3448
Comments (231)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
20
ReggieTabasco 20 points ago +20 / -0

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 ā€œprivateā€ 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 aren’t even close to being there. That’s why antitrust legislation and regulations to protect civil liberties is so important because there are no other ā€œfree marketā€ solutions since we do not exist in one. It would be great to live in a world where they wouldn’t be needed, but that is a delusional pipe dream, much like the communists who constantly claim that ā€œrealā€ communism has never been tried.

10
powershellder 10 points ago +11 / -1

Every libertarian I’ve met only cares about legalizing drugs.

6
Toughsky_Shitsky 6 points ago +8 / -2

They like to kill unborn babies too.

3
TheThreeSeashells 3 points ago +3 / -0

They're also pro-slavery. By that, I mean they think anyone in the world should be able to waltz into the U.S. and stay here. Since we know they are nothing more than a slave class and/or criminals, anyone who is for open borders is pro-slavery.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Toobin247 1 point ago +2 / -1

I’ve never understood this as a ā€œlibertarian ā€œ. Surely abortion violates the NAP

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
5
unicornpoop 5 points ago +5 / -0

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.

2
MAGA_MEXICAN_CHILI 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's the only thing Ron didnt do, was wrestle the reigns of what it means to be a Libertarian as a U.S citizen.

Now in that wake populism has taken up the bastion of being everything Libertarians should have been in recognizing the evil necessity of the state on a national scale but protecting the rights on the individual scale.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
2016TrumpMAGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's just their come-on for the stoner vote.

1
NeverTwitterer 1 point ago +1 / -0

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

1
deleted 1 point ago +4 / -3
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
3
Crockett 3 points ago +3 / -0

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.

3
MAGA_MEXICAN_CHILI 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's funny because the way I view efficiency and how my grandfather told me was the ability to get everything I need without going too far.

Just because Country A B C and D may be efficient in making 1 widget specialization each to me seems highly inefficient because of transportation. Where as having one country having the ability to create the 4 specialized widgets to me is efficient. Since as a person who needs those widgets I can go directly to the source (within a 50 mile radius) and pick up all the parts just in case the local -mart doesn't have them.

At some point libertarians do not recognize that supply chains are a thing and hinging the whole global market on very specific countries making very specific things eventually fucks everything up.

Making everything in house has always been the most efficient when it comes to production. You can monitor quality easily and keep on a eye on production. Exporting manufacturing is highly inefficient and those who buy into that 'free trade' are just morons.

1
Toobin247 1 point ago +2 / -1

I believe in free trade but it’s very dangerous to rely on one place for one thing. We’ve already seen this with PPE from China. Actually everything from China. But I don’t think free trade means lacking redundancy. Redundancy is just smart in any situation where you can’t afford a critical failure. One is none and two is one.

2
Goldlight 2 points ago +2 / -0

venezuela lol

1
Crockett 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yuuup.

1
Goldlight 1 point ago +1 / -0

very good

1
current_horror 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good post.