Ayan Rand's entire philosophy which is the backbone of modern internet libertarianism requires its population to be both rational and educated while making absolutely zero effort to achieve it (creating systems that allow children of poor families to have equal access to quality education and healthcare that actually allow the next generation to be educated).
lol it's not the backbone of libertarianism, or "internet libertarianism" as you say, and that's a lazy over generalization... Many may like her work and do, but it's not the backbone behind it. I would say you'd have to go further back to locke and his enlightenment cohorts to get there and perhaps even further back than that. Now I will say that as someone who is leaning libertarian, I don't believe in the complete anarchy idea people attribute to libertarians (open borders for example which is a **** Brothers initiative). Liberty is the core focus of such a movement, and it does not mean to get rid of the existence of the state. It is not anarchy. Many libertarians are OK with the state and just want it to support people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And they have varying opinions on the state's desired role and size. My personal belief is that it should be as small as possible in order to properly ensure we have basic elements of governance like property rights and I am not even against providing a basic safety net/education and things, to what Rand disagreeably calls parasites, so long as it is possible for us to support it (like without open borders because then it becomes a true impossibility to maintain) and these things are OK should they not intrude on liberty. These ideas really aren't in conflict with it though there are insane libertarian hardcore weirdos who equate tax to theft and just have no idea of their ideological underpinnings. In fact there are libertarian arguments for those govt programs that if done right, can maximize freedom. Like education and funding for safety nets. The libertarian demonetization comes for simplification and trying to lump them all together into one group. And Rand definitely is NOT some heroic deity who founded libertarianism or even exemplifies a practical model of it. And her works, while thought provoking, as pointed out, are flawed if you actually want to take them and try to translate them into real life in some insane manner. I think Rand was slightly crazed because of her adolescence to be honest, but nonetheless still a smart, yet angry, personality. Her work isn't as bad as people make it out to be, but it's not really worth its own institute. I find that a bit laughable and that's actually a fair thing to critique. A good work doesn't need to be pushed on people; that right there tells you political activists are hijacking it. If you want to know what is closer to my belief, look up minarchist. Or nightwatchmen state. While I'm sure there are flaws to this, and every system, this is more what libertarians are often for without even realizing the name for it. Again there are variations to that too, which are essentially libertarians being insane libertarians as usual. Which is why I don't fully identify as one, because what is it really? I just have my own beliefs and they are somewhat close to this. MUCH closer than to neocons, neolibs, and the modern democrats and republicans. Hell even Trump is not really representative of my views. I may vote for West at this point if Kanye impresses me.
lol yeah ending corporate welfare is a huge must. I'd rather see more stimulus going, in a limited manner, into the pockets of U.S. tax payers, who can then in turn use that money in the most crucial areas of the economy.
