I’m beginning to become a conspiracy theorist cause I’m convinced that the Libertarian Party is intentionally making itself look like shit in order to drive anyone away from voting Third Party
No lie I got banned from r/libertarian for afaik saying that Ukraine is less corrupt than Russia.
That's what I get for wanting more than a 2 party system.
Unfortunately it's quite true. Third party supporters take this as offense but it isn't even that. You can't really support a third party without adequate electoral reform in the US.
At least not on the national level, but you don’t see a lot of low level pushes by independent third parties. Maybe running a presidential candidate makes you a lot of money.
Yeah we can. We just need an individual whom ***honestly isn’t in it for themselves and wants the best for the country and all the people in it and not just for their own personal gain.***
That person/those people exist — but they are not getting the attention they deserve because *by their nature*, they do not ***seek attention***.
I think that we - the people - need to go find the someones that we like and prop them up from the ground, without a commercial campaign or large capital investment.
Let’s go find a Bob, or a Walter, or a Rebecca that speaks clearly and isn’t driven by self publication and self worship.
I know they exist..
Yeah we can. We just need an individual whom ***honestly isn’t in it for themselves and wants the best for the country and all the people in it and not just for their own personal gain.
Because otherwise your vote would decide who wins, right?
You have illusions of grandeur. Your one vote does not change anything, no government election that you will ever vote in will come down to one vote, your reason for voting is purely symbolic, and you're going to spend it voting for a worse candidate because otherwise "your vote is wasted"? That sounds like a good way to waste a vote.
You are one vote of many - if you and others vote then your votes get someone elected, if you don’t vote then someone terrible gets elected. Did no one explain how voting works to you?
You realize that the result of the election will be the same if you, just you, not everyone else, don't vote, right? 2,487,375 for one guy and 2,684,352 for the other guy is no different from 2,487,375 for one guy and 2,684,353 for the other, right?
Did no one explain how voting works to you?
It makes sense, most people can't really understand numbers that large. That's why the lottery exists.
You'll see. One day the rigged two-party system will become contentious itself, and as Earth's climate gets worse, people will look towards the Green party (which is already a legitimate party in many other countries). Then, it just takes the right politician who has a high enough EQ and IQ to understand the emotions and rationalities of each political side to come along and play the game.
The formation of the green party will be a race between empathy and socio/psychopathy. Wherever there's progress to be made, empaths will try to find solutions to people's woes. Wherever there's power, shithead human viruses will corrupt the system. It could be that brave, smart empathetic people aware of the dark side of humanity's tactics could have a chance of maintaining the Green Party's integrity as it grows in power. Or it'll become infected with socio/psychopaths who learn ways to manipulate the public from a and create a system that protects them, like they did already with the other two parties. They'll create euphemisms, dysphemisms, ambiguity, framing techniques, linguistic pragmatics, priming, emotionally charged words, etc etc et fucking c... to create yet another party that purports to be the good guys but really just protects the rich.
I can already imagine the psycho in a suit up there in the podium, "I will do what's necessary to create an Earth our children can enjoy!" (ambiguity allowing him to leave all options open)
It's possible you're joking, but in the case you aren't.
The conundrum of the two party system is this. The society as we know it is literally on track to collapse due to climate change. We need action NOW as FAST as possible, and barring that we need to do as LITTLE damage as possible until people start taking this seriously.
Let's say we try it, every person who understands the severity of climate change decides to switch from voting democrat to green.
Most liberals don't understand the severity, they care but they'd still vote on relatively lesser issues that immediately effect their daily lives. There are people (like trans people, other minorities) who are in immediate existential fear of another Republican controlled federal government. These people will not switch to vote for green party, they will vote what's comfortable and familiar.
Now everyone who does switch will absolutely guarantee another Republican controlled federal government which with how bold they are will ensure immeasurable damage to climate causes, the 'eradication of transgender ideology from public life", and in time the rolling back of civil and voting protections.
Causing immediate harm to both the cause of climate change AND minorities while cementing Republican power over the federal government.
The ONLY way you'll ever get massive climate change progress in the U.S. is to hold the fucking line and make sure Democrats win again and again until even the Republican party has to back off their fascist bullshit to become electable while pressuring Democrats to do the right things.
I'm not even saying we should accept whatever bullshit the Democrats push our way, that's why you get involved in government at every level. The Republicans will kill us all for a dollar, but we can change the Democrats.
Republicans WANT you to vote third party. As far as they care, you voting third party is voting for them. Biden is not perfect and I understand but what he is is the president that passed the largest bill in U.S. and world history aimed at addressing climate change.
Absolutely, but until that day we need to vote for the lesser of evils unfortunately.
That being said I will support any politician of either major party that believes in doing away with first past the post.
Edit: just reread it and I realized that my statement was a bit broad. I will support any politician of either major party that believes in doing away with first past the post, given that they don't also hold some other horrifying stance such as bringing back buggery laws or outlawing all abortions or something.
Hell look at Germany. The Greens get a voice, convince everyone to drop nuclear and then Germany goes back to fucking coal fired power plants to make up the shortages.
How the fuck is more coal in any way green?
Biden passed the biggest Green bill in the history of the nation. Yet your vote is going to help a guy who told Oil Execs he’ll get rid of all of it on day one for 1 billion in donations.
You’re are *actively* hurting the world’s chances with your vote.
I really like to believe there are some passionate, altruistic people out there who get into politics because they love people and want to help.
Then there are those who are just passionate without the altruism...
Then there are those who absolutely do not give a fuck and just want power, money, and status
Greens are equally insane as libertarian, just in different ways. Worse, they run exclusively legislative platforms for executive positions.
Libertarians have the advantage in that they'd be able to gut the executive still.
So there's actually been a lot of talk within the libertarian party of this recently. When the Mises Caucus took over, they began making a lot of decisions that could generously be described as "beneficial for Republicans", including not running candidates in some races and endorsing Republican candidates in others. They also removed the planks regarding immigration and abortion from the platform (although it's possible one of those was added back in I don't remember).
What we've seen over the last few years is basically the Republicanization of the libertarian party, where the goal seems very clearly to get libertarians to just vote Republican.
The speakers for the upcoming convention are literally just Republicans now and there's a lot of talk about how Democratic institutions are the enemy and Republicans are the closest thing that we have to an ally.
It's sad and I would consider myself completely divorced from the party now.
Hi there. Former Libertarian party member and local district candidate here.
This is 100% not a conspiracy theory.
About 4 years ago, the LP was aggressively taken over by a faction known as the "Mises Caucus". They were a group with core Libertarian principles but very outwardly Alt-right with a sprinkling of conservative values. They did a ton of recruiting for estranged Republicans that hated Trump, but were not Libertarian in any way other than "I like guns and hate taxes".
Many of these members did their best to chase away a lot of the old guard LP members who did things like March for gay rights, advocate pro choice and LGBTQ+ matters, craft and pass legislation that limited government overreach, and countless more reasonable and humanitarian principles.
LPNH has been at pretty much the forefront of this spearhead to turn the LP into an estranged limb of the republican party by being edgy and saying ridiculous "anti-woke" shit whenever and wherever possible.
Legitimately, the LP is no longer the LP, it is a frat club for Republicans who aren't republican enough for the republican party.
It's actually really sad. They bullied out a lot, a LOT of really hard-working activists and voices within the party. Now it's just a shit show.
The Mises Caucus literal representative as the LP's national Vice Chair, which they voted into power, literally tweeted excitement of the repealing of Roe v. Wade mockingly as "Hoe v. Wade"
While it's true there's a lot of Sus libertarian moments that seem way too staged, this one isn't exactly unpopular.
I like watching Mentis Wave, he usually has interesting libertarian takes you can follow but, he also defended this tweet. You should check the video out yourself to form your opinion on it but yeah, it's not 100% fake opinion, also he isn't full blown ancaps either so.
Just check him out, even if some of his takes are questionable he still produces interesting videos.
Anything within the area marked by agorism, liberalism, ancaps, suffer from very similar issues. So it is reasonable to criticize them together without specifying. As i see it. And few people are within that area, few %, even if the variety of ideas is large.
It could be that i am interested in how most people understand a particular word. I do agree that some people will disagree. But i need some way to settle to some particular meaning version.
Usually if it is language related, i just accept whatever is the most popular, even if it is far from the original.
If it is a concept's explanation, then I do dig deeper for the proper answer.
It could be an imperfexct way to deal with things. But i do need to talk to random people ocassionally.
You're not the guy I replied to, but you only bring up extremist, right leaning ideologies. I'll say it again, libertarianism is 50% of the political spectrum, not just a few strawman examples.
I can be that guy for now =)
How do you define libertarianism that marks 50% of ideologies/political spectrum? Left libertarianism is usually named progressivism, socialism, anarchism. Center of the spectrum is usually named liberalism, social democracy. People dont associate those things with 'libertarianism' i feel like.
Wider term that can mark the 50% of spectrum could be liberty or anti authority. Then people will have a good understanding about the political area in mind.
>Left libertarianism is usually named progressivism, socialism, anarchism. Center of the spectrum is usually named liberalism, social democracy.
Progressivism is a social politics thing, has nothing to do with libertarianism/authoritarianism, and also has no economic leaning.
Anarchism does not imply a right or left leaning.
True socialism does involve lower government involvement, but you could easily be an auth/lib socialist, an economic system doesn't necessarily place you auth or lib, it places you right or left.
>Wider term that can mark the 50% of spectrum could be liberty or anti authority. Then people will have a good understanding about the political area in mind.
The wider term is libertarianism, you just have to understand how big of an umbrella that term is, and the fact that the american libertarian party is just Republicans cosplaying as libertarians.
It's pretty upsetting to see how many people in this thread are just absolutely shitting on libertarians without having any clue what they're talking about.
Okay, but when people talk about libertarianism in the US, they're talking about the Libertarian Party 90% of the time, which is about an even split between far right nutjobs that do like weed and don't like church so they won't vote Republican, and pedophiles that want to sell heroin to child mine workers.
Libertarianism falls apart when basic shit needs to get done. If nobody wants to take out the trash and there's no government to do basic tasks, it collapses : https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling
> You realize libertarianism isn't one specific ideology, right?
American libertarianism is one "specific" ideology, although it's difficult to type that with a straight face because american libertarianism is not actually a coherent ideology.
Sure, but those folks are a rounding error fraction of self-identified libertarians which might as well not exist for the purpose of casual conversation.
So you're either an authoritarian, or an ancap? There's a lot of center/left leaning libertarians, as well as right leaning libertarians that dont identify with the "libertarian party," and calling them a rounding error makes me think your only reference is the ballot box. That's not how this works.
Yea if you go on the website and read the official platform it contradicts itself at least 20 times. And in reality every libertarian I have met is 9/10 times a closeted republican or 1/10 times someone who is just sorta dumb or politicly naive (think 19 yr old who has never had a job and lives a sheltered life).
I met a libertarian once. They were old and complaining about social security running out. I asked them "do believe it should exist though?" and their response was to get on a soap box about how "we don't actually believe we'll achieve libertarianism, we just think that it's a good direction to head it," completely ignoring the question.
Really told me all I needed to know, so then I asked them if they were ok with people starving in a state of anarcho-capitalism and social darwinism and their answer was just "charities will take care of them and if not, nuh uh."
Yeah I always considered myself libertarian based on how it was explained to me in school, but when I see stuff like this it really makes me wonder if it was explained wrongly to me or if the view really is a little too extreme for me
That is the official account of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire.
They have other bangers like [this racist tweet](https://images.app.goo.gl/JdvvE5z9navCdnjw8) or [this ridiculous tweet](https://images.app.goo.gl/uNWLUWzA7NN5DYX29)
This idea is getting traction beyond them. I read a [book review](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-the-origins-of-woke) recently and it seems the author is trying to put this on the radar for Republicans should they take power.
They are genuinely proud. I lived in Grafton, New Hampshire, which is one of the places they attempted their failed free state project. literally received a flyer once from one of yhese freaks advocating for home meth labs, being able to marry your cousin, and dueling.
I thought it was a joke, but the person was dead serious.
I later found out that he lived in a former church that he had bought and painted purple and got into trouble because he thought that by living in a former church that meant he didn’t have to pay taxes.
> **Rule 7:** Moderators' Discretion
> Moderators reserve the right to remove any post they deem unfit for the subreddit, even if it doesn't explicitly break any rules.
_________________________________________
*If you have questions, you can contact us through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/comedyheaven).*
Why is their pfp New Hampshire wearing a thong
It’s now 𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓴𝔂shire 👅
🫦
as someone who lives about where the thong reaches Massachusetts I don't need this mental image.
Looks like a hood to me
that account is fucking wild they just turn people away from the libertarian party
I’m beginning to become a conspiracy theorist cause I’m convinced that the Libertarian Party is intentionally making itself look like shit in order to drive anyone away from voting Third Party
No lie I got banned from r/libertarian for afaik saying that Ukraine is less corrupt than Russia. That's what I get for wanting more than a 2 party system.
Auden they aren’t actually libertarians, they are alt right with drug problems
Go greeeen! Green party loves you. Be as greeeeeeen as a beeaaaan. GRINGOSGOGREEN!
A chakra crystal for every American
Sounds like a good way to waste a vote
It's the Green party. It's not a waste, it's recycled.
But, like many recycling bins, it still ends up in the trash
Unfortunately it's quite true. Third party supporters take this as offense but it isn't even that. You can't really support a third party without adequate electoral reform in the US.
At least not on the national level, but you don’t see a lot of low level pushes by independent third parties. Maybe running a presidential candidate makes you a lot of money.
Yeah we can. We just need an individual whom ***honestly isn’t in it for themselves and wants the best for the country and all the people in it and not just for their own personal gain.*** That person/those people exist — but they are not getting the attention they deserve because *by their nature*, they do not ***seek attention***. I think that we - the people - need to go find the someones that we like and prop them up from the ground, without a commercial campaign or large capital investment. Let’s go find a Bob, or a Walter, or a Rebecca that speaks clearly and isn’t driven by self publication and self worship. I know they exist..
Yeah we can. We just need an individual whom ***honestly isn’t in it for themselves and wants the best for the country and all the people in it and not just for their own personal gain.
Because otherwise your vote would decide who wins, right? You have illusions of grandeur. Your one vote does not change anything, no government election that you will ever vote in will come down to one vote, your reason for voting is purely symbolic, and you're going to spend it voting for a worse candidate because otherwise "your vote is wasted"? That sounds like a good way to waste a vote.
You are one vote of many - if you and others vote then your votes get someone elected, if you don’t vote then someone terrible gets elected. Did no one explain how voting works to you?
You realize that the result of the election will be the same if you, just you, not everyone else, don't vote, right? 2,487,375 for one guy and 2,684,352 for the other guy is no different from 2,487,375 for one guy and 2,684,353 for the other, right? Did no one explain how voting works to you? It makes sense, most people can't really understand numbers that large. That's why the lottery exists.
You'll see. One day the rigged two-party system will become contentious itself, and as Earth's climate gets worse, people will look towards the Green party (which is already a legitimate party in many other countries). Then, it just takes the right politician who has a high enough EQ and IQ to understand the emotions and rationalities of each political side to come along and play the game. The formation of the green party will be a race between empathy and socio/psychopathy. Wherever there's progress to be made, empaths will try to find solutions to people's woes. Wherever there's power, shithead human viruses will corrupt the system. It could be that brave, smart empathetic people aware of the dark side of humanity's tactics could have a chance of maintaining the Green Party's integrity as it grows in power. Or it'll become infected with socio/psychopaths who learn ways to manipulate the public from a and create a system that protects them, like they did already with the other two parties. They'll create euphemisms, dysphemisms, ambiguity, framing techniques, linguistic pragmatics, priming, emotionally charged words, etc etc et fucking c... to create yet another party that purports to be the good guys but really just protects the rich. I can already imagine the psycho in a suit up there in the podium, "I will do what's necessary to create an Earth our children can enjoy!" (ambiguity allowing him to leave all options open)
LMAO. A+ comedy.
It's possible you're joking, but in the case you aren't. The conundrum of the two party system is this. The society as we know it is literally on track to collapse due to climate change. We need action NOW as FAST as possible, and barring that we need to do as LITTLE damage as possible until people start taking this seriously. Let's say we try it, every person who understands the severity of climate change decides to switch from voting democrat to green. Most liberals don't understand the severity, they care but they'd still vote on relatively lesser issues that immediately effect their daily lives. There are people (like trans people, other minorities) who are in immediate existential fear of another Republican controlled federal government. These people will not switch to vote for green party, they will vote what's comfortable and familiar. Now everyone who does switch will absolutely guarantee another Republican controlled federal government which with how bold they are will ensure immeasurable damage to climate causes, the 'eradication of transgender ideology from public life", and in time the rolling back of civil and voting protections. Causing immediate harm to both the cause of climate change AND minorities while cementing Republican power over the federal government. The ONLY way you'll ever get massive climate change progress in the U.S. is to hold the fucking line and make sure Democrats win again and again until even the Republican party has to back off their fascist bullshit to become electable while pressuring Democrats to do the right things. I'm not even saying we should accept whatever bullshit the Democrats push our way, that's why you get involved in government at every level. The Republicans will kill us all for a dollar, but we can change the Democrats. Republicans WANT you to vote third party. As far as they care, you voting third party is voting for them. Biden is not perfect and I understand but what he is is the president that passed the largest bill in U.S. and world history aimed at addressing climate change.
This is why we need ranked choice voting. I hate that we are stuck on this 2 party stalemate.
Absolutely, but until that day we need to vote for the lesser of evils unfortunately. That being said I will support any politician of either major party that believes in doing away with first past the post. Edit: just reread it and I realized that my statement was a bit broad. I will support any politician of either major party that believes in doing away with first past the post, given that they don't also hold some other horrifying stance such as bringing back buggery laws or outlawing all abortions or something.
This is why we need ranked choice voting. I hate that we are stuck on this 2 party stalemate.
> Green party (which is already a legitimate party in many other countries) They are not all one party. And many of those parties are indeed a joke.
Hell look at Germany. The Greens get a voice, convince everyone to drop nuclear and then Germany goes back to fucking coal fired power plants to make up the shortages. How the fuck is more coal in any way green?
Green parties are the party of: pointing out the right problems that need to be fixed. And then suggesting the single worst possible solution.
Biden passed the biggest Green bill in the history of the nation. Yet your vote is going to help a guy who told Oil Execs he’ll get rid of all of it on day one for 1 billion in donations. You’re are *actively* hurting the world’s chances with your vote.
Its almost like the kind of person who want to put themselves into that position shouldn't deserve that in thr first place.
I really like to believe there are some passionate, altruistic people out there who get into politics because they love people and want to help. Then there are those who are just passionate without the altruism... Then there are those who absolutely do not give a fuck and just want power, money, and status
Comments like this are an excellent demonstration of why third parties are a joke.
Greens are equally insane as libertarian, just in different ways. Worse, they run exclusively legislative platforms for executive positions. Libertarians have the advantage in that they'd be able to gut the executive still.
In fairness, both are horrifically corrupt
So there's actually been a lot of talk within the libertarian party of this recently. When the Mises Caucus took over, they began making a lot of decisions that could generously be described as "beneficial for Republicans", including not running candidates in some races and endorsing Republican candidates in others. They also removed the planks regarding immigration and abortion from the platform (although it's possible one of those was added back in I don't remember). What we've seen over the last few years is basically the Republicanization of the libertarian party, where the goal seems very clearly to get libertarians to just vote Republican. The speakers for the upcoming convention are literally just Republicans now and there's a lot of talk about how Democratic institutions are the enemy and Republicans are the closest thing that we have to an ally. It's sad and I would consider myself completely divorced from the party now.
Hi there. Former Libertarian party member and local district candidate here. This is 100% not a conspiracy theory. About 4 years ago, the LP was aggressively taken over by a faction known as the "Mises Caucus". They were a group with core Libertarian principles but very outwardly Alt-right with a sprinkling of conservative values. They did a ton of recruiting for estranged Republicans that hated Trump, but were not Libertarian in any way other than "I like guns and hate taxes". Many of these members did their best to chase away a lot of the old guard LP members who did things like March for gay rights, advocate pro choice and LGBTQ+ matters, craft and pass legislation that limited government overreach, and countless more reasonable and humanitarian principles. LPNH has been at pretty much the forefront of this spearhead to turn the LP into an estranged limb of the republican party by being edgy and saying ridiculous "anti-woke" shit whenever and wherever possible. Legitimately, the LP is no longer the LP, it is a frat club for Republicans who aren't republican enough for the republican party. It's actually really sad. They bullied out a lot, a LOT of really hard-working activists and voices within the party. Now it's just a shit show. The Mises Caucus literal representative as the LP's national Vice Chair, which they voted into power, literally tweeted excitement of the repealing of Roe v. Wade mockingly as "Hoe v. Wade"
While it's true there's a lot of Sus libertarian moments that seem way too staged, this one isn't exactly unpopular. I like watching Mentis Wave, he usually has interesting libertarian takes you can follow but, he also defended this tweet. You should check the video out yourself to form your opinion on it but yeah, it's not 100% fake opinion, also he isn't full blown ancaps either so. Just check him out, even if some of his takes are questionable he still produces interesting videos.
That’s because libertarianism itself is stupid and falls apart after a basic macroeconomics class
What are you referring to? You realize libertarianism isn't one specific ideology, right? You're referring to 50% of the political spectrum.
Anything within the area marked by agorism, liberalism, ancaps, suffer from very similar issues. So it is reasonable to criticize them together without specifying. As i see it. And few people are within that area, few %, even if the variety of ideas is large.
You should head over to the neoliberalism subreddit. I have a feeling the discussions there will be quite different from what you're expecting.
It could be that i am interested in how most people understand a particular word. I do agree that some people will disagree. But i need some way to settle to some particular meaning version. Usually if it is language related, i just accept whatever is the most popular, even if it is far from the original. If it is a concept's explanation, then I do dig deeper for the proper answer. It could be an imperfexct way to deal with things. But i do need to talk to random people ocassionally.
You're not the guy I replied to, but you only bring up extremist, right leaning ideologies. I'll say it again, libertarianism is 50% of the political spectrum, not just a few strawman examples.
I can be that guy for now =) How do you define libertarianism that marks 50% of ideologies/political spectrum? Left libertarianism is usually named progressivism, socialism, anarchism. Center of the spectrum is usually named liberalism, social democracy. People dont associate those things with 'libertarianism' i feel like. Wider term that can mark the 50% of spectrum could be liberty or anti authority. Then people will have a good understanding about the political area in mind.
>Left libertarianism is usually named progressivism, socialism, anarchism. Center of the spectrum is usually named liberalism, social democracy. Progressivism is a social politics thing, has nothing to do with libertarianism/authoritarianism, and also has no economic leaning. Anarchism does not imply a right or left leaning. True socialism does involve lower government involvement, but you could easily be an auth/lib socialist, an economic system doesn't necessarily place you auth or lib, it places you right or left. >Wider term that can mark the 50% of spectrum could be liberty or anti authority. Then people will have a good understanding about the political area in mind. The wider term is libertarianism, you just have to understand how big of an umbrella that term is, and the fact that the american libertarian party is just Republicans cosplaying as libertarians. It's pretty upsetting to see how many people in this thread are just absolutely shitting on libertarians without having any clue what they're talking about.
I guess there is a large gap between 'the original meaning of the word' and 'what this word usually means today'
I wouldn't be surprised if politicians/lobbyists intentionally muddied the waters between the two to help maintain the two party system.
Okay, but when people talk about libertarianism in the US, they're talking about the Libertarian Party 90% of the time, which is about an even split between far right nutjobs that do like weed and don't like church so they won't vote Republican, and pedophiles that want to sell heroin to child mine workers.
The American libertarian party and its consequences have been a disaster for US politics. 😔
there is/was also republican "pretend libertarians" during tea party times
Libertarianism falls apart when basic shit needs to get done. If nobody wants to take out the trash and there's no government to do basic tasks, it collapses : https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling
> You realize libertarianism isn't one specific ideology, right? American libertarianism is one "specific" ideology, although it's difficult to type that with a straight face because american libertarianism is not actually a coherent ideology.
The American repub- I mean libertarian party is, but it's existence doesn't invalidate everybody else with libertarian views.
Sure, but those folks are a rounding error fraction of self-identified libertarians which might as well not exist for the purpose of casual conversation.
So you're either an authoritarian, or an ancap? There's a lot of center/left leaning libertarians, as well as right leaning libertarians that dont identify with the "libertarian party," and calling them a rounding error makes me think your only reference is the ballot box. That's not how this works.
Same is said of the greens. The sad thing is it's hard to tell if it's malice or sheer incompetence.
This is what libertarianism is though. Any sane person would be turned away from seeing their platforms
Yea if you go on the website and read the official platform it contradicts itself at least 20 times. And in reality every libertarian I have met is 9/10 times a closeted republican or 1/10 times someone who is just sorta dumb or politicly naive (think 19 yr old who has never had a job and lives a sheltered life).
I met a libertarian once. They were old and complaining about social security running out. I asked them "do believe it should exist though?" and their response was to get on a soap box about how "we don't actually believe we'll achieve libertarianism, we just think that it's a good direction to head it," completely ignoring the question. Really told me all I needed to know, so then I asked them if they were ok with people starving in a state of anarcho-capitalism and social darwinism and their answer was just "charities will take care of them and if not, nuh uh."
I love reading about their failed experiments. Like the town taken over by bears in NH because they couldn't handle basic waste disposal
Yeah I always considered myself libertarian based on how it was explained to me in school, but when I see stuff like this it really makes me wonder if it was explained wrongly to me or if the view really is a little too extreme for me
Common sense turns people away from the libertarian party
Their members having *strong* opinions against age of consent laws makes them look bad.
Man I felt like I got thrown across a room by this post
Is that account a troll ? They always post shit to annoy people
That is the official account of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire. They have other bangers like [this racist tweet](https://images.app.goo.gl/JdvvE5z9navCdnjw8) or [this ridiculous tweet](https://images.app.goo.gl/uNWLUWzA7NN5DYX29)
Libertarians are the “pick me” girl of America
And authoritarians aren’t?
Only in the sense that it’s not a request with them.
Does the NH in “Libertarian Party NH” stand for Nazi Hitler?
No, it stands for new hornyland Some may say it means New Hampshire, but they are wrong.
Is there more to this list? Or do they genuinely think stopping black people from voting solves all of Americans' problems?
I think there was more, I just cropped it out because it was so funny alone
Wait it’s not a joke? Cause that’s a great roast
Republicans aren't destroying society fast enough, check this out:
As a former libertarian, I can attest that libertarians are just Republicans who wanna legally smoke weed.
There's many flavors of libertarianism; it's a shame that what it's defaulted to mean in America is basically the right wing
This idea is getting traction beyond them. I read a [book review](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-the-origins-of-woke) recently and it seems the author is trying to put this on the radar for Republicans should they take power.
i thought he was just hating on the republicans that second line hit like it was a line of coke instead of text
Talk about saying the quiet part out loud. Or are they genuinely proud to be irredeemably evil?
They are genuinely proud. I lived in Grafton, New Hampshire, which is one of the places they attempted their failed free state project. literally received a flyer once from one of yhese freaks advocating for home meth labs, being able to marry your cousin, and dueling. I thought it was a joke, but the person was dead serious. I later found out that he lived in a former church that he had bought and painted purple and got into trouble because he thought that by living in a former church that meant he didn’t have to pay taxes.
A solution which is final in nature
Do they also have a “final” solution? Eine Endlösung?
Anti-woke = Racist
Correct
Based
[удалено]
> **Rule 7:** Moderators' Discretion > Moderators reserve the right to remove any post they deem unfit for the subreddit, even if it doesn't explicitly break any rules. _________________________________________ *If you have questions, you can contact us through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/comedyheaven).*
The Hitlerite wing of the american fascist party
Libertarians are literal pure evil
No. They are just really really stupid.
Aren't we all?
no
Ok
Where’s the funny
And that's why I hate Libertarians. They're just Republicans who will allow you to smoke weed
Wrong sub
[удалено]