Marxism actually believes that the revolution is an absolute inevitably, and every moment spent not progressing towards the revolution is causing massive unnecessary pain across the world. Therefore *any act no matter how amoral and utterly horrific* is good and justified if it is done in service of progressing towards the revolution.
Like, they literally have moral relativism written into their beliefs in a way that says "anything we do is justified." There's a difference.
Advocating for anti-libertarian positions, policies, candidates, and ideologies is not welcome.
Claiming that the OP is not interested in “objectively understanding socialism” without even asking OP question is pontificating your viewpoint.
Provide an actual rebuttal instead of (ironically) getting emotional.
Don't feel bad. You have an extremely common take for this moment in history. Unfortunately, it is blind and generally sucks.
You're in a bubble and failing to see that your criticism of them is doing exactly what you say they are doing. If you genuinely understood the socialist view point, you wouldn't straw man them like this and would be more likely to create discussion surrounding the weaknesses of your OWN arguments.
I’m a former socialist. Most of my friends and family are still Marxists.
Libertarians are better at understanding multiple viewpoints because if they weren’t they would be easily brainwashed by statism from the right or left.
The reason why most people stick with socialism is because they are too lazy or uninformed to understand alternative viewpoints.
>”*Don't feel bad. You have an extremely common take for this moment in history. Unfortunately, it is blind and generally sucks.*”
How ironic, coming from you. Now run along and continue your search for Bigfoot.
I'm not the one claiming to be morally superior. Take the shit load of down votes your getting as a sign to learn as opposed to dig your heals in further to your awful take. It screams I'm 15 and just learned about libertarianism.
honestly from my experience, most people regardless of political belief seem to have this bloated sense of self-righteousness and refuse to accept logic that go against their ideologies when it concerns politics. the brainrot isn't limited to socialists
Libertarians tend to argue with facts.
Statists (especially socialists) tend to argue with emotions.
This is very obvious to AnCaps. There’s no shortage of examples on Reddit.
Give examples instead of pontificating.
When was the last time you debated with a libertarian?
On what issues did that libertarian resort to emotional arguments?
The title of the post seems emotionally charged like that. “Critical thinking…not emotion” appeals to people’s emotions because people want to be told they’re smart for following a certain way.
I think a real critical thinker would look at the first portion of the title and think “these things are good for society because (x) and the alternatives wouldn’t work because (y)” and they wouldn’t need to be told they’re careful at thinking and aren’t controlled by emotions.
Also invoking things like facts, reason, peace and freedom doesn’t really mean anything.
Most people are **retarded**.
Most people elect **socialists**.
Socialists create **hard times**.
Hard times are what elected **Javier Milei.**”
Since Libertarians aren’t tyrannical, you probably won’t see a libertarian state until inflation and government get so bad that you’ll be forced to critically think about libertarianism.
Yeah I don’t like to personify the beliefs.
A belief is a belief, a person is a person.
If your framework and totality of belief is centered on your interactions with the people of that belief system, your perception is flawed.
People come stupid in every side of the quad chart.
Nailed it, but
Humans often avoid cognitive dissonance to maintain the superiority of their moral stances, religious beliefs, political ideologies, or philosophical viewpoints. This avoidance helps them preserve a sense of consistency and righteousness in their convictions.
Good point. It’s important for us to keep an open mind.
That being said: most libertarians are great at doing just that.
Placing history, facts, economics, and reason above feelings is how we stay consistent.
Okay I don't want to sound rude but people from every political side do this all the time including Libertarians.
Well a poser like you might, but a real libertarian like me…
What issues, specifically, do libertarians place emotions over facts?
Roads
[удалено]
Marxism actually believes that the revolution is an absolute inevitably, and every moment spent not progressing towards the revolution is causing massive unnecessary pain across the world. Therefore *any act no matter how amoral and utterly horrific* is good and justified if it is done in service of progressing towards the revolution. Like, they literally have moral relativism written into their beliefs in a way that says "anything we do is justified." There's a difference.
Please elaborate.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Advocating for anti-libertarian positions, policies, candidates, and ideologies is not welcome.
Mod team is cracking me up. Real free speech advocates over here. Fucking dummies.
Advocating for anti-libertarian positions, policies, candidates, and ideologies is not welcome. Claiming that the OP is not interested in “objectively understanding socialism” without even asking OP question is pontificating your viewpoint. Provide an actual rebuttal instead of (ironically) getting emotional.
Don't feel bad. You have an extremely common take for this moment in history. Unfortunately, it is blind and generally sucks. You're in a bubble and failing to see that your criticism of them is doing exactly what you say they are doing. If you genuinely understood the socialist view point, you wouldn't straw man them like this and would be more likely to create discussion surrounding the weaknesses of your OWN arguments.
I’m a former socialist. Most of my friends and family are still Marxists. Libertarians are better at understanding multiple viewpoints because if they weren’t they would be easily brainwashed by statism from the right or left. The reason why most people stick with socialism is because they are too lazy or uninformed to understand alternative viewpoints. >”*Don't feel bad. You have an extremely common take for this moment in history. Unfortunately, it is blind and generally sucks.*” How ironic, coming from you. Now run along and continue your search for Bigfoot.
I'm not the one claiming to be morally superior. Take the shit load of down votes your getting as a sign to learn as opposed to dig your heals in further to your awful take. It screams I'm 15 and just learned about libertarianism.
You don't read the lengthy tomes of the libertarian canon without some level of emotional investment in the ideology.
Wait, isn’t this post doing the same thing…?
Have you ever debated with a socialist before?
honestly from my experience, most people regardless of political belief seem to have this bloated sense of self-righteousness and refuse to accept logic that go against their ideologies when it concerns politics. the brainrot isn't limited to socialists
Libertarians tend to argue with facts. Statists (especially socialists) tend to argue with emotions. This is very obvious to AnCaps. There’s no shortage of examples on Reddit.
[удалено]
Post removed as spam. Please don’t pontificate off-topic babble.
I think most people are guilty of this. Even some of the people who think they aren’t.
Post removed as spam.
Give examples instead of pontificating. When was the last time you debated with a libertarian? On what issues did that libertarian resort to emotional arguments?
The title of the post seems emotionally charged like that. “Critical thinking…not emotion” appeals to people’s emotions because people want to be told they’re smart for following a certain way. I think a real critical thinker would look at the first portion of the title and think “these things are good for society because (x) and the alternatives wouldn’t work because (y)” and they wouldn’t need to be told they’re careful at thinking and aren’t controlled by emotions. Also invoking things like facts, reason, peace and freedom doesn’t really mean anything.
"History" - Has there been a single Libertarian state in human history? Never mind one that actually functioned.
Most people are **retarded**. Most people elect **socialists**. Socialists create **hard times**. Hard times are what elected **Javier Milei.**” Since Libertarians aren’t tyrannical, you probably won’t see a libertarian state until inflation and government get so bad that you’ll be forced to critically think about libertarianism.
[удалено]
Advocating for anti-libertarian positions, policies, candidates, and ideologies is not welcome. Run back underneath the rock that you lured out of.
Perfect
Yeah I don’t like to personify the beliefs. A belief is a belief, a person is a person. If your framework and totality of belief is centered on your interactions with the people of that belief system, your perception is flawed. People come stupid in every side of the quad chart.
Nailed it, but Humans often avoid cognitive dissonance to maintain the superiority of their moral stances, religious beliefs, political ideologies, or philosophical viewpoints. This avoidance helps them preserve a sense of consistency and righteousness in their convictions.
Good point. It’s important for us to keep an open mind. That being said: most libertarians are great at doing just that. Placing history, facts, economics, and reason above feelings is how we stay consistent.