Libertarians have always been corporatist shills. They are there to convince conservatives that corporations are good as they are getting crushed by these same corporations.
I used to frequent Reason all the time. They've always have some impressively dedicated trolls in the comments. I don't visit much any more, but do check in on occasion, including today. There's an article about how bad it is to worry about mail in voting. It's a shit article, but just as I expected, the author got savaged in the comments. Every time I've checked in on Reason the past few years, I've seen the same thing. TDS editorial, comments saying "AYFKM? What happened to this publication?"
I don't know if they got bought out or compromised or what, or if cucking just comes naturally to pundits. Nonetheless, it's refreshing to see that the userbase still recognizes bullshit when they see it.
Libertarians are retarded. They immediately sided with Democrats once Trump won. That's why the Libertarian Party sucks. They accepted a boatload of Democrat cash and for the next 4 years sided with Democrats on basically everything. Justin Amash supported every fake impeachment and sided with Democrats when we all knew they massively abused the surveillance state to weaponize government against their political opposition but they still sided with them anyways. Libertarian party an Libertarian mouth pieces are fucking retarded. This coming from someone who's pretty fuckin libertarian but also not a retard who wants completely free trade and open borders while they could care less about dismantling the welfare state first. Smart libertarians went the way of Stefan Molyneux and realized we don't have time to undo 30 years of commie indoctrination to convince stupid people why libertarian ideas might be better before the complete destruction of the country takes place thus requiring more drastic and immediate actions so we still have the chance to have these conversations in the future.
Diversity in their eyes would also mean a company ran entirely by black people is diverse, but a company ran 65% by whites, 35% by other races "isn't diverse enough".
It's like how 6% of America makes it into 85%+ of all commercials.
Almost everything Reason or low IQ libertarians advocate for has nothing to do with a free market. Our current system with transnational corporations is so far removed from anything resembling a free market. Monopolies and cartels arise because of government interference, subsidizing, and heavy-handed regulations. When someone is defending the rights of these large āprivateā corporations and institutions, they are defending the network of politicians and bureaucrats that prop them up. Free markets and free trade is ideally the most efficient way to run an economy, but given the relationship of governments and corporations (even outside the United States), we arenāt even close to being there. Thatās why antitrust legislation and regulations to protect civil liberties is so important because there are no other āfree marketā solutions since we do not exist in one. It would be great to live in a world where they wouldnāt be needed, but that is a delusional pipe dream, much like the communists who constantly claim that ārealā communism has never been tried.
Back in the Ron Paul days it was about personal liberty and small government. But an ever growing section of the country are gimme dats and border jumpers. Those populations can't self govern, so this concept won't work.
Well I'm a libertarian and don't care about drugs, but regardless think they should be legal.
Only retard libertarians want zero laws. Legalizing drugs would have to come with social conduct laws (Illegal to be homeless).
I want a society where you are either self sufficient, accept gov help at the expense of liberity (e.g. rehab, job assignment, someone waking you up at 6 AM to do community service, etc), or exiled to some desigated zone with 0 funding or goverment and just other degenerates and you are totally on your own
A small tropical island nation is perfect for growing sugarcane. They devote most of their agricultural capacity to it, and export sugar, using the profits to import the food they need. Then their crops get hit by a disease that just hits sugarcane. Or their main trading partner moves to another source for sugar. They are devastated. Not just one business or industry, but an indispensable foundation of their whole economy. One hiccup has made it so they can't feed their own people. Because it was more "efficient" to go all in on one commodity and be dependent on others for the basics.
Imagine:
A country outsources almost all of their manufacturing capacity to another country. Then that country becomes hostile. Or that country faces a crisis that requires them to use all those resources for themselves. Now the first country is left high and dry, because it was "cheaper" to let the other country take care of the basics.
Imagine:
A web services company decides to let another company handle all their cloud computing. Then the bigger company decides to put the boot down and kick the first company off their platform. A company is destroyed on someone else's whim, because it was "easier" to let a specialized market middleman hold the keys to the castle.
Globalist "efficiency" is a trap. It's a web to catch unsuspecting flies. It's a vulnerability, it's fragility, it's a thermal exhaust port. The trap may be sprung by accident or by evil. It doesn't matter. Either way, it kills you just the same.
This is not a difficult lesson to learn. It's easy to understand and easy to spot when it happens, which it does often. Anyone who deliberately denies the hazard can safely be assumed to be either a shill for something sinister, or a dunce.
"Free minds and free markets."
"POPULISM IS BAD."
Free markets except for ideas, then we will tell you what's good.
Diversity. Except diversity of opinion.
Inclusion. As long as you exclude Pupulism
What the hell happened to reason. The TDS in editorial and some of the commenters is unreal.
Libertarians have always been corporatist shills. They are there to convince conservatives that corporations are good as they are getting crushed by these same corporations.
I used to frequent Reason all the time. They've always have some impressively dedicated trolls in the comments. I don't visit much any more, but do check in on occasion, including today. There's an article about how bad it is to worry about mail in voting. It's a shit article, but just as I expected, the author got savaged in the comments. Every time I've checked in on Reason the past few years, I've seen the same thing. TDS editorial, comments saying "AYFKM? What happened to this publication?"
I don't know if they got bought out or compromised or what, or if cucking just comes naturally to pundits. Nonetheless, it's refreshing to see that the userbase still recognizes bullshit when they see it.
Libertarians are retarded. They immediately sided with Democrats once Trump won. That's why the Libertarian Party sucks. They accepted a boatload of Democrat cash and for the next 4 years sided with Democrats on basically everything. Justin Amash supported every fake impeachment and sided with Democrats when we all knew they massively abused the surveillance state to weaponize government against their political opposition but they still sided with them anyways. Libertarian party an Libertarian mouth pieces are fucking retarded. This coming from someone who's pretty fuckin libertarian but also not a retard who wants completely free trade and open borders while they could care less about dismantling the welfare state first. Smart libertarians went the way of Stefan Molyneux and realized we don't have time to undo 30 years of commie indoctrination to convince stupid people why libertarian ideas might be better before the complete destruction of the country takes place thus requiring more drastic and immediate actions so we still have the chance to have these conversations in the future.
I don't know, but they seem really bipolar now. They have author(s) who still write good articles, and then author(s) who shill this nonsense.
And to think āReasonā used to be reasonable.
Diversity in their eyes would also mean a company ran entirely by black people is diverse, but a company ran 65% by whites, 35% by other races "isn't diverse enough".
It's like how 6% of America makes it into 85%+ of all commercials.
As long as you consider everyone being darker than a chocolate bar 'diversity', sure.
Almost everything Reason or low IQ libertarians advocate for has nothing to do with a free market. Our current system with transnational corporations is so far removed from anything resembling a free market. Monopolies and cartels arise because of government interference, subsidizing, and heavy-handed regulations. When someone is defending the rights of these large āprivateā corporations and institutions, they are defending the network of politicians and bureaucrats that prop them up. Free markets and free trade is ideally the most efficient way to run an economy, but given the relationship of governments and corporations (even outside the United States), we arenāt even close to being there. Thatās why antitrust legislation and regulations to protect civil liberties is so important because there are no other āfree marketā solutions since we do not exist in one. It would be great to live in a world where they wouldnāt be needed, but that is a delusional pipe dream, much like the communists who constantly claim that ārealā communism has never been tried.
Every libertarian Iāve met only cares about legalizing drugs.
They like to kill unborn babies too.
Back in the Ron Paul days it was about personal liberty and small government. But an ever growing section of the country are gimme dats and border jumpers. Those populations can't self govern, so this concept won't work.
That's just their come-on for the stoner vote.
Well I'm a libertarian and don't care about drugs, but regardless think they should be legal.
Only retard libertarians want zero laws. Legalizing drugs would have to come with social conduct laws (Illegal to be homeless).
I want a society where you are either self sufficient, accept gov help at the expense of liberity (e.g. rehab, job assignment, someone waking you up at 6 AM to do community service, etc), or exiled to some desigated zone with 0 funding or goverment and just other degenerates and you are totally on your own
Imagine:
A small tropical island nation is perfect for growing sugarcane. They devote most of their agricultural capacity to it, and export sugar, using the profits to import the food they need. Then their crops get hit by a disease that just hits sugarcane. Or their main trading partner moves to another source for sugar. They are devastated. Not just one business or industry, but an indispensable foundation of their whole economy. One hiccup has made it so they can't feed their own people. Because it was more "efficient" to go all in on one commodity and be dependent on others for the basics.
Imagine:
A country outsources almost all of their manufacturing capacity to another country. Then that country becomes hostile. Or that country faces a crisis that requires them to use all those resources for themselves. Now the first country is left high and dry, because it was "cheaper" to let the other country take care of the basics.
Imagine:
A web services company decides to let another company handle all their cloud computing. Then the bigger company decides to put the boot down and kick the first company off their platform. A company is destroyed on someone else's whim, because it was "easier" to let a specialized market middleman hold the keys to the castle.
Globalist "efficiency" is a trap. It's a web to catch unsuspecting flies. It's a vulnerability, it's fragility, it's a thermal exhaust port. The trap may be sprung by accident or by evil. It doesn't matter. Either way, it kills you just the same.
This is not a difficult lesson to learn. It's easy to understand and easy to spot when it happens, which it does often. Anyone who deliberately denies the hazard can safely be assumed to be either a shill for something sinister, or a dunce.
very good
Good post.
muh free market
rigs the market when hedge funds lose tons of money
muh populism
"PATRIOTISM REEEEEEEEE"
Right!
The wokesters there should scrub their motto off the magazine cover.
And write an apology article: āWhy free minds and free markets leads to populism, and why that is badā
They can also change the name of their magazine by adding a T.
T reason.
Big companies only want atomized individuals.