And your credibility self-destructs with this terrible generalization of libertarianism....

Wrong, scoobie doo.  My description was actually accurate. Libertarianism is an ideology of pure greed disguised as an ethic. They attempt to take something with instrumental utilty--freedom--and turn it into something that's good for it's own sake, regardless of the consequences to others ultimately because they don't want to spend money or resources on others if they don't feel like it and are not personally benefiting from it. It's all about the $$ and personal gain either materially or emotionally.

Libertarians try to make their bullshit more palatable by tauting the freedom and charity principles. To hide the fact that they are greedy fuckwits who can't stand having to give up "their property" for someone else, they disguise it appealing to the notion that they will give it to charity anyway.  It's an argument convenience when no such thing will happen, nor is it practical.  The whole point is that they don't want to pay for other people whom they despise as leeches in the first place, so they wouldn't part with their money when they would rather buy something for themselves. 

Under Libertarianism, "property" is the ultimate value...in fact more valuable than causing untold suffering indirectly to others as a result of it's worship alongside freedom for it's own sake.


They want a neo-19th-century free-for-all society because they actually believe they will benefit from it. That's the goal.  That it would cause vast suffering for those not as fortunate as they are is irrelevant.  They don't give a shit, which is why they support an ideology of selfishness. They are Randian-lite. Fuck the poor people! Fuck those welfare bums!Fuck healthcare and people who don't have it. Fuck regulation, companies will, out of the goodness of their hearts, stop doing bad shit to people.  The magic invisible hand of Adam Smith will fix everything as they worship at the alter of the Market.

The fundamental premises behind their religion are false, including the idea that the market fixes all, is always better, freedom is good for it's own sake, property is more important than suffering, the sanctity of individual rights, and the bogus assumption that private everything is good. They also pose a false view of human nature as some isolated individual who is purely responsible for his own welfare, success, thus owns the "fruits of his labour" all by himself and owes society nothing.


Libertarianism is stupid. Period. As I said...a secular religion for teenagers because it appeals to anti-authority, freedom, and self-interest as the ultimate virtues.  Of course like you, most Libertardians don't like the truth, because stripping away the bullshit philosobabble you peddle to obfuscate exposes the poverty of your greedy little secular religion of the market and the self.


As I said, accurately: it's the "ME ME ME ME ME! Fuck em, I got mine" philosophy. If you disagree, you are wrong or lying, period.

Libertarianism, as defined from a book I read, is defined as an ideology where the individual has the freedom to live their life and make their own choices as they please, provided they don’t intrude on other’s lives.

Don’t see greed anywhere in that.

I don't think Friedman was scum. Libertarianism is about responsibility, a person should be responsible for their own acts and no others. They don't recognize a need to force others to care for their fellow man. They see taxes as a way to fairly distribute the burden for the things that affect us all, not a way to make society run. They have the expectation that every person in society is rational and able to handle responsibility, which I'm not sure in borne out by the data, but I figure its bad form to say someone isn't. I don't mean psychopaths and children, those are dealt with through responsible agents (judges and parents) I mean normal people (including myself) often act so dumb it's difficult to believe they feed themselves.

That's a load of crap, there's nobody who would disagree with that. The difference is different people say different things infringe on other's autonomy.

What matters is what you're actually advocating, not some vague and poorly defined piece of shit about your ideals. Libertarians need to be de-mystified, and stripped naked to reveal them for the authoritarians they really are.

What? Libertarianism and authoritarianism is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. Libs advocate total freedom while autos advocate total control.

Why not Major?  If it doesn't directly impact me, I don't see what the issue is.  If they want that for my government, that is different.

Like I said, since libertarianism is about the general freedom to choose, then yeah people should be allowed to be collectivists. Of course if it causes a seriously harmful problem in the neighborhood, then we have a problem.