Why is it that when people talk about leftists, people act like this doesn't exist?
People have unironically started to call leftists commie, but communism is authoritarian, not libertarian, and thus can't be considered synonymous with being a leftist.
Because the leftists today are all authoritarian.
>Libertarian left
>We want a small government that taxes the shit out of its people
Yeah nah breh, taxation is theft, it's why those Nazis are also stupid with their all white welfare states
The only kind of leftism people on Sup Forums know is Hillary Clinton or Karl Marx, which are both horrible representations of what true leftism is.
Show me one person in the political realm who is libertarian left.
Nah
If all leftists were authoritarian, liberals wouldn't exist.
Can anybody give examples of parties or politicians and their viewpoints that represent libertarian left?
Green Party?
Because it doesn't make any sense. At least with ancap you can say everyone is king of their own little allodial fief and individual force rules the day. Anarchocommunism is just retarded and just somehow assumes that people will continue to furnish gibs in the absence of the state. Ancom theorists are fun to read and arguably less Jewy than ancaps, but there's not a workable political system there.
That implies that they still do.
liberalism died decades ago, what we have now is retardation wearing it's skin
>This
Green party of the UK literally demanded interracial breeding grounds and other autoritarian bullshit.
>inb4 but thats just the UK
Its not.
The only valid ideology. Everyone else is a shill.
Interracial breeding is a good thing.
Ugh. That wikipedia page.
Why isn't there a party that is conservative when it comes to islamic immigration and gender issues. And more progressive when it comes to social benefits for actual americans.
I dream of a world where economic islamic refugees are stopped but the poor, weak, sick and downtrodden americans actually have a safety net to rely upon.
Because that square is the single most nonsensical square in the history of squares.
The only way to implementleftism without massive government (which cannot be libertarian), is through completely voluntary participation, which would make the politics bottom right anyway.
>communism is authoritarian
>a stateless, moneyless, classless society is authoritarian
Imagine making this post
That whole green area is pantsu on head retarded.
>we're gonna redistribute wealth and make everyone equal
How?
>um
>communism is adopted voluntarily by entire nations
>there's no prior authoritarian force compelling them to adopt it
Libertarian leaning individuals are defensive whereas authoritarian leaning individuals are aggressive. The green corner is a pushover since they neither are aggressive nor are they advocates of force to protect themselves at all costs.
The left right up down political spectrum is largely bullshit. The only question that should matter is
How much do you think of a person's life you have a right to control via the government?
>stateless
>moneyless, classless
Ask yourself how you would enforce the society being moneyless and classless.
Without a huge state to enforce it.
Thats the problem with the green party all of their "good things" are authoritarian.
Whats liberal about mandatory breeding pairs, mandatory electric cars, mandatory vegetarian food. Etc etc.
Spoiler: nothing, its just a different flavor of commie. A gayer, weaker commie.
Communism can't work without a forceful government, therefore its authoritarian.
But you don't have to completely be rid of government in order to be libertarian. Just have light government control. You don't need anarchism in order to follow some libertarian ideas.
That area is communism. Or at least, the ultimate goal all socialists aspire to. That is Marx's final stage of history.
Taxation is theft. Fuck off I work hard and don't want my labor given to those that are able to work.
>Just have light government control.
Then you wouldn't be able to have leftism, because there's nothing to enforce it.
It's a good thing, it doesn't mean you're forced to do it.
I'm not telling you how it would fucking work, I'm just telling you what a communist society is.
If the answer isn't 0 you likely need to be shot.
The government should enforce laws decided upon by the legislative branch and liberties and that is it.
>true leftism
lol
We already talk about these fags.
>dude weed
Because that square is even worse.
It's called being a child or an early teen.
>le government spending is literally totalitarianism meme
I think the left/right dichotomy isn't about the size of the state, it's about the role of the state. In theory, you could have a government that taxed its citizens and companies heavily and provided lots of public goods without meddling in the lives of its citizens. That, I think, is what the bottom left of the graph represents. Meanwhile back in reality, a government that provides a lot of public shit will automatically have a great deal of control over how people will live their lives. The political elite will be able to dictate what citizens can and cannot do, because they have a relatively large amount of a nation's GDP in tax revenue and thus a large amount of that nation's power. There is only one axis in real life, and it's the economic one. An authoritarian government without heavy taxes is ineffectual and weak and is forced to prioritize or die, and a liberal government with lots of economic control will soon force all kinds of things on its people just because it can.
Eh.
Honestly I'd call top left societies communism, the Trot meme of "not real communism, it's just state capitalism/red fascism/whatever the fuck" is just Jews Jewing Jews. The thing about ~trve gommunism~ is that it's literally impossible to enact unless the entire world goes full post-scarcity.
Why isn't Iceland libertarian left? We don't have a military and the police can be easily overpowered by a mob but the government always relinquishes control way before anything like that happens. By not overthrowing the government when we could the people demonstrated we voluntarily agree to use the government as a tool to service the people.
Doesn't it check all the boxes since the government is cooperative and not authoritarian? We can still be anti immigration, want strong borders etc, that's irrelevant to the dimensions on the compass.
Is that when you stop being an idealist?
no one benefits unless they have the ability to see clearly through the binary lens of Globalism v. Nationalism. this includes the political spectrum. so, on balance, anyone taking this test has to know enough about themselves to differentiate indoctrination from real pragmatic knowledge and logic. one of the key factors in communicating (yes, on this board as well) is defining whether the subject matter is being viewed as Globalist or Nationalist.
>muh communism
People don't automatically default to being right wing. People are intentionally kept in the dark about progressive ideas, and said ideas are thus more widespread than people realize.
>true leftism has never been tried
Because right now the /libertarian right is the biggest and most powerful force opposing the authoritarian left.
I'm a classical liberal, firmly in the libertarian left, but I despise the SJW socialists just as much as the alt-right does.
The best society needs free speech to function, and right now the authoritarian left is the biggest threat to free speech. We can argue about whether gays deserve death or if welfare is a good idea after we've made the West safe from the Islamic SJW socialist menace.
I think there are actually a lot more liberals like myself in the alt-right, we're just sick of the neo-liberal cunts ruining everything that we support the conservative position. Once the idiots have lost power, then we can bring back rational liberalism and engage in intelligent discussion.
>People are intentionally kept in the dark about progressive ideas, and said ideas are thus more widespread than people realize.
user progressivism is literally the elite religion, if someone is a prog they either fucking know it or they're that way by default
It's not literally totalitarian but it's authoritarian because the money/resources the government spends has to come from somewhere and it can only obtain it through force.
Even if what you just said wasn't sourced from your ass: Fucking so what?
That doesn't magically make redistributionist policies (and all other equalization policies) libertarian.
>believe several wasteful government funded programs should stop receiving funding
>believe marijuana should be legalized
>believe the military should have a severe reduction in funding
>believe the US should have almost open borders with regards who it lets in
>believe some welfare and government aid for the poor should still exist
>believe that taxation should be used to enact such things and that the amount of taxation should depend upon one's income
>believe in a free almost unregulated market
>but do want some government protections to ensure monopolies can't happen
>don't want a communist government
>don't want corporations to buttfuck citizens
Which square Sup Forums?
They're nice people who get ignored and overrun by authoritarian left drones (who in most cases probably believe themselves to be libertarian left). That or they're smoking grass.
Reminder that this is traditionally what left vs right meant.
a ton of people on Sup Forums identify as classical liberals
>unironically merging idealist and materialist ideologies
>being this cucked
>but communism is authoritarian
Not according to commies. You see, real communism has never been tried.
>not getting the point
The original spectrum was between authoritarianism and anarchy. The original democrats were interested in bigger governments, while republicans wanted a smaller government.
Get fucked.
Yes, and in a time of a real crisis, your government would be seized by mob or a foreign power. Either way you would be in an authoritarian government in the end.
Because leftism is an inherently authoritarian ideology. Redistribution of property is impossible without a large structure in place to coerce people into complying. Otherwise the whole system falls apart when a single person decides he doesn't want to play along.
>why don't we talk about people who effectively don't matter
You answered your own question there, faggot.
I'm pretty sure the terms left and right originated in the french revlutionary parlament, which had egalitarians on the left and royalists on the right.
Capitalism and by extent libertarians/ancaps became associated with the right because the left is inherently anticapitalist. (The "true" left as in the far left, anyway).
Libertarian leftism isn't a thing. Capitalism already allows for communes and coops to exist, so if you're some kind of hippie but you don't want to forcefully reallocate property then you're just a right-wing libertarian.
I like capitalism and want the government to tax me to do things with it though
Iceland also has a very homogeneous population of only about 330000 people. So maybe something kind of like libertarian leftism is possible in a tiny secluded island nation where everybody is basically the same culturally and ethnically.
That sort of political system just can't be scaled up, and it still requires at least some coercion by government. I see what you mean though, it does appear to at least lean somewhat in the direction of that bottom-left quadrant.
...
>the people demonstrated we voluntarily agree to use the government as a tool to service the people.
The subset of the people in question did so, yes.
Is the same mob going to allow the subset of the icelandic population who do NOT voluntarily agree to not participate?
I somehow doubt it.
Consequentially it's just as authoritarian. That a larger percentage of the population consents means literally nothing so long as those who don't are still coerced along.
Taxes are anti-libertarian.
>would be
Sup Forums often repeats the meme you did that there is no path to the green square but we managed it. Whether it can work long term is a different question but I think it can, at least here.
It's been shown many times that the mobs are not a problem here, as long as we don't get too many immigrants even mobs serve the interests of the group. Civic duty, responsibility and awareness of social contracts blossom when the government is not authoritarian and the society is homogeneous.
I don't pretend to have the answers but I lean more and more to global balkanization. It would spread out the balance of power across the world and give people a real voice in their local representative government. Politicians can't represent the interests of millions of people unless those people have almost everything in common.
Being an idealist has nothing to do with your political leaning.
But I also want the government to put very little control on the market, spend less, offer people more personal freedoms, and have less border control.
>communism is authoritarian
You have no idea what communism is.
Your libertarian left inevitably becomes communism because the strong will always take over the weak.
>put very little control on the market
Taxes are part of that government control on the market, so raising taxes is anti-libertarian.
>spend less
What do you need the taxes for if you want the government to spend less?
>offer people more personal freedoms, and have less border control
Taxes are not needed for that, in fact the only thing we need to get that is for the government to do nothing.
coming from someone who doesn't know clean drinking water.
>government offer personal freedoms
Nigga do you even enlightenment? Your freedoms come from God, it's the government's duty to preserve them. Infringing on them is immoral and an affront to humanity.
Liberals get the bullet too. Once there's no longer a need for faggot rallies you will be placed in a work camp.
Communism is not authoritarian, there is no state in real communism. I fucking hate communism, but it's time for real talk
... but it is you retard
The idea says it isn't, it's just a fair share of resources to everyone, but the only way to enforce this is via authoritarian gov't. There isn't a single historical case where communism wasn't authoritarian (and didn't lead to mass murders)
If there was a sizable subset of the icelandic population who sincerely didn't want a government they could have and would have seized the opportunity in the financial collapse. People were emotional and easily swayed, small groups could have overwhelmed the government buildings, even killed all the cops if they wanted. There were no such voices heard at all.
You could argue that the government could have called in foreign allies to secure the peace but that's just not the dominant culture here, if the people had demolished the government and continued riots that would have been seen as a message about the future of the nation. We wouldn't be a cohesive unit that can really call itself a nation anymore. I think almost no matter how small the group was that did it it would still represent a dominant sentiment to be taken very seriously.
It doesnt exist. You cant regulate all of the wealth in an economy without a state. ancoms and shit are worse than actual Nazis, because at least their system has function and can exist IRL. All leftlibertarians are LARPers.
>I also want the government to ... offer more personal freedoms.
The government can't give that. Only spend your taxed money to take them away.
Trump was the closest thing to that yet. In Britain there was the BNP but they're pretty much irrelevant now.
Taxes is not the only part of government control on the market though. There are regulations in place to prevent monopolies, regulations in place for companies to ensure their products are safe, etc.
Taxes isn't the only part of government control on the market. Raising taxes is anti-libertarian, but reducing government control in other ways on the market is pro libertarian.
>Be in communism
>Have something worth something
>Authority declares it is money
>Get sent to gulag by authority
>"At least it's a classless and free society"
>minarchist
Just admit it, youre a closet commie.
>well atleast im progressive
If the government is currently restricting freedoms and you push for the government to offer more freedoms, then that is the government offering people more freedom.
The easiest and most commonly pushed of such illegal things that people want the freedom to do is the legalization of marijuana, for example.
>Raising taxes is anti-libertarian, but reducing government control in other ways on the market is pro libertarian.
Yes, but at that point you're just a guy who's somewhat less libertarian than the guy who's anti-regulations AND anti-taxes. You're not a "left libertarian", you're just less libertarian.
Because "Libertarian Left" is an Oxymoron.
Leftism requires regulations.
Libertarianism requires none.
As any internet forum will show you, a libertarian environment is a right wing environment, as shown by places of high authority (Tumblr, etc) versus places of much lower authority (Sup Forums, etc). Which is not to say you can't have places with high authority and right wing views, but to say you CANNOT have leftism without enforcement.
People don't ACT like that place doesn't exist, it literally does not exist. On fact the graph should have a retarded somewhat question mark shape tapering to the point.
Because they don't actually exist. Ancom and related things are not actually possible. They ignore very basic things like iron law of oligarchy and conservation of sovereignty. The only way to have equality is to force it with a totalitarian state.
It is simply puts the authoritarian role at a central place in a nation to give the large group of followers that exist in society a way to be represented by authority.
As opposed to letting the corporate boss make all the rules (eg work 7 days, no vacation, unlivable wages, etc) and play the authoritarian role.
the actual implementation defines what it actually is
"communism isn't authoritarian"
is like saying
"feminine penis"
It is objectively authoritarian you cretin. That doesn't necessarily make it bad, violence is the foundation of society, but pretending it isn't because you fear association is silly.
They generally don't want to tax because they don't believe in private property. But their entire understanding of property comes from liberalism, so it's false and dumb.
Like i said, the size of the subset doesn't matter. It could be literally just you.
Try refusing to pay your taxes and see what happens. See how free you really are.
You don't have that freedom.
Therefore iceland isn't libertarian left.
sick state != state
Forceful redistribution of resources is a violation of the NAP. Left libertarian doesn't exist, it simply cannot.
This is pure linguistic semantics, but you are still wrong.
The government is not offering you more freedom. It is offering to restrain them less.
Get the fuck out of here, Ed!
Anarcho communism is still fucking cancerous.
Libertarianism doesn't necessarily imply anarchism either
now: police forces dissasembles unregulated, untaxed, commercial transactions of weed
weed legalized: police forces dissasembles unregulated, untaxed, commercial transactions of weed
????
what's Sup Forums's opinion on Hobbes' theory of the social contract? Should I make a new thread? This is basic college level stuff, but completely ignored by modern civilization.
Lib Right is really the only thing that can function properly....