"you wont pass libertarian policies under a socialist dictatorship!! Trump was the harm reduction candidate!! you could have push trump to the libright!!"
-chuds
They're not wrong TBH.
FUCK Donald Trump for splitting the Jo Jorgenson vote. If he didn't want Biden to win he should have dropped out and endorsed her.
Trump already had 2016. This was her turn.
o7
They hated SerLava because he told them the truth.
Also because he trolled them, but mainly the truth thing.
Haha
The thread got me thinking, it's probably good to push the /pol/ psychos toward raging about libertarians flipping the election. Not only does it channel the energy away from racism and anteeefa paranoia, it also kind of reinforces electoral realism.
Excellent idea.
Getting the /pol/acks to be viciously anti-libertarian also fucks one of their main radicalization pipelines and could help drive more people going through the "wow our government sucks I wonder why/who else thinks this" process to the left instead of the right.
Now's a good time to reach out to that segment of libertarians that actually gives a shit about people, because they're getting slapped in the face with how much of a joke libertarianism is and if you can get them to seriously interrogate their beliefs they're persuadable.
It's tricky, because a lot of libs can be brought over, too. I think what you're running into there is that Warrenite libs are pretty convinced they're right and have at least some electoral skins on the wall as evidence, while ancaps -- convinced as they might be -- have nothing to show for their ideology but having to answer questions about Somalia and "flourishing free markets in children" all the time.
If you eat shit long enough you become open to other ideas. If you have a senator who might get a cabinet position, and can plausibly claim a lot of New Deal-type policy accomplishments, you dig in.
If you have a senator who might get a cabinet position
:michael-laugh:
There's actually a sizable community of left-libertarians/libertarian socialists on /r/libertarian. As you said, it's good to get those ideas out there to at least counter the libertarian-to-fascist pipeline.
Not really apolitical. It's more that they don't think too deeply about their political opinions (and you can hold strong political opinions without having really thought them through) and are disillusioned with both Republicans and Democrats. It's easy for people like that to see libertarianism -- the biggest third-party alternative in the past few decades -- and glom onto it because superficially it doesn't seem too bad. You like freedom, right? You like free speech, right? You like lower taxes and weed, right?
Some of these people are just soulless ghouls who would sell everyone they've ever known down the river to make a buck. They're not worth bothering with. However, there are others who do care about other people, but they've been sucked into libertarianism because it was there when they abandoned major party politics. Those people are reachable.
EDIT: Of course, there are some truly apolitical people who self-describe as libertarians, mostly because they need an answer when people ask them what their politics are, and they don't want to present themselves as either a Democrat or Republican. What the fuck have I done with my life that has given me an ethnographic understanding of these people.
EDIT: Of course, there are some truly apolitical people who self-describe as libertarians, mostly because they need an answer when people ask them what their politics are, and they don’t want to present themselves as either a Democrat or Republican.
Now I'm completely confused. According to this definition is South Park political in an "apolitical" both-sidesing of American politics way or apolitical in a "so far outside of mainstream politics that you can't even call it politics, it's like, the opposite of politics man" kind of way?
I'm using apolitical to mean disinterested in politics. Some people who are disinterested in politics call themselves libertarians because they don't want to get dragged into political fights they don't care about.
I wouldn't say South Park is apolitical at all: they have many expressly political episodes, which you don't do if you're disinterested in politics. They seem to be the type of libertarian who (1) is at least semi-interested in politics, (2) is disillusioned with both major parties, but (3) has not thought too deeply about their political stances beyond that.
has such little power that your ideas never have to meet reality
That's definitely a recurring theme among libertarians -- they just don't know or don't consider how their ideas have actually panned out when implemented in the real world.
Honestly, it’s surprising how much radicalization strategy comes down to “target disillusioned young people”
Fantastic point.
I had no idea that libertarianism was this arch-conservative ideological project to privatize and deregulate everything.
It's really a catch-and-kill operation for people who leave the Republican Party.
Ha, I’m glad finally someone has said it. Libertarians, the good ones at least, seem like lost cousins sometimes. They understand power structures and care about civil rights but fall apart at the free market.
im happy the chuds meltdown is as good as the libs one with r/neoliberal going for the "we have to be more racist" strategy
discovering that libertarianism has a component of hating state violence goes brrr
It's hilarious seeing them blame the thirty party this time around. It feels like a swan song for the whole Ron Paul craze since most of them I remember eventually became Trump supporters.
Secretary Xi can have one of my organs whenever he wants
I can imagine the US government being more left than under, say Obama, but I really have a difficult time imagining how the US goverment could be much more liberatarian than under Trump and still continue to function at all.
That's the end game for them. They'd prefer government to be converted into a private military service for hire to corporations.
Ah, yes, Donald "Take the guns first, ask questions second" Trump.
Looks like this time Jo did fuck it up for the Republicans. They could've held the presidency and the senate, since the Biden campaign failed to win Senate races, but instead the 16 EC votes go to the democrats and cement a weak Biden presidency with a Republican Senate.
weak Biden presidency with a Republican Senate
Tell me how this will be any different than the Bush years
You will see the Democratic party on federal level move to the right to compromise with the Senate. They will shoulder the blame when the budget doesn't pass the Senate. If you would play with power you would do a lot of executive orders, but that is highly unlikely.
So for leftists you can expect more repression than you would've expected with a Democratic senate (to be honest, for already targeted people and marginalized ones this won't change much). Feel free to mark the thread and proof me wrong in 4 years.
There will never be "no guns." It's fucking stupid. The Dems have been talking about gun control since Columbine and that shit never ever happens. This is 'murica. It's fantasy. There are 6 skillion guns already in circulation.
Only because Americans needed those guns to fight off a potential Soviet invasion. Some one get me the black book, I'm adding 7 gazillion US gun deaths.
really makes you reflect on, among other things, how fucking stupid those people are.
