Libertarians are much friendlier with conservatives than they are with liberals, however
I remember, a forum I was part of when I was in my youth had a good number of libertarians. I was on reasonably good terms with a number of them, and thought them genuine, if misguided.
The speed at which they changed their labeling to out-and-out fascists once Trump was elected was… staggering.
That was my experience also. I had a very smart coworker, a scientist, who was libertarian, very anti-police and everything. Then Trump came along and he went full fascist. It was very disturbing, and I haven’t trusted libertarians since.
Note: I’m using libertarian as shorthand for libertarian capitalist, which is mostly how it’s used in the US, though, as noted in another comment, there are other kinds of libertarians, like libertarian socialists.
Its the same all over. Right-wing “libertarians” are just socially embarrassed corporate statists.
Then they weren’t libertarians at all. They were randians
Would you believe there are libertarian communists? It sounds like a contradiction. Old queer couples should be able to protect their Marijuana plants with guns and pay their taxes for welfare.
Or to be more exact: “LET ME BUILD A FUCKING SHED ON MY OWN LAND. ALSO, STOP TEARING DOWN HOMELESS PEOPLES’ TENTS.”
All that being said, the libertarian party has taken a horrible turn and I hate being conflated with a guy who had brain worms.
Why do libertarian concerns always sound like loud petty arguments you would hear at the HOA?
I want to be on the side that’s NOT on the HOA. What about this sounds like I want to police your yard? I’m advocating for personal freedoms. I’m: Pro choice. Pro Marijuana. Pro mail in vote. Pro welfare. Pro camping. Honestly, fuck you for being unnecessarily dogmatic. There are libertarians out there who DON’T say “lEt tHE StaTEs DecIde.”
Well you were yelling about sheds and growing weed. I assume you’re waving a gun around as you type. This is like a stereotypical rant at an HOA or city council meeting.
Speaking of which, here’s what a town run by libertarians looks like:
It would be hard to wave a gun and type, lol. That’s a battle AGAINST HOA and the city council. Also, I don’t identify with them. I’m a libertarian communist, not a “red pilled, tech bro, toll roading, anti-choice,” libertarian. I’ve largely denounced my party. I believe in the ideals, not the party. I don’t think that’s petty. If you do, I don’t think you’re politically active. That’s fine, but you should probably pull your head out of your asshole.
Edit: I noticed you’re editing your comments
Social libertarian is what you are looking for.
🤨
Yes, but the libertarian party of the USA doesn’t adhere to the roots of the party. No need to be so hostile, it was an honest question and the fu very much sounds like "get off my lawn!”
I’m drunk, and I’ll admit I’m being hostile. Also, fuck lawns. They’re a French staple meant to express wealth. They kill pollinators. I just want to build a shed. I like shed.
I’d very much like to learn and talk more with you about the original ideas of libertarianism when you’re sober. Back in the late 90s, before the American Libertarians took over the party and changed it, a friend suggested it sounded like a fit for me. I’d also like to know if any other libertarians who are in accord with the original values have an online space for discussion, and any ideas to reclaim the party mechanisms.
There are very few left. I considered myself a social libertarian for a while but I now just don’t like political labels. They’re terrible for getting a point across.
I’d get into that space too
deleted by creator
Right, this is the part that Libertarians fail to grasp. Liberty comes with responsibility, and responsibility breeds liberty.
In some cultures there is enough civic engagement that they can mostly be trusted to build sheds which don’t become oil soaked termite nests after a few years. People take that responsibility seriously so they have more freedom. In the US, the attitude is almost exclusively the purview of childish edgelords who don’t care that their behavior impacts others, which is precisely what breeds the need for dumb regulations. The regulations for building a shed are exactly as dumb as the people building sheds.
Stfu
Would you believe there are libertarian communists?
There were libertarian communists. Then Murry Rothbard and Ludwig Von Mises happened, and the movement was functionally hugged to death by John Birchers and other neo-confederate freaks.
Now we have the DSA, the PSL, and the Green Party.
Or to be more exact: “LET ME BUILD A FUCKING SHED ON MY OWN LAND. ALSO, STOP TEARING DOWN HOMELESS PEOPLES’ TENTS.”
That’s more old school Spanish-flavored anarchism than American Libertarian-Communism. The Libertarian Communists actually wanted to build communes. And some of them were successful, for at least a little while. You can find small towns sprinkled all over the upper midwest and the Pacific Coast that were started as hippie communes and trans-racial utopian communities dating back to the 40s and 50s, but then got re-absorbed into the national economy over subsequent decades.
Lots of the weirder home improvement laws and residency laws came through as a response to these projects, as Good Ole Boy state governments reasserted themselves over young indie counter-culture communities.
the libertarian party has taken a horrible turn and I hate being conflated with a guy who had brain worms
The official LP also rejected RFK Jr. He’s in with the Reform Party which was Ross Perot’s old party from the 90s and also the party Donald Trump tried to run under back in… I wanna say 2000?
The modern LP (at least down in Texas) is split neatly between the Kathy Glass freaks and the Pat Dixon geeks. A bunch of disaffected reactionary goons too insurrectionist for the Bush Era Republican party on the right and a bunch of NORML loving hippie anarchists on the left. Its actually kinda beautiful to see them all come together and bag on Trump.
If you have to convince yourself that “libertarianism” is the answer, you have bigger issues than weed plants. It doesn’t matter how high they grow…
Is that a global thing for libertarians or good old American exceptionalism?
I thought in other countries, “libertarian” meant libertarian and not “embarrassed conservative”.
I agree with the first part, the second I consider as more belligerent, very unhealed inner child.
Until you get to weed and incarceration
Libertarians being on brand delusional
Libertarians are just Republicans that smoke weed.
We also gamble, respect people’s choice of religion (or not having a religion), respect the woman’s right to choose, want kids to have proper sex ed, etc.
A libertarian on social issues is a liberal who is okay with guns
You say that and then you vote against policies that would actually give people these rights, because too much “government overreach”. Libertarians have a tendency to just trust that people will do the right thing, which is a very immature and naïve way of seeing the world. If Libertarianism actually worked, then we wouldn’t have Billionaires because they would be using those money for the betterment of humankind. But it’ll never work because people are inherently greedy and selfish. Which is why we need government policies that force the world’s elite to put their money to good use.
Billionaires got that way because of housing lobbyists to lobby the government. You think Windows would be so dominant if Microsoft didn’t go out of their way to put it into public schools? You think Walmart would be everywhere without government subsidies?
No, I don’t trust people to do the right thing, especially people in government.
Ideologically, they’re different, but practically, they’re not.
Again, I didn’t vote for Donald Trump last election, but 97% or something of conservatives did,
Yeah, I remember when the libertarians packed an entire circuit and the SC, and then rallied behind the reblican cantidate at a convention.
Take the win. We’ll fight in better times. We got work to do now.
Yea I remember as well. They all vote republican. There is no reality where libertarians come out on the right side of Bush. History has shown you stupid. Keep trying to re-write it.
They definitely don’t “all vote republican”. And I’m. Not sure which bush you’re talking about but if you mean patriot act Bush… You’re kidding yourself.
This day and age I have no way of knowing if your some troll account or not, but in the event that you’re not: libertarian praxis is awful. But there are a ton of folks like myself and others who realize to vote in 2028 there’s only one way this can go. Literally the article. You’ll also find a lot of libertarians who are in favor of things like UBI and a strong social safety net.
And it’s the same as it was when we had gay marriage as tent pole when Democrat cantidate were equivicating: we’ll do the right thing, but no one gets to dictate that because the current situation is not purely a function of external factors. Two things are true: the democratic party utterly failed, and it’s still our best hope for the future.
My local libertarians helped set up pro-choice protests downtown and some of the younger guys did security for the speakers.
Yeah, I’ll always say “libertarian ‘with a little l’”. There’s some great principles there, and certainly a much better (if only because it’s stated) framework to work from, but I do laugh at the memes.
Sometimes it goes right. It was a pleasant surprise that Trump got yelled down so much, but it’s an embarrassment he was there in the first place.
And it’s borderline copy pasta for me, but abortion is an odd one. Strictly because if you genuinely belive a zygote is a human… Well… The rest doesn’t matter. Most people I know DONT belive that, including me, but that will always be the crux of things. But the sort of libertarian “default” is “if I can’t say, I certainly can’t use a gun to force your decision, therefore your independent decision should be protected”.
Yeah. At the 2020 state convention we had a 60ish year old dude stand up to remind libertarian christians to vote no on the abortion shit here.
The internet fucks up perceptions of libertarians to a large degree.
And, yeah. I think the progressive left has issues assuming the worst of people they disagree with.
I mean… I still love em but you don’t have to look far for crazy. That’s the “little l” part. You can absolutely take the best and leave the worst. One of the benefits of our electoral system is if you’re not in a swing state, youre “protest vote” really does matter. None of those folks will win, but notes will be taken. There’s also campaign finance dollars that free up.
And I cannot emphasize the if enough. With what’s coming up you have to weigh that against your certainty your state’s delegates will still ensure a 2028 election. Fun stuff.
Keep trying…
So here’s the thing: I don’t need to, but you do. Anyone I still want in my party understands how 2024 needs to go. Meanwhile Democrats can’t get out of their own way, have a spotty history at best, and continually fail at 85% of the promises that get them elected.
They were given the softest pitches in history, barley squeaked out a win in 2020, and fours years later they’re, somehow, our best hope at getting back to arguing about the best way towards real progress. There is no choice in 2024, it’s that simple.
But I am not the one that needs to “keep trying”.
I can dig it. But you’re talking about party and I’m talking about policy.
The dems have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. But that’s separate from lying the country into multiple wars. It’s separate from the history of conservatism that existed for decades. It’s separate from the “tea party” and all the dirty money that ever gave libertarians air time in the first place.
It’s an argument begging for validity without any actual civil benefits it can point to. You can keep saying how shitty dems are at getting elected. My response is how shitty libertarians are when that they’re in office.
That’s totally fair. I’ll fully concede a huge part of why libertarians have a great track record on principles is because they’ve never BEEN in a position to compromise on them.
But you ask about track record, you mention multiple wars, you could have mentioned a ton of other things dem shot their foot off at…
We need more than two parties. Desperately. We don’t have it so it’s not worth talking about, but it doesn’t change the need. But at the end of the day, the thing I can never get past, despite agreeing with dems on a huge number of things, is there’s no guiding principle.
Libertarian NAP has a boatload of issues… But it’s a starting point to be worked from that supercedes the party. It’s incomprehensible to me running a cantidate who voted to get us into those wars, who opposed gay marriage, and we haven’t even gotten to Biden yet.
Again, there is no choice in 2024. But the democratic party is entirely without principle. There is no way to shift it internally because it has no internal framework that lasts. I pray to a God I don’t belive in it gets us through, but it also got us into this mess and for that it should go.
Such an important distinction I’m sure, as they both file into the ballet box to vote for the Republican nominee.
Wrong, I didn’t vote for Donald Trump and I’m not planning to
You are the exception, not the rule
We have our own party. I voted for both Gary Johnson and Jo Jorgersen in the last two presidential elections. They represent my views just fine. And they both gained more than 1% of the vote, so I am not happy with the libertarian erasure you’re trying to do
Same thing but libertarians are too embarrassed to call themselves conservatives. Or too stupid.
But I’m not a Conservative. I’m pro choice
You can be pro-choice and be a conservative. The divisions between conservative, progressive, etc. are not well-defined, strong boundaries but ideologies. In general if you profess a majority of political opinions that are opposed to your country’s/locale’s conservative policies then it might be hard for you to justify it. But there are pro-choice American Republicans. There are pro-LGBT American Republicans. There are even pro-democracy American Republicans (a shocker, I know).
But I’m contending that American Libertarians (as in the party, not the very vague ideological notion) are Conservatives and very close to American Republicans. They share, in effect if not in stated policy, the same stances as Republicans based on their support for bills and politicians. They are essentially just a slight white-washed versions of Republicans.
A person can be a pro-choice conservative. But if you’re pro choice, pro lgbt, want to legalize all drugs, and didn’t vote for Donald Trump, you’re not a Republican.
You’re not really in line with American Libertarians, either,
It’s plenty in line with the likes of Gary Johnson, or Jo Jorgersen, as in the last two nominees of the Libertarian party
I can’t remember when a Republican candidate sought the Libertarian vote. They must be getting desperate.
Mate, they’re going for the Tankie vote. This shit is going down to the wire.
That fix has been in since 2016
Yeah. It is less that republicans go for the tankies and more that putin and Xinnie The Pooh are behind both groups.
Which is why it is important to always side eye anyone who advocates for not voting or for wasting a third party vote during the presidential election (state and even congress? Go wild. But not for POTUS).
It’s the other way around. There’s a lot of overlap with conservatives and big L Libertarians over idealized “rugged individualism” fantasies. Conservatives like it because it’s an excuse to continue marginalizing historically marginalized groups, and Libertarians like it because it feeds their ubermensch delusion.
So when conservatism becomes unpopular, a lot of those voters do the big L protest vote, so Republicans messaging to Libertarians is really just Republicans attempting to form ranks, not embiggen the tent.
Right but I’ve never seen a Republican presidential candidate actually go to their convention.
Libertarians are republicans who like weed, CMM
They are socially apathetic. To them, they think all social issues and prejudice just magically resolve. They won’t necessarily condone the persecution of, say, lgbtq+ or various other minorities… But they also won’t lift a finger to stop it either. Their goal is to externalize guilt and responsibility.
Generically corporate-regulation apathetic, too. They think corporations will magically do the right thing, as in not monopolize, pollute, depress wages and benefits, etc.
They want their utopia and modern conveniences but refuse to pay for any of it.
Oh yeah they don’t even care about negative market externalities. In their utopia they think corporations in the beeline pursuit of profit will just naturally be compelled
To that I always ask them who would’ve voluntarily promoted EPA regulations on vehicles or safety regulations in such a society? Automobile manufacturers didn’t want to incorporate them as that changes their bottom-line, requires them to re-tool, and raise prices. Consumers didn’t want it either because it would again raise prices while those emission devices reduced vehicle power (my grandpa ripped them off in those early years…).
The only people advocating for such things were scientists and health experts who had the foresight to understand the consequences. That then only came from Democratic institutions mandating such requirements.
Libertarians: create a regulation to stop systemic bigotry? No, the Invisible Hand will fix that. Obviously stores that do want those customers will open.
People with functioning brains: looking at history and blinking.
No you see, it’s those evil regulations that stifle competition. Monopolies definitely wouldn’t form and block out any potential competition.
No, I’m a libertarian who was for gay marriage long before it actually became reality
That’s great but I don’t believe that changes my overarching point.
Interestingly by the core tenents of Libertarianism, segregation to colored bathrooms would still be alive and well, since private property and individual freedom reign supreme. There’d be a similar recognition or lack thereof for things like same-sex marriage or Trans rights.
Taken to its logical conclusion, such a libertarian utopia would be a hodgepodge of private properties with arbitrary and often draconian local laws dictated by landlords. In effect it would probably devolve into something of a feudal system.
Can’t simultaneously have a small toothless government and at the same time one with enough authority to ensure equal rights and counteract discrimination. There’s a reason the biggest proponents of Individual Freedom and states rights tend to be the most backwards, socially.
I don’t personally believe in segregating bathrooms by gender either. Just go into your stall and do your business. If you want to stand up to pee, that can be in a different compartment
But if a business wanted segregated bathrooms for different races, they would get protested so hard they would go out of business. This would be a good outcome since the racist business owner would be ruined.
The problem is it doesn’t matter if you don’t personally believe that. What matters is that a vast swath of the dipshit Southern Confederate culture does, and it would be entirely unenforceable to suggest otherwise under such a Libertarian system where private property reigns supreme.
they would get protested so hard they would go out of business. This would be a good outcome since the racist business owner would be ruined.
If that was the case, then the Civil Rights Act or Emancipation Proclamation wouldn’t have been necessary in the first place. Unfortunately you’d find vast swaths of geographical cesspools where people too unfortunate to be born in that area would be subject to great discrimination.
Emancipation Proclamation is actually a human rights issue. What is the the thing that all libertarians believe? It’s that other people should not meddle in your life. Slavery is the most egregious violation of this short of killing you.
The Civil Rights Act was necessary at the time, but would not be necessary now. Not because there are no bigots, but because the public opinion is against them. Notice the difference: if someone doesn’t hire you because their race makes them uncomfortable, it’s affects you the same as any other rejection. It doesn’t force you to do anything.
By the way, people still get rejected based on race all the time, it’s just more hidden so it’s not like the law solves the entire issue. The question of the matter is whether we should encourage the dumb racists to express that opinion on public. I would certainly want to know so that I don’t accidentally patronize their establishments
Again, your belief is not what matters; what matters is how you enforce aforementioned human rights issues with a toothless government where private property ownership reigns supreme. This is the key hole in your argument you’ve yet to address.
The Civil Rights Act was necessary at the time, but would not be necessary now.
Says who — you? Considering how rampant discrimination and racism still is, I beg to differ. If someone refuses to hire you because YOUR race makes them uncomfortable, that remains utterly unenforceable under a utopic Libertarian society. The key point being: We wouldn’t have ever passed a Civil Rights Act under such a Libertarian society in the first place. And so when another issue comes along just as slavery, segregation, same-sex marriage, trans rights, bathrooms and so forth… Where will Libertarians be? Curiously absent in the fight to enforce aforementioned civil rights. Why? Because the government they believe in literally makes said government toothless against enforcing such laws in the first place. So while you may or may not choose to believe in “socially liberal” things, you’ve constructed a society that doesn’t promote said socially liberal things. To that end, we’d probably still have the Confederacy with slavery.
By the way, people still get rejected based on race all the time, it’s just more hidden so it’s not like the law solves the entire issue. The question of the matter is whether we should encourage the dumb racists to express that opinion on public. I would certainly want to know so that I don’t accidentally patronize their establishments
Of course it doesn’t resolve the issue; that’s like saying “outlawing murder doesn’t stop murder,” — no shit, but it sure as fuck reduces it.
The question of the matter is whether we should encourage the dumb racists to express that opinion on public. I would certainly want to know so that I don’t accidentally patronize their establishments
Yeah that’s no working so hot, considering the damage MAGA has caused out in the open. I’d rather make it harder than easier, if that’s truly what you’re trying to suggest here.
And are generally ok with LGBTQIA+, I think it’s important to note.
Generally okay with, but are they generally OK with legislation protecting those individuals/recognizing them as protected under the same laws that protect for factors of sex and race?
Well, we think bigots should be allowed to come out as bigoted so we can cancel them. If they generally hide and still do it sneaky-like, a law wouldn’t stop them
Yes, with the caveat that libertarianism is opposed to some of those laws for any group.
For example, libertarianism strongly condemns murder, but does not support hate crime laws whereby the murderer’s motive becomes a separate crime provided it interacts with a protected class, such as murdering someone based on sex or race.
Probably yes and no: yes insofar that they are for identical rights for everyone, no insofar that they are for identical rights for everyone.
Oh cool like gamble with these nazis… they might not be socially toxic… generally.
“Okay” with their existence. Not with protecting them from abuse and persecution.
Which about sums up the fundamental flaw with libertarians and why they are basically chickenshit republicans.
Everyone has a right to exist. But you are on your own because I am not paying for that since I don’t personally care about it
It is why the silver bullet is, and always will be, “explain how orphanages work under libertarianism”
At which point you just have people vaguely saying they support other people’s rights while still wanting to pay no taxes, offer no help to anyone who doesn’t directly impact them, and still want to get everything they want.
Libertarianism as a personal philosophy? You are an asshole. Libertarianism as a government? You are basically advocating for all the same shit republicans are but are too cowardly to admit what you actually want.
“Okay” with their existence. Not with protecting them from abuse and persecution.
I guess it depends on what kind of abuse we’re talking about… but in many places I believe just the cessation of abuse and persecution from the direction of the government would be a pretty big positive change. You don’t need protection beyond that, since violence is (and needs to be) already illegal.
It is why the silver bullet is, and always will be, “explain how orphanages work under libertarianism”
Can you elaborate? I don’t get what this is implying.
Libertarians are mostly pro choice, against restricting gambling, against censorship, against mass government surveillance, against NIMBYism, for gay marriage, and trans rights. Find me a conservative that checks even half of those boxes
“The only problem with the KKK is that they smoke weed” - Jeff Sessions, allegedly
Nuance is unimportant to you, CMM
This meme just confused everyone who isn’t American or doesn’t follow American politics.
Especially since Libertarian as a word and definition of an ideology was co-opted by American anarcho-capitalist Murray Rothbard. Prior to that, libertarian meant freedom of will and general liberty, with some association in anarchism.
Yea, that’s what I meant. In the rest of the world libertarian is still a left wing ideology with no connection to ancaps.
what are you talking about, in Europe it’s center right
Libertarianism is a anti capitalist, socialist and very left wing ideology everywhere except in the US where it apparently has been co-opted by insane people with the opposite beliefs.
I have the feeling you don’t know what libertarianism is, or you are one of the guys who dosn’t understand the consequences of your actions
Feel free to read the wiki to get an overview of what happened: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
But basically anarcho capitalists co-opted libertarianism in the US. That effect has not spread to Europe.
so you fall into the camp of not knowing the consequences.
the issue inherently is that the power imbalance of stuff like wealth inequality, coupled with material conditions, always end up curtailing the freedoms of those who are not on top, ironically making them less free (bit of an irony, eh?)
I still don’t understand why you USians insist on calling them “conservatives.” They’re fascists - period.
There might still be some people around in the US you could call conservative with a straight face… but the last time I met one of those online was in 2012. Bernie Sanders is more of a conservative than these fascists are.
Given how much they love property rights, of sure is funny that they stole the terms “libertarian” and “anarchist” from the left. Primitive terminology accumulation, haha.
deleted by creator
