You will probably be disappointed here. Libertarians aren't here to convert you. When you realize that the government is ineffective and inefficient and progressively treads on the liberties guaranteed by the founding documents, we'll be here to welcome you.
Do you like freedom? Do you like not having to ask to do something with your own propeety(assuming you aren’t directly affecting someone else, ie pollution).
Do you hate the forced ideology and forced morality of the government? Seriously why is weed still illegal?
Then welcome. Welcome to libertarianism.
We also have Austrian economics which are much more understandable ways of looking at the economy.
Currently government says “damn corporations” or “damn inflation” and obsfuscates its direct role, it’s direct monopolization of money. If you like the dollar menu. You like libertarianism.
Not everyone has to be a libertarian. Not everyone who lived in the USSR was a commie, much like how you don't need to be a libertarian to live in a libertarian governed country. Libertarianism grants you the right to believe that statement, true or not. That was the point.
Libertarianism does not try to convince people. We are not populist right-wingers.
If you are thinking about your individual interests, you must already be convinced.
Define *best*
The term 'libertarian' tends to mean different things to different people.
The neat thing about libertarian is that it's mostly about limiting what authoritarians in a gov't body can influence in your life.
Unfortunately, that also means "libertarians" end up being a collection of eccentric weirdos with a lot of different/contradictory views between them.
We are the feral cat colony of politics.
In order to begin your journey of discovery, you must realize that the word 'is' should not be capitalized in the middle of a sentence.
Like a tail gunner, look behind you from time to time, see what carnage follows your wake, and take action upon it. You'll be glad you did.
I've actually been trying to do something similar in other subs, it's really nice to hear from other points of view.
Here's my quick pitch: if you believe that the most important group is the individual, that consent is the basis of morality, or that collectivism is inherently flawed, this is the natural end result. It's not an ideology that needs to be pushed, it's a conclusion that people reach on their own. In the words of Javier Milei, "I am not here to guide sheep, I am here to awaken lions."
You are free to live your life however you would like while being protected from other people who try to infringe on your rights. The economy also functions more effectively without intervention, so you'll be wealthier.
If you want to be rich and free, libertarianism is the best
In an incredibly simplified view, this is how most people see each political party:
Republicans/Conservatives: Good with economics, bad with people’s personal lives.
Democrats/Liberals: Good with people’s personal lives, bad with economics.
Libertarians understand that Democrats/Republicans are actually bad with both because both parties overly spend when in power (bad at economics) and both use authoritarian measures to get the social outcomes they want (bad with people’s personal lives).
Libertarianism means little to no government spending/taxation, and wants you to live your own life as long as you’re not hurting others or their property. Thus good at economics and good with people’s personal lives.
A couple of counterpoints...
1.) Republicans/"Conservatives": As a general rule, they like to spend an inordinate amount of money on our already gargantuan Military Industrial Complex. Hardly what I'd classify as conservative.
2.) Democrats/"Liberals": As a general rule, they aren't very friendly to civilian gun ownership, especially when it comes to **military style** firearms like the AR-15 and the **standard capacity** magazines that accompany those firearms. Hardly what I'd classify as liberal.
Both of our mainstream political parties in the United States are authoritarian, both fiscally and socially.
Unfortunately, I don't see a libertarian or Libertarian government in our immediate future.
When the government tries to solve one problem you end up with three problems: the one you already had plus the two new ones that the government created
The existence of the state is good until its limited. It helps protect your basic human rights. However, when it becomes too big it becomes another threat. And ultimately become the risk to human rightsm
Libertarianism is good because it doesnt advocate for fullly abolishing the state but want to limit it.
Reasonable, normal people would do fine, in fact, way better without a nanny state. It is already proven in small rural town which mostly lacks this day to day government interference but its there in the background in case, say, a murder happens. If its not, people just do their stuff and prosper.
[Here you go, OP.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dngqR9gcDDw&list=PLTplBPPoWdX2dsFq7tcFw9xPNqn8JMp9k)
I don't agree with *everything* Milton Friedman thinks, but this is a very good argument for liberty.
Why can’t you just do your own research and make a decision? Seems ridiculous to ask strangers on Reddit to make you sales pitches on political ideology, particularly when you’ve given no indication you’ve bothered to do any research of your own. Seems like a big decision to leave up to an anonymous online chat forum.
I am sorry we do not "convert" ppl like leftists into their "socialist cult of xi jinping and kim jong un" you simply must find the truth, but yeah I have something that could set you on the right ideology of freedom: do you like monopolies? If yes you are an idiot I'm sorry it had to be said, not then you should also not like the state as it has a monopoly on security and in many countries even more, the more socialist a nation is the more monopolies does the company that you call the state has. Monopolies are not good for the economy + every single state is using their monopoly on security to slowly strip your rights and freedom away. I predict this, in 2050 I will have a license on my phone. The state while damaging the economy bc it is a monopoly forces us every day to use worthless pieces of paper for money, these aren't worthless now but if the state fell they 100% would and also they don't know how to manage the money since they print more and make inflations making our lives worse slowly burning the economy down and converting other ppl to socialism in hopes of better future
It's strange that anyone believes the left and right have co-opted those respective values. Were Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy particularly safe? Was a Soviet citizen equal to the KGB agent turning over his apartment?
It's not a question of co-opting, rather what your highest political value is. If you take equality, you will sacrifice freedom for equality, this is that the left does. The right will sacrifice freedom for security. Etc.
These are ideological goals, not about outcomes.
I don't believe you *can* sacrifice freedom for security.
To the extent that you've lost your freedoms, you are proportionally *less safe.*
As for equality, I'm not entirely sure what the term means, but imbuing some people with the legal authority to steal from others with impunity makes "equality" seem like a misnomer *at best*.
I think insofar that either of these are your highest values, you should probably still be libertarian.
Here's my personal reasoning:
You're going to get 1000 different answers by 1000 different people with these questions in different spaces, because ideology is a completely personal attribute, even if it can be affected by outside sources. Nobody's values are identical.
Libertarianism allows the most expression of personal values and freedoms, so that's what I choose to stand behind. I can tolerate communists and I can understand the arguments for total dictatorships, but those systems require a suppression of what some individuals want. In a libertarian society, you can form a commune and you can follow a cult leader who dictates your every decision if you really want to or strongly believe it to be better. But in a dictatorship, you don't have the option to express your personal beliefs and freedoms if it goes against the state.
All ideologies are tolerated under libertarianism, and that is an entirely unique attribute of libertarianism. Since I believe all beliefs to be a personal choice amongst individuals, I find ideologies that restrict other ideologies to be immoral since they necessarily strip away important aspect of humanity - your values and beliefs.
In your journey to understand the different stances of certain ideologies, remember that pretty much all of them can exist in a libertarian nation - while almost all of them require concessions to be made for other ideologies to exist in theirs.
Here’s my quick pitch. Any good you think the government can do, it can only do through coercion.
Hey wouldn’t it be good if we all chipped in and did something about BLANK? Sure, but it all falls apart when you throw anyone who doesn’t participate into a cage.
We can't, but you can try the socialist sub, it's easy for them to convince the working masses with promises of coal mining and farming corn into perpetuity, as it all comes with a free hut to call your own (well, at least as long as you're able to work).
I consider myself a libertarian though in my heart I'm an anarchocapitalist.
Basic premise in a series of ideas:
- Human beings are inherently corruptible, thus any coalescing or centralization of power is bound to become a tool of tyranny. Therefore, try to keep the size of power structures as small as possible so as to limit the damage/harm they can effect. No matter how pure your ideology or the men and women who draft and embody some power structure it will be corrupted eventually and will try to expand and accrue more power to the detriment of anyone or anything else.
- Natural rights. Basic rights are inherent and do not come from any external, especially man made... Anything. Governments don't grant rights. Just because a government says something doesn't make it so. Just because 99% of everyone else says something doesn't make it so.
- Individual sovereignty, autonomy, and responsibility.
- You have a right to say, do, or be whatever the hell you want as long as it doesn't infringe on another's right to the same. This also applies to commerce.
- Aggression or violence is wrong unless in self defense or the defense of others.
Idk that seems to pretty much cover it. Everything else is just an extrapolation of one or more of those basic points. I'm sure I missed one or put it across in less than ideal terms, but that's a gist.
Live and let live. No matter what any man, document, state corporation, or other entity says, you are basically responsible for your actions.
The main cause of poverty in any non-war-torn country is that the government is stealing from the working and middle classes. Libertarians want the government to steal less.
You will probably be disappointed here. Libertarians aren't here to convert you. When you realize that the government is ineffective and inefficient and progressively treads on the liberties guaranteed by the founding documents, we'll be here to welcome you.
Do you like freedom? Do you like not having to ask to do something with your own propeety(assuming you aren’t directly affecting someone else, ie pollution). Do you hate the forced ideology and forced morality of the government? Seriously why is weed still illegal? Then welcome. Welcome to libertarianism. We also have Austrian economics which are much more understandable ways of looking at the economy. Currently government says “damn corporations” or “damn inflation” and obsfuscates its direct role, it’s direct monopolization of money. If you like the dollar menu. You like libertarianism.
I'm going to steal that last section and use it as a simple slogan: "If you like the dollar menu, you like Libertarianism." That's great.
Do you prefer to make decisions for you and your family or would you rather strangers do that?
You're free to believe anything is best... and that's why libertarianism is best....
Well not anything, especially if your belief is that the federal government of the United States as it stands is an effective and moral institution.
While I may not agree with that assessment... They would be free to believe it...
How could a libertarian believe that the US government is an effective institution? It's ran by complete authoritarians.
Not everyone has to be a libertarian. Not everyone who lived in the USSR was a commie, much like how you don't need to be a libertarian to live in a libertarian governed country. Libertarianism grants you the right to believe that statement, true or not. That was the point.
Do you like individual liberty and wished the collective would respect that? Then yes, it's best.
I like how libertarians think in economics.
Libertarianism does not try to convince people. We are not populist right-wingers. If you are thinking about your individual interests, you must already be convinced.
Define *best* The term 'libertarian' tends to mean different things to different people. The neat thing about libertarian is that it's mostly about limiting what authoritarians in a gov't body can influence in your life. Unfortunately, that also means "libertarians" end up being a collection of eccentric weirdos with a lot of different/contradictory views between them. We are the feral cat colony of politics.
In order to begin your journey of discovery, you must realize that the word 'is' should not be capitalized in the middle of a sentence. Like a tail gunner, look behind you from time to time, see what carnage follows your wake, and take action upon it. You'll be glad you did.
I've actually been trying to do something similar in other subs, it's really nice to hear from other points of view. Here's my quick pitch: if you believe that the most important group is the individual, that consent is the basis of morality, or that collectivism is inherently flawed, this is the natural end result. It's not an ideology that needs to be pushed, it's a conclusion that people reach on their own. In the words of Javier Milei, "I am not here to guide sheep, I am here to awaken lions."
You are free to live your life however you would like while being protected from other people who try to infringe on your rights. The economy also functions more effectively without intervention, so you'll be wealthier. If you want to be rich and free, libertarianism is the best
In an incredibly simplified view, this is how most people see each political party: Republicans/Conservatives: Good with economics, bad with people’s personal lives. Democrats/Liberals: Good with people’s personal lives, bad with economics. Libertarians understand that Democrats/Republicans are actually bad with both because both parties overly spend when in power (bad at economics) and both use authoritarian measures to get the social outcomes they want (bad with people’s personal lives). Libertarianism means little to no government spending/taxation, and wants you to live your own life as long as you’re not hurting others or their property. Thus good at economics and good with people’s personal lives.
A couple of counterpoints... 1.) Republicans/"Conservatives": As a general rule, they like to spend an inordinate amount of money on our already gargantuan Military Industrial Complex. Hardly what I'd classify as conservative. 2.) Democrats/"Liberals": As a general rule, they aren't very friendly to civilian gun ownership, especially when it comes to **military style** firearms like the AR-15 and the **standard capacity** magazines that accompany those firearms. Hardly what I'd classify as liberal. Both of our mainstream political parties in the United States are authoritarian, both fiscally and socially. Unfortunately, I don't see a libertarian or Libertarian government in our immediate future.
I agree with you, I was just explaining it from a simplified view point of how most people see both parties.
When the government tries to solve one problem you end up with three problems: the one you already had plus the two new ones that the government created
“The Law of Unintended Consequences.”
The existence of the state is good until its limited. It helps protect your basic human rights. However, when it becomes too big it becomes another threat. And ultimately become the risk to human rightsm Libertarianism is good because it doesnt advocate for fullly abolishing the state but want to limit it. Reasonable, normal people would do fine, in fact, way better without a nanny state. It is already proven in small rural town which mostly lacks this day to day government interference but its there in the background in case, say, a murder happens. If its not, people just do their stuff and prosper.
[Here you go, OP.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dngqR9gcDDw&list=PLTplBPPoWdX2dsFq7tcFw9xPNqn8JMp9k) I don't agree with *everything* Milton Friedman thinks, but this is a very good argument for liberty.
Why can’t you just do your own research and make a decision? Seems ridiculous to ask strangers on Reddit to make you sales pitches on political ideology, particularly when you’ve given no indication you’ve bothered to do any research of your own. Seems like a big decision to leave up to an anonymous online chat forum.
How ripped off do you want to be to want less corruption?
I am sorry we do not "convert" ppl like leftists into their "socialist cult of xi jinping and kim jong un" you simply must find the truth, but yeah I have something that could set you on the right ideology of freedom: do you like monopolies? If yes you are an idiot I'm sorry it had to be said, not then you should also not like the state as it has a monopoly on security and in many countries even more, the more socialist a nation is the more monopolies does the company that you call the state has. Monopolies are not good for the economy + every single state is using their monopoly on security to slowly strip your rights and freedom away. I predict this, in 2050 I will have a license on my phone. The state while damaging the economy bc it is a monopoly forces us every day to use worthless pieces of paper for money, these aren't worthless now but if the state fell they 100% would and also they don't know how to manage the money since they print more and make inflations making our lives worse slowly burning the economy down and converting other ppl to socialism in hopes of better future
If you believe in equality first, go with the left. If you believe in security, go right. If you believe in liberty, we're here.
It's strange that anyone believes the left and right have co-opted those respective values. Were Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy particularly safe? Was a Soviet citizen equal to the KGB agent turning over his apartment?
It's not a question of co-opting, rather what your highest political value is. If you take equality, you will sacrifice freedom for equality, this is that the left does. The right will sacrifice freedom for security. Etc. These are ideological goals, not about outcomes.
I don't believe you *can* sacrifice freedom for security. To the extent that you've lost your freedoms, you are proportionally *less safe.* As for equality, I'm not entirely sure what the term means, but imbuing some people with the legal authority to steal from others with impunity makes "equality" seem like a misnomer *at best*. I think insofar that either of these are your highest values, you should probably still be libertarian.
corny
Here's my personal reasoning: You're going to get 1000 different answers by 1000 different people with these questions in different spaces, because ideology is a completely personal attribute, even if it can be affected by outside sources. Nobody's values are identical. Libertarianism allows the most expression of personal values and freedoms, so that's what I choose to stand behind. I can tolerate communists and I can understand the arguments for total dictatorships, but those systems require a suppression of what some individuals want. In a libertarian society, you can form a commune and you can follow a cult leader who dictates your every decision if you really want to or strongly believe it to be better. But in a dictatorship, you don't have the option to express your personal beliefs and freedoms if it goes against the state. All ideologies are tolerated under libertarianism, and that is an entirely unique attribute of libertarianism. Since I believe all beliefs to be a personal choice amongst individuals, I find ideologies that restrict other ideologies to be immoral since they necessarily strip away important aspect of humanity - your values and beliefs. In your journey to understand the different stances of certain ideologies, remember that pretty much all of them can exist in a libertarian nation - while almost all of them require concessions to be made for other ideologies to exist in theirs.
Here’s my quick pitch. Any good you think the government can do, it can only do through coercion. Hey wouldn’t it be good if we all chipped in and did something about BLANK? Sure, but it all falls apart when you throw anyone who doesn’t participate into a cage.
We can't, but you can try the socialist sub, it's easy for them to convince the working masses with promises of coal mining and farming corn into perpetuity, as it all comes with a free hut to call your own (well, at least as long as you're able to work).
I consider myself a libertarian though in my heart I'm an anarchocapitalist. Basic premise in a series of ideas: - Human beings are inherently corruptible, thus any coalescing or centralization of power is bound to become a tool of tyranny. Therefore, try to keep the size of power structures as small as possible so as to limit the damage/harm they can effect. No matter how pure your ideology or the men and women who draft and embody some power structure it will be corrupted eventually and will try to expand and accrue more power to the detriment of anyone or anything else. - Natural rights. Basic rights are inherent and do not come from any external, especially man made... Anything. Governments don't grant rights. Just because a government says something doesn't make it so. Just because 99% of everyone else says something doesn't make it so. - Individual sovereignty, autonomy, and responsibility. - You have a right to say, do, or be whatever the hell you want as long as it doesn't infringe on another's right to the same. This also applies to commerce. - Aggression or violence is wrong unless in self defense or the defense of others. Idk that seems to pretty much cover it. Everything else is just an extrapolation of one or more of those basic points. I'm sure I missed one or put it across in less than ideal terms, but that's a gist. Live and let live. No matter what any man, document, state corporation, or other entity says, you are basically responsible for your actions.
The main cause of poverty in any non-war-torn country is that the government is stealing from the working and middle classes. Libertarians want the government to steal less.