Why do libertarian types like Oligarchy & Corporate rule?

indoctrination and refusal to update their brain software based on present day information.

 

They don't? Ayn Rand wasn't a libertarian? Objectivists are pretty much neocons nowadays anyway? Paul Ryan clearly doesn't believe in the non-aggression principle?

 

You obliterated that straw man.

Impressive.

 

glynch lives in a fantasy world. Your efforts will be in vain.

 

Libertarian ideal is a lot like communism, sounds nice on the paper but does not work in practice.

 

Governments are responsible for war and genocide.


Why do liberals naively like gubmint so much?

 

Government have done many bad things, but without government, humans would still be in the stone age today. If we want to advance as a race, government is a must, at least in the foreseeable future.

 

glynch, he didn't "define away the problems." He (naively) tried to point out that your premises are wrong. Ayn Rand wasn't a libertarian. Objectivists are f***ing nuts* and are more neocons than anything. And Paul Ryan is not a proponent of NAP. These statements are all plainly true.

The only mistake bingsha10 made was trying to tell you these things, as though talking to you is any more effective than talking to a wall.

Look, it's ok to disagree with and even deride libertarians. Do that all you like. But your passion for being so clueless about libertarianism is problematic simply because you talk about it more than anyone else on this board. I sincerely hope you don't flaunt your ignorance like this in real life.

*Think of Objectivists as the LOFs of political philosophy.

 

Just because governments emerged at the same time human civilization was ramping up does not mean that government was a precondition for rising out of the stone age. You're absolutely right about it being something we're stuck with (for better or worse) for the foreseeable future.

On the other hand, if you're right about government being necessary for advancement, you would think glynch would love to see all government abolished so that we could descend back into the stone age. There would be much less wealth inequality that way.

 

Organization, innovation and opportunities, the key distinctions between industrialized and developing countries. They're the only groups that can mobilize, produce and enrich in a non-political/tribal or non-militaristic means.

 

Oligarchy and corporate rule are exactly what I think when I think of libertarians. You nailed it.

 

The lumping together of disparate philosophies is a deliberate confusion by the powers that oppose popular democracy. Libertarians are promoted by oligarchs, though they would be natural political opposites, because they drum up a lot of dissention and noise and promote a sense of dissatisfaction with 'government' that aids the oligarchs in their obstruction of reforms, in corporate regulation, taxation, military spending, carbon based energy, social safety net and welfare spending, minimum wages and other things that serve The People.

It's just more astroturf paid for by those who can afford it, and profit from it.

 

I have always thought there should really be a Libertarian state in the world. I wish some of the rich Libertarians would create a state and show the world how great the philosophy works in practice. But as it stands now, there haven't been any significant successful country through the history that was build on the Libertarian ideals.

 

It isn't ONLY governments responsible for genocide, but understanding this would take accepting reality so I won't expect that of you.