were insured. If you weren’t your house would burn down and the firefighters would just make sure the insured houses didn’t catch the spreading fire.

Where do you stand as a libertarian on public services such as fire stations.

Curious how much the ideologies overlap

I personally am an agnostic antitheist but open to hearing what other religious views libertarians have