Why is libertarianism so unpopular?

Why is libertarianism so unpopular?

Why is not giving a fuck about social issues, while also being fiscally conservative such a rare combination?

inb4 muh anarchyball memes

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=UPmo2e-bAMQ
youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

They are just Commies who took Lenin's capital reform a tad further and accept economical inequality as the only inequality.
The Market somehow magically builds utopia too.


The largest Economics Redpill is realizing Libertarians are just Commies in disguise.

wew lad

communism = capitalism
holy shit u r a genius
why didnt i think of it first???

Democrats are not libertarian because
- A, They want their gibs, and have no sense of personal responsibility.
- B. Social libertarianism isn't enough for them because they think minorities won't make it unless they get special treatment. Letting people do what they want is oppressive.

As for Republicans, I can only assume it's because the party is so heavily infested with Christians, who try to enforce social conservatism. Many of the most reasonable Republicans lean Libertarian, but don't go along with shit like open borders.

Well meme'd

because it's a true meritocracy and most people wouldn't succeed under it

and also it's retarded

lolbergs are niggers that have turned gibsmedat into an ideology
>da gubmint tellin me I can't deal drugs n sheeeiiit
>copyright lawz is statist n sheeeiiit
>nigga u can't tell me not to bring a camcorder into a movie n sheeeiiit
>paying for software lul I only use shareware n sheeeiiit
>Bitcoin is real nigga money I can use it to buy illegal sheeeiiit

A nation built that has no fundamental loyalty other than brand loyalty wont' have a strong base of community which is a bedrock of society.

>Why is libertarianism so unpopular?

It requires an understanding of economics most people don't have.

youtube.com/watch?v=UPmo2e-bAMQ

>victimless crime
>IP is statist, copyright is the market solution
>private property owners set the terms in their establishments
>copyright again
>bitcoin is a thing, it has no connection to ideology

It's unpopular because there are no comedians or news agencies shilling for it.

Classical liberalism > libertarianism

I used to be libertarian. Human rights are absolute and inalienable. Ends do not justify the means.

Classical liberalism is basically libertarianism in a christian society. If we want freedom to work, we need christianity. We need a homogenous society. We need to undo the socialist deconstruction. This is the ultimate redpill.

social issues are important, without social cohesion you do not have a nation

Sometimes, for some people, thinking can be hard. Most people would rather vote for someone who promises them someone else's money than think about where that money comes from and what principles are violated to obtain it. There is also the social shaming. Say that welfare should be ended at a party (yes I do this all the time, fuck you) and you will get shouted down as a racist and sociopath. All the while people will not see that your plan is actually the most compassionate because it will move people away from the statist plantation. Say that business owners should be able to discriminate and people will shout you down for the same reasons, not knowing that competition will ensure that all are served except for complete closet cases.

>this guy with a degree in psychology will explain to people who don't understand economics how the Austrian school, which doesn't use maths, is superior
10/10 kek'd heartily

Because normally the only ones who get memed into drinking the "free market" kool-aid are happy merchants. Most republicans (as in voters, not politicians) aren't fiscally conservative, they just think they are.

The clog knows

Lol apparently you dont realize Moly discarded his libertarian beliefs and made a video explaining why its a flawed ideology that wont work.

Hes NatSoc now.

>Why is libertarianism so unpopular?

Because it's inherently not a populist worldview or ideology.

There is no scope in libertarianism to buy votes by promising to provide endless gibs or easy answers to economic problems. It requires one be capable of considering, and comprehending, consequences of policies which are not immediately obvious and frequently unseen.

Also because 30-50 years of open borders and race creationism have left the West - which contains the only societies with any libertarian character - facing disaster due to demographic displacement by hostile foreigners. This has resulted in a considerable number of libertarians getting redpilled and going on to form a major chunk of the Alt-right and leaving behind a ragtag collection of serious autists and the confused retards (SJWs, just slightly smarter and less obnoxious than most SJWs) who call themselves 'left-libertarians'.

You wanna be libertarian until you need the help of police or fire department. Do you pay them after they put your fire out? Hypocrite

It's fucking stupid. I don't give a shit about money, I want a decent culture.

Because privatized prisons are just a form of legal slavery.

Source: your leaf filled asshole

Bad analogy, you're already forced by the state to pay for these services so you might as well use them.

Have you seen an IQ bell curve? The free market would be devastating for any immigrants. Plus, without welfare or relocation programs many people wouldn't come here.

And public prisons aren't? At least when used for victimless crimes.

Taxation is just a form of legal slavery.

Austrian school > Neo-Keynesian

not an argument

He's still a libertarian. He just complained about their hypocrisy on some things and how they don't get anything done/are ineffectual politically.

This. If you want to get rid of mud expose them to the market in which they are not intelligent to succeed.

It is appealing to have a lot of important things managed by a group of people to "free" people up to do what they want with their own lives which is why it seems more and more people want universal health care, basic income, or are against arms and wanting the police to only have arms. It gives them a sense of security. They are willing to give up some of their money or other peoples money so there can be this central control in their lives.

Libertarianism is a joke

Because it's a weak ideology that says "hurrrrrrr let in all the Somalis as long as they embrace muh constitution and muh values"
It's cancer.

Not an argument.

He is still an Ancap, listen to the call in show. He doesn't hide his intentions there. Molymeme just went on a tendie flinging autism rant against certain libertarians, in part for not being more open to spanking their kids. Good luck trying to get religious conservatives on your side. I still respect the guy but whew.

Who told you that?

>Plus, without welfare or relocation programs many people wouldn't come here
Far more people came here before there were safety nets and the results weren't much better. Tribalist conflict, organized crime, and the ghettoization of neighborhoods and cities.

Freeing the markets as much as possible = centrally planned economy now?

Not with privatized borders kiddo :^)

This, sadly. This is why multiculturalism is the true enemy of libertarianism/freedom.

Are you retarded? Look at the statistic on the fall of poverty before the government got involved. Poverty was on its way to being obliterated, then the government got involved and it flat lined remaining stagnant for decades.

Somehow... He has grown younger..

>90% of rural homes in the US didn't have electricity in 1939
>but there was almost no poverty
I'm sure the free market would've fixed that real quick.

You can have the most strict immigration rules in the world, and still be a libertarian country.

Raising the requirement for getting a green card from a high school education to a PhD doesn't increase the size of government at all.

Most people just don't don't care because they don't have any racial bias, and under libertarianism you wouldn't have to pay immigrants any welfare.

Bullshit

Nothing keeps nations more pure than private property, you can literally eliminate all negroids from your neighborhood and pay people to stop them from entering.

Wow, way to answer my question with a resounding, 'yes'. How does a lack of electricity in 1930 in rural areas have anything to do with the trajectory of poverty rates?

>Me: that car is gong up that hill
>You: I don't think so, its painted red

Because it's the ideology that really isn't.

To compare it to religion, being an atheist would be the political equivalent of being apolitical; simply not involved in politics or apathetic to. The fedora atheist would be the anarchist; it's not enough that I do, or do not do, but rather that I must destroy that which I disagree with.

A libertarian would be the rough equal to an agnostic. I don't practice or believe strongly in any religion formally(I don't hold to any political party firmly), but I believe that God might exist maybe, I don't know. (I believe government might be necessary in certain cases, etc.)

So, the majority of people that are don't like politics or government are actually apolitical. The edgy conviction kids are anarchists. Libertarians, minarchs, etc are an unsatisfying middle ground of people attempting to use the government to limit itself.

It also doesn't help that the title of liberal is an insult and so distanced from the original meaning that it can't be used for their movement.

>a large portion of Americans didn't have electricity, plumbing, or cars
>people regularly died from polio
>life expectancy was 48
>25% of children died before age 5
>average work week was 50-60 hours
>then the government got involved and stopped them all from being poor

Whoa, actually used this same argument myself. If you define politics as the process by which power is exercised, it does work as an analogy to atheism/agnosticism.

>Hey guys, listen, listen, the king of england, no really, I have a good point. The king of England in 1500 lived in poverty because he didn't have modern technology that we have today.
Literally what you are saying.

This conversation is over.

My problem with arguments like these is that we don't know if the government did it or if there was an increase in productivity due to mechanization, fossil fuels, electricity and other factors. Laborer production went up due to these factors and allowed people to make much more money, except in depressions which are largely caused by central banks creating the conditions for malinvestment (low interest rates, fiat currency, etc). By the same token I could say that government actually restricted advancement out of poverty by creating depressions, meanwhile none of these innovations can be credited to government.

want to know the truth? the leadership is trash

>majority of people lived without technology was getting outdated even in the early 1900s
>autistic screeching about kings and red cars driving uphill
I would shut up too.

nigger because life is about balance

if culture is too restrictive, we expand towards freedom
if culture is too lax, we retract towards conservatism

careful not to confuse "libertarian" utopia with the general drive to reduce social and government control. We have gone off the deep end on social control, and now desperately need a new non-religious moral authority

libertarianism is currently failing because it doesn't address that moral authority disparity

Because of the right/left dichotomy.

Meanwhile Elves are turning humans into Christmas shart trees and Nobody cares

Prior to government intervention in infrastructure and technology, nobody had crowdfunded or privately funded transcontinental railroads, electric grids, interstates, airports, space programs, the internet, etc. We know those things happened. Without tax dollars appropriated to them, it's a big hypothetical as to when or if they would've happened.

>nigger because life is about balance

Not an argument, what does this even mean. REEEEEEEE.

>We have gone off the deep end on social control, and now desperately need a new non-religious moral authority

Does this necessitate government action though?

>libertarianism is currently failing because it doesn't address that moral authority disparity

It's failing because it doesn't offer people gibmedats. The government cannot legislate morality. Do you really think that having a conservative government could put the cat in the bag regarding our current moral problems? If there were no government programs women wouldn't be able to divorce men left and right and use the state as their husbands. Are cultural problems are largely due to their being a safety net of some sort (welfare, employment opportunities within the state, mandates to employers, state universities) for these degenerates.

The issue with what you're claiming is that when the government is a resource, people utilize it.

For instance, the transcontinental railroad in the United States was financed by many private companies, but they petitioned the government for bonds and other aid and got them.

Likewise, the electrification of the United States became a part of the TVA because companies knew they could get the government to pay a part of the bill.

Likewise, the technology that actually started all these improvements, perhaps minus DARPA, I don't know enough about it was privately funded and profit driven.

>private companies weren't able to secure the funds necessary to provide their services to the masses without government assistance
Right, now remind me how it's detrimental to aid them in succeeding.

wew lad

This get's to the heart of the libertarian argument. If these companies can't get the funding themselves, why should I have my money involuntarily taken from me in the form of taxes, in order to subsidize the business? They can come up with a business plan and if there is enough demand for investors to give them the venture capital, then they can build the railroad, electric grid or whatever. If there is not enough demand to justify the project then why bother? They're just using the government as an easy way out. To boot, if I don't pay for it I go to jail.

It's on you to be a good salesman for your idea.

>it's failing because it doesn't offer people gibmedats
No, nigger, it's failing because people on a BASIC FUCKING LEVEL are fucking ATROCIOUS
and don't DO WHAT IS RIGHT. Libertarianism -fails- because capitalism eventually results in extreme corporations with extreme power, headed by people who aren't questioned.

Maybe it doesn't necessitate government power- then what does it necessitate? What's your plan, asshole? Because right now it's the corporations which leash us, not the government.

>Libertarianism -fails- because capitalism eventually results in extreme corporations with extreme power, headed by people who aren't questioned.

How do corporations wield power? They can't force me to buy a product. They wield power by using the government to provide them favorable conditions. If the legal scope of the government is extremely limited in nature then the government cannot be co-opted without the most obvious corruption.

>Maybe it doesn't necessitate government power- then what does it necessitate? What's your plan, asshole?

If there were no government programs women wouldn't be able to divorce men left and right and use the state as their husbands. Are cultural problems are largely due to their being a safety net of some sort (welfare, employment opportunities within the state, mandates to employers, state universities) for these degenerates.

>Because right now it's the corporations which leash us, not the government.

See previous.

The government is useless at everything it does. Without distorting social structures by pumping money into unproductive groups of people and serving as a surrogate husband, these degenerates have to get to work.

There is a reason most people grow out of being Libertarians, it just won't work.

The flaw is not with the ideology, but with the people. There are simply too many stupid people and shitskins that rely on the federal government and too many people that are interested in abusing the power entrusted to them by those stupid people and shitskins. We would have to kill tens of millions and balkanize for there to even be a chance for it in the US.

A strong National Capitalist society is the best we can hope for, and even that is going to be tough.

Open borders is a concept that all of us have learned to stay the hell away from.

Blame A Leppo for your Libterarian woes. he attracted nothing but pure faggots to the party and doomed the party for all time as dipshits.

Libertarianism is a very wide net of beliefs. Libertarian economics are fairly well established as valid but not libertarian social politics or libertarian ethics.

Molymeme often says that in an IQ 90 society even democracy starts to fall apart.

Democracy is a fucking meme.

>how do corporations wield power
>because lol corporations have no control over the market
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

I'm not even going to read the rest you can't be serious

It's unpopular for three reasons:

1 - it's internally consistent and people hate that because people are naturally hypocrites
2 - it's been psy-opped into irrelevance because it disrupts the military-industrial complex. ie. Libertarian = No Roads meme is a short circuit to keep from achieving freedom and low taxes.
3 - it's popular among smart people and everyone hates smart people in the US.

Most libertarians are Reddit tier fedora tippers. They are libertarians not because they have rationally assessed the argument and have a firm grasp of economics, but because they like to be able to hold a holier than thou attitude to mainstream views.
While libertarians advocate free market capitalism almost every single one I have met (I would consider myself one), lacks a basic understanding of economics, they couldn't draw a supply demand curve to explain the actions of their invisible hand, their faith is religious in nature, not based on reason and very little experience.
The real heavy weight libertarians (Friedman, nozick, Hayek) are usually unknown to these types who get their news and ideology from Facebook pages.

Bred to worship the state. Or they don't like open borders + benefits since there is no way in hell you are going to convince a welfare state to vote away all benefits and the right to vote for immigrants and the poor.

Where I live all the fire departments are volunteer but private. The firemen dont get paid and when they come put out a fire you do pay for the resources used afterward.

Corporations cannot compel you to do anything without collusion with the government. They are at the mercy of the market and must please their customers as long as their is competition.

youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs

You tell me OP

>because of him

That's pretty much what you get when everyone in your political party knows they're never going to win.

Non-serious people like Gary "I'm with her" Johnson.

Two reasons.

First, the libertarian challenge to the status quo (the Ron Paul movement and such) proved ineffective. People hate the establishment more than they love liberty.

Second, increasing centralization of power leads to increasing politicization of the people which leads to everyone realizing their surrounded by madmen and really might need a government to stomp on the other guy.