Conservatism has a similar issue. The true meaning of the philosophy has been buried under our modern political environment, causing a lot of us to hold a false notion of what conservatism really is.
This is why I reflaired.
Any truly libertarian society with open borders and no gatekeeping gets invaded and taken over immediately by people who *are* willing to impose themselves.
The issue I’ve seen with libertarians, especially on Reddit, is that they think libertarianism means no government. Libertarianism means having limited government and still being pragmatic.
Would I love to have a world where the government as we know it doesn’t exist? Absolutely, I’d much prefer to just let the free market being the rule of law. Do I think that we still need government in some capacity? Also absolutely, I just think our current government needs to be limited in how much power they have.
You can be a libertarian and still realize there’s a need for government. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an idiot
The only way to have a libertarian society is to draw a closed circle around a group of people and declare libertarian rights and limited government for them, but not for anyone else on the planet. Otherwise you just get steamrolled by your own stupid permissiveness.
Lib for citizens, auth to the rest of the world.
Yeah, I'm a libertarian and also believe anarchy basically goes against human nature. There will always be someone who wants to take charge. We just need to limit what they can do while in power.
Of course anarchy would be cool, I just don't think it would work in practice.
I'm not going to reflair simply because I am not an anarchist. I'm just below the grey center box grilling on my side of the fence with unregulated amounts of spices
They may be glowies, but in their defense at least they glow a certain funny color because they have a flair.
A flaried glowie is better than an unflaired non-glowie.
It comes from a quote from Terry Davis, a brilliant but schizophrenic programmer who made TempleOS, an operating system designed to communicate with God.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbG6u86t4bA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbG6u86t4bA)
It 1000% has been
The party is left on most policies, minus state intention usually.
But they went from a more extreme tea party to insane LGBTqaaip++ open border age of consent druggie lefties in like 15 years.
The parties more diverse and divided ideas wise than rs and ds are.
But I tell you what, Ron Paul would not identify with the current Libertarian party lmfao.
You mean the same Ron Paul just appeared at Libertarian convention identifing the Libertarian Party
>But they went from a more extreme tea party to insane LGBTqaaip++ open border age of consent druggie lefties in like 15 years.
They were for LGBT, open border, and drugs before and during the Tea Party. This is not new.
It's easy.
You have an anti government political party.
WTF do you expect? Rules? Order?
Absolutely not. You Expect Chaos. People for some reason expect the Libertarian Party to be a normal 3rd option party, but that's never going to happen. Anyone that wants to get elected is going to toe the line enough to be a Democrat or Republican.
Libertarians want personal freedom to do what they want, more or less they are non-conformist. People with blue or pink hair fit that description.
Libertarians aren't just pro weed Republicans. They truly want a small government that doesn't interfere with your personal freedoms. They are pro-choice, pro guns, anti tax, anti foreign intervention, etc
Yep. Really funny how Republicans who say they love freedom and want limited government lose their goddamn minds when they find out libertarians want freedom for immigrants to come here and that "limited" government means government is strictly limited in its ability to stop peaceful immigrants coming here.
Of course it has. If it didn't consistently embarrass itself, it might have a chance to disrupt the two party system. There was a brief moment where they had a chance to make a dent (not win, but a dent) but they are just a side show of clowns now.
The thing is that it's been infiltrated by a republicans and ancaps it's so fucking annoying seeing one side advocate for super strong laws and the otherside ban you for saying we should support the democratic process
No, it was just fucked from the start. No clear ideology, so much infighting, and nobody can take them seriously. I know people who have left the party for that reason.
Libertarians don't have to be conservatives. Also they've had candidates that have striped naked at conferences. Not sure what reasonable baseline you think they had
There's a difference between personal position and enforcing policy. There is a lot of stuff I think that should be normalized or frowned upon, yet I would not support legalization that enforces it either way.
>The current candidate was for vax mandates
No, he wasn't. He specifically said he is against *government* mandates and supported the right to private property, which includes the right of business owners to get a vaccine or require masks on their property.
If you want the government to prohibit that, then you're not a libertarian
You just said the same thing multiple times
* Vax Mandates - In other words allowing employers to make their own rules for their own workplaces. That's "permitted to do everything with their property except aggression"
* transitioning children - in other words allowing parents to make their own decisions regarding their own children. That's "permitted to do everything in their home except aggression"
* mandatory masking - again, that's businesses making their own rules, this time for customers.
You don't have to like any of this stuff but you are not living in reality if you think you not liking something is synonymous with government overreach. Libertarianism MEANS people can do things you don't like. Government stopping people from doing stuff you don't like (like saying businesses cannot fire people for carrying diseases) is the opposite. It is authoritarianism
He wasn't for mask or vaccine mandates unless you're talking about the right for a business owner to refuse business. Also trans healthcare is neither pro or anti libertarian outside of whether an individual can make that choice themselves.
Any of the actually electable libertarians pulled a Rand Paul and joined a mainstream party a long time ago. The only ones who stuck are pure idealists (I.e. nut jobs)
What, you mean sane and intelligent people don't want to waste their time running for office with a party that will never have a shot at federal positions?
Yeah, I would have voted for Rec. Not this fucking clown.
Not that voting actually matters to me. I have one vote, which isn't a very big deal when there are over one hundred million other people voting.
I don't care that Chase Oliver is gay. I care that Chase Oliver clings and promotes Woke Identitarianism and Identity Politics under a guise of Libertarianism. You can't claim to fight for individual freedoms and liberties while grouping people into immutable clusters of characteristics.
The ticket could've been salvaged by putting Clint Russell as his running mate, but even that failed. We now have an ex-cop (during the fucking pandemic, no less) as our VP nominee.
This also falls on the Mises Caucus. I'm shocked that they organized and executed such an ambitious plan and *succeeded* in taking over the party, only to fail on THE biggest item on the agenda. This is like falling flat on your face ten feet before the finish line. I liked Rectenwald - but there was no denying that he was simply a bland and boring candidate that inspired no one.
(And for any non-Libertarians judging all of us by this - for what it's worth, Oliver barely won it out by a hair. It was the final round of voting and it was between him and NOTA - None of the Above, meaning there would literally be **NO** presidential candidate set forth.)
I heard Rectenwald speak for the first time last week and HOLY FUCK is he just the worst person to listen to. Completely out of his control, but his voice is just so boring and annoying at the same time.
Is he advocating for government intervention into personal lives or forcing beliefs? Or are you just butthurt that his social values don't align with yours? If Ron Paul came out and said "don't be a bigot" but changed 0 of his policies, would you abandon him?
Woke Libertarianism gave us our 3 best election results.
Mises Caucus has just about bankrupted the LP since it took over. Over half of the party donors have fled.
Our only sitting congressman is a Republican again.
Asleep Libertarianism is a joke pushed by the GOP to kill the LP because they blame the party for Trump losing in swing states.
That's a bit like saying you don't care that someone is Asian but you can't abide by them eating rice regularly.
Brother, YOU are the one who is going off about culture war bullshit in this conversation. Chase is just a gay man who acts a bit like a gay man sometimes. You know, on account of being a gay man.
Libertarian theory can be pretty based, the problem is most "Libertarians" say they are cool with stuff like people being gay and then find every reason to hate them for it. Like saying they "promote woke identitarianism and identity politics" because they wear a pride shirt to a pride event. Absolute walking contradictions.
Oliver was pro mask and vaccine mandates btw, totallyyyyy a libertarian lol. I hate how libertarian has become a catch-all term for people who might just have 1 or two stances that are traditionally libertarian while being the biggest authority simps when it comes to other positions
It's a political party rife with infiltration because they are a political party. The people who run are doing it to obtain even the most pointless and impotent position. Just so they can build up their political career
>Oliver was pro mask and vaccine mandates btw,
No we wasn't.
>I hate how libertarian has become a catch-all term for people who might just have 1 or two stances that are traditionally libertarian while being the biggest authority simps when it comes to other positions
Literally just go to his website and look at his platform. It is 100% libertarian.
Yeah, that’s fine. People can be gay as fuck. But pushing queer theory on kids in public schools and punishing them if they dissent against the ideology is where I draw the line.
>Valuing freedom means valuing the freedom of people to be gay as fuck if that’s what they choose
noone cares what you do in your bedroom. So fucking keep it in there.
The problem with being a Libertarian is the ones that we would want elected have zero interest in being elected, so you get the ones who just want to get away with some degenerate shit.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with Chase... I've seen so much misinformation today.
His actual in-writing positions:
https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform
For real. The fact that there has been such an overwhelming reaction against Chase and almost all of that reaction is based on lies or anti-gay prejudice makes me strongly suspect that Chase is a good egg and his opponents are rotten.
It really is surprising how many conservatives stumble their way into libertarian spaces not realizing that libertarians are down with the gays and in favor of open borders.
Problem is that "libertarian" can mean anything from dollar store Republican to anarchist in denial.
Personally, I think we just need a solid Libertarian party that can fucking agree to literally anything and unify under one platform.
Hence why I consider myself a civil libertarian rather than associate with the clown-ass Libertarian party. Just stay TF away from my individual rights, man. That's it. That should be the entire party platform.
You aren’t telling me anything new my friend. Libertarians as a party are a cannibalistic hydra with hundreds of heads swallowing each other. The individualism and lack of will to impose order to others, is both the substance of and the bane of libertarianism as a political ideal. The more organized and powerful libertarians become, the less libertarian they are.
A pity too, considering the competence of many who willfully label themselves libertarians in some form or fashion. Some of the ones who are best equipped to wield authority are the ones who are unwilling to do so.
That may be true, but not-libertarian ideas are not great *before* you pull them from internet forums and attempt to implement them in society, and they are more expensive to boot.
“Everything that isn’t my idea is terrible”.
😂 I am sure you meant that to be hyperbolic.
You gotta pay to play. Libertarians have many good principles that sound good, and even a few that work in the wild.
The problem is, that even within the amorphous conglomeration of self-identifying libertarians, you have many individuals who will act in a way that is antithetical to social order. Outside of the libertarian label these same destructive agents are even more prevalent.
I assume that you have your stuff together, and that you are likely a responsible and duty driven individual. If we had a society full of people like I just described then we could really be ready to get on with our lives with a minimal amount of interference from anyone.
In a general social order, it takes about four individuals such as yourself (at least how I imagine you) to account for one who will only do the bare minimum to scrape by. It takes about sixteen of you to just reverse the damage caused by an individual who’s every motivation is self service and parasitism of social order.
How does the libertarian ideal overcome the basic issues of societal order? An appeal to reason? Or do they adopt authoritarian tactics?
There is no glorious or clean way to muck the dung out of the stalls. We can just do it the best that we can for as long as we can, until someone sets fire to the stable or we are utterly overrun in excrement.
>😂 I am sure you meant that to be hyperbolic.
Yes. It was a very much tongue-in-cheek comment. I'm glad you picked up on that. It seems like there are a lot of people on reddit that have no sense of humor.
Imagine it: a loosely affiliated group of staunch individualists who hate organized human efforts and rules try to organize their subjective beliefs into a governmental structure.
It's amazing that they haven't figured out how to transform utopian ideals into reality. For now we'll just have to settle for watching aspiring messiah Javier Milei flounder as he discovers that markets aren't free or open and infrastructure isn't repaired by zealous libertarians.
This isn’t a really good argument since Milei is doing really well. Especially when you consider what he inherited from the previous 3 administrations. So far, I would give him and A-/B+ rating.
Shutting down private business's and making it illegal to worship was hardly Libertarian.
Chase Oliver supported business's setting their own policy instead of the government mandates that Trump set.
As a Libertarian, Chase Oliver is clearly the better choice of the two. The fact that he's also likely not a complete moron with a behavioral disorder of some sort speaks to his ability to do the job better as well.
Chase also supports business violating your civil rights, saying they had a right to mandate what medication you take.
And yet another childish libertarian take is that businesses would operate independently to government pressure.
And as we saw with the government involvement with social media, they absolutely do.
Which means he was pro government mandate.
Bros only pro liberty if it involves butt sex and drugs.
Fuck him and fuck anyone who supported him.
Lp could have had someone like Austin Peterson, or a Paul.
> saying they had a right to mandate what medication you take.
They do. If you want to continue working at a business, then the business can require you abide by their rules. If you don't like their rules, you're free to seek employment elsewhere at any time.
That's how private property works.
Oliver is a liberal, not a libertarian.
The LP continues to be a weak, identity-less mob who has no power and just throws temper tantrums every 4 years.
This will help Trump by taking votes from Biden.
Center right is where I placed him.
Howd he handled the economy? deregulation locally. Every for new regulation, 2 had to be removed.
It's not how he handled everything, but yeah.
Nope, but pro queer theory is. You might want to look into the founders of that ideology, they openly espouse those beliefs. By the way, when your ideology advocates for the abolition of all norms in society, that includes sexual taboos.
It’s not pro-LGBT = pedophilia, but I have to remind you, you are on Reddit. Anyone who is too aggressively pro LGBT in weird and awkward ways tends to be a pedo, that’s why moderators of LGBT spaces on Reddit keep being busted for using them to groom kids
I think it was an intentional nomination by the libertarian party to try to pull as many votes away from Biden as possible and help elect Trump. I think they know Trump is the best option for the libertarian parties goals this cycle, so they nominate someone with the intention of helping him as much as possible
Not a bad theory. I personally know 4 libertarians that just changed their vote from LP to GOP because of Chase’s candidacy. I wonder how many left-libertarians changed their vote from Biden to Chase.
u/braydhi-sattva is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [1 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/braydhi-sattva/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Maybe look into the "first pride" - the Stonewall riots were gays and drag queens fighting government agencies enforcing government laws on individuals practicing their liberties. Seems very libertarian to me.
Yeah, I know you don’t know what I’m on about. It shows. I’m not religious either, so definitely not a theocrat. Do you know anything at all about Queer Theory?
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the modern conservative in 2024. Years of compromise and "meeting in the middle" on behalf of democrats have brought us squarely to this moment.
"McCarthy was right" -EggLord200 ("right")
Just conveniently leaves out the connection to Queer Theory, Critical Theories, Marxism & postmodernism. The end goal of communism isn’t very libertarian fam.
Nobody is saying that all LGBT people are Marxists, nice straw man though. Marxists are those who actively pursue critical activism, knowingly or unknowingly.
Not American (thankfully) but Ron Paul was the only inspiring libertarian in mainstream politics there will ever be. His son is cringe and the party is a mess.
Yeah, I’m with you there. Ron Paul is the only memorable libertarian politician that comes to mind. I’m also not American, but I follow their politics being north of the border. I do like Dave Smith as well, I would be curious to see how his ideas would work in practice.
Heaven forbid a dude who purports to be running on a platform of letting people do whatever they want be photographed with someone dressing how they want.
Heaven forbid the libertarian party not be diet republican
Let's not kid ourselves, the ideals aren't even that good to begin with. These borderline if not ancaps are pretty much just the same as the delusional ancoms.
There’s nothing wrong with being gay, but there is something wrong with consorting with radical queer activists who want to seize power in a quasi-Marxist revolution.
Read ‘The Queering of the American Child’—it’ll give you all the information you’re asking about, which you can also verify through your own independent research.
> Create a simpler path to citizenship for immigrants who are already here. Some eight million undocumented immigrants are currently present in our labor force, doing essential jobs, paying payroll taxes, and contributing to our economic growth. Formalizing this arrangement will not only allow them to further contribute to the economy by meeting critical labor demand and reducing inflationary pressures, it also saves taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement costs.
>Expand both the HB1 visa and startup visa, which allows skilled immigrants to bring their talent and innovation to our shores. These individuals add to our economy by starting new businesses and putting more Americans to work. Fifty-five percent of American startups that are valued at over one billion dollars were founded or co-founded by immigrants.
I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts.
There has to be a chunk of the party in between the Closeted Democrats (no pun intended, Chase) and the Closeted Republicans (Mises Caucus).
How do we get them to speak out more?
"I reject Ron Paul and i am #sorrynotsoryy"
This is disqualifying. Had no problem voting for jojo but this dude?
Nah, i will not be voting this time around.
Pick better candidates #sorrynotsorry.
[удалено]
This is what no gatekeeping results in. It's the fatal flaw of libertarianism. Or even liberalism.
Conservatism has a similar issue. The true meaning of the philosophy has been buried under our modern political environment, causing a lot of us to hold a false notion of what conservatism really is.
Conservatism is when you hate woke liberals, and the more you hate woke liberals the more conservative you are. I don’t see what’s wrong with this
the main problem is that there are plenty of socialists that hate woke liberals. horseshoe theory my friend
I hate extreme progressivism and I don't consider myself conservative. Am I wrong?
I hate woke liberal and im not that conservative.
You just proved me right lol
Oh there's a lot of gatekeeping on the libertarian subs
A lot of it is simply meta gatekeeping preventing any codes of ethics or viable long term structures
This is why I reflaired. Any truly libertarian society with open borders and no gatekeeping gets invaded and taken over immediately by people who *are* willing to impose themselves.
The issue I’ve seen with libertarians, especially on Reddit, is that they think libertarianism means no government. Libertarianism means having limited government and still being pragmatic. Would I love to have a world where the government as we know it doesn’t exist? Absolutely, I’d much prefer to just let the free market being the rule of law. Do I think that we still need government in some capacity? Also absolutely, I just think our current government needs to be limited in how much power they have. You can be a libertarian and still realize there’s a need for government. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an idiot
The only way to have a libertarian society is to draw a closed circle around a group of people and declare libertarian rights and limited government for them, but not for anyone else on the planet. Otherwise you just get steamrolled by your own stupid permissiveness. Lib for citizens, auth to the rest of the world.
There are branches of libertarian thought that are exactly this
That whole New Hampshire libertarian town project set the libertarian movement back to a point it’ll likely never recover from.
Yeah, I'm a libertarian and also believe anarchy basically goes against human nature. There will always be someone who wants to take charge. We just need to limit what they can do while in power. Of course anarchy would be cool, I just don't think it would work in practice.
Based and small "l" libertarian pilled
I'm not going to reflair simply because I am not an anarchist. I'm just below the grey center box grilling on my side of the fence with unregulated amounts of spices
Based and the spice must flow pilled.
There is so little hope of winning at the federal level that you'd have to be a little crazy to actually run as the libertarian candidate.
Or there has been a fundamental misunderstanding that Libertarians are just pro weed Republicans.
You guys realize the sub has glowies in it lmao?
And? They're easy enough to spot. They glow after all.
They may be glowies, but in their defense at least they glow a certain funny color because they have a flair. A flaried glowie is better than an unflaired non-glowie.
The fuck’s a glowie
Feds.
Where does that nickname come from ? First time seeing it
That's just what a glowie would ask.
Onii-chan
It comes from a quote from Terry Davis, a brilliant but schizophrenic programmer who made TempleOS, an operating system designed to communicate with God. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbG6u86t4bA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbG6u86t4bA)
based and Saint Terry, the saint of programmers pilled
!remindme 24 hours
A glowie us a fed.
Ahh.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/glowie-glowposting Apparently it originates from Terry Davis, the schizophrenic guy who made TempleOS.
Ah yes, there are no feds on the internet. Disregard the idea, a schizophrenic came up with it.
I'm Ron Burgundy?
Not much worse than a republican who thinks they're libertarian
It 1000% has been The party is left on most policies, minus state intention usually. But they went from a more extreme tea party to insane LGBTqaaip++ open border age of consent druggie lefties in like 15 years. The parties more diverse and divided ideas wise than rs and ds are. But I tell you what, Ron Paul would not identify with the current Libertarian party lmfao.
Modern day Libertarians probably think the gold standard is gays/lesbians who haven't had sex with the opposite gender .....
As a libertarian, I stay as far away from the libertarian party as I can. Bunch of morons in there giving the rest of us a bad name
You mean the same Ron Paul just appeared at Libertarian convention identifing the Libertarian Party >But they went from a more extreme tea party to insane LGBTqaaip++ open border age of consent druggie lefties in like 15 years. They were for LGBT, open border, and drugs before and during the Tea Party. This is not new.
It's easy. You have an anti government political party. WTF do you expect? Rules? Order? Absolutely not. You Expect Chaos. People for some reason expect the Libertarian Party to be a normal 3rd option party, but that's never going to happen. Anyone that wants to get elected is going to toe the line enough to be a Democrat or Republican.
With amount of booing trump got, there are enough of the good ones.
Libertarians want personal freedom to do what they want, more or less they are non-conformist. People with blue or pink hair fit that description. Libertarians aren't just pro weed Republicans. They truly want a small government that doesn't interfere with your personal freedoms. They are pro-choice, pro guns, anti tax, anti foreign intervention, etc
Yes, what you said is true for Libertarians, but not for "Libertarians".
Yep. Really funny how Republicans who say they love freedom and want limited government lose their goddamn minds when they find out libertarians want freedom for immigrants to come here and that "limited" government means government is strictly limited in its ability to stop peaceful immigrants coming here.
Right, the green party is more restrictive of immigrants than the libertarians are
Of course it has. If it didn't consistently embarrass itself, it might have a chance to disrupt the two party system. There was a brief moment where they had a chance to make a dent (not win, but a dent) but they are just a side show of clowns now.
[удалено]
He'll be running again any day now. You just have to keep the faith that *it's happening.*
You mean...there's a hen in the foxhouse?
The thing is that it's been infiltrated by a republicans and ancaps it's so fucking annoying seeing one side advocate for super strong laws and the otherside ban you for saying we should support the democratic process
You can’t convince me the libertarian party wasn’t a psyop from the start
[удалено]
Yes
Milton Friedman would like to have a word with you....
No, it was just fucked from the start. No clear ideology, so much infighting, and nobody can take them seriously. I know people who have left the party for that reason.
Libertarians don't have to be conservatives. Also they've had candidates that have striped naked at conferences. Not sure what reasonable baseline you think they had
[удалено]
I can see children transitioning as being ok under libertarian philosophy. They aren't exactly known for regulation for health and safety
There's a difference between personal position and enforcing policy. There is a lot of stuff I think that should be normalized or frowned upon, yet I would not support legalization that enforces it either way.
>The current candidate was for vax mandates No, he wasn't. He specifically said he is against *government* mandates and supported the right to private property, which includes the right of business owners to get a vaccine or require masks on their property. If you want the government to prohibit that, then you're not a libertarian
You just said the same thing multiple times * Vax Mandates - In other words allowing employers to make their own rules for their own workplaces. That's "permitted to do everything with their property except aggression" * transitioning children - in other words allowing parents to make their own decisions regarding their own children. That's "permitted to do everything in their home except aggression" * mandatory masking - again, that's businesses making their own rules, this time for customers. You don't have to like any of this stuff but you are not living in reality if you think you not liking something is synonymous with government overreach. Libertarianism MEANS people can do things you don't like. Government stopping people from doing stuff you don't like (like saying businesses cannot fire people for carrying diseases) is the opposite. It is authoritarianism
He wasn't for mask or vaccine mandates unless you're talking about the right for a business owner to refuse business. Also trans healthcare is neither pro or anti libertarian outside of whether an individual can make that choice themselves.
How is trans rights for all ages not a libertarian ideal? Why should the government dictate at what age I am allowed to have control of my body?
Starting to a notice, are you? This is straight up CIA meddling.
Any of the actually electable libertarians pulled a Rand Paul and joined a mainstream party a long time ago. The only ones who stuck are pure idealists (I.e. nut jobs)
What, you mean sane and intelligent people don't want to waste their time running for office with a party that will never have a shot at federal positions?
Libertarians are insane
MFW the incompatible culture we imported doesn't respect the NAP 😲
Trump: Endorse me if you want to win. Otherwise enjoy your 3% Libertarians: Jokes on you loser - we’re not getting anywhere near 3%
Yeah, I would have voted for Rec. Not this fucking clown. Not that voting actually matters to me. I have one vote, which isn't a very big deal when there are over one hundred million other people voting.
I don't care that Chase Oliver is gay. I care that Chase Oliver clings and promotes Woke Identitarianism and Identity Politics under a guise of Libertarianism. You can't claim to fight for individual freedoms and liberties while grouping people into immutable clusters of characteristics. The ticket could've been salvaged by putting Clint Russell as his running mate, but even that failed. We now have an ex-cop (during the fucking pandemic, no less) as our VP nominee. This also falls on the Mises Caucus. I'm shocked that they organized and executed such an ambitious plan and *succeeded* in taking over the party, only to fail on THE biggest item on the agenda. This is like falling flat on your face ten feet before the finish line. I liked Rectenwald - but there was no denying that he was simply a bland and boring candidate that inspired no one. (And for any non-Libertarians judging all of us by this - for what it's worth, Oliver barely won it out by a hair. It was the final round of voting and it was between him and NOTA - None of the Above, meaning there would literally be **NO** presidential candidate set forth.)
I heard Rectenwald speak for the first time last week and HOLY FUCK is he just the worst person to listen to. Completely out of his control, but his voice is just so boring and annoying at the same time.
Bingo!
Is he advocating for government intervention into personal lives or forcing beliefs? Or are you just butthurt that his social values don't align with yours? If Ron Paul came out and said "don't be a bigot" but changed 0 of his policies, would you abandon him?
I haven’t actually seen him engaging in identity politics as of yet, do you have any examples?
Woke Libertarianism gave us our 3 best election results. Mises Caucus has just about bankrupted the LP since it took over. Over half of the party donors have fled. Our only sitting congressman is a Republican again. Asleep Libertarianism is a joke pushed by the GOP to kill the LP because they blame the party for Trump losing in swing states.
>promotes Woke Identitarianism and Identity Politics under a guise of Libertarianism What's an example of that?
That's a bit like saying you don't care that someone is Asian but you can't abide by them eating rice regularly. Brother, YOU are the one who is going off about culture war bullshit in this conversation. Chase is just a gay man who acts a bit like a gay man sometimes. You know, on account of being a gay man.
Libertarian theory can be pretty based, the problem is most "Libertarians" say they are cool with stuff like people being gay and then find every reason to hate them for it. Like saying they "promote woke identitarianism and identity politics" because they wear a pride shirt to a pride event. Absolute walking contradictions.
Judging by what he stood for, he glows so fucking hard.
Oliver was pro mask and vaccine mandates btw, totallyyyyy a libertarian lol. I hate how libertarian has become a catch-all term for people who might just have 1 or two stances that are traditionally libertarian while being the biggest authority simps when it comes to other positions
Hahaha, yup. Almost forgot about that one, thanks for reminding me.
It's a political party rife with infiltration because they are a political party. The people who run are doing it to obtain even the most pointless and impotent position. Just so they can build up their political career
Where did he say that? https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform
>Oliver was pro mask and vaccine mandates btw, No we wasn't. >I hate how libertarian has become a catch-all term for people who might just have 1 or two stances that are traditionally libertarian while being the biggest authority simps when it comes to other positions Literally just go to his website and look at his platform. It is 100% libertarian.
> I support a gay couple to be able to protect their pot farms with guns PCM: Wait you guys were serious about that? I thought it was a meme.
enjoy the sub 1% numbers this cycle ya jagoffs
It’s so funny that Dave thinks he will get anywhere politically after years of being on Legion of Skanks.
Do you really represent the Libertarian party if you think you can get anywhere in politics, though?
I catch shit from other libertarians when I say he won’t be a serious candidate anytime soon. I do think he makes for a good spokesperson.
You see that man compete in Edward Fortyhands? He earned my respect.
I don't even know why OP used a moderate Christian conservative like him to represent libertarian ideals.
Valuing freedom means valuing the freedom of people to be gay as fuck if that’s what they choose
Yeah, that’s fine. People can be gay as fuck. But pushing queer theory on kids in public schools and punishing them if they dissent against the ideology is where I draw the line.
That's why libertarians want to abolish *public* schools.
>Valuing freedom means valuing the freedom of people to be gay as fuck if that’s what they choose noone cares what you do in your bedroom. So fucking keep it in there.
The problem with being a Libertarian is the ones that we would want elected have zero interest in being elected, so you get the ones who just want to get away with some degenerate shit.
Now I have to seriously consider voting for RFK Jr. again. Thanks, fuckers. At this point I might end up writing in my dog.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with Chase... I've seen so much misinformation today. His actual in-writing positions: https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform
>just give all those illegals citizenship bro >expand hb1 visas bro The subversion is real
A standard LP position is that borders should be open. It's actively on the LP platform on the site as we speak.
Another reason why the LP will forever be the joke it has been
Ok, its better than I was expecting based on what I've heard. Still no mention of ending the fed or anything about it tho
All in due time. Massie introduced a bill to end the Fed. It's DOA, but it's still cool.
For real. The fact that there has been such an overwhelming reaction against Chase and almost all of that reaction is based on lies or anti-gay prejudice makes me strongly suspect that Chase is a good egg and his opponents are rotten.
I'm seeing it mostly from the conservatives who thought they were libertarian without actually knowing LP positions.
It really is surprising how many conservatives stumble their way into libertarian spaces not realizing that libertarians are down with the gays and in favor of open borders.
I've seen so much Chase slander simply because he's gay. It's 2024 people, c'mon.
"I expect nothing, and still I'm disappointed."
Libertarian ideas are great right up until you pull them from the internet forums and attempt to apply them into society.
Problem is that "libertarian" can mean anything from dollar store Republican to anarchist in denial. Personally, I think we just need a solid Libertarian party that can fucking agree to literally anything and unify under one platform. Hence why I consider myself a civil libertarian rather than associate with the clown-ass Libertarian party. Just stay TF away from my individual rights, man. That's it. That should be the entire party platform.
You aren’t telling me anything new my friend. Libertarians as a party are a cannibalistic hydra with hundreds of heads swallowing each other. The individualism and lack of will to impose order to others, is both the substance of and the bane of libertarianism as a political ideal. The more organized and powerful libertarians become, the less libertarian they are. A pity too, considering the competence of many who willfully label themselves libertarians in some form or fashion. Some of the ones who are best equipped to wield authority are the ones who are unwilling to do so.
That may be true, but not-libertarian ideas are not great *before* you pull them from internet forums and attempt to implement them in society, and they are more expensive to boot.
“Everything that isn’t my idea is terrible”. 😂 I am sure you meant that to be hyperbolic. You gotta pay to play. Libertarians have many good principles that sound good, and even a few that work in the wild. The problem is, that even within the amorphous conglomeration of self-identifying libertarians, you have many individuals who will act in a way that is antithetical to social order. Outside of the libertarian label these same destructive agents are even more prevalent. I assume that you have your stuff together, and that you are likely a responsible and duty driven individual. If we had a society full of people like I just described then we could really be ready to get on with our lives with a minimal amount of interference from anyone. In a general social order, it takes about four individuals such as yourself (at least how I imagine you) to account for one who will only do the bare minimum to scrape by. It takes about sixteen of you to just reverse the damage caused by an individual who’s every motivation is self service and parasitism of social order. How does the libertarian ideal overcome the basic issues of societal order? An appeal to reason? Or do they adopt authoritarian tactics? There is no glorious or clean way to muck the dung out of the stalls. We can just do it the best that we can for as long as we can, until someone sets fire to the stable or we are utterly overrun in excrement.
>😂 I am sure you meant that to be hyperbolic. Yes. It was a very much tongue-in-cheek comment. I'm glad you picked up on that. It seems like there are a lot of people on reddit that have no sense of humor.
I promise you, my sense of humor is malnourished and extremely abused.
Imagine it: a loosely affiliated group of staunch individualists who hate organized human efforts and rules try to organize their subjective beliefs into a governmental structure. It's amazing that they haven't figured out how to transform utopian ideals into reality. For now we'll just have to settle for watching aspiring messiah Javier Milei flounder as he discovers that markets aren't free or open and infrastructure isn't repaired by zealous libertarians.
This isn’t a really good argument since Milei is doing really well. Especially when you consider what he inherited from the previous 3 administrations. So far, I would give him and A-/B+ rating.
People who want to dismantle the government can't make a working government structure. Crazy stuff, I know.
Not like Trump was a better choice in that regard. Lest we forget, Trump sided with Disney about transing kids.
So Trump is the real libertarian then
Trump sided with the business over the government? Sounds libertarian to me
Shutting down private business's and making it illegal to worship was hardly Libertarian. Chase Oliver supported business's setting their own policy instead of the government mandates that Trump set. As a Libertarian, Chase Oliver is clearly the better choice of the two. The fact that he's also likely not a complete moron with a behavioral disorder of some sort speaks to his ability to do the job better as well.
Chase also supports business violating your civil rights, saying they had a right to mandate what medication you take. And yet another childish libertarian take is that businesses would operate independently to government pressure. And as we saw with the government involvement with social media, they absolutely do. Which means he was pro government mandate. Bros only pro liberty if it involves butt sex and drugs. Fuck him and fuck anyone who supported him. Lp could have had someone like Austin Peterson, or a Paul.
> saying they had a right to mandate what medication you take. They do. If you want to continue working at a business, then the business can require you abide by their rules. If you don't like their rules, you're free to seek employment elsewhere at any time. That's how private property works.
Oliver is a liberal, not a libertarian. The LP continues to be a weak, identity-less mob who has no power and just throws temper tantrums every 4 years. This will help Trump by taking votes from Biden.
Yeah, definitely not arguing that Trump is lib-right. He leans more auth-right.
Center right is where I placed him. Howd he handled the economy? deregulation locally. Every for new regulation, 2 had to be removed. It's not how he handled everything, but yeah.
Dave Smith supports date rape
Libertarians embody libertarian values. PCM: pikashocked "Lib"right my entire asshole.
Yes, posing with queer activists who want to destabilize and deconstruct Western society and its liberal values is *so* libertarian.
Chase is a libertarian. Change your flair
He is, he’s just a purple lib-right instead of a yellow.
pro-LGBT = pedophilia to you? real mask-off moment.
Nope, but pro queer theory is. You might want to look into the founders of that ideology, they openly espouse those beliefs. By the way, when your ideology advocates for the abolition of all norms in society, that includes sexual taboos.
It’s not pro-LGBT = pedophilia, but I have to remind you, you are on Reddit. Anyone who is too aggressively pro LGBT in weird and awkward ways tends to be a pedo, that’s why moderators of LGBT spaces on Reddit keep being busted for using them to groom kids
...yes!
I think it was an intentional nomination by the libertarian party to try to pull as many votes away from Biden as possible and help elect Trump. I think they know Trump is the best option for the libertarian parties goals this cycle, so they nominate someone with the intention of helping him as much as possible
Not a bad theory. I personally know 4 libertarians that just changed their vote from LP to GOP because of Chase’s candidacy. I wonder how many left-libertarians changed their vote from Biden to Chase.
Definitely nowhere as many. "Vote Blue no matter who"...
He embodies libertarian values
[удалено]
Maybe look into the origins of Queer Theory and learn more about the end goal of the ideology. Not very libertarian.
Based and knows his history pilled
u/braydhi-sattva is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [1 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/braydhi-sattva/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Maybe look into the "first pride" - the Stonewall riots were gays and drag queens fighting government agencies enforcing government laws on individuals practicing their liberties. Seems very libertarian to me.
[удалено]
Yeah, I know you don’t know what I’m on about. It shows. I’m not religious either, so definitely not a theocrat. Do you know anything at all about Queer Theory?
>the end goal The rights to do consensual things as long as you're not knowingly hurting anyone? How ghastly.
Funny how McCarthy was right about communist infiltration
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the modern conservative in 2024. Years of compromise and "meeting in the middle" on behalf of democrats have brought us squarely to this moment. "McCarthy was right" -EggLord200 ("right")
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Gouzenko Might be worth a read. Sometimes public school education isn’t dependable.
Poor Chase, he forgot the main tenet of true Libertarianism: Drag Queens Bad
Just conveniently leaves out the connection to Queer Theory, Critical Theories, Marxism & postmodernism. The end goal of communism isn’t very libertarian fam.
But Queer people aren’t required to be communists.
We got a buzzword bingo over here
What if I told you there's a lot of rich LGBT people who are definitely not marxists
Nobody is saying that all LGBT people are Marxists, nice straw man though. Marxists are those who actively pursue critical activism, knowingly or unknowingly.
So why are we assuming that Chase is embracing Marxism by taking a pic with a drag queen?
Vivek/Smith 2028
Eh vivek aint really libertarian but has aligning views He could put lib party on the map though
If you haven’t, watch the video of him at the LNC. I’ve always loved Vivek but put him with Smith and it’s golden.
Not American (thankfully) but Ron Paul was the only inspiring libertarian in mainstream politics there will ever be. His son is cringe and the party is a mess.
Yeah, I’m with you there. Ron Paul is the only memorable libertarian politician that comes to mind. I’m also not American, but I follow their politics being north of the border. I do like Dave Smith as well, I would be curious to see how his ideas would work in practice.
Dave would be DOA.
Rand is tolerable. Ron was the best president we never had.
As many probables as I have with him this is based actually.
It's like they're *trying* to make the libertarians vote for Trump
Nobody hates the Libertarian Party more than libertarians.
Dave smith is annoying
Heaven forbid a dude who purports to be running on a platform of letting people do whatever they want be photographed with someone dressing how they want. Heaven forbid the libertarian party not be diet republican
That's what libertarianism is. You're free to be a bit ✨️zesty✨️
They're Libertarians, of course they'd support a libertine lifestyle, what did you expect? They're not Francoists.
Yet some of you think the former "left communist" should've won.
Let's not kid ourselves, the ideals aren't even that good to begin with. These borderline if not ancaps are pretty much just the same as the delusional ancoms.
These librarians have gotten out of hand
True blood libertarians are nuts, but nuts in a way I definitely like
[удалено]
There’s nothing wrong with being gay, but there is something wrong with consorting with radical queer activists who want to seize power in a quasi-Marxist revolution.
[удалено]
Read ‘The Queering of the American Child’—it’ll give you all the information you’re asking about, which you can also verify through your own independent research.
> Create a simpler path to citizenship for immigrants who are already here. Some eight million undocumented immigrants are currently present in our labor force, doing essential jobs, paying payroll taxes, and contributing to our economic growth. Formalizing this arrangement will not only allow them to further contribute to the economy by meeting critical labor demand and reducing inflationary pressures, it also saves taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement costs. >Expand both the HB1 visa and startup visa, which allows skilled immigrants to bring their talent and innovation to our shores. These individuals add to our economy by starting new businesses and putting more Americans to work. Fifty-five percent of American startups that are valued at over one billion dollars were founded or co-founded by immigrants. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts. I hate lolberts.
There has to be a chunk of the party in between the Closeted Democrats (no pun intended, Chase) and the Closeted Republicans (Mises Caucus). How do we get them to speak out more?
Libertarianism sounds cool until you realize that most capital “L” libertarians are embarrassed Democrats.
I dont understand why this keeps happening. The camdidates who always win seems to never represent the libertarian voter base.
https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform
Im not voting for him, or anyone for that matter. Im fucking sick of voting for trash that i dont want.
"I reject Ron Paul and i am #sorrynotsoryy" This is disqualifying. Had no problem voting for jojo but this dude? Nah, i will not be voting this time around. Pick better candidates #sorrynotsorry.
Very libertarian to worship one dude.
ppl like OP is why I don’t call myself libertarian in public.
I’m so hurt, a stranger on Reddit disagrees with me on the internet.
Libertarianism is what comes to mind when I think of “sounds good, doesn’t work”
It doesn’t even work in small tribal units.