Alright /pol/, I consider myself to be libertarian on all social issues, and I have a moderately liberal stance on economics (I don't believe socialism nor a completely free-market is viable, I think there needs to be some control on big companies, like prevention of monopolies.)
So /pol/, red pill me, logically explain to me why my beliefs are wrong. Give me a logical argument that explains why I'm wrong past "brainwashed liberal."
>>70635082
bump
>>70635082
You do know that the government creates monopolies right? The only way for companies can be monopolies nowadays is because the government makes them.
>>70635548
Fuck me with those typos
K OP, if this is b8, I'll bite. Basically the libertarian and leftist attitudes have a history in failure. Throughout the millenia, empires, kingdoms, nations, etc. (rome, britain, greece, etc.) All these had notable periods when they started to fall from the top, periods that correlated with their more liberal social policies (diversity, more free shit from gubmint, etc.) Notably, the only modern examples of successful leftist nations are currently falling down the shitter. (sweden, britain, etc.) What makes you "brainwashed" is that America was started on core conservative policy, intermixed with some socialism yes, but far and beyond conservative heavy. Capitalism got us to the success we are, and now people want to change the system. We have seen what does and doesn't work in history, and people have made all these other ideas sound so great, regardless of the likely consequences, if not ignoring them completely. The brainwashed comes from you having been shown as a child what works, only to be told that it should change. Because where else would you get that information than the media, other leftists, etc. All people who boil down "great leftist" ideals from marx, et al. When really those ideas even require capitalism, homogeneity, etc. IDK, hope that helps
>>70635082
There is nothing subjectively wrong in moderate left or right wing ideas, they both have their pros and cons and they best serve humanity by alternating each other to reach a balance.
The problem is with extremist political stances, they never end well.
>>70635082
That must be the worst comic ever
>>70635082
Corruptions and monopolies will happen anyway unless your population is 100% educated about everything and constantly informed in an unbiased way your country would get subverted and will turn communist.
>>70635082
Put a black lives matter hat on him and you have a more accurate picture.
>>70636217
God damn it's fucking awful
>>70635082
>I consider myself to be libertarian on all social issues, and I have a moderately liberal stance on economics
Fuck off and read a book libtard!
>>70635082
why do you consider yourself a libertarian at the first place ? i believe in control on monopoly , but only in the way of introducing competition , thats how we should do things , let the market fix itself as much as possible .
>>70635082
>>70636118
In response more directly to your origninal questions, social issues are pretty easy to explain why they don't line up with what works. Doing ANYTHING to the nuclear family structure is literally shit-tier. Two dads, two moms, mom turns into a dad, etc. messes up the growth of the child. (not to say 2 normal parents couldn't fuck up a kid, but law of large numbers says it'll beat out the alternative)
Abortion is clear disregard for human life, which if accepted in a culture is a mark of apathy and barbarism, once the DNA blueprint starts self assembling it in the mother, that shit has rights, as if a baby fully born could take care of itself without the mother, god i hate that argument. Welfare unchecked allows people to freeload, and once others see that, they desire to stop working, which slows productivity. The goal of a nation is to be a productive and well guarded, so they can further the reseaches of science, math, philosophy, etc. Most other social policies affect this in a negative way if the liberal side is chosen. For economics you are kind of right, kinda wrong. Monopolies do need to be checked, as stagnation can occur if people need the product less than the money they'd pay. Historically, a mixed market is best, not too many people dispute that any more.
>>70635082
>dont believe in free markets
>libertarian
Pick one faggot
