It’s a stalking horse for generic conservatism, where ingroup good and outgroup bad. Then you shuffle cards to form argument-shaped sentences following the word “because.” If they differ from yesterday’s sentences, eh, who cares.
Libertarianism is an approach to policy, not a set of policies itself. Generally speaking, libertarians want to solve problems with more freedom rather than less. They generally don’t think government should make decisions for people, but they do think the government has a role in helping people when they run into problems.
Libertarians disagree with each other on what extent government should be involved, hence why they disagree with each other, but they’re similar in the approach to policy. There isn’t really an in-group or out-group, just people who generally agree that more freedom is better than less.
If you look at the two popular sides of political debate, it’s all about which freedoms we’re willing to give up to accomplish some goal, like giving up guns or privacy. Or in other words, the ends justify the means, provided the means aren’t too bad. In libertarianism, the means are the ends, meaning how we solve a problem is more important than solving the problem, and if the solution to the problem is too intrusive, the problem probably doesn’t need to be solved. For example, let’s say someone decides to tackle gambling addiction. The conservative may want to ban it because gambling is a sin, the liberal may want age restrictions and heavy regulations to prevent companies from taking advantage of people, and the libertarian would maybe say legalize it, and if they’re left leaning, tax it a bit to provide rehab services because anything more is a violation of freedom.
Your opinion isn’t fact. Bro, you are a well-known duopoly worship promoter. I don’t take anything you say seriously. Republicans suck. Democrats suck. That’s my opinion. You have yours. We’re never gonna agree.
Ooh, I’m well-known. Shame it’s for something made-up. I’ve long been an absolute crank about ranked voting and breaking the two-party system.
I have not seen any alleged third party fall so consistently to one side, as libertarians backing republicans. You can glibly denounce ‘both sides,’ but so does one side, and it’s the side y’all routinely vote for. Pretending the outright fascists are only as bad as the ineffectual liberals is standard rhetoric for those fascists. I have no love for the democratic party, but they’re a thousand times better than the bastards currently snatching people off the street. Your beef with people who want cheaper healthcare needs to be fundamentally distinct from your beef with people openly drooling about rounding up sixty million Americans.
Observable reality is not a matter of opinion. On some subjects, you can speak your mind, and be wrong. Claiming any great bulk of self-professed libertarians are-too distinct from and unaligned with generic conservatives is observably wrong. You know who else claims that? Conservatives. The ones who aren’t fully in the cult act like there’s some silent mass of real conservatives, like however we pretend they were thirty years ago, and they’re gonna ride over the hill and put all this extremism behind us. But no. It’s just the extremism, and a facade.
The facade for this group is a lot of high-minded academic language to say, let rich people wield unchecked power. Pleasant-sounding excuses to eliminate societal guardrails against discrimination, poverty, hunger, and child laborers who can’t count to ten.
Actual pragmatic property-fetishism would still acknowledge the diminishing marginal utility of money and tax the hell out of rich people. A handful of guys being able to shape an entire country is antithetical to any visions of decentralized order. Everyone does better when that excess is spent on infrastructure.
Actual economy-uber-alles thinking would demand a high minimum wage, so people can buy things. If a business can’t afford to pay a comfortable living wage, they fail, oh well.
Actual individualist fixation would expect amazing schools for everyone, so no brilliant budding minds are doomed to obscurity. Do you want meritocracy, or do you want to measure how rich some kid’s parents were? Some beat the odds, but most don’t, because that’s what odds are.
A society arranged on your stated ideals would look nothing like what you advocate. What you advocate looks an awful lot like what republicans advocated, before they went mask-off. A gun in every fridge and private school and deregulated everything and tax cuts tax cuts tax cuts. These are just demands from hierarchy, to increase hierarchy.
I’ll keep voting third party. Thanks! By the way, you aren’t just a “crank,” you’re an outright dick to people on Lemmy. I don’t know what your deal is, but you’re easily one of the biggest assholes I’ve ever witnessed on Lemmy. I’ve seen you advocate violence, stalking, troll accusations, etc. I don’t know what you got going on in your real life, but dude…
The problem with that, is on the few times you aren’t ranting or calling people names, I can’t take ya seriously. And I know you’re ok with that too. So all good.
There are fun chaos trolls, ragebaiters, etc. But you, oy. You are the unhappiest person I have ever come across on the internet. And I’m fucking old. So I think you are either fake and you are trying to confuse people because you work for foreign agents, or you have some condition that makes you chronically bitchy. Either way, nah, I don’t believe a word you are saying. And you worship the duopoly.
Libertarianism does not exist.
It’s a stalking horse for generic conservatism, where ingroup good and outgroup bad. Then you shuffle cards to form argument-shaped sentences following the word “because.” If they differ from yesterday’s sentences, eh, who cares.
Libertarianism is an approach to policy, not a set of policies itself. Generally speaking, libertarians want to solve problems with more freedom rather than less. They generally don’t think government should make decisions for people, but they do think the government has a role in helping people when they run into problems.
Libertarians disagree with each other on what extent government should be involved, hence why they disagree with each other, but they’re similar in the approach to policy. There isn’t really an in-group or out-group, just people who generally agree that more freedom is better than less.
If you look at the two popular sides of political debate, it’s all about which freedoms we’re willing to give up to accomplish some goal, like giving up guns or privacy. Or in other words, the ends justify the means, provided the means aren’t too bad. In libertarianism, the means are the ends, meaning how we solve a problem is more important than solving the problem, and if the solution to the problem is too intrusive, the problem probably doesn’t need to be solved. For example, let’s say someone decides to tackle gambling addiction. The conservative may want to ban it because gambling is a sin, the liberal may want age restrictions and heavy regulations to prevent companies from taking advantage of people, and the libertarian would maybe say legalize it, and if they’re left leaning, tax it a bit to provide rehab services because anything more is a violation of freedom.
Your opinion isn’t fact. Bro, you are a well-known duopoly worship promoter. I don’t take anything you say seriously. Republicans suck. Democrats suck. That’s my opinion. You have yours. We’re never gonna agree.
Ooh, I’m well-known. Shame it’s for something made-up. I’ve long been an absolute crank about ranked voting and breaking the two-party system.
I have not seen any alleged third party fall so consistently to one side, as libertarians backing republicans. You can glibly denounce ‘both sides,’ but so does one side, and it’s the side y’all routinely vote for. Pretending the outright fascists are only as bad as the ineffectual liberals is standard rhetoric for those fascists. I have no love for the democratic party, but they’re a thousand times better than the bastards currently snatching people off the street. Your beef with people who want cheaper healthcare needs to be fundamentally distinct from your beef with people openly drooling about rounding up sixty million Americans.
Observable reality is not a matter of opinion. On some subjects, you can speak your mind, and be wrong. Claiming any great bulk of self-professed libertarians are-too distinct from and unaligned with generic conservatives is observably wrong. You know who else claims that? Conservatives. The ones who aren’t fully in the cult act like there’s some silent mass of real conservatives, like however we pretend they were thirty years ago, and they’re gonna ride over the hill and put all this extremism behind us. But no. It’s just the extremism, and a facade.
The facade for this group is a lot of high-minded academic language to say, let rich people wield unchecked power. Pleasant-sounding excuses to eliminate societal guardrails against discrimination, poverty, hunger, and child laborers who can’t count to ten.
Actual pragmatic property-fetishism would still acknowledge the diminishing marginal utility of money and tax the hell out of rich people. A handful of guys being able to shape an entire country is antithetical to any visions of decentralized order. Everyone does better when that excess is spent on infrastructure.
Actual economy-uber-alles thinking would demand a high minimum wage, so people can buy things. If a business can’t afford to pay a comfortable living wage, they fail, oh well.
Actual individualist fixation would expect amazing schools for everyone, so no brilliant budding minds are doomed to obscurity. Do you want meritocracy, or do you want to measure how rich some kid’s parents were? Some beat the odds, but most don’t, because that’s what odds are.
A society arranged on your stated ideals would look nothing like what you advocate. What you advocate looks an awful lot like what republicans advocated, before they went mask-off. A gun in every fridge and private school and deregulated everything and tax cuts tax cuts tax cuts. These are just demands from hierarchy, to increase hierarchy.
I’ll keep voting third party. Thanks! By the way, you aren’t just a “crank,” you’re an outright dick to people on Lemmy. I don’t know what your deal is, but you’re easily one of the biggest assholes I’ve ever witnessed on Lemmy. I’ve seen you advocate violence, stalking, troll accusations, etc. I don’t know what you got going on in your real life, but dude…
The problem with that, is on the few times you aren’t ranting or calling people names, I can’t take ya seriously. And I know you’re ok with that too. So all good.
There are fun chaos trolls, ragebaiters, etc. But you, oy. You are the unhappiest person I have ever come across on the internet. And I’m fucking old. So I think you are either fake and you are trying to confuse people because you work for foreign agents, or you have some condition that makes you chronically bitchy. Either way, nah, I don’t believe a word you are saying. And you worship the duopoly.