pull down to refresh
31 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 23 Jan \ on: Trump's Annexation Proposals Should Be Nonstarters Politics_And_Law
Sounds like the writer is another 'libertarian' who voted for Kamala and her government ownership principle
I'm starting to believe critics of libertarians who say they all came from the left and never actually left despite their Mises and Rand rhetoric
There was a big blowup on Libertarian twitter this week when Trump freed Ross. It was blockback from the Trump deal of "if you libertarians vote for me, I will free Ross and put a Libertarian as part of my cabinet".
A large segment of twitter Libertarians were strongly against this. They literally would've preferred to not back Trump, instead vote for a Libertarian candidate, and lose the election and gain nothing.
All this reminded me of why I distanced myself from Libertarian / Mises in 2010....a fairly big percentage of the people are living in a fantasy land. They live in the world we "ought" to have instead of the world we actually have. As a result, they can never make any political headway and constantly shoot themselves in the foot. They are very poor political strategist (probably from high percentage of autistics in the movement), and thus are easily outflanked by those more experienced with how human society operates.
The left was able to make the "long march thru the institutions" by playing the long game and being very incremental in their approach. They saw that the US is a 2 party system, played that game, and they wound up taking over large swaths of both parties.
But many libertarians however would prefer to be principled losers and complain on twitter. Checker players in a 3D chess world.
reply
1000 percent correct
reply
All this reminded me of why I distanced myself from Libertarian / Mises in 2010....a fairly big percentage of the people are living in a fantasy land. They live in the world we "ought" to have instead of the world we actually have. As a result, they can never make any political headway and constantly shoot themselves in the foot.
The way I always figured it was that they made the perfect the enemy of the good. There was a lot of good that Ron Paul could have done, but he wasn’t always good and pure enough for the hard core Libertarians (notice the big “L”. They will f it up every time with that kind of thinking. They are never satisfied with what they could have gotten versus what they wanted with purity. Lately, I think some of them are starting to come around to the good enough kind of thinking.
reply
Sounds like the writer is another 'libertarian' who voted for Kamala and her government ownership principle
I don’t think any libertarians voted for Kamala and her collectivist plans for everybody. Real, small “l” libertarians are a bit different from the big “L” Libertarians on a lot of points. I think the Libertarians have to bend their philosophical outlook to belong to a party. After all, what is.a party beside being a collectivist venture?
reply