Headline: Libertarians be like Picture of disugested women next to “Tyranny.gov” Picture of intressted women next to “Tyranny.com

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    The interconnectedness of the world and our systems make it too complex for small government now. I mean, what’s the libertarian answer to global pandemics or climate change? Hands off doesn’t work in all cases

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Don’t know exactly how you define ‘libertarians’, but if you mean right wing/small government advocates, I’m with you.

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The only libertarians in the general population’s consciousness are right-wing, as libertarian political parties were literally financed by fossil fuel, tobacco, and weapons manufacturer oligarchs — the US Libertarian parties first presidential candidate was a fucking Koch bro (billionaire fossil fuel oligarch) — all because they wanted to pay less taxes and deregulate their businesses, after regulations like the clean air act meant they could no longer destroy waterways and create acid rain without consequence.

        99% of the human population have no idea that left-wing libertarians exist, or that libertarianism was considered left-wing and progressive prior to right-wing appropriation in the 1960/70’s.

        • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          prior to right-wing appropriation in the 1960/70’s.

          Because when its been this way for long enough to be considering retirement, the way it used to be is pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

          It’s like calling Republicans the party of Lincoln. It has no connection to today’s politics.

          • III@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            It has no connection to today’s politics.

            “We are the party of Lincoln, so let us fly our confederate flags!” I mean, it does connect… just in an “opposite day” kind of way.

    • BossDj@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think another implication here is they trust a corporation more than a government

      • d00ery@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I’m not condoning this, but one argument I’ve heard is that it’s easier to pick a different corporation (i.e. don’t buy from them) than it is to change your government (every 4 years ish) and it’s only the political party, not the civil service / employees (or whatever it’s called in the USA) that change.

        Of course monopolies, huge barriers to entry for new companies, etc, weaken this argument.

        As a final note; I think the combination of unions, govt., and private enterprise is the best we can hope for under the existing system.

        • GraniteM@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          it’s easier to pick a different corporation (i.e. don’t buy from them)

          This argument also falls apart when the thing you want to buy is essential and/or all of the companies selling it are horrible (or the very concept of selling it at a profit is horrible), e.g. health insurance, water, housing, staple foods, and so forth.

    • fah_Q@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Libertarian definition 1.Conservatives who like to smoke weed.

  • megabat@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I’ve never understood the hate for libertarians. It seems to me some of the biggest injustices in the world never could have happened if governments weren’t allowed to have the authority to control those aspects of individuals lives. Such as the legalization of slavery, manifest destiny and illegalization of drug use, gay marriage, gender affirming care, birth control, abortion were all aspects of government controll in our lives that they had no business dictating IMHO. Edit - missed a word

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s because the good libertarians just call themselves anarchists or maybe even syndicalists.

      Your typical online libertarian is like the stereotype of the “parasitic socialist” who doesn’t want to work and just wants free stuff.

      To continue my gross simplification: libertarians want to be able to boss around poor people using their wealth, but don’t want poor people to be able to band together to stop them from doing so. And they definitely don’t want to share their wealth.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Modern, specifically American libertarians are imposters. Rejecting basic concepts of actual libertarianism like public ownership of natural resources. And are ideologically at least (economic) liberals. Not libertarians. Who chant weird self defeating tautologies that have nothing to do with libertarianism like the Non Aggression Principle.

      Basically they’re Libertarians in the same fashion Marxist Leninist are communist. Not.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Because Libertarians don’t care about people’s rights (in the modern US usage at least). For example, without government legalization of slavery would be the default since nothing is stopping it. Libertarianism would say if you can afford to buy a person, and they ended up in slavery because they weren’t good enough or whatever, then it’s fair that you should be able to purchase them.

      Libertarianism is the philosophy of Ayn Rand. They’re the people who want to remove government so they can fuck children and exploit people. They don’t want liberty. They want authority, but by rich people not voters.

      What you are talking about is Anarchism. Government shouldn’t be telling people how to live their lives but should provide protections and assistance to allow them to live the best they can.

      • megabat@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I don’t agree with the assessment on slavery because in that system nobody would have the authority to sell another person in the first place. Although I suppose you could sell yourself and have indentured servitude.

        Edit and I guess I’m going to get all “no true scottsman” over here and say a libertarian that doesn’t believe in liberty and freedom isn’t a libertarian at all. But thanks for explaining it a bit.

  • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Another person who’s never read the platform of any actual Libertarian politician. Supporting tyranny of any kind is inherently antithetical to those platforms. The root word of Libertarian is Liberty, my dudes. That is what they are primarily about.

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You mean abolish all labor laws and enforce all contracts to the letter by the government. We know that this is going to lead to company towns, slave contracts and similar setups. We had those everywhere before the workers won those laws. You end up with a capitalist class ruling everything in a nearly aristrocatic fashion. This is already the case in many ways, but this would make it so much worse.

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Proving my point - you have not read anything about the Libertarian party platform, because those are not positions they hold. You are talking about the cartoon version of libertarians that you made up out of the whims of prejudice.

        Here’s what they actually stand for: https://www.lp.org/platform/

        • MrMakabar@slrpnk.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          2.11 is very clear about abolishing all labor laws. 1.0 is very clear about "Individuals are inherently free to make choices for themselves and must accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. " hence slave contracts are legal, as long as you do sell yourself for any reason. The rest is just pure and simple logic. States are one of the systems redistributing wealth, obviously not perfectly, but richer people are supposed to pay more taxes then the poor. The rest is distributed via social security, which the Libertarian Party is against as stated in 2.13 and 2.14. With contracts being enforced and no limits on contracts being placed, they replace many current laws. Hence you get an aristocratic class. Eve worse 3.7 expressly allows for governments to be completely ignored, if they hurt their freedoms.

          I have no doubt that most libertarians are actually good people and mostly are pissed at a lot of stupid government rules, which are absolutely real. However it is like a lot of things an overreaction, which could hurt a lot of people.

          • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I guess you could read that into it when you are determined to believe that’s what they stand for, but I don’t read it with such a pessimistic outlook. I understand that the general premise they are going for is individual liberty and not freedom for businesses to do whatever they want.

            But anyway there’s no chance they could do any of that, even if a member of the party was elected President. They could at best achieve some improvements to our liberties and at worst no changes. So I will keep voting for them unless a better option is available.

            • Srh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I guess you don’t read into it with any historical outlook. because historically slave contracts are what happened when we had no labor laws. They could do worst the no regulations has done terribly worse. And most issues with today are lack of regulations we let corporations do whatever they want.

        • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          2.2 Environment

          Competitive free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources.

          The free market will protect the environment? Please explain, because that sounds absolutely absurd on its face.

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      To be fair, it’s super rare to see a Libertarian Politician gain any following without a platform that isn’t textbook conservative but with more weed or absolutely batshit insane.

    • anar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I think the downvotes you are getting are from people who have only heard “Libertarian” in american context.

      American libertarians are conservative/capitalists

      In Classical definition/for the rest of the world, Libertarians are closer to Anarchists