Libertarians are grumpy indoor cats. They’re violently independent and want to be left alone, but their survival is also entirely dependent on the systems surrounding them, which they completely take for granted.
The grumpy indoor cat doesn’t want your attention, they just want their auto-feeder to activate like it always does. Never mind the fact that you’re the one who keeps the auto-feeder filled. They don’t care about that, they just care that the auto-feeder dispenses food.
On a TV series, a cowboy libertarian explains his being libertarian to a rich evil lady. She smiles and exclaims “you are all a bunch of toddlers! Wanting to suckle on other peoples tits and being treated as adults, while having none of the responsibility of being one”.
I can only speak for America, but here they’re all a bunch of corporate-sponsored anarchy LARPers.
I mean…that says it all.
Sure, the seemingly benevolent small business owners feature highly at the conventions…but behind the curtains it’s really a coalition of rich guys, gun nuts, NAMBLAs, zoophiles, etc. in a stuffed cheap suit.
It’s funny that in the classic Libertarian novel “The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress” the rule free society only works because there are no guns and literally everything is controlled by a single giant computer.
Objectivism creator Ayn Rand ended up on welfare after she lacked the will power to give up smoking.
Need I say more?
Hooray for me, and fuck you!
In Poland most libertarians are at best petty bougie failchildren thinking they would be billionaires when they grow up, those that do grow up without touching grass (or too dense to feel the grass) are usually turning into unhinged austrian cultists with monarchist and nazist inclinations. Deeply unserious people
Libertarianism is a lie for people that want a high trust society without putting in any of the effort and cooperation that it requires. For people who expect things to naturally work while still saying “fuck you got mine”.
Left libertarianism is great and serves as an effective counterbalance to many issues. Right libertarianism is often foolish at best and rarely includes the freedom to do things like live your life as you please
I don’t think libertarianism works, it relies naively on how the free market is omnipotent, how freedom is everything and how having a small government is somehow good. There are no countries that are entirely libertarian, that also tells a lot about the ideology’s applicability in practice. A brilliant book about why libertarianism doesn’t work is a book “A Libertarian Walks into a Bear”. In the book, a group of libertarians decides to take over the small town of Grafton in New Hampshire en masse as part of their “Free Town Project”. Of course this group cares neither about the town’s original inhabitants nor their rights. What’s the result? They hollow out pretty much everything from the library, to the school, the fire department and the police. No regard is given to any laws on hunting or food disposal, and that lures in bears, who turn so aggressive that they invade people’s homes. In addition to bears, sex offenders and all kinds of criminals are also lured into Grafton. It’s pretty entertaining book, I recommend it.
Another reason why I dislike libertarianism is that it can function as a gateway to fascism. This is a known phenomenon. Several key figures in the alt-right for example used to be libertarians. I stumbled into a clip from some American Libertarian Party convention where Richard Spencer was with Ron Paul. I had to rub my eyes a bit.
You forgot to mention that the book is nonfiction, this really happened.
What a fun read, ty. I went to the Talk page hoping for some back and forth about ensuring the description of the project was unbiased. Nope, nada, surpised there aren’t any free state project fans within the ranks of Wikipedia editing volunteers who would have something to say.
“Omnipotent market and little government”
Sounds like Somalia.
Left wing (actual OG) Libertarianism is great. Right wing Libertarianism is basically a bunch of antisocial/intellectually lazy people who think the ideal society is one where everybody has a few acres of land with a little shack that they built themselves where they subsist on potatoes, carrots, and chicken eggs and stockpile gold and silver to trade with another libertarian twice a year.
I consider myself pretty left (at least in comparison to the average German), but that lifestyle sounds quite tempting to me. I’d skip chicken though.
That description looks too close to some videogame.
Naive idiots at best genocidal Maniacs at worst.
I’ve known a bunch of them and I think their ideology is fine on the surface, but full of small contraddictions, for example:
- they believe freedom is the utmost important thing, but their freedom is always threatened so they always should do what they do want, even if that limits other people freedom. For example: I should not be forced to pay taxes if I don’t want to because noone should be forced to pay for a “service”, it should always be a choice (but if my country gives me healthcare without paying taxes, I should also use the service). However, things like paying tolls for private highway is also bad, because one should be able to go wherever they want withou paying.
- they don’t believe in “rights” as anything imposed from the top is bad. If a category is persecuted (black people, gays, whatever) they should not be protected, but fight on their own
- according to them, in true capitalism, free market is perfect and the most just, and monopolies will not never happen, now they do only because laws allow them to “manipulate” the market.
- they often spiral down alt-right conspiracies theory with a libertarian flavour, like a deep-state working hard to limit even more your freedom, or everything even remotely “politically correct” (even things like protection against protection against being fired because you are homosexual) is woke propaganda and also aimed to limit your freedom.
That’s my experience with a few tens of people, so I don’t know if that’s representative of the whole community, bu my own little consipracy theory is that libertarianism as I know it was crafted by the US alt-right to subtly manipulate people into fascism, the premises are all there: hatred for the current state, bigotry, extreme victimism, a willingness to strip down thenselves of hard-fought rights and a hustle/grinding mentality to slave yourself down to work and enrich other people
Absolutely bat shit insane you say?
Depends on how it’s defined.
Current libertarianism is just rebranded reactionary conservatism.
Classically though, “libertarian” simply referred to someone who advocated for maximum individual liberty and minimum state intervention. The term first gained popularity in the US in the wake of the New Deal, when the term “liberal,” which had up until then referred to that position of maximum individual liberty and minimum state intervention, was coopted by leftist authoritarians. Since the classical liberals needed a new term, they shifted to “libertarian.” And notably, at that point, libertarians were at least as likely to be left-wing as right, with the two groups merely splitting on which specific government services should be counted among the minimum.
That started to go wrong when the Libertarian party was established, and finished going wrong when the Tea Party was transformed from a series of protests against the Wall Street bailouts to a traveling carnival of hate.
And there’s also the political compass sense of “libertarian” as simply the opposite of authoritarian, by which I’m as “libertarian” as it’s possible to be. It should be noted though that in recent years, mostly through meme communities, even that conception of “libertarian” has been increasingly characterized as more of an alternate authoritarianism.
So there’s a conception back behind each use of the term “libertarian” that is at least close to mine (I’m actually an anarchist). But IMO not coincidentally, the term has been in all cases warped to refer to some form of authoritarianism, which I unequivocally oppose.
I have to push back a bit that the core of the proper definition of libertarianism is freedom from the state. It’s isn’t/wasn’t. The state plays an essential role in functional libertarianism, for what should be obvious reasons: libertarianism requires a mechanism, aside from power, to resolve tension between competing freedoms.
I have to push back a bit that the core of the proper definition of libertarianism is freedom from the state.
I’m not sure why you feel a need to push back against something I didn’t say.
“…minimum state intervention…” isn’t part of the definition. That’s a value judgement and a concept that gets thrown around by the idealists. The concept of libertarianism was invented to moderate a necessary and ubiquitous state, and can’t exist without one.
You defined classical libertarianism or right libertarianism, which grew up to be what we see as The Libertarian Party in the USA today, for example. It was “rebranded” specifically to add the notion of “minimal state intervention” - to make themselves distinct from libertarians (who functionally existed, at that time). Much like classical liberals, classical libertarians are antithetical to the definition of their namesake.
“libertarians generally advocate for minimal government regulation, believing that businesses should operate freely and regulate themselves through voluntary exchange and competition. They argue that over-regulation can stifle innovation and economic growth.”
So in my opinion, they are dumbasses. Yeah let’s get the Nestles and Monsanto’s of the world to regulate themselves. Honestly just unserious people with no critical thinking skills in my opinion.
It’s depends on what you mean…it’s a fraught term, to say the least.
Actual definition of the word…or the Ron Paul (etc) nuts?
The DSA libertarian socialist caucus has reinvented itself the last year or so, they put out some good solid analysis prior to convention, and is doing a lot of work to build a libertarian socialist plurality within the org.
Right libertarians arent politically coherent, their lack of coherence means they are shot through with Nazis who exploit unprincipled movements yo plant the seeds of hate. A libertarian could be your uncle who smokes weed but listens to Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan podcast, or it could be a school shooter, a transhumanist tech accellerationist who always brings up Rokos basilisk after a couple Busch lights, or a neo-Randian objectivist.
As a left-Hegelian, I like discourse around human freedom, but people never concretize what they mean by freedom, and we always end up back to Marx:
Do not be deluded by the abstract word Freedom. Whose freedom? Not the freedom of one individual in relation to another, but freedom of Capital to crush the worker.








