Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

861

Permit me a rant,

Libertarians are the lowest IQ morons there are. Worse than anarchists and worse than Communists.

I should know, I was born into communism;

  1. Libertarians have no values and no morals. Case in point they are all about 'muh individualism' meaning that your immorality and your degeneracy is fine as long as it "doesn't impact you." which in the long term IMPACTS you.

1a: Libertarians believe in the concept of 'consent' meaning that if you are 12 years old and you want to have sex with a boomer that's completely fine with them. AKA they support pedophilia

1b: Libertarians believe in complete open borders. Everyone has a right to seek their individual liberty, why stop immigration?

1c: Libertarianism is corpocracy. Since individual rights transfer to corporations, a business can force you to do whatever they want because "muh property rights". Meaning, you don't have a vaxxxine? Build your own business. You believe in the second ammendment? Can't shop here. Their philosophy by definition allows for sociopathic rule by the rich.

Libertarian philosphy put into practice is absolute hell in real life and creates a worse system than communism because it's by definition pure narcissism. There is no 'greater good' philosophy, there is no policing, there is nothing but, "as long as I have (((consent))) I can do whatever I want. Sound familiar?

Permit me a rant, Libertarians are the lowest IQ morons there are. Worse than anarchists and worse than Communists. I should know, I was born into communism; 1. Libertarians have no values and no morals. Case in point they are all about 'muh individualism' meaning that your immorality and your degeneracy is fine as long as it "doesn't impact you." which in the long term IMPACTS you. 1a: Libertarians believe in the concept of 'consent' meaning that if you are 12 years old and you want to have sex with a boomer that's completely fine with them. AKA they support pedophilia 1b: Libertarians believe in complete open borders. Everyone has a right to seek their individual liberty, why stop immigration? 1c: Libertarianism is corpocracy. Since individual rights transfer to corporations, a business can force you to do whatever they want because "muh property rights". Meaning, you don't have a vaxxxine? Build your own business. You believe in the second ammendment? Can't shop here. Their philosophy by definition allows for sociopathic rule by the rich. Libertarian philosphy put into practice is absolute hell in real life and creates a worse system than communism because it's by definition pure narcissism. There is no 'greater good' philosophy, there is no policing, there is nothing but, "as long as I have (((consent))) I can do whatever I want. Sound familiar?

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

You aren't describing libertarian-ism

Very straw man of you

Before the yanks bastardised the meaning of liberal, a libertarian position was basically english liberalism. Or close to the constitutional bill of rights. Limited government etc..

Your straw man seems to describe right wing anarchists.

Everyone advocates for the system they believe they would do best in

Lolberts are closer to anarchists than to nazis but to say they are worse than communists is taking it too far. Commies are thieves, lolberts just want a fair system that recognises the individual as the smallest divisible unit of autonomy and believe the rights of the individual are paramount in order to secure the rights for all.

It is a completely impractical philosophy in the face of the dumbed-down masses being led by corrupt psychopaths but by advocating for it maybe it can help curb the worst excesses of clown world

[–] • 1 pt

Atleast you know what Communists stand for and at minimum you know that communists respect borders. Libertarians do neither.

As for accusations of straw man or generalization. . You will see how insane it truly is. I've never met a libertarian who was principled, if you believe in individual freedoms that's one thing but to support the actual party ideas is another.

[–] • 1 pt

I read their platform and was in some agreement up until point 3, security.

I think a locally administrated defer-able National Service in which you serve the public good in a suitable capacity would be a worthwhile civic duty. National service could feed into a federated system that exists only as the smallest possible entity to enforce the libertarian rules within the natural borders.

You would need a border declaring where the platform applies but you don't need an internal border for those rules. States rights or private property apply for any internal borders but the states can't abuse the natural rights of people without a federal intervention of some kind. Unless you exist in a state in which you forego federal protection for some privilege so long as your privilege doesn't impinge on someone else's federalized libertarian protected natural rights.

We would have to refrain from violence, theft or coercion on a personal level and show immense tolerance for the degenerates while having virtuous citizens

You're correct it is all absolutely crazy

[–] • 0 pt

a locally administrated defer-able National Service in which you serve the public good in a suitable capacity would be a worthwhile civic duty.

Problem, "Muh individual rights" civic duty doesn't exist in libertarianism

libertarian rules within the natural borders.

Natural borders don't exist. Per the ideology and "muh individualism" libertarians believe in open borders. Because, why stop someone who wants to better themselves?

Unless you exist in a state in which you forego federal protection for some privilege so long as your privilege doesn't impinge on someone else's federalized libertarian protected natural rights.

You just contradicted Libertarianism. Can you see now why it's a joke?

We would have to refrain from violence, theft or coercion on a personal level and show immense tolerance for the degenerates while having virtuous citizens

This opens you up to pedophilia and open borders. YOu can't defend your borders and you can't defend against people who want to break your rules.

The ideology sucks

[–] • 0 pt

Ron Paul is not for open borders. I think it is possible to embrace some Libertarian ideals and remain within the framework of a country. You’re looking at this like everyone is the Steve Ditko character Mr. A.

[–] • 0 pt

Name Two Libertarian ideals that you embrace.

Take Paul out of it.

[–] • 1 pt

Yeah. John Locke was a retard. “Universal negative rights?” What does that even mean? He was so stupid.

[–] • 0 pt

I considered myself Libertarian-leaning (if that is possible) and not absolute in a Randian sense. I would never support pedophilia and I’m not a fan of “do it because it feels good.” I guess I am more of a laissez-faire capitalist.

[–] • 1 pt

laissez-faire capitalism leads to corpocracy like we currently have to date. Which is my point in calling out libertarians. If you scrutenize the ideology it's evil.

[–] • 0 pt

Over generalize much?