172
173

Congratulations! r/Libertarian is trending! (i.redd.it)

PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian が 投稿

全 182 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]mc2222 69 ポイント70 ポイント  (28子コメント)

We're doomed.

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Kinda my thinking as well, like "NO! Keep this a secret! A place where honest discussion can still be had!"

[–]ysrdog 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If only...

[–]Clericuzio 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Too late, subbed.

[–]10art1left-libertarian -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Did you just create joinder with me, you statist?

[–]NimbleCentipodancap 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Your tag is an oxymoron

[–]10art1left-libertarian -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

and your tag is just plain old moron

[–]Geometry314 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also just landed. I solemnly swear not to obstruct honest discussions.

[–]Baka_MD 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (5子コメント)

We're already fucked. I love that this subreddit has a lot of discussion but lately the majority of the people here are not libertarians. It defeats the point.

[–]Knapperx 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

lately the majority of the people here are not libertarians

*police searchlight illuminates u/knapperx

[–]Arcturus2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

It defeats the point.

Ah. What point?

[–]Baka_MD 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Of having a libertarian subreddit.

If we're just going to be overrun by socialists we could just talk about libertarian opinions anywhere else on reddit.

[–]Arcturus2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I guess I was asking what's the point of having a libertarian subreddit?

[–]Baka_MD 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

To talk about libertarian philosophies, politics, and opinions. Having people to critique and keep us smart is good, being overrun by people who want to shut us down is not.

[–]bjt23utilitarian 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (14子コメント)

We get a lot of attention from people who think they are libertarian but have no idea what it is from time to time. Like last election where people believed locking down borders was a free market policy, or the one before where people kept spreading "race realism" (code for white supremacist) statistics. Here's a hint, if you don't believe the individual is the most important demographic of them all you aren't libertarian.

[–]ThePoorAndTheMad 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I think you're confusing splits within the libertarian movement with "fake libertarians." There are libertarian arguments for and against borders. It's fine to take a definitive stance on these topics, but to pretend your opponents are secret statists is purism in its ugliest form.

[–]Arcturus2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are libertarian arguments for and against borders.

Ha! The debate wasn't:

Borders? Yes/No

It was about how our system of immigration should be organized. And no, there really isn't any libertarian reason to further restrict it.

[–]bjt23utilitarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

How can you claim your market is free if I have restrictions on trade of goods, and cannot freely hire the most cost effective people for the position I want, or sell my land to the highest bidder even if they live elsewhere now?

[–]ThePoorAndTheMad 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

A border doesn't mean "absolutely no one comes here ever," nor does it restrict international trade.

Your worldview really only works if everyone is a libertarian. I would love a world where we can hire anyone from anywhere with no negative consequences; this is not the world we live in. How does this libertarianism defend itself, not physically, but ideologically? Democrats believe in majority rule, and once they obtain a majority, the freedom of movement has opened the door for losing every other freedom. A libertarian territory can trade with democracies, dictatorships, even fucking Ancoms, but inviting them in is suicidal.

Furthermore, this wasn't even my point. Your distinctions between who is and isn't a libertarian is based on whether they agree with you on every single point. This is absolutely ridiculous and completely unhelpful in achieving any sort of liberty.

[–]KruglorTalks 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

With his examples he is trying to point out the "America First" nationalist crowd who call themselves Libertarian because they hate SJWs. They then vote for someone who pushes tarriffs, tearing down free trade and forcing dying buisnesses to thrive for votes. Its a skewed sense of priorities about not understanding what really matters.

[–]LTJ98 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Here's a hint, if you don't believe the individual is the most important demographic of them all you aren't libertarian

Obviously individuals are important, however if you have statistics that show certain behaviors are highly prevalent within a certain section of the population it is not wrong to ask why this is occurring

I disagree that 'race realism' is code for white supremacy. If a race realist were to argue that Asians were academically superior to whites that would hardly be white supremacy.

I don't think there is anything wrong with discussing trends within a population, as long as you do not let that infringe on individuals rights. When you have car insurance young men are charged higher due to their statistically higher risk of dangerous driving, I doubt many people would have a problem with this.

[–]bjt23utilitarian 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

OK fine, let's focus on "asians are good at math" and examine why that's not a useful metric. 200 years ago, record keeping was much worse and there weren't really good ways to check these records, so people needed shortcuts. If "asians are good at math" is right 60% of the time, then that would be a useful thing to know for someone in 1817. Now we have instant access to everyone's individual records. I don't have to assume Kim is good at math and then maybe be wrong because I can just look it up in 5 seconds.

We don't have "abacus realists" or whatever running around extolling the virtues of abacuses, because they're outdated and will hurt your productivity more than help you in the modern age. Focusing on race is weird and unproductive.

[–]darthhayekTrump supporter 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Eh.

[–]ysrdog -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

If you don't believe that blacks have a lower average IQ and commit far more crime than they should you aren't using common sense.

[–]bjt23utilitarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Who designs the IQ test? Beings of infinite intellect, or flawed humans like the rest of us? Those tests measure a very narrow view of intelligence.

That's of course besides the point though; you grouping these people together is a collectivist move on your part. People should be allowed to rise and fall on their own merit, not be prejudged based on their skin color.

[–]zangerinusneoliberal big bank shill 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

your username structure has the same as /u/LTJ98

3 letters and 2 number

(((COINCIDENCE)))

[–]bjt23utilitarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

We probably were assigned the same email naming scheme. So no probably not a coincidence.

[–]KruglorTalks 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dont respond to (((x))) marks. Theyre alluding to tmyou being a shill, possibly jewish.

[–]zangerinusneoliberal big bank shill 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

OY VEY

[–]Fl1pzomglibertarian party 36 ポイント37 ポイント  (38子コメント)

Welcome statists!

[–]LibertyTerpfriedmanite 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (37子コメント)

Most libertarians are statists, as in they believe in a limited government. I don't know why anarchists are even considered libertarian. It's such a radically different philosophy. It's pointless to bunch us all into one.

[–]machocamacho88libertarian party 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Statists such as Socialists and Marxists believe every problem can be solved by the state. Libertarians tolerate a limited almost entirely defanged state. Not sure you can honestly refer to that as statism.

[–]Lost_Sasquatch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

almost entirely defanged state.

Literally statism. Libertarians/minarchists argue over the appropriate size of the state, not it's existence.

[–]bjt23utilitarian 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Rome wasn't torn down in a day. Anarchists and libertarians are allies because the state can only be weakened brick by brick.

[–]Lost_Sasquatch 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I completely agree, just pointing out that technically minarchists are indeed statists.

[–]smokeyjoe69 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

They are still statists, but they're not quite filthy statists.

[–]trampolinebears 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I, a slightly-soiled statist, agree.

[–]retrocountyChristian libertarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Especially if they only view the state as a necessary evil.

[–]ondarenclassical liberal 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (15子コメント)

I've always thought of it as a gradient. Eventually you slip from authoritarian into libertarian. An caps being about as pure libertarian as you can get. That said, I think you can still very much be a libertarian without being an cap.

[–]Dsnake1rothbardian 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (14子コメント)

I feel like the idea behind ancap is the logical conclusion of many libertarian claims.

Essentially, if private property rights reign supreme and the state impedes on private property rights -> the state is invalid.

[–]-jute- 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (11子コメント)

And then you become your own micro-state?

[–]Lost_Sasquatch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

That would imply an individual has a monopoly of force on their own property. Which it's fairly well agreed upon that this isn't entirely the case, in that you can't just invite someone on your property and then shoot them in the head.

So no, you aren't a micro state, there is no state.

[–]-jute- 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Don't people already shoot other people for trespassing on what they see as their property?

[–]Lost_Sasquatch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (7子コメント)

How often do you actually hear of someone being shot for simply trespassing? Generally it's a home invasion, not someone getting blown away for cutting across their lawn.

My point is, there's a spectrum to the NAP/reasonable response, and monopoly of force on ones property isn't absolute.

[–]-jute- 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yes, but to enforce and guarantee those and settle disputes/conflicts you need some police force and courts, and then you either have them be part of a (democratic) state, be part of some direct-democracy commune (the far leftist option) or privatized (which would most like very much privilege those who are the richest and leave those who would need protection the most the most vulnerable)

[–]Lost_Sasquatch 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

A) Competing private courts, and before you ask, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTYkdEU_B4o

B) Do you really think you'd be taken advantage of more by the rich in a privatized system than you already are by the government? Edit: Additional caveat, the rich already use the current system to get their way, the government helps them if anything.

[–]ThePoorAndTheMad 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

privatized (which would most like very much privilege those who are the richest and leave those who would need protection the most the most vulnerable)

I don't really see how you could back up this claim. Free markets are about what's best for the consumer, not what's best for the richest consumer. If a private arbitration firm sided with the richest party every time, no one would take them seriously.

And I don't want to come at this issue assuming I have more knowledge than you, but in the event that you haven't delved into the depths of private law, here's a really good animation/lecture on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8pcb4xyCic

[–]Dsnake1rothbardian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I know people that would agree with this concept. I would certainly be more agreeable to such a society in which private property rights were ultimately the end-all be-all than a communist state or something similar. Of course, not having some sort of system for arbitration that is typically agreed to by many parties would be a massive detractor to human advancement, and I fully believe that individuals would set up some sort of arbitration system.

Now, this ultimately breaks down because not everyone wants to play by the same rules. Essentially, I was just saying that the ancap philosophy is the logical conclusion. I don't personally think that logic will or could solve 100% of humanity's problems.

[–]Arcturus2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Essentially, if private property rights reign supreme and the state impedes on private property rights -> the state is invalid.

If the state is impeding on private property rights, yes. But the whole point would be for the state to protect private property rights, not impede on them.

[–]Dsnake1rothbardian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, but eventually and in every case so far, a state has impeded on private property rights.

[–]NoShit_94Somalian Warlord 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because anarchists are the ones that that take the libertarian principles serious.

[–]ysrdog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You know the Libertarian Party was started by a bunch of anarchists right?

[–]lemonparty"libertarian socialism" is like "sanitary landfill" 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Calling libertarians statists is like calling muslims islamists.

[–]animosityiskey 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Anarcho-capitalists and anarchists are different. The first is a bit like extreme libertarianism, the second is closer to a world wide hippy commune. At least to my understanding

[–]-jute- 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Libertarianism should guarantee liberty to everyone. Which usually happens by way of a democratically elected government that upholds a constitutions with basic rights.

With anarcho-capitalism, you don't have that, and have to rely entirely on the goodwill of people and corporations to treat you well and respect your rights, and I don't see that happening.

Even though I believe most people are good and decent, some will try to exploit other people, or arguments might escalate, and then the wealthier one is more likely to get the private police forces or courts that support them.

[–]insidious_1ceancap 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

guarantee liberty to everyone [via] democratically elected government

So liberty is given by the government, which by definition limits people's liberties through taxation? No, government can only exist to take away certain liberties that would otherwise thrive without violent consequences.

[–]-jute- 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

without violent consequences

Only for those powerful enough to realize them. There needs to be a neutral arbitrator to ensure that natural/constitutional rights are not violated by anyone (and voters and judges would ensure that the arbitrator doesn't violate them either)

[–]shanuluGreedy capitalists get money by trade. Good liberals steal it. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

We can't rely entirely on the goodwill of people so well elect people into authority....

the wealthier one is more likely to get the private police forces or courts that support them

Source?

[–]-jute- -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Wealthier people can pay more, and those forces that are paid more can get more influential by paying more police officers, better weapons etc.

[–]ysrdog -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

When we say anarchists in this context we are talking about anarcho capitalists. It's just easier to say.

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think libertarians and anarchists are lumped together because A) they share the same values (esteeming above all the individual and the liberty of all individuals, among other values), they simply differ on how best to protect their mutual values and B) for both libertarians and anarchists want in the short to medium term a gigantic reduction in the government.

[–]throwitupwatchitfallalt-right is not libertarian so don't pretend it is 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No it's not. It's the only rational philosophy.

What do you even think that libertarian is?

[–]TurrPhennirPhan 35 ポイント36 ポイント  (66子コメント)

Dear r/all:

Taxation Is Theft

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9RVS8cjNN0

[–]hoiwanteralmost uk -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

And breathing is pollution, so we have to tax to at least compensate on this.

[–]LibertarianSarah 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Neat. What do we win?~

[–]Praise_the_Omnissiah 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hi.

[–]JuggernautRepublicPot smoking Republican 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Well, looks like this place is gonna be cancer for a day or two

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Why, because you might see some dissenting opinions?

[–]boona 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (6子コメント)

This is THE SUB of dissenting opinions. Where, as long as you aren't being a jerk, you can bring up any point you like. What we don't like seeing is /r/politics types who believe they can argue with you by just calling you names. And when we hit front page, that inevitably happens.

[–]tokyoburns 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I am coming from my own front page because this sub is trending. I think the posts are silly but decide not to say anything because, hey, this is your sub. I navigate to this thread because if there is any approporiate place for visitors to comment it's here in the thread about you trending, right? I find /u/paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij has commented a few times with some different opinions than your own. All he got was downvotes and insults. And then your comment

This is THE SUB of dissenting opinions. Where, as long as you aren't being a jerk, you can bring up any point you like. What we don't like seeing is /r/politics types who believe they can argue with you by just calling you names. And when we hit front page, that inevitably happens.

with ten upvotes

You lack self-awareness and this is why nobody takes Libertarians seriously. Your top post is a meme with an embedded insult and yet you shit on r/politics. Please.

[–]boona 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I looked at his history and when he comments "muh free speech" and "I'm looking forward to seeing your plans for a fantasy libertarian government that runs without taxes of any kind." he got down voted. When his comments were more somewhat more insightful, he got upvoted. Which goes to show, and I like I said, as long as you aren't just being a jerk, your comments are welcome.

You lack self-awareness and this is why nobody takes Libertarians seriously. Your top post is a meme with an embedded insult and yet you shit on r/politics. Please.

You've shown an example of /r/libertarian working as evidenced by that user's history, so you can't even get your facts straight, then you ironically insult me and everyone in the libertarian movement. If you get downvoted, you'll know why.

[–]Toothspitignorant 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your top post is a meme with an embedded insult and yet you shit on r/politics.

Wat? Our top post is a meme congratulating drugs for their victory in the drug war, last I checked.

You also have to understand, we're not out to be taken seriously. We don't have an agenda to push, we don't really care what others think of us, and dissenting opinions are great so long as they're honest. Don't judge an ideology by the Internet points it awards.

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sure. I welcome open and honest discussion. That's why I was drawn to libertarianism. I'm just sick and tired of people anywhere on the Internet who live in echo chambers and call anything that pops their bubble "cancer." What the fuck does that even mean? Cancer? How can the expression of free speech be "cancer"? It makes me question what kind of libertarian would use the word "cancer" so flippantly.

[–]boona 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It makes me question what kind of libertarian would use the word "cancer" so flippantly.

I have several family members that have died of cancer, am I allowed using it? Should it matter? If using the word cancer in this context makes you clutch your pearls and swoon, then be trigger warned, adult conversation happens here and we use words like cancer.

[–]ultraforce47Don't tread on me 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

echo chamber

This sub gets brigaded everyday, especially by r/socialism.

[–]JuggernautRepublicPot smoking Republican 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The statists don't just come in here and disagree. They downvote and vote manipulate

[–]KruglorTalks 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Christ the newbies. Welcome to /r/libertarian and since youre new I guess you didnt know we basically shit on each other all day but stop only to shit on others.

We just groan and sigh that people think this is another echo chamber because theyre used to theirs. Every 15 minutes a righty or lefty wheels off their cape with a flourish basically shouting "BEHOLD FOR I AM DIFFERENT I CHALLENGE YOU" via some snarky bullshit. Its tiring. Anyone who comes to discuss or ask questions earnestly is, almost to the person, greeted well.

[–]trenescesePolish ancap | Taxation is theft you idiot 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Comments brigaged by lefties again. Amusing.

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

muh free speech

[–]ysrdog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Private property not free speech.

[–]number_kruncher 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Meme'd into popularity...

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Quality and popularity apparently share an inversely proportional relationship.

[–]zangerinusneoliberal big bank shill 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

helicoptered*

[–]Barefoot_Raphsode 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I actually just donated to the Libertarian party for the first time and am hopefully going to get involved whenever there are events I can volunteer at. I think that these next four years are going to be great for getting people to realize how broken the 2 party system is and how both parties don't give a rat's ass about us anymore.

[–]KruglorTalks 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What state?

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Wonderful! I donated to Gary Johnson's campaign and feel better for it. If you're in the Bay Area (California--or should I say "Commie"fornia?) maybe we can protest together.

[–]Knapperx 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Question: Why is this sub trending?

[–]KruglorTalks 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The smell of liberty.

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dissatisfaction with the status quo.

"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing....after they've exhausted every alternative."--Winston Spencer Churchill

[–]NoShit_94Somalian Warlord 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Hope y'all perish, filthy statists!

[–]rumpumpumpumGovernment, like war, should only be a last resort. 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Looking at your flair, is this a suicide note?

[–]RireBaton -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Isn't the failure of the state what allowed warlords to exist?

[–]rumpumpumpumGovernment, like war, should only be a last resort. 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

You mean like when a state collapses because of economic failures or after egregious rights violations that lead to revolution? Did the American colonist's revolution cause warlords? Capitalist libertarians (to distinguish them from anarcho-communists) know that it is essential for the bulk of the people to agree to abolishing the state. You can't force people to be free, and you can't trick them into it. It has to be nearly unanimously voluntary and done in an orderly way. This is why I don't hold out hope for an anarcho-capitalist society in my lifetime or even my grand kid's lifetime, so I'm a minarchist.

[–]RireBaton 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are we talking about Somalia?

[–]rumpumpumpumGovernment, like war, should only be a last resort. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I actually don't know what you're talking about.

[–]Arcturus2 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The warlords are attempting to be states, and that's the problem. It's not like they're running around with guns enforcing everybody's civil and property rights... Once again, government is the problem, not the solution. You don't get to say, "Oh, they're not government," just because they're bad at it.

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Live free or die!!!

[–]kirkisartistDecentralist 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's probably the Syrian war. I was a hopeless Obamacrat until he pitched another war over chemical weapons without investigating the situation.

So be prepared for this sub to be overrun with alt-right in the coming months. I hope you like helicopter rides.

[–]ysrdog 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I hope you like helicopter rides

[–]PaperbackWriter66Verified Libertarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Frankly, I think it will be really interesting if disillusioned Alt-Right and Leftists come here and hash out their differences.

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (8子コメント)

It's ironic that the links on your screenshot are about the inevitable result of libertarianism--corporations putting profit above everything else and using force to abuse customers who get in the way of their profits. I'm against government authoritarianism, but what about corporate authoritarianism? What happens when the police state is replaced by privately-hired thugs enforcing the will of corporations?

Full disclosure: I actually voted for Gary Johnson, but these stomach-turning videos of United Airlines are seriously making me reconsider my support for libertarianism.

[–]ultraforce47Don't tread on me 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

what about corporate authoritarianism

Guess what the opposite of the word "authoritarian" is.

[–]Dsnake1rothbardian 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wish you weren't getting downvoted because it likely will put you off of libertarianism due to the actions of a few within our folds. Sure, I don't think you quite grasp the whole thing yet, but that isn't a crime.

Essentially, what we have now is a semi-free market where the government uses regulation and other tools to restrict market growth, that is the organic rise of competitors. This results in corporations of large sizes being free from worrying about losing business to smaller, newer competitors which leads directly to a decline of service quality. That's how we have ISPs that almost everyone hates yet still turn a profit.

Also, just a tip, but I would be careful about basing your political philosophies (and thus legislation or lack thereof that you support) on emotion and edge cases.

[–]fizzer82 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The theory is that in a truly libertarian form of government, corporate authoritarianism would not be supported any more than government authoritarianism.

Reason being that the protectionism afforded to corporations by a too-powerful federal government is what allows them to get away with too much.

The idea of too big to fail doesn't exist in a libertarian ideal state. So one supposes they would be more motivated to limit risk by not screwing people over.

Hard to say what the reality would be as we've never seen a truly free market on a grand scale.

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hard to say what the reality would be as we've never seen a truly free market on a grand scale.

You guys are just as bad as the "true socialism has never been tried" assholes.

[–]rumpumpumpumGovernment, like war, should only be a last resort. -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Full disclosure: I actually voted for Gary Johnson, but these stomach-turning videos of United Airlines are seriously making me reconsider my support for libertarianism.

Fuck off then. We don't need your desperation vote, which you'll likely never cast again anyway. You've made it clear in this comment and your others here that you don't get libertarianism, and that would be ok except that your arrogant attitude makes you repugnant to reasonable people. Take your tired gotcha-questions and cram them.

[–]Viraus2ancap 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a very common troll gambit to claim that they "used to be [x]" or "considered voting for [x]", when in reality they never researched [x] outside of sources that are specifically against it. It's meant to make them appear more credible.

[–]paoisjdfpoiajsdpfoij 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Libertarians are the most arrogant, self-centered pricks in the universe. Your philosophy is patently selfish and defends corporate greed. Most encounters I've had with libertarians have been extremely offensive and the way you treat outsiders is an extreme turnoff. Have fun trying to get more than 1% of the vote, ever. The angrier you get, the more insular you become, the more you offend anyone who doesn't step in line with your extreme views, the less you attract anyone to your political philosophy. I raised a simple and common point, which is that in the absence of a state to defend the public good, libertarianism has no easy solution for how to combat corporate abuses. You attacked me. We who are skeptical of libertarianism will remember this. Your reckless attitude has far-reaching consequences.

In other words, it doesn't matter how smart or self-righteous you are. What matters most is how you make others feel. People won't remember what you did for them, but they will remember how you made them feel. In their interactions with libertarians, too many people have been left feeling hurt and offended. This is why you won't win.

[–]rumpumpumpumGovernment, like war, should only be a last resort. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nice troll, kiddo. 6/10

[–]pacjaxMilitary interventionism is a fucking plague on the earth 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Woooo liberals can come and take over our sub faster!!