My GF (massive tumblr feminist liberal) said she couldn't take me seriously when I said I was a libertarian. Whats wrong with that? She said "I imagine fat guys wearing fedoras when I hear that word!" What the fuck? I generally don't care about politics at all, but then I listened to some Ron Paul speeches and...goddamn, I agreed with everything the man said! Why do liberals react this way towards libertarians? Shouldn't they hate conservatives more? After trying to talk some sense into her, she just ignored everything I said and then said "Yeah, lets just not talk about politics". She also seemed to think that libertarians and anarchists are the same.
>guys look I have a girlfriend
>le ebin fedora meme irl
>libertarians are not anarchists!
Nice, it's like three shitposts in one. I hope this means we get two fewer in the catalog, but I'm sure it won't.
I don't vote because I don't think a libertarian will ever be elected anytime soon, so really I don't care about politics that much. I can just dream of a Ron Paul America, but it probably won't happen.
>libertarians are not anarchists!
But they aren't. Weaker government does not equal no government. Our founding fathers wanted a weak central government. Ron Paul is the hero that America needs.
>Why do liberals react this way towards libertarians?
Did you mean: Why do cunts react this way towards libertarians?
Because cunts would lose all privileges they currently enjoy.
Libertarian principles and meritocracy is the opposite of what cunts want. Cunts are the enemy.
This is what ancaps look like.
The crazy looking old guy is the son of Milton Friedman.
tbh only a beta would take that from his girl. you should have dumped her the second she went on about being a feminist and you're a beta for taking her opinions seriously beyond that.
Let me just tell you about the NAP and paying my part for the property right protections I receive from the state is theft.
We don't stand for our own gratification, we stand for the individual rights and liberties of all people, unlike you conservatives who just want put the whole fucking Bible into legislation and force everyone to live by Baby Boomer moral principles. You all talk about freedom, but as soon as somebody wants to do something that doesn't coincide with your moral outlook you freak out and label them criminals, fags, babykillers, etc.
>we stand for the individual rights and liberties of all people
1. Not everybody values the same rights and liberties
2. Not everybody would benefit the same from the particular individual rights and liberties pushed forward by the libertarian movement.
Don't pretend to be anything more than a self serving ideologue. In that respect you are no different than a conservative or a socialist.
Just stop pretending you are fighting for all because you aren't.
> Not everybody values the same rights and liberties
I fail to see what you are trying to argue by saying that. The idea of personal liberty within libertarianism is that people should be allowed to do whatever they want in their personal lives, PROVIDED THAT (stay with me here) they do not infringe upon the rights of another.
>My GF (massive tumblr feminist liberal)
kill yourself faggot
99% of the people would agree with that sentiment but the majority of the people would disagree with you when you apply that statement in practice because it is not well defined.
"infringe upon the rights of another" means nothing without defining another's rights.
No people won't agree with you when you start talking about the libertarian view of personal rights. You should know that already.
Because libertarianism is nothing but edgy idealism that has no place in the modern world. What did government funded roads ever do to Ron Paul? Fuck off with your high school tier political party
If it's a definition of how these principles would be put into legislative practice then you should look at this: http://www.lp.org/platform
>No people won't agree with you when you start talking about the libertarian view of personal rights. You should know that already.
If that statement were true, then the inherently negative ideals of social conservatism and social justice wouldn't form the basis of conservative and liberal ideas on individual liberty like they do in the U.S.
>Stand for something beyond your own gratification. Become conservative.
>being conservative is about breaking the bonds between families and making everyone subservient to the state.
Nice try, kike. I'll take traditional conservatism based off the institutions of natural law and private property.
I basically see libertarianism as a sort of... childish fantasy. The fantasy is born out of a very fundamental misunderstanding about how power, force, coercion, and networks of influence work.
For many, it's a stopping point they arrive at after reading only High School level political philosophers (typically, Locke, Hobbes, Utilitarians) but never reading further or understanding the critiques of their ideologies.
The problem with it is, the way Libertarianism presents itself, it seems like it's almost a collection of things that are obviously desired and have no downsides. On a real analysis, what Libertarianism does, is replaces state power with private power, power that is not even accountable to the citizenry. It's a failure to understand what it is people will do to each other in the absence of state power, or why so much government intervention is necessary.
Libertarianism is heavily promoted because it is an ideology that benefits only the very wealthy who can fill the power void with their resources, but the message of Libertarianism resonates with middle class hysterics, who it would further subjugate.
If there are specific points about Libertarianism that you believe are really strong and valid points, I'd like to hear them and see if I can point out the contradictions or provide more specific arguments as to why it is not a valid ideology.
>1. Not everybody values the same rights and liberties
Yes, thieves hate private property.
>2. Not everybody would benefit the same from the particular individual rights and liberties pushed forward by the libertarian movement.
>Why do liberals react this way towards libertarians? Shouldn't they hate conservatives more?
Because liberals and conservatives are both statists. If the other side gets to run shit for a few terms, the power of the state still exists and might expand. They won't get what they want for a while, but when they get back into power they will be able to use the power of the state to make the changes they want. Libertarians want smaller government and less state involvement, so if libertarians are in power they will systematically strip away power from the state, weakening the tool set the liberals have to work with if they return to power.
In other words, the two main parties are just a temporary inconvenience to one another, where libertarians gained power they might make changes that will drastically reduce the effectiveness of the two other parties, especially liberals since they tend to lean more heavily on the states coffers.
Voting third party doesn't make a difference for the moment, but it does help them in future elections, because the popular vote (5% min) is what determines who is allowed in the final presidential debates. Gary Johnson's major mistake in 2012 was that he didn't start running on the "Give me 5%" slogan until the last minute. If he had brought it up sooner he probably could have done better than the 1% he got.
>I imagine fat guys wearing fedoras when I hear that word!
Shit, I imagine that too when I heard that word.
Outside of Ron Paul libertarians are a bunch of hippy cunts.
your gf is a lying whore, theres never been fat fedoras who are libertarians. thats an atheist stereotype. shes a reddit sjw, you better dump her quick before she tries to ruin your life by exposing something you said or something you own or whatever.
According to libertarians there should be a strong state that imposes private property laws and other crap they like without exception.
But the people should not be allowed to interfere with the state and mould the economy as they see fit.
So in essence libertarianism is more restrictive than other ideologies for most people because it ties them to mercy of the market without any other way to have a say in society. And it also takes away their say as citizens. Because if there are no laws to passed because "muh freemarkets" then what the fuck are they going to vote for.