Why is libertarianism a bad ideology? I will ignore all bait.
Also inb4 someone mistakes libertarians for anarchists.
>>78995518
its not.
>>78997275
It seems like most of pol hates it so I'm looking for arguments.
>>78997620
You're certainly right that /pol/ hates libertarians. Mostly the left-wing ones. You and I are in the same boat.
>>78995518
Because some libertarians are cunts
Libertarianism isn't a bad ideology. "Left libertarianism" is though. You see, what people would call "right" libertarianism is the only true libertarianism. Leftists tried to hijack the ideology just like they did liberalism, so of course people who larp nazis see these leftist degenerates and blame all of us good virtuous paleolibertarians.
>>78998111
can you explain what "left/right libertarianism" is?
>>78998111
I see. Makes sense.
>>78998504
Yes I'd like to hear that too.
>>78995518
Libertarian Socialism (the original meaning) is great. American "Libertarianism" isn't.
>>78995518
>open borders
>>78995518
Main problem is the entirely ideology is slow to organize well, so politically they're pretty weak.
Those that do organize politically tend to be the wackos. That doesn't help things either.
Just wanting to be left alone isn't enough anymore, it's a much smaller world.
>>78995518
Who's going to maintain the roads?
Libertarianism doesn't work because the average person is stupid, and needs leadership. It may sound harsh, but it's the truth.
Because the libertarian party in the USA is fucking garbage and a joke
>>78997729
>You're certainly right that /pol/ hates libertarians.
lol how things have changed in just a couple years. /pol/ used to be almost universally libertarian and loved Snowden and the Pauls like they were saviors to mankind. Some people still like Ron and Rand here, but not as much as back then.
>>78998575
You got it backwards commie
>>78998609
LET
IT
DIE
>>78998780
Businesses
>>78998851
What you said sounds pretty stupid. You literally are saying people can't make their own choices for their life and you need some statist babysitter telling them what to do.
>>78998609
Thats not how it works.
>open borders are a requirement and cannot be opposed without affecting the free market
>no realistic way to counter corporate oligarchies
>judges would have unbelievable power and would essentially be the patrician rulers
>statism made the West great while libertarianism is why Somalia is the way it is
>supports feminism, egalitarianism, homosexuality, and paedophilia
>>78999106
Somalia is an ANARCHY
>>78999164
>no true Scotsman
Somalia has a government. It's just powerless like a government would be in a Libertarian society.
>>78995518
it isn't as long as you are in the purple corner
>>78998550
Left = leaning socialist
Right = leaning capitalist
>>78999250
I'm a capitalist. I think it leans left because I'm more liberal.
>>78999328
Wat
>>78998931
Rand sucks ass. His father was great.
>>78995518
I hate 2 dimensional political charts like yours, anon.
Politics is 4d - show us a Möbius strip and a grandfather clock next time.
The extremes typically meet up with each other.
/pol/ however is in the middle of the Möbius strip looking at the twists and turns from all angles.
>>78999668
my compass shows its on the left side. But I'm a capitalist.
>>78999807
Möbius strip and a grandfather clock?
>>78998575
Socialism sucks. "American libertarianism" is just classic liberalism. The word "liberal" has now been hijacked by socialists, communists, and authoritarians, so people found a new word.
>>78998609
Not all libertarians support open boarders. Look at it this way: Anyone at any point on the political spectrum, could or could not be a nationalist.
>>78998780
I would say that a road is not some kind of sophisticated technology. It's literally ground up rocks and water, and then you just get a big truck and pour it all over the ground. Pretty sure someone could take care of the roads with little / no government. It's not some kind of really advanced, complicated procedure that only the government is smart enough and competent enough to do.
>>78998876
There is a big difference between the libertarian party and philosophical libertarians. I'm a libertarian but I don't really like the libertarian party.
>>78995562
It's the easy straw man.
>>78997729
Most authoritarians hate it, from the left or right.
>>78997827
Composition/Division fallacy, aka the "X are only one Y" fallacy.
>>78998504
Very subtle, I'm starting to view political spectrum as a triangle since both extreme left and right are mutually exclusive together and to libertarianism.
Left wing libertarianism care slightly more about social freedoms.
Right wing libertarianism care slightly more about economic freedoms.
But the question "what is social and what is economic" itself proves the difference is subtle. There's only one freedom ideology.
>>78998609
The cosmopolitan and nationalism spectrum does not intersect. Open borders plus zero welfare state (something libertarians want) is essentially UAE, would you like examples of how this isn't a great idea?
>>78998876
Guilt by association.
>>78998851
This is why libertarianism actually works: there must be winners and losers in order for competition to work. The not stupid can be incentivised as an example to the stupid.
Where this fails is if you attempt to implement this artificially via a state or any authority. In that situation, the process of incentives easily becomes corrupted, in fact exactly what is being incentivised is the first to corrupt.
For the lazy Nazi argument
>intelligence is good
>white people are intelligent
>therefore we'll incentive white people
And Thomas Sowell looks back with his trademark "I see your bullshit" frown. Neil Degrasse Tyson is still waiting for his writer to tell him his views on the subject.
>>78998780
Communally, same way fences are.
>>78999807
This is true.
>>78999095
>implying statist shitlords have the authority to tell me how it works
>>79000917
>Anyone at any point on the political spectrum, could or could not be a nationalist.
Yeah that's great buddy but libertarianism and free movement of goods, capital, and labor are inextricably linked.
r8 me
>>79001099
>Yeah that's great buddy but libertarianism and free movement of goods, capital, and labor are inextricably linked.
That doesn't really address what I said. Libertarians can still be biased towards their own citizens. Not all libertarians love Islam and just want to open up the boarders for everyone with no screening process. Some libertarians don't think on a global level, or they want to start with their own country first.
>>79000917
>The word "liberal" has now been hijacked by socialists, communists
Ironically, because there is nothing liberal about either of those. It's just a buzzword for their low IQs to spout to sound hipster at parties.
Libertarians don't know how to compromise and take a "all or nothing" stance when normal people are resistant to big sweeping changes.
Shrewd libertarians, for example, would vote Trump because they know he could set up the stage for potentially more liberty minded politicians in the future. But pure philosophical libertarians don't like Trump and will lump him together with Hillary ala Ron Paul.
>>78997620
/pol/ only hates Libertarianism now because it became mainstream.
Just look at the archives back before Ron Paul became a meme... /pol/ was literally a Libertarian board.
>>79001487
Are you agreeing, or disagreeing? I can't tell.
There is nothing liberal about socialism, communism, or authoritarianism - and that's precisely why those people stole the word. They invaded the democratic party and they changed what it meant to be a liberal, because they saw that those were the people they would have to destroy in order to gain control.
That's why you now have all these people who consider themselves "liberals", but they really just want higher taxes, they want gun bans, they complain that police are racist while also wanting more police presence, and they stand up for both gays and Islam, when Muslims want to kill gays or throw them off of roofs.
They have dismantled what it means to be a liberal, and have torn liberals apart with all all of these stupid and hypocritical ideas, and these false talking points.
>It's just a buzzword for their low IQs to spout to sound hipster at parties.
You really can't blame people for not liking the word, after everything that has happened to it and what it is now associated with. Some people almost use liberal and authoritarian interchangeably, sometimes not knowing that they were supposed to be complete opposites.
I would argue that it doesn't really matter that people use "liberal" to refer to authoritarians / progressives; we just changed the word to "libertarian" instead.
>>78998609
Borders are actually compatible with Libertarianism. It's just that most Libertarians don't want to enforce them because they are socially leftist. This is more of a criticism of the followers than the ideology itself.
>>79002586
I argue the only true and viable ideology is libertarianism, and all arguments should reside within that sphere. All other ideologies are a product of blatant misconceptions - a product of the typical reactionary human brain.
>>78995518
No, not in principle. The only inherent problem with it is borders. That's really it, hence why paleoconservatism exists
>>79003137
As edgy as you sound, I actually agree.
Libertarianism is one of the few attempts to build a coherent and consistent ideology from the ground up.
>>79003708
I don't know why people say I sound edgy, is it because the typical human brain does not have a logical thinking pattern? Because I know what I say goes over most people's heads, and they probably think I sound edgy or some other reactionary conclusion.
Libertarianism is a stupid concept. A society function because there are rules that everyone must follow for the good of everyone else. I can't just kill my neighbor and eat all his apples because otherwise the rest of the society will punish me. I have to give up some liberties in order to secure others.
>inb4 voluntary businesses will privatize police, roads, healthcare, education, and parks and their rules will be totally better and less oppressive than what our government currently does.
Debate me.
>>79004283
Libertarians are not anti-punishment, you fucking retard. All that are are against is the initiation of violence. You can't rape, you can't murder, you can't steal from people. Why is this so hard to understand. You already obey this rule in the private sphere, is it really so hard to imagine applying this rule to your rulers?
I officially have the best political compass on /pol/
come at me authoritarians and anrchists
>>79004658
I follow rules in the private sphere because the public sphere defends the rules of the private sphere. If you ask me to get off your lawn, I legally have to comply or I'll get punished by the public sphere.
In a libertarian society, if I'm stronger than you and I refuse, who's gonna act as the greater sphere, protect your private rules and do the punishing? Some private armed force? What assures me it won't be Mafia style "protection" or some "might is right" fuckfest?
>>79007187
> What assures me it won't be Mafia style "protection" or some "might is right" fuckfest?
That's the government..
>>78995518
Because "Individual responsibility" is lunacy when the clothes you buy, the food you eat, it's all statistically predictable. I mean, most people don't even read the terms of service yet still agree.
Also, more people are dying because of gun violence in America than any other country without guns.
Switzerland is a big exception to that, but it's mostly because of the heavy regulation actually in Switzerland, which is why gun control is a good idea.
