Selfish idiots who want to earn all advantages of society but don’t want to contribute anything.
(Like Musk, who was a subsidy queen for years, but has suddenly discovered his love for a minimal state, or David Sacks, also a big fan of libertarianism, except when in dire need for a bailout from Silicon Valley Bank)
It’s supposed to be about individualism and individual freedom above all else, which is on par with the selfishness imo. Though many are conservatives that use the term to larp as apolitical.
Looking at this image, I would think that if I’m against authoritarianism, I’d be libertarian right? Yet, from my experience hearing from others who identify as libertarian, they all seem to be rather selfish as you say, or just very short-sighted. Is this a matter of the libertarian name being co-opted for something very different, or is that actually what it means to be libertarian?
Political compasses are a terribly misleading way of understanding political opinions IMHO, I wouldn’t read too much into this.
Libertarians tend to be against state authority and all-in with private authority. They are market absolutists and see the expression of influence or power through market dynamics as not just OK but desired, since they consider markets to be meritocratic.
I would say you can be anti-authoritarian and pro-democracy (i.e. power is still exerted through a state authority, but the state is more evenly represented by the people)
The issue with libertarianism is that it only sees the abuse of power being that which is exercised through the state, but I think most people recognize that to be an incomplete picture.
Also libertarianism only exist in theory / ideals. No society exists under it in any meaningful way. Their ideas have never been tested to the point where the consequences of their action have not been clearly seen.
They want to think everything is black or white, but in reality it’s different shades of gray.
You can be against authorities limiting your freedom without thinking other people’s rights also limit your freedom. It’s a spectrum. I don’t know what it actually means to be libertarian but it makes sense to me that the polar opposite of authoritanism is selfishness. I think it’s the best to not take it to either extreme.
I consider myself liberal and it’s not about my own freedoms (though I guess I’d like that too) but those of others. Believing others have a right to be non-binary as an easy example, or believe whatever they choose. I don’t believe corporations in particular have a right to authority over the individual. Isn’t that considered liberal?
Selfish idiots who want to earn all advantages of society but don’t want to contribute anything. (Like Musk, who was a subsidy queen for years, but has suddenly discovered his love for a minimal state, or David Sacks, also a big fan of libertarianism, except when in dire need for a bailout from Silicon Valley Bank)
Ah so right wing liberals?
It’s supposed to be about individualism and individual freedom above all else, which is on par with the selfishness imo. Though many are conservatives that use the term to larp as apolitical.
Looking at this image, I would think that if I’m against authoritarianism, I’d be libertarian right? Yet, from my experience hearing from others who identify as libertarian, they all seem to be rather selfish as you say, or just very short-sighted. Is this a matter of the libertarian name being co-opted for something very different, or is that actually what it means to be libertarian?
Political compasses are a terribly misleading way of understanding political opinions IMHO, I wouldn’t read too much into this.
Libertarians tend to be against state authority and all-in with private authority. They are market absolutists and see the expression of influence or power through market dynamics as not just OK but desired, since they consider markets to be meritocratic.
I would say you can be anti-authoritarian and pro-democracy (i.e. power is still exerted through a state authority, but the state is more evenly represented by the people)
The issue with libertarianism is that it only sees the abuse of power being that which is exercised through the state, but I think most people recognize that to be an incomplete picture.
Also libertarianism only exist in theory / ideals. No society exists under it in any meaningful way. Their ideas have never been tested to the point where the consequences of their action have not been clearly seen.
They want to think everything is black or white, but in reality it’s different shades of gray.
its a scale and individually on every topic you may be in a different quadrant
You can be against authorities limiting your freedom without thinking other people’s rights also limit your freedom. It’s a spectrum. I don’t know what it actually means to be libertarian but it makes sense to me that the polar opposite of authoritanism is selfishness. I think it’s the best to not take it to either extreme.
I consider myself liberal and it’s not about my own freedoms (though I guess I’d like that too) but those of others. Believing others have a right to be non-binary as an easy example, or believe whatever they choose. I don’t believe corporations in particular have a right to authority over the individual. Isn’t that considered liberal?
Libertarians don’t believe (or want) those kinds of rights, they mostly just want to be free to be assholes, and to not pay taxes.
The liberty of libertarians is NOT just a more radical version of the liberty of liberals.
👆 This encapsulates well 99% of German libertarians (and probably worldwide)