Me too.

I think you're overthinking it. Libertarianism is basically: I want guns, don't want to pay taxes, and would prefer no legal responsibility in most of my actions.

Even baser: Libertarians are adults still stuck in a teenage mindset.

Those stars are mostly for the last photo.

yeah, if I get one of those for going Libertarian, sign me up!

Speaking of teenage mindset, here's a delicious quote from the Daily Show forums:

"Who would have thought a rally to restore sanity is just Jon Stewart being a tool for the Democratic party to get 18-35 to vote democratic.Why should I bother,they haven't done anything for my age group except make me pay for insurance I can't afford for Parents."

So apparently, this young philosopher hasn't been told that you don't get to change age groups. I'd like to be there when he finds out. (By then, I'll be happy to be ANYWHERE.)

The issue isn't real libertarians. Anyone who REALLY believes in limited government for everybody has my respect, though not my sympathy. The problem is bullshit libertarianism. Verizion gives money to the Cato institute because of their opposition to municpal wifi, and then hires lobbyists to get them subsidies and corporate welfare. Glenn Beck calls himself a libertarian and he's not. That's the issue with libertarianism right now. It's not libertarians. It's republicans calling themselves libertarians.

Correction: So apparently, this young philosopher hasn't been told that you have to change age groups.

Sorry, true libertarians are retarded too.

FABIO: non-libertarians spent their children's future income like teenagers with credit cards. 60 trillion (or higher) in debt and unfunded liabilities. By all means have a safety net. But middle-class wealth transfers from tomorrow to today, from the young to the old, are a time bomb.

What does people hating to pay taxes have to do with libertarians being any less retarded?

Libertarianism and Communism are the two sides of the same coin - both are the perpetual-motion machines of political theory, equally elegant on paper and also equally impossible to maintain in reality.

I never said true libertarians weren't retarded, if "retarded" is a snarky way of saying "wrong". But they're not hypocrites, and they're not part of the problem. The problem, the ONE BIG PROBLEM that plagues American politics in the early 21 century, is misinformation. A majority of Republicans believe that Barak Obama is a muslim. That's not a difference of opinion. That's fantasy folklore taking the place of reality. The Daily Show caught Sean Hannity using doctored footage on his program. Hannity's on air "apology" was just another lie. He "apologized" for "using the wrong footage", but what was broadcast was not the wrong event, it was two events edited together to appear as one.

The problem isn't so much that conservatives trust Fox News, it's that they don't trust reality. Stephen Colbert described the attitude perfectly: "Reality has a proven liberal bias."

Why do the same old same old conservatives call themselves libertarians now? I think it's to disassociate themselves from the failure of George Bush, though they won't be shy about defending him when it seems convenient. These guys are all about having it both ways. They'll acknowledge climate change is real (but not man made) and then claim the whole thing is a crock, if there happens to be a big snowstorm. They'll paint themselves as oppressed victims when they've been in control of the government for most of the past 30 years. When you live in your own reality, reality is subject to change.

End of rant.

The other thing that bothers me about Libertarians, IMHO, is that they go on and on about individuals making their own choices and being their own people. That assumes that individuals will have perfect knowledge available to them to make their good decisions.

People are dumb. They can be influenced, lied to, tricked, manipulated, and easily led to make decisions that are against their own interest. Without someone out there making sure that people aren't being deceived, they can't make good decisions and they end up doing dumb things like joining the Tea Party.

Yeah I was going to bring up the communism/libertarianism comparison.

You know what though? At least Communism's impossible ideal is total equality and sharing for everyone. Libertarianism is a core belief of "fuck the weak" survival of the fittest where subscribers jerk off to Soylent Green.


So yeah, from the bottom of my heart, fuck libertarians. Theirs is an entire movement of people who never moved on from a teenager's understanding of government and authority. Just keep glomming on a mix of objectivist crap and poorly understood theories to keep supporting the belief they never let go of when they were 13.

The end result of Libertarianism would be a Wrath of Khan situation where Khan wins and rewrites the rules of the game anyway he wants, rights of the individual be damned.

And yes, a Star Trek metaphor is exactly what is called for, thank you very much.

By their benchmark, Afghanistan and Somalia are the freest countries on Earth.

An armed society is a polite society.


These people honestly believe Mad Max Wild West Robber Baron frontier justice is better than what we have now.

Usually, when I hear the words "survival of the fittest", its from someone brutal explaining to me why brutality is a good thing.

I too am disgusted by what some people get away with, but I'll put up with it if the alternative is to see innocent people being crushed because they are "weak".

I don't think it would take even the stupidest of people long to figure out, once it's actually enforced, that the first target of social darwinism should be the social darwinists.

Furthermore, I think it's pretty arguable that "survival of the fittest" has outlived its usefulness to humanity as a species. Once upon a time, it may have been essential for continuation and evolution of the race, But if you look at the world today, a willingness to destroy the earth tends to make a person "fit" to prosper in the marketplace... therefore the "fit" are more of a threat than a boon to the continuation of humanity.

I just came up with this idea, and I'm not sure I believe it, but I think it's defensible.

Fabio, the under such a system, robber barons wouldn't live long...

Why wouldn't they? They'd have all hired thugs.

I am glad you have your entire Mad Max gun fantasy all worked out though.

Yeah, that whole thing was kind of tried before. It was called "Feudalism."

No thanks.

We don't need guns or violence for "survival of the fittest". We have TFL.

"And personal accountability -does- factor into the libertarian mindset, but it has a lot more to do with taking care of the ne'er do wells yourself. Or as a community"

Soooo... you all die out in a year because you're all standing around spending all your time protecting yourself from ne'(er do wells|gros) until you realize your guns don't shoot out crops? Or do some people who are better at growing crops stop doing that and grow crops, while sharing those crops with those who do spend all their time protecting you from internal threats, from external threats, and those who can organize the whole system? And if it's the second, how is it any different then the system we have now with farmers, and police, army, and government (except maybe everyone is grabbing their balls and quoting Galt a lot more)?

I LIKE TURTLES

We have a new mutant strain of Cena Mark here.

If this isn't a copy&paste job then this guy is 10X smarter and more eloquent than troll fuck Cena Mark.

OT, responding to Burnov: I suspect my future peers will be retreating from the rising seas, from the expanding deserts, from the starving global South. Migration and social flux tends to make static wealth abstractions, like those of the late 20th, irrelevant. Sometime in the 22nd century, perhaps wealth will be measured by how many neighbors arrive to support against outsiders.

Miscegenation prevents biological speciation. I'm unaware of eras before the paternity lawsuit where elites refrained from impregnating the more hungry. The infrastructure of civil law accessible to all is perhaps a side-effect of a moment of prosperity.

Seriously, what the fuck was that?

It's not that I cannot conceive of libertarianism beyond a corporate aristocracy. I'm sure that it could happen. Perhaps the Vulcans will bring it when they make contact with James Cromwell. Right now, the corporate aristocracy is using a twisted version of libertarianism to push their agenda. This is what's actually happening.

If you'd rather talk science fiction, that's your right. I was talking politics.

No, because it's more important to vent my impotent rage on an internet video site against a group that never has and never will have any real political power. Plus, anyone who doesn't agree with me 100% is obviously evil and is my enemy.

Well, respecting people, and expecting them to respect you is not so much a libertarian thing as just being common sense.

I like libertarians, but I don't like this Burnov person. Burnov lost me at "In a libertarian society, yeah, people would die a lot more, but it's that whole natural selection thing. "

And he (maybe she) is not going to get me back after that.

"And personal accountability -does- factor into the libertarian mindset, but it has a lot more to do with taking care of the ne'er do wells yourself. Or as a community, and honestly, some really fearful weak people can't fathom that."

Fearful of what? Death, maybe? Pussies.

You make it sound like Nazi eugenics on a budget. I know it's not really like that, but you do make it sound like that.

Yeah but, they produce creatures like Ron Paul. Where exactly does someone like him fits in the political ecosystem?

They are called "Mocktorates."