My Ascent From the Tar Pit of Amoral Libertarianism

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Sep 25, 2011
63,590
16,756
2,220
Just wanted to share my personal experiences here. These personal experiences do not empirically prove anything, but some readers might find some resonance with their own experiences with ideological libertarianism and might share theirs as well.

I read Atlas Shrugged way back in high school, 9th grade. I was truly enamored with the story and the characters and I was outraged that such things could happen to a person at the hands of indifferent bureaucrats. I knew that the story was fiction, but that it was deemed believable by enough people that the novel sold well was itself damning.

My union officer grandfather, who had passed away in 68, had been my political mentor for years. And I tried to grasp the books events and themes with his voice and guidance in mind. He would have pointed out the great harms that the government had prevented would have far outweighed the harm it caused less frequently in regulating industry and that corruption was inevitable in any system. He would have told me that the Founding Fathers had a libertarian streak to their philosophy and statecraft, but that the demands of the urban modern age made much of that obsolete. But still it couldnt salve the outrage I felt, an outrage I had not felt since I read 'Uncle Toms Cabin'.

I spoke with the librarian at my high school about what I could read that would be a rhetorical response to Rands libertarian philosophy, and she mentioned a number of articles and books, which I read. Most of them were using arguments I was already familiar with. But I read one from National Review, by Whitacker Chambers who said that Rands philosophy was Godless, amoral and silly. He tempered my slow slide into Libertarianism and allowed me to pull myself out of its moral quick sand years later.

Most of my friends were libertarians of one variety or another. The Great Deracination of White Southerners was ongoing at the time and most of them felt a need to latch on to something that could replace the values of their Southern upbringing, and Rand made a very compelling and glib alternative to anything that hinted of conservatism and its familiarity with the racism of Jim Crow. We discussed Rand quite a bit though I can only remember bits and pieces of it all now.

But one thing I do remember was the insistence of my friends that one can have a moral philosophy even if an atheist, even if one had no religious institutions to guide ones moral formation. I would counter that while it is possible that children abandoned to grow up in the wild could survive and end up as civilized as the next man, but feral children have never done so without the help of their fellow man. We are a social creature, not a mere collection of independent Philosopher Kings.

Well that went on for decades with different people I would meet. From discussions with the Libertarian Party booth 'venders' at country fairs to young programmers fresh out of college spitting out the same old slogans as if no one had ever heard them before, I really enjoyed these conversations. "Everything should be allowed unless it is violent or fraudulent" was the most frequently heard Libertarian bumper sticker slogan I heard during all that time. But close to that was "The common good is no excuse for stealing a persons property to give it to those who did not earn it and do not deserve it." was another. Those are not direct quotes but a composite of the many times I have heard this from enthusiastic freshly scrubbed Libertarian acolytes.

I considered myself to be a Constitutional Christian Libertarian, by and large from the time I left the Army till this year. It was all about hypothetical utopian dreaming while Libertarians had no chance of ever getting any real political power which made it fun, but it still rubbed off on my thinking. Libertarianism was too 'pure' for actually winning an election for many reasons, from the legalization of drugs and prostitution to the deregulation of commerce. But that was OK, it only made it more fun as we would build these fantasy castles out of Dreamers Sand.


That all changed with Ron Paul's run for the Presidency in 2012. For the first time, Dr Paul was having real impact on the Republican Party, though not at the voting booth. Dr Paul was slipping in his people as delegates in states across the country, with the intention of having them vote for him on subsequent rounds if the convention turned into an open convention.

"But wait, isnt that fraud to pose as a Romney supporter while your full intent is to vote for Paul instead?" I would ask them.

"Well, yes, but it is what we have to do to change things for the better." They would respond in utterly unRandian terms.

"Isnt that what every ideological despotism justified itself with?" I would counter to silence or a change in subject.

And so I began to see that Libertarianism is as morphable as any other ideological system and Libertarians along with it all. Its principles are only as good as the next election and the needs of its promoters to win.

Then this election was the double knock out Death Punch Spinning Roundhouse Kick of Doom. Libertarians have actually welded themselves to the Preachers Kid Ted Cruz. Growing up, 'PK' was a dismissive way of referring to a preachers child that was unruly, contemptuous and a bit of a hooligan. And Ted Cruz is a PK, in spades, as he has all the ear marks to include smooth rhetorical delivery while espousing things that are just blatant lies or irrational nonsense.

Cruz can calmly sit in front of a camera interview and say that Trump has little chance of getting the nomination since 60% of the GOP has been voting against Trump and Trump still has to win 65% of the remaining delegates...even though the same logic, if applied to Cruz means that Cruz has even less chance of winning. But no, somehow the previous logic does not apply to Cruz and he has the inside track to win. The Baghdad Bob school of political rhetoric is now the reigning spin method used by all 'Die Standing Never Trump' zealots.

But the current fraud that Cruz's libertarian supporters is using to pose as Trump supporters to get on a slate of delegates while fully intending to vote for Cruz on the first open ballot is just irredeemable fully knowing that we are likely to have a brokered convention. Fraud is one of only two prohibitions for people in Libertarian philosophy, and this is fraud that not only do these people admit to, but they gleefully wallow in. They are proud that they are defrauding Trump supporters, because these people DESERVE it for not being as smart as the Cruz people and thus fraud has become a competitive tool, somehow OK if it is to beat the bad guys.

But this is not the only nonsense that I have encountered in this election from Libertarians. Most of the younger ones have completely absorbed all the Establishment anti-white racism that colleges today spew out. I have heard these morons repeat the biggest bunch of nonsense, everything from 'White privilege' to 'immigration restrictions are racism' to 'everything white people have was stolen from someone else'. And no, they wont discuss it, unlike everything else. A libertarian friend I have known for 12 years now, just told me a few weeks ago that there is no basis for wanting secure borders other than racism. Nothing more than purely racism. He tells me this even though he and I both know he has been posing as a conservative for the whole time I have known him. These 'Conservative Libertarians' are closet amoral Ends Justifies The Means slime, just like the Nazis, the Stalinists, the Maoists and every other totalitarian group that I and other Libertarians have condemned with complete moral superiority for decades. Today's Libertarians are not Conservative Libertarians, they are Marxist Libertarians; culturally Marxist with Libertarian politics.

Again, Principle does not outweigh need, and the need to avoid correcting racist ideological nonsense among today's youth is a trade off that Libertarians are making.

It is all for the common good, you see?
 
Last edited:
So, vote for John Kasich. All your existential-angst solved.
Classic response.

I am talking about the internal validity of a system of thought, and you boil that down to "OK, so vote for the other guy then."

I might end up voting for Cruz, if he is running against Hillary, but Cruz is only marginally better than Hillary in his dishonesty and willingness to lie.

At least he has more pleasant lies.

But I hope to vote for Sanders or Trump in the general election, not Cruz though he will do.
 
So, vote for John Kasich. All your existential-angst solved.
Classic response....I am talking about the internal validity of a system of thought, and you boil that down to "OK, so vote for the other guy then."...I might end up voting for Cruz, if he is running against Hillary, but Cruz is only marginally better than Hillary in his dishonesty and willingness to lie...At least he has more pleasant lies....But I hope to vote for Sanders or Trump in the general election, not Cruz though he will do.
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?
 
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?

My 'problem' with Kasich is his support for Open Borders and the TPP.

He is also delusional since he thinks the GOP Establishment will pick him for the nomination in an open convention.
 
Cruz is not a Libertarian. Never has been. Ask Ron Paul.
 
Last edited:
I think you are missing the point with the Cruz-Trump thing.

Trump is a reality-TV star who appeals to about a third of the Republicans who care enough to vote in the Primaries. The other 2/3 have been divided among several excellent candidates, any one of whom would have - in my opinion - kicked Trump's ass in a one-on-one contest. So in summary, the votes have been, "1/3 want Trump; 2/3 want a real Republican." Now, the 2/3 (maybe closer to 60%) are divided between Cruz and Kasich, but the important thing to know is not whether they like Cruz or Kasich, but that they affirmatively DO NOT WANT Trump.

Cruz is the "Champion" of the "Anyone-But-Trump" movement, and although not everyone in the movement supports Cruz, they are all appreciative of his efforts to prevent Trump from taking his PLURALITY and converting it to a MAJORITY before the convention.

So do not be seduced by the Trump-ites whining that Cruz is trying to "steal" Trump's rightful victory in the campaign because Trump will undoubtedly go into the convention with "more votes than any other Republican." The requirement is that one get a MAJORITY of the Republican delegates, and Trump doesn't have it, and apparently will not get that majority before the first ballot.

After the first ballot, we move into the "representative democracy" mode of the process. We do not vote for delegates so that they will blindly vote for the candidate who won the individual states' primaries in ballot after ballot; we vote for delegates so that they will use their knowledge and judgment to nominate the candidate most likely to win in November, whether that be Donaldus Maximus, Terrible Ted, Milquetoast John Kasich, Paul Ryan, or Newt Fucking Gingrich!

AND WE ALL MUST SUPPORT WHOMEVER THEY NOMINATE! Because the alternative is the devil incarnate.
 
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?

My 'problem' with Kasich is his support for Open Borders and the TPP.

He is also delusional since he thinks the GOP Establishment will pick him for the nomination in an open convention.

What "open borders "?

The kid that said that the wall is about racism is true. Why aren't we building a wall wh Canada ? That border is much more open than the south .
 
Thanks for that OP, JB.

Yes, the Whitaker Chambers piece on Atlas Shrugged is one of the best takedowns of Libertarianism ever written.

I read Atlas Shrugged many years ago, and found it could have been written in 50 pages or less. The reason it is such a massive tome is to pound its propaganda into the heads of the malleable through unrelenting repetition. It is literary brainwashing of the dullest kind.

I think Ayn Rand's true nature is revealed in the train tunnel scene where she justifies the death of every living soul on board, right down to the tiniest child. She was one sick bitch. I completely understand her venomous reaction to her native Soviet Union, but she let her emotions run away from her while pretending "objectivism".

Nevertheless, I have a bit of a libertarian (small "l") streak myself. It can't be helped if you are a natural born conservative who was a member of the Young Americans for Freedom who met Ronald Reagan in 1977 like myself. Reagan had his own libertarian streak. After all, he was a great friend of Bill Buckley (who I also met that same year).

But I have found hardcore Libertarians to have no sense of human nature whatsoever. Their naivete knows no bounds.

There are Libertarians who are practically indistinguishable from Green party members. These must be the ones you encountered. But there are also Libertarians who are practically indistinguishable from White Nationalists (Nazis).

Most, though, are the kind who want to End the Fed™, legalize all drugs, end all federal regulation of business, and isolationists who want to shrink our military down to the size of a cub scout troop.

I've always admired the steadfastness of principle Ron Paul demonstrated. Right or wrong (and he was frequently right), he did not bend.
 
Ted Cruz is a liar. No doubt about it. He's the kind of liar who knows he lying, but thinks the public are too stupid to know he is lying.

Unfortunately, his base has proven his assumptions correct.

If elected, Ted Cruz is not going to "abolish the IRS". He isn't, and he knows he isn't. But he gets a big round of applause with his base every time he says it.

You'll notice you don't hear him saying that as much now that the national spotlight is really focused on him.
 
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?

My 'problem' with Kasich is his support for Open Borders and the TPP.

He is also delusional since he thinks the GOP Establishment will pick him for the nomination in an open convention.

What "open borders "?

The kid that said that the wall is about racism is true. Why aren't we building a wall wh Canada ? That border is much more open than the south .
they don't call it the great white north for nothing ,
 
What "open borders "?

Open Borders are the desired goal of corporations in the USA so they can freely attain dirt labor costs using Third World labor.

The kid that said that the wall is about racism is true.

No, it is not true simply because you think it is.

Why aren't we building a wall wh Canada ?

Because Canadians are not pouring across our borders by the thousands each day.

That border is much more open than the south .

You dont fix what aint broke, dude.
 
Just wanted to share my personal experiences here. These personal experiences do not empirically prove anything, but some readers might find some resonance with their own experiences with ideological libertarianism and might share theirs as well.

I read Atlas Shrugged way back in high school, 9th grade. I was truly enamored with the story and the characters and I was outraged that such things could happen to a person at the hands of indifferent bureaucrats. I knew that the story was fiction, but that it was deemed believable by enough people that the novel sold well was itself damning.

My union officer grandfather, who had passed away in 68, had been my political mentor for years. And I tried to grasp the books events and themes with his voice and guidance in mind. He would have pointed out the great harms that the government had prevented would have far outweighed the harm it caused less frequently in regulating industry and that corruption was inevitable in any system. He would have told me that the Founding Fathers had a libertarian streak to their philosophy and statecraft, but that the demands of the urban modern age made much of that obsolete. But still it couldnt salve the outrage I felt, an outrage I had not felt since I read 'Uncle Toms Cabin'.

I spoke with the librarian at my high school about what I could read that would be a rhetorical response to Rands libertarian philosophy, and she mentioned a number of articles and books, which I read. Most of them were using arguments I was already familiar with. But I read one from National Review, by Whitacker Chambers who said that Rands philosophy was Godless, amoral and silly. He tempered my slow slide into Libertarianism and allowed me to pull myself out of its moral quick sand years later.

Most of my friends were libertarians of one variety or another. The Great Deracination of White Southerners was ongoing at the time and most of them felt a need to latch on to something that could replace the values of their Southern upbringing, and Rand made a very compelling and glib alternative to anything that hinted of conservatism and its familiarity with the racism of Jim Crow. We discussed Rand quite a bit though I can only remember bits and pieces of it all now.

But one thing I do remember was the insistence of my friends that one can have a moral philosophy even if an atheist, even if one had no religious institutions to guide ones moral formation. I would counter that while it is possible that children abandoned to grow up in the wild could survive and end up as civilized as the next man, but feral children have never done so without the help of their fellow man. We are a social creature, not a mere collection of independent Philosopher Kings.

Well that went on for decades with different people I would meet. From discussions with the Libertarian Party booth 'venders' at country fairs to young programmers fresh out of college spitting out the same old slogans as if no one had ever heard them before, I really enjoyed these conversations. "Everything should be allowed unless it is violent or fraudulent" was the most frequently heard Libertarian bumper sticker slogan I heard during all that time. But close to that was "The common good is no excuse for stealing a persons property to give it to those who did not earn it and do not deserve it." was another. Those are not direct quotes but a composite of the many times I have heard this from enthusiastic freshly scrubbed Libertarian acolytes.

I considered myself to be a Constitutional Christian Libertarian, by and large from the time I left the Army till this year. It was all about hypothetical utopian dreaming while Libertarians had no chance of ever getting any real political power which made it fun, but it still rubbed off on my thinking. Libertarianism was too 'pure' for actually winning an election for many reasons, from the legalization of drugs and prostitution to the deregulation of commerce. But that was OK, it only made it more fun as we would build these fantasy castles out of Dreamers Sand.


That all changed with Ron Paul's run for the Presidency in 2012. For the first time, Dr Paul was having real impact on the Republican Party, though not at the voting booth. Dr Paul was slipping in his people as delegates in states across the country, with the intention of having them vote for him on subsequent rounds if the convention turned into an open convention.

"But wait, isnt that fraud to pose as a Romney supporter while your full intent is to vote for Paul instead?" I would ask them.

"Well, yes, but it is what we have to do to change things for the better." They would respond in utterly unRandian terms.

"Isnt that what every ideological despotism justified itself with?" I would counter to silence or a change in subject.

And so I began to see that Libertarianism is as morphable as any other ideological system and Libertarians along with it all. Its principles are only as good as the next election and the needs of its promoters to win.

Then this election was the double knock out Death Punch Spinning Roundhouse Kick of Doom. Libertarians have actually welded themselves to the Preachers Kid Ted Cruz. Growing up, 'PK' was a dismissive way of referring to a preachers child that was unruly, contemptuous and a bit of a hooligan. And Ted Cruz is a PK, in spades, as he has all the ear marks to include smooth rhetorical delivery while espousing things that are just blatant lies or irrational nonsense.

Cruz can calmly sit in front of a camera interview and say that Trump has little chance of getting the nomination since 60% of the GOP has been voting against Trump and Trump still has to win 65% of the remaining delegates...even though the same logic, if applied to Cruz means that Cruz has even less chance of winning. But no, somehow the previous logic does not apply to Cruz and he has the inside track to win. The Baghdad Bob school of political rhetoric is now the reigning spin method used by all 'Die Standing Never Trump' zealots.

But the current fraud that Cruz's libertarian supporters is using to pose as Trump supporters to get on a slate of delegates while fully intending to vote for Cruz on the first open ballot is just irredeemable fully knowing that we are likely to have a brokered convention. Fraud is one of only two prohibitions for people in Libertarian philosophy, and this is fraud that not only do these people admit to, but they gleefully wallow in. They are proud that they are defrauding Trump supporters, because these people DESERVE it for not being as smart as the Cruz people and thus fraud has become a competitive tool, somehow OK if it is to beat the bad guys.

But this is not the only nonsense that I have encountered in this election from Libertarians. Most of the younger ones have completely absorbed all the Establishment anti-white racism that colleges today spew out. I have heard these morons repeat the biggest bunch of nonsense, everything from 'White privilege' to 'immigration restrictions are racism' to 'everything white people have was stolen from someone else'. And no, they wont discuss it, unlike everything else. A libertarian friend I have known for 12 years now, just told me a few weeks ago that there is no basis for wanting secure borders other than racism. Nothing more than purely racism. He tells me this even though he and I both know he has been posing as a conservative for the whole time I have known him. These 'Conservative Libertarians' are closet amoral Ends Justifies The Means slime, just like the Nazis, the Stalinists, the Maoists and every other totalitarian group that I and other Libertarians have condemned with complete moral superiority for decades. Today's Libertarians are not Conservative Libertarians, they are Marxist Libertarians; culturally Marxist with Libertarian politics.

Again, Principle does not outweigh need, and the need to avoid correcting racist ideological nonsense among today's youth is a trade off that Libertarians are making.

It is all for the common good, you see?

STFU, liar, you were never a libertarian. You're a socialist. And your arrogant pontification shows that as you just personally attack us and give us zero content of an understanding of what libertarian even is.

Here you go:

What is a small government libertarian?

Specifically, which part did you reject in favor of being a servant to government?
 
Ted Cruz is a liar. No doubt about it. He's the kind of liar who knows he lying, but thinks the public are too stupid to know he is lying.

Unfortunately, his base has proven his assumptions correct.

If elected, Ted Cruz is not going to "abolish the IRS". He isn't, and he knows he isn't. But he gets a big round of applause with his base every time he says it.

You'll notice you don't hear him saying that as much now that the national spotlight is really focused on him.

LOL, yeah, Hillary doesn't lie, that's why you're voting for her. Sucker
 
I think you are missing the point with the Cruz-Trump thing.

Trump is a reality-TV star who appeals to about a third of the Republicans who care enough to vote in the Primaries. The other 2/3 have been divided among several excellent candidates, any one of whom would have - in my opinion - kicked Trump's ass in a one-on-one contest. So in summary, the votes have been, "1/3 want Trump; 2/3 want a real Republican." Now, the 2/3 (maybe closer to 60%) are divided between Cruz and Kasich, but the important thing to know is not whether they like Cruz or Kasich, but that they affirmatively DO NOT WANT Trump.

And historically the plurality holder would pick up the momentum and walk into the convention with a majority of the delegates also, but hte GOP Establishment would rather lose to Hillary than to allow Trump to have a fair chance, so they are pulling this nonsense.

Cruz is the "Champion" of the "Anyone-But-Trump" movement, and although not everyone in the movement supports Cruz, they are all appreciative of his efforts to prevent Trump from taking his PLURALITY and converting it to a MAJORITY before the convention.

That is how it normally works. But when you have a fraud of a two party system that is effectively a duopoly that has stood by while we hit record deficits, while Middle Class Americans see their wages stagnate for 50 years, while the whole country is turnedinto a steaming pile of shit on a stick, then you have to run out all of the bastards, not just change one bastard for another.


So do not be seduced by the Trump-ites whining that Cruz is trying to "steal" Trump's rightful victory in the campaign because Trump will undoubtedly go into the convention with "more votes than any other Republican." The requirement is that one get a MAJORITY of the Republican delegates, and Trump doesn't have it, and apparently will not get that majority before the first ballot.

Again, no one is whining about not having a primary.

We are pissed off at the fact that the GOP has defrauded dues paying party members in Colorado by not letting them vote for who they wanted to and by purging the ballot of all Trump supporters.

This isnt really rocket science, you know?

After the first ballot, we move into the "representative democracy" mode of the process. We do not vote for delegates so that they will blindly vote for the candidate who won the individual states' primaries in ballot after ballot; we vote for delegates so that they will use their knowledge and judgment to nominate the candidate most likely to win in November, whether that be Donaldus Maximus, Terrible Ted, Milquetoast John Kasich, Paul Ryan, or Newt Fucking Gingrich!

Yeah, where everyone gets to pick from a safe collection of corporate whores and career sell-outs.

I hope it works out that way and the GOP gets run into the dirt for the very last time.


AND WE ALL MUST SUPPORT WHOMEVER THEY NOMINATE! Because the alternative is the devil incarnate.

Lol, no, we should not. Four years of Hillary will not be as bad for this country than letting the same crooks to keep running the only other party in the system, doofus.
 
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?

My 'problem' with Kasich is his support for Open Borders and the TPP.

He is also delusional since he thinks the GOP Establishment will pick him for the nomination in an open convention.

What "open borders "?

The kid that said that the wall is about racism is true. Why aren't we building a wall wh Canada ? That border is much more open than the south .

Seriously, you think Canada and Mexico are the same except for skin color? And you're calling anyone else racist when all you see is skin color?

That's mindlessly inane even for you, wheelchair boy
 
Just wanted to share my personal experiences here. These personal experiences do not empirically prove anything, but some readers might find some resonance with their own experiences with ideological libertarianism and might share theirs as well.

I read Atlas Shrugged way back in high school, 9th grade. I was truly enamored with the story and the characters and I was outraged that such things could happen to a person at the hands of indifferent bureaucrats. I knew that the story was fiction, but that it was deemed believable by enough people that the novel sold well was itself damning.

My union officer grandfather, who had passed away in 68, had been my political mentor for years. And I tried to grasp the books events and themes with his voice and guidance in mind. He would have pointed out the great harms that the government had prevented would have far outweighed the harm it caused less frequently in regulating industry and that corruption was inevitable in any system. He would have told me that the Founding Fathers had a libertarian streak to their philosophy and statecraft, but that the demands of the urban modern age made much of that obsolete. But still it couldnt salve the outrage I felt, an outrage I had not felt since I read 'Uncle Toms Cabin'.

I spoke with the librarian at my high school about what I could read that would be a rhetorical response to Rands libertarian philosophy, and she mentioned a number of articles and books, which I read. Most of them were using arguments I was already familiar with. But I read one from National Review, by Whitacker Chambers who said that Rands philosophy was Godless, amoral and silly. He tempered my slow slide into Libertarianism and allowed me to pull myself out of its moral quick sand years later.

Most of my friends were libertarians of one variety or another. The Great Deracination of White Southerners was ongoing at the time and most of them felt a need to latch on to something that could replace the values of their Southern upbringing, and Rand made a very compelling and glib alternative to anything that hinted of conservatism and its familiarity with the racism of Jim Crow. We discussed Rand quite a bit though I can only remember bits and pieces of it all now.

But one thing I do remember was the insistence of my friends that one can have a moral philosophy even if an atheist, even if one had no religious institutions to guide ones moral formation. I would counter that while it is possible that children abandoned to grow up in the wild could survive and end up as civilized as the next man, but feral children have never done so without the help of their fellow man. We are a social creature, not a mere collection of independent Philosopher Kings.

Well that went on for decades with different people I would meet. From discussions with the Libertarian Party booth 'venders' at country fairs to young programmers fresh out of college spitting out the same old slogans as if no one had ever heard them before, I really enjoyed these conversations. "Everything should be allowed unless it is violent or fraudulent" was the most frequently heard Libertarian bumper sticker slogan I heard during all that time. But close to that was "The common good is no excuse for stealing a persons property to give it to those who did not earn it and do not deserve it." was another. Those are not direct quotes but a composite of the many times I have heard this from enthusiastic freshly scrubbed Libertarian acolytes.

I considered myself to be a Constitutional Christian Libertarian, by and large from the time I left the Army till this year. It was all about hypothetical utopian dreaming while Libertarians had no chance of ever getting any real political power which made it fun, but it still rubbed off on my thinking. Libertarianism was too 'pure' for actually winning an election for many reasons, from the legalization of drugs and prostitution to the deregulation of commerce. But that was OK, it only made it more fun as we would build these fantasy castles out of Dreamers Sand.


That all changed with Ron Paul's run for the Presidency in 2012. For the first time, Dr Paul was having real impact on the Republican Party, though not at the voting booth. Dr Paul was slipping in his people as delegates in states across the country, with the intention of having them vote for him on subsequent rounds if the convention turned into an open convention.

"But wait, isnt that fraud to pose as a Romney supporter while your full intent is to vote for Paul instead?" I would ask them.

"Well, yes, but it is what we have to do to change things for the better." They would respond in utterly unRandian terms.

"Isnt that what every ideological despotism justified itself with?" I would counter to silence or a change in subject.

And so I began to see that Libertarianism is as morphable as any other ideological system and Libertarians along with it all. Its principles are only as good as the next election and the needs of its promoters to win.

Then this election was the double knock out Death Punch Spinning Roundhouse Kick of Doom. Libertarians have actually welded themselves to the Preachers Kid Ted Cruz. Growing up, 'PK' was a dismissive way of referring to a preachers child that was unruly, contemptuous and a bit of a hooligan. And Ted Cruz is a PK, in spades, as he has all the ear marks to include smooth rhetorical delivery while espousing things that are just blatant lies or irrational nonsense.

Cruz can calmly sit in front of a camera interview and say that Trump has little chance of getting the nomination since 60% of the GOP has been voting against Trump and Trump still has to win 65% of the remaining delegates...even though the same logic, if applied to Cruz means that Cruz has even less chance of winning. But no, somehow the previous logic does not apply to Cruz and he has the inside track to win. The Baghdad Bob school of political rhetoric is now the reigning spin method used by all 'Die Standing Never Trump' zealots.

But the current fraud that Cruz's libertarian supporters is using to pose as Trump supporters to get on a slate of delegates while fully intending to vote for Cruz on the first open ballot is just irredeemable fully knowing that we are likely to have a brokered convention. Fraud is one of only two prohibitions for people in Libertarian philosophy, and this is fraud that not only do these people admit to, but they gleefully wallow in. They are proud that they are defrauding Trump supporters, because these people DESERVE it for not being as smart as the Cruz people and thus fraud has become a competitive tool, somehow OK if it is to beat the bad guys.

But this is not the only nonsense that I have encountered in this election from Libertarians. Most of the younger ones have completely absorbed all the Establishment anti-white racism that colleges today spew out. I have heard these morons repeat the biggest bunch of nonsense, everything from 'White privilege' to 'immigration restrictions are racism' to 'everything white people have was stolen from someone else'. And no, they wont discuss it, unlike everything else. A libertarian friend I have known for 12 years now, just told me a few weeks ago that there is no basis for wanting secure borders other than racism. Nothing more than purely racism. He tells me this even though he and I both know he has been posing as a conservative for the whole time I have known him. These 'Conservative Libertarians' are closet amoral Ends Justifies The Means slime, just like the Nazis, the Stalinists, the Maoists and every other totalitarian group that I and other Libertarians have condemned with complete moral superiority for decades. Today's Libertarians are not Conservative Libertarians, they are Marxist Libertarians; culturally Marxist with Libertarian politics.

Again, Principle does not outweigh need, and the need to avoid correcting racist ideological nonsense among today's youth is a trade off that Libertarians are making.

It is all for the common good, you see?

STFU, liar, you were never a libertarian. You're a socialist. And your arrogant pontification shows that as you just personally attack us and give us zero content of an understanding of what libertarian even is.

Here you go:

What is a small government libertarian?

Specifically, which part did you reject in favor of being a servant to government?

Lol, no, I am not a socialist and yes I used to consider myself a Christian Constitutional Libertarian, but I dont any more.

Libertarianism is a lie, a fraud to cover the dissolution of the United States of America by attacking those social bonds that bind us together as a nation.

That is why the corporate owned media has been just dandy with you morons becoming so popular, you make it even easier for them to auction off our last factory and all the jobs that go with it while you debate yourselves about the true meaning of the word 'sovereignty'.

You guys are useful tools, fellow idiot travelers they need to distract and confuse the simple.
 
And so your problem with Kasich is.....? That he balanced the federal budge under Clinton for a surplus? That he has experience pulling his own state out of the financial mud and into productivity? That he gets crap done? That he isn't a malignant narcissist or a smooth-talking preacher-puppet, or over 70 years old and a shrieking LGBT-puppet liberal?

My 'problem' with Kasich is his support for Open Borders and the TPP.

He is also delusional since he thinks the GOP Establishment will pick him for the nomination in an open convention.

What "open borders "?

The kid that said that the wall is about racism is true. Why aren't we building a wall wh Canada ? That border is much more open than the south .

Seriously, you think Canada and Mexico are the same except for skin color? And you're calling anyone else racist when all you see is skin color?

That's mindlessly inane even for you, wheelchair boy

To a libertarian, all countries are nothing more than socials constructs and the people all the same everywhere, so while I agree with you tone here, I have to ask, why now?
 
Thanks for that OP, JB.

Yes, the Whitaker Chambers piece on Atlas Shrugged is one of the best takedowns of Libertarianism ever written.

I read Atlas Shrugged many years ago, and found it could have been written in 50 pages or less. The reason it is such a massive tome is to pound its propaganda into the heads of the malleable through unrelenting repetition. It is literary brainwashing of the dullest kind.

I think Ayn Rand's true nature is revealed in the train tunnel scene where she justifies the death of every living soul on board, right down to the tiniest child. She was one sick bitch. I completely understand her venomous reaction to her native Soviet Union, but she let her emotions run away from her while pretending "objectivism".

Nevertheless, I have a bit of a libertarian (small "l") streak myself. It can't be helped if you are a natural born conservative who was a member of the Young Americans for Freedom who met Ronald Reagan in 1977 like myself. Reagan had his own libertarian streak. After all, he was a great friend of Bill Buckley (who I also met that same year).

But I have found hardcore Libertarians to have no sense of human nature whatsoever. Their naivete knows no bounds.

There are Libertarians who are practically indistinguishable from Green party members. These must be the ones you encountered. But there are also Libertarians who are practically indistinguishable from White Nationalists (Nazis).

Most, though, are the kind who want to End the Fed™, legalize all drugs, end all federal regulation of business, and isolationists who want to shrink our military down to the size of a cub scout troop.

I've always admired the steadfastness of principle Ron Paul demonstrated. Right or wrong (and he was frequently right), he did not bend.

Yup, what he said.
 

Forum List

Back
Top