T O P

It drives me nuts watching typical GOP conservatives fight for freedom and liberty more vehemently than lots of libertarians are.

It drives me nuts watching typical GOP conservatives fight for freedom and liberty more vehemently than lots of libertarians are.

lotidemirror

NOTE: This post was automatically [mirrored to the new Hoot platform beta](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/14668), currently under development by the /r/goldandblack team. This is a new **REDDIT-LIKE** site to migrate to in the future. If you are growing more dissapointed in reddit, come check it out, and help kick the tires. [*What is Hoot?*](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/4344)


Lagkiller

This is my wife. She loves to talk about all the ancap points with me and agrees on all of them, but then regularly says "There ought to be a law..." unironically.


CCWaterBug

Oh god I can relate with this.


omgcoin

Let me give you a real example where your logic might lead to. Then I will also explain why you might be correct in your specific situation (NH) but not for reasons you might think. And finally, I will explain what libertarians should do. Currently, Russian political map is divided like this: 1. Supporters of Putin's regime: It's a broad alliance of conservative forces (not in American sense!). These conservative forces comprised of the following groups: those who wish to restore glory of USSR, those who wish to restore glory of Russian Empire and various nationalists in the middle of these two; 2. Opposition to Putin's regime: It's mainly broad alliance of pro-western socialist forces (with very niche non-socialist exceptions). The biggest force is European social democrats. You might think of them as copy cat of American liberals. They have severe cargo cult of everything western (but only on liberal side). They are for wokism, vaccine mandates, tax the rich and so on. Their twitter feed is Russian copy cat of American liberal twitter feed. All big opposition media sites like Meduza is Russian version of New York Times, CNN, Washington Post and so on. On top of this biggest force you have long tail of pro-western leftist movements (feminists, trotskyists and so on). Then you have even more niche movements who entertain ideas like Nazbol (dead party but ideas still alive). In the end of this tail of niche movements you have libertarians (catastrophic minority); So what those active libertarians do? (because according to them and you, they might *do something*, right?) The entire Russian opposition is united around main opposition (pro-western social democrats). So libertarians must be in this (mainly leftist) unity as well. And they do! (because you have to *do something*). Russian libertarians decided that it's a good idea to help social democrats for their cause. Namely, going out for the purpose of being punching bags for Russian police. Because you have to *do something*, right? Why not just go and become a punching bag. After all, Russian police have to train somehow (street gym). Would you enjoy being beaten by police for cause of people who are in favor of *vaccine mandates*? You have to! Because you have to *do something*. In the end of this very "productive" activity, Russian libertarians prosecuted by police (so unexpected!). But that's not the end of madness. Social democrats decided to participate in most recent "elections" for the purpose of "destabilizing" of Russian government (so called "smart voting" scheme). They know that Russian elections are rigged but the idea is that if everyone agrees to vote on some fake candidate on the ballot, it supposedly makes headache for Russian government. It's turned out that almost all these fake candidates are from Communist Party of Russian Federation which is itself a puppet opposition party. Now, let's unpack what Russian libertarians do: They decided to help social democrats (copy paste from American liberals who do love vaccine mandates!) to participate in smart voting of rigged elections (even if they, as libertarians, don't believe even in functional democracy) to vote for puppet communist party. I know there are too many levels and every single level is fucked up, lol. Of course, their "plan" didn't work (what a surprise!). So far, Russian libertarians was helping to prop up cause of social democrats (who in return despise libertarians, lol) by being punching bags for police and voting for fake communist party. And all of this nonsense in the name of *do something*. Look, I don't think that *running like headless chicken* promotes liberty in anyway. In 2014, before I left Russia, I've met Russian libertarian who tried to convince me that alliance with communist party is a good idea. My reaction was - ... dude ... never mind ... So are you willing to play **5D chess** and ... **unite with AOC to support vaccine mandates**? I guess not... but that's where your position eventually leads to if you end up on the other side of the ocean. You are doing okay in your situation but it's not because of what you think. America was founded on libertarian grounds (private land and guns to defend it). Then it was old right who opposed the Fed, then decades later opposed New Deal and so on. So libertarian (not ancap) ideas is more or less known in America. However, even given this, you still have absolutely *zero* chances to change *anything* in San Francisco. You will be drown in deeply **blue** ocean of liberal NPCs. That's why you actually adopted *semi-exitarian* strategy to concentrate all efforts in New Hampshire. Your strategy does make sense but it's fundamentally exitarian strategy because you advocating people to move to New Hampshire. Your strategy works because of alliance with republicans as mainstream force (again, nothing wrong with that). But if you were surrounded by tankies on the one side and woke libs on the other side, then with your mentality, you would get stuck playing meaningless 5D chess which I just mentioned above. So enjoy the fact that wind blows in your direction (but don't waste your energy in liberal shithole like San Francisco). So what's correct strategy for other libertarians who in *catastrophic minority*? You actually have the only one option - *get really fucking rich*. Seriously, it's the only available option. Here is a thing: power of leftists in unwashed masses (who do love free lunch). And libertarians will never, never, never able to harness this power. You are either have to be in majority (like leftists) or be in very, very, very rich minority. That's rules of the game! *If you are in minority and you don't have capital, your opinion doesn't matter*. If you have class of extremely wealthy libertarians, then using corruption, you can influence the government. After all, why do you voluntarily gave up this field to leftist influencers like George Soros? If you truly understand how market works better than others, then you must get very, very rich (otherwise you should reassess your ability to understand how market works). I do my part. Currently, I take absolutely *insane* amount of risks to get into top 1% and eventually to top 0.1%. If I fail to get there, then may be I just suck at understanding how market works... In short, if you claim to be free market capitalist, then you must be able to become actual capitalist.


somguy18

This comment is extremely interesting. I think you are very right that accumulation of massive amounts of capital to try and influence things is the only hope for a no-win situation like Russia. People forget that even in America, our revolution was lead by the richest class. A great majority of pro-freedom movements historically have come only when there is a significant, powerful merchant class rich enough to oppose the ruling system and demand freedom.


Anen-o-me

The Koch brothers tried to do exactly that for decades, they're billionaire 'libertarians'. They then partnered with the republicans and tried to steer policy using money for influence. They raised like $400 million for Trump for instance. They still achieved almost nothing for liberty.


Handheld_Joker

What state are you located in? I'm finally becoming successful enough that within 2-3 years I should be able to move from MD to WV where I'd like to start another free state movement. NH is great, but they have it pretty well covered. WV is a very red state, which suffice to say is at least a better starting point than a very blue state... I agree with your post 100%. I believe it applies to everything in our society now, though. Which is, people rarely walk the walk. 2-3% of the population actually *does* stuff - as in make things happen. It's not people's fault necessarily if they don't; could be shitty situations etc, but for those who are lucky enough or work hard enough to get stuff done, an organization like free state should exist in more locations.


shieldtwin

I disagree they have it covered. Only like 4000 out of the goal of 20,000 have actually moved there. The state is far from a libertarian utopia at the moment. I think it’s best to stick with New Hampshire. If successful then take over Wyoming next


GrasshoperPoof

Wouldn't Wyoming be a better FSP 2.0? It has much lower population and as in a whole new region


reecelvmi1926

Wouldn’t Alaska be the best option? Yes it’s not as good as Wyoming statistically but it beats it by being completely separate from mainland while Wyoming is legit in the middle of the country. I’m planning on moving to either Wyoming, Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Tennessee, or NH after college.Can’t decide


TheAzureMage

All three are honestly more libertarian than the other 47 states. That said, NH is the only one floating a secession law, so I suspect they're a bit further along.


JobDestroyer

why do people act like this decision is something we can revisit? No, AK is a terrible choice because we already chose NH 20 years ago. What do you want us to do, abandon NH and move over to AK after all the work we did here?


Handheld_Joker

Is there not merit to creating different hubs that may be more suited to people's likes/dislikes of location? I grew up in New England, and love NH, but to someone who can't move for $ or job reasons, or can only move a certain distance, or whatever other myriad of different reasons exist, does it not make sense to have regional HQs? Keeping it *only* in NH seems a bit restrictive and counter productive to the (perhaps/hopefully) many people that like the idea but simply cannot move. Not trying to be combative, I feel like it's a fair question. It can be called something else if the Free State folks don't want to associate with other movements.


JobDestroyer

>Is there not merit to creating different hubs that may be more suited to people's likes/dislikes of location? No, that defeats the purpose of libertarian concentration. It's counter-productive. >many people that like the idea but simply cannot move. You know how free-staters are a self-selecting sample of people who care enough about liberty to pick up and move? This just makes a self-selecting sample of people who *don't* care enough to move to NH. So many people just say, "FSP 2 in Sheboygan!" and it routinely fails because *the entire reason they try* it is because they're not committed enough to move to NH. Non-committed people make awful freedom fighters.


Good_Roll

I agree entirely with your pragmatism, though I don't think it's a good move to entirely rule out other states. I think having additional states is a great long term goal which requires setup now, just like the FSP is a project 20 years in the making. The simple reality is that a lot of people who actually walk the walk when it comes to liberty prefer to homestead and live away from other people(because snitches suck). While a portion of these people probably find the climate and geography of NH suitable or at least tolerable, you're missing out on a lot of people who'd aren't apathetic, but still probably don't see any personal benefits in moving to NH. For example, if I want to live in WY and freely disregard federal and state law because I'm totally self sufficient and away from other people, is standing up for other people's liberty really worth moving to a totally different environment that's vastly different from my preferred climate and has much different optimal yields/staples? If there were regional hubs that covered the different clients and cultures, it would allow all of these people to contribute. But yes, taking settlers away from NH who would have moved there otherwise is a very real concern. So this is probably an extension of the project that would have to wait until NH is sustainably controlled. But surely it's worth it to think about expanding at some point, no?


JobDestroyer

>I think having additional states is a great long term goal which requires setup now, just like the FSP is a project 20 years in the making. How about you wait until we finish the project here before expanding? If people from the FSP in NH wish to expand to other states after we manage to thoroughly libertize NH, that's on them. I am extremely skeptical anyone who is not willing to move to NH is going to have any success in other states. Besides, it defeats the purpose of libertarian concentration to not concentrate. You're not the first to have the idea. You're probably the thousandth or so, I've personally had people go, "What about AK? What about WY? What about MO?" over and over again and have been hearing it for years.


Good_Roll

>How about you wait until we finish the project here before expanding? You misunderstand, my point is not that the movement needs to diversify now. My point is that the movement has other allies who(for the reasons I listed above) would not thrive in NH and wish to homestead in a different area. Building relationships(and the infrastructure that follows fruitful relationships) as you know takes a long time. So I don't understand why you seem inclined to completely write off these relationships when the movement could be sowing seeds now which will fruit in decades(as we see NH successfully doing now). It comes across as elitist and bitter.


Perleflamme

I'd say, have NH all set and good. Then, expand to a neighboring state. Then start having free trade between these states and challenge the US about its disrupting policies between states. It would erode the central power by much, as well as prove free market is way better for everyone.


GrasshoperPoof

You pretty much have me convinced that the only personal trainers in this analogy who aren't fat live in NH. Other states have a few liberty legislators here and there, but not enough to do much to change state politics. NH is the only place libertarians are getting any real wins as opposed to small ones we like to blow out of proportion, and I think you're right about why.


JobDestroyer

The best part of NH is that we've turned winning into a habit here. Lots of libertarians, I think, have a sense of learned helplessness that prevents then from believing that they can win. Having a community of winners at your 6 is really effective at driving you forward.


Endofciv

"We chose this place, you cant choose there!" Said person moonlighting as a Ancap. The reason most people are armchair QBs is because we have no interest in telling othera how to live their life. The nuisance is important. If your way cry is get out their is inflicr your will upon others, you are confused.


JobDestroyer

You can choose there but you are not the Free State Project. The Free State Project already chose NH. You can't re-choose for the FSP.


Whos_Sayin

No one who isn't already in NH is going to Alaska


Hotrodlink

I’ve lived in Wyoming 38 years. There’s a reason it’s the least populated state. Most people that move here leave before the second winter.


JobDestroyer

you mean fsp 45.0? Every week someone comes along to say, "New FSP over here! Woohoo!" But it never goes anywhere. It turns out 20 years of effort trying to get people to move to one place isn't something you can just do on a whim.


mn_sunny

>It turns out 20 years of effort trying to get people to move to one place isn't something you can just do on a whim. Sounds like they should've tried free city and then free county in a bunch of states instead of "running before they can crawl". Seems more pragmatic/realistic in my opinion...


TheAzureMage

Oh hey, there's actually a decent Libertarian movement here in MD. We used to be abysmally small, but over the last couple of years, have started ramping up. Anne Arundel County had like thirty people show up to last month's meeting. Yeah, that's still small potatoes to the others, but it's a far sight better than the whopping three people we had knocking doors statewide for Jo/Spike.


jacob_pro

Great idea, dilute the libertarian influence by half, literally trying to destroy the FSP as it has just started getting going.


JobDestroyer

> where I'd like to start another free state movement. so many imitators, but if they don't understand *why* it works in NH it won't work where you want to have it. If you don't know *why* it defeats the purpose to have "Another free state project", then you don't know why it works.


Perleflamme

Technically, we could have some DAO showing people committing to organize themselves around choosing a location and getting there as soon as enough people have committed to it. A bit like some kick-starter, but with people vote of action.


JobDestroyer

we already did that (minus the dao). They debated, voted, and chose NH.


MarriedWChildren256

Me: Finally got my kid to homeschool. That was a battle w/ the wife. Me: Campaigned hard and handed out 3D printed tokens ad-nauseum to limit emergency orders in PA Me: Succeeded in my first 3D printed gat a while back and working on second (sourcing materials is surprisingly hard AF). Me: Letter campaign w/ studies to my CEO and covid team calling out their lies. (Will still likey be fired once the dust clears on the OSHA BS) Me: Driving thousands of miles the past 18 months to reward good actors with my vacation money (namely SD, FL, and NH) Me: Fly my don't step on Sneek flag Me: Read my kids Maus as a bedtime story. It's a bit more graphic than I remember from 20+ years ago but Im committed at this point. Me: Supporting speakeasies and other business that DGAF about The 'Rona. I'm just ranting.


JobDestroyer

Thank you for your service.


MarriedWChildren256

I expected to be fired 18 months ago. So I'm at least winning there. With the recent school nonsense my wife has also agreed to relocation. The state is really handing my wins to me that's I've been fighting years for. Unfortunately I'm still constrained to some guidelines so I can't just pack up and get a job delivering pizza in NH.


JobDestroyer

Well if ever that changes, we'd be happy to have you over.


MarriedWChildren256

Oh I'll keep trying. It's not on the wife's "No Go" list but neither is it on the "Yes Harder" list.


AlpacaCentral

>Letter campaign w/ studies to my CEO and covid team calling out their lies. You got any links to these studies by any chance? I need to do this at my work.


MarriedWChildren256

I used to but it's just easier to pick a sensationalized point then search r/lockdownskepticism


bassjam1

You don't notice the libertarians because it's such a smaller group. Conservatives also pick and choose what freedoms they'll fight for and which they don't give a shit about They get all worked up over a bakery being forced by the government to bake a cake, but when the police are militarized and trigger happy they fly flags with blue lines.


SirReginaldWittberg

I think the point is that at least conservatives *fight* for some liberties while libertarians sit around and quote Bastiat


LL_Train

Yeah, a lot of the so-called libertarians here don’t seem to give a shit about liberty. They just hate cops. A tremendous amount of gatekeeping here, too. Every other post is aimed at the “faux libertarians” as if liberty is something precious and these few were hand-selected to distribute said liberty to their newest ensigns. The irony just kills me. Nevertheless, posts like this will always be popular because some of the loudest so-called Libertarians really, really hate conservatives — even when said conservatives approach this community saying, “teach me.”


BastiatFan

> while libertarians sit around and quote Bastiat Hey! I resemble that remark!


JobDestroyer

>You don't notice the libertarians because it's such a smaller group. I notice the libertarians, I'm very in-tune with what the broader liberty movement is up to as a general rule. Some libertarians are kicking ass. >Conservatives also pick and choose what freedoms they'll fight for and which they don't give a shit about True, and most libertarians choose not to do any fighting whatsoever.


Dawg1shly

What libertarians are even in elected office at the federal level? Rand Paul and Justin Amash afaik and they definitely fight for liberty with actions. But two people can’t pass any legislation. It’s on us to get more Libertarians elected.


RightMillennial

Justin Amash is no longer in the House of Representatives. He declined to run in 2020 and Rep. Peter Meijer won his district.


JobDestroyer

>What libertarians are even in elected office at the federal level? Not very many. If you're hitting the pavement and working to get a libertarian elected federally, I'll credit you: You're doing something. Whether it has any result or not is another argument (I'd say it likely isn't), but you're already way ahead of the curve. Most libertarians don't do shit. At least you're doing something. Now, that being said, I'd say that trying to win at the federal level isn't an effective strategy. Local and state is probably where you'll have more luck.


NoGardE

Yeah, one thing I've been learning within the LP is the importance of either running yourself for a local position, or funding another local candidate to do the same. If we want the LP to be useful as a strategy, we need to have people doing the work and making alliances within the local offices. That's where the operating structure of the government mostly is, anyway.


Good_Roll

>That's where the operating structure of the government mostly is, anyway. and even where it isn't, it is often positioned closely enough to hamstring federal overreach(just look at how well sanctuary cities did that to ICE)


TheAzureMage

Federals hard. Honestly, starting with state and local is easier, and even that is a chore.


Belisarius124

Well, I apologise if it's gonna come out *too* rude, but in my opinion, you're just being arrogant here. You say that libertarians that don't support FSP in NH are lazy and do nothing in support of the liberty, but there's a one huge problem with that sentiment. You see awfully sure that NH has a future and completely disregard the fact that many people don't agree with you on that point. At best, the libertarians in NH are gonna stagnate in their numbers and keep doing their part as useful idiots for reds, or perhaps their numbers might even go downhill, who knows? At worst however, that is if you're successful in getting enough people to move there in the first place, the libertarian ideas are inevitably gonna sway the public opinion to divorcing the Unle Sam and becoming independent...at which point, and I say that with absolute certainty, you're gonna get crushed by the feds, who're hellbent on maintaining the US' intergrity and once that happens you're gonna end up with only two paths to choose from, either you bend your knees and return to being the diligent citizens of united states of america, with a few pleasant uncles from FBI and NSA making sure everything works out as it should, or if you're stubborn enough to refuse, you get chechened instead. That's why, for me, the future of liberty lies not in the NH or any other state in america for that matter, but in the country called South Africa, which is sooner or later gonna blow up and then either fracture or turn in to an absolute anarchy, a chance I'm not about to miss if I'm able to.


JobDestroyer

> That's why, for me, the future of liberty lies not in the NH or any other state in america for that matter, but in the country called South Africa, which is sooner or later gonna blow up and then either fracture or turn in to an absolute anarchy, a chance I'm not about to miss if I'm able to. ok so what do you do?


Belisarius124

Well, pretty much the same thing you guys did in NH, move in there and try to pioneer the way so that more likeminded people can do the same. It's probably not gonna be as simple as just moving in and settling down, since there will be the conflict and chaos and all that stuff, and we will likely end up drawn into that conflict aswell, but it's still much more reasonable than picking a fight with the Uncle Sam and expecting to come out of it without getting totally chechened in the process. Once SA seems just about ready to blow up, I intend to either found or help co-found a group of volunteers that wouldn't mind getting their hands dirty and together with them attempt to lay the groundwork for an autonomous territory that the bigger regional players wouldn't mind to keep around in exchange for our support.


JobDestroyer

OK, so you're actually doing stuff. That's what matters. Good luck.


LL_Train

What do YOU do?


DuplexFields

> but when the police are militarized and trigger happy they fly flags with blue lines. These sorts of Republicans are often found in blue states where progressivist policies have yielded high crime. Telling such a Republican to demilitarize the police *before* crime is brought under control (organized crime, gangs, drug crime, etc.) will result in the same incredulity as telling a Republican to have open borders and open citizenship *before* the welfare state is dismantled. While Libertarians tend to take a timeless utopian view wherein *any* step toward increasing freedom is a good thing, libertarian-leaning Republicans have a libertarian state as the end-goal and defeating leftism as a necessary strategic step. It's a little like Netanyahu's famous quote: "If Palestinians were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel." Of course, whether that's a sound position or not, this view is weaponized and monetized by the Republicans who like the power that the War Against Leftism gives them, and who fundraise based on it.


JobDestroyer

>If Palestinians were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. this is a dumb quote. Israel routinely murders innocent and unarmed people, the worst attacks on Israel from Palestine have come in the form of kites and home-made improvised weapons. Israel won the war decades ago, now it's just a slow-boil ethnic cleansing campaign under the guise of a "two state solution".


Good_Roll

Not to mention how our support of them is literally why bin laden executed the 9/11 attacks.


TheBastiatinator

> this is a dumb quote These are the Republicans/Conservatives you want to ally with. Gleefully celebrating as the Israeli government routinely slaughters innocent people.


JobDestroyer

I'll ally with any Tom, Dick or Harry that is fighting for liberty insofar as they do. Considering that lots of libertarians are idiots on Israel, and that the conservatives in NH have no say over foreign policy or border policy whatsoever, I'm okay with that.


TheBastiatinator

> fighting for liberty insofar as they do My main worry is that such alliances, which should be temporary, often become permanent. Even when those allies start pushing authoritarianism.


JobDestroyer

It's not an alliance, it's a takeover.


VoiceOfLunacy

I’ll take someone who doesn’t give a shit about a particular policy over some one who is for/against it. Let’s say, nose picking. Someone who doesn’t care won’t be trying to regulate your right to stick a finger up your nose vs someone who does care trying to stop you.


JobDestroyer

Congratulations, you've hitched your wagon to Team Impotent. I want liberty in my lifetime. If that means that my allies are conservatives, then as far as they support liberty I'm going to work with them. If libertarians don't do anything for the cause of liberty then they're nothing.


VoiceOfLunacy

Meh. At least the impotent won’t be trying to fuck me.


JobDestroyer

No, but they're not going to work very hard to prevent you from getting fucked. They're useless.


Dnayew

Left libertarianism is a mental disease.


JobDestroyer

no, it's an oxymoron


SkyfatherTwitch

If I was not a minor, I would absolutely be in NH right now. And even then, I am active in my schools political discussion groups, and I am doing what I can to promote liberty.


JobDestroyer

Hell yeah, you're doing more than most!


SlouchingToElysium

This is where the idea of Muscular Judaism came from, popularized by an early Zionist who was at the first congress. Rights cannot be secured by intellectuals who will not be anything else.


PassStage6

Amen to all of this. Too many people love yelling into the internet void and do nothing in relation to doing their part to help push liberty forward. Learn stuff, and do stuff. Stop feeding the bad guys with no action.


Stoopid81

Join the Mises Caucus, the largest caucus in the libertarian party. Their goal is to get more people elected at the local level. Sherrif, city council members, mayors, etc. They're also fighting to take leadership positions within the libertarian party and completely change the overall message. They want another Ron Paul movement.


NemosGhost

You must be watching different conservatives and libertarians than I am. GOP conservatives are actively fighting against the abolishment of the war on drugs and qualified immunity of cops. They are actively fighting against the right to protest and to film police that are violating peoples rights. They are fighting against criminal just reform. The list goes on and on. And in the cases where the GOP and libertarians align, libertarian institutions are fighting alongside them. CATO is constantly giving legal briefs to the SCOTUS when issues of liberty are at stake. There are numerous other examples. [https://www.cato.org/about/cato-amicus-program](https://www.cato.org/about/cato-amicus-program) ​ A big problem is that the GOP actively fights to keep the LP off the ballot and out of debates, just like the DNC fights to keep the Green Party out. Both major parties also fight against ranked choice voting. Neither major party gives a crap about our rights. They just want to stay in power.


MarriedWChildren256

I must say that here in PA the state GOP didn't actually fight against the L ticket this past cycle. The DNC did fight the green party and got their candidate removed. The GOP is still mostly shit here though less a few outliers. I need to bring that up more when camp D is telling "Democracy".


JobDestroyer

All that you're describing is a direct result of libertarians being too lazy to actually fight for liberty. The reason we don't see any of this being true whatsoever in NH is because libertarians here *do* fight for liberty and the libertarians where you live *don't do jack shit.*


NemosGhost

Sorry, but you are out in left field. We do what we can and sure many people don't do much. But you claim that conservatives fight for freedom more than libertarians, that that is just flat out asinine. Most conservatives don't do jack shit, and those that do the most tend not to care about freedom and liberty that much. The most active ones are fighting against abortion rights. The recent environment has changed that a bit, but we can be honest and realize that once lockdowns and mandates are over things will go back to normal.


Tullyswimmer

> Sorry, but you are out in left field. We do what we can and sure many people don't do much. But you claim that conservatives fight for freedom more than libertarians, that that is just flat out asinine. Not entirely out in left field, though. I'm also in NH and at one point considered myself Libertarian. Hell, I even helped found a regional chapter. NH Libertarians have a crazy amount of influence on LP national, and in the last 3-4 years the NHLP has taken a *hard* left turn. There was a group of people who got into positions on the board of LPNH, and promptly tried to turn it into a never-Trump party. They ran LP candidates against established, libertarian, house reps, because "Libertarians have the best shot at winning these seats" even though most of their candidates had views nearly indistinguishable from the Democrat/progressive "never Trump" movement, even as far as supporting an income tax because property tax was unfair" Then the whole Mises caucus thing happened, and had a ripple effect all the way up to the board at LP National, and most of LP National sided with the left-wing faction.


Anen-o-me

>and promptly tried to turn it into a never-Trump party. Why would any libertarian be pro trump. >even as far as supporting an income tax because property tax was unfair" Sounds asinine, but we shouldn't be pro trump, he's an enemy of liberty too. >Then the whole Mises caucus thing happened, and had a ripple effect all the way up to the board at LP National, and most of LP National sided with the left-wing faction. LP national wants to turn the LP into a competitive political party. Most of their compromising and bullshit comes from that fact. As always, **playing politics poisons principles**.


JobDestroyer

The fact that we're making the GOP libertarian *and* making the LP libertarian in NH just makes me giggle. It's good to have positive control back in the hands of actual libertarians.


Tullyswimmer

Well.... Until the chair of the LPNH went rogue we did. Now I have no fucking idea, but LP National seems to be backing the left-wing caucus, whatever the fuck they call themselves.


JobDestroyer

Oh she's gone, it's all liberty peeps now. The coup failed and failed gloriously.


Tullyswimmer

Oh thank fuck. Maybe the LPNH can actually do something liberty-focused again without JP and JJ fucking it all up. Of course LP National is still a shitshow now that they kicked out CAH....


JobDestroyer

> Maybe the LPNH can actually do something liberty-focused again without JP and JJ fucking it all u I'm privy to ONE SPECIFIC thing they're doing. It'll be a surprise, but I'm giggly about it!


TheAzureMage

Fuckin' Prag caucus disbanded in a fit of angst. It's all just Mises and a sprinkling of Redacted now.


TheAzureMage

And fortunately, that is going very poorly for those members of LP national. Reno gonna be interesting.


Tullyswimmer

That's encouraging to hear. Now let's see if Reno ends up with LP national executive committee pulling a JJ now that they've kicked out CAH and have almost no checks.


B0MBOY

Guys if you actually want to further libertarianism run for local office and kill the government from the inside. Get involved in the community, volunteer for things. Be known as the assistant football coach, the scoutmaster, the guy/woman who helps at the church bakesale, the rec league team organizer, etc. study local politics, read your local newspaper. Volunteer for a candidate you sorta like so you get to watch the election process over their shoulder and you have someone to scratch your back because you scratched theirs. Save at least a grand for fliers and signs. At an opportune moment, run for something. School board is thankless and no one wants to do it but you do get to set curriculum for the next generation. For offices with power wait until there’s some general discontent like after a tax hike. Then make your move.


JobDestroyer

You don't slam the brakes from outside the car.


usernamesaretits

When you leave the Republicans because they didn't lift a fucking finger to dight back the last 10 years to go to the LP. Then watch the cato and reason types fall in line with authoritarianism. THIS IS WHY I FUCKING LEFT THE RIGHT.


JobDestroyer

Honestly when it comes to the dude who shilled for vax mandates for Cato, fuck that guy. Dude's a traitor, we should ostracize him from everything related to liberty and petition him to get fired from his job. He doesn't deserve to work a job for liberty if he's fighting against the cause of liberty. That being said, who is going to replace him? Cato is made up of the people who cared enough to show up, just like the LP is made of people who cared enough to show up, just like the FSP is made of people who cared enough to show up. If the only people who care enough to show up are traitorous mock-"libertarians", then don't be surprised at the outcome. Go do work instead.


BladeDoc

Republicans don’t fight for freedom. They are currently an opposition party that has no principles other than “not whatever the Democrats want.” Occasionally that makes an alignment with the libertarians but often not. Anti-immigration. Pro drug war. Pro police. Pro mass incarceration. They claim to be anti spending and then “compromise” on trillions of dollars. They are only anti-mask and lockdowns because Dems are for them.


JobDestroyer

>They are only anti-mask and lockdowns because Dems are for them. Yet they do the actual fighting while libertarians who are more principled do nothing whatsoever.


Crypto-anarchist7

What actual fighting so you see conservatives doing? Most I know just sit around bitching on social media. There version of "taking action" is going to a Trump rally. They're just as useless as the guy who sits around quoting Human Action. Probably more so since many of them will defend their rights being violated as long as the right person does it. I knew so many Trump supporters who voted for him in part because he was anti war. Then they rushed to his defense when he whacked Qasem Soleimani for no reason.


JobDestroyer

They're leading the fight against vaccine mandates and coronavirus restrictions currently. That's incredibly important.


Crypto-anarchist7

Conservative governors are. That's because there are no libertarian governors. That said my observation has been that libertarians are over represented at lockdown protests. I go to every lockdown protest in my area waving a gold and black flag. I usually get some interesting questions.


spimothyleary

I think the problem is that there aren't " lots of Libertarians"


Catullus13

Do I have to move to NH to be apart of the libertarian movement? Can I just run a business properly, gain customers, honor contracts, negotiate in good faith with my employees, suppliers, and customers? Maybe sprinkle in a dash of respecting other people's property. I've read Rothbard and Mises. They're not great books for how to treat people in society. Their works on liberty and economics are theoretical frameworks for analysis. They're not prescriptive for the most part except for a few chapters of Rothbard later in life. This is kind of what they handed off. They built the intellectual framework and it's for other people to figure out how to live this way. What I love to see as a small business owner is a libertarian arbitration court, where libertarians can agree in advance to be subject to arbitration from an evolving jurisprudence of property rights consistent with libertarianism. Just spell it out in contracts, "we agree to work out a dispute before this arbiter and not through the government court systems."


JobDestroyer

> Do I have to move to NH to be apart of the libertarian movement? No but it's a pretty good route. >Can I just run a business properly, gain customers, honor contracts, negotiate in good faith with my employees, suppliers, and customers? no everyone does that, there's nothing whatsoever special about that. Congratulations, if you do that, you're a normal person. Woohoo!


Catullus13

I'm not sure what you want this movement to be if you're going to discount the normal, everyday interactions people have with each other both socially and economically. Not everyone can start a crypto currency or build some rocket or move to NH. It really does begin and end with respecting people's properties rights. Maybe stop blaming libertarians for not being more enthusiastic about storming the castle.


JobDestroyer

> I'm not sure what you want this movement to be if you're going to discount the normal, everyday interactions people have with each other both socially and economically. Effective. I want it to be effective instead of ineffective. >Not everyone can start a crypto currency or build some rocket or move to NH. No but everyone can do something instead of nothing. > It really does begin and end with respecting people's properties rights. wow, something so trivially simple that even most commies can accomplish it in their day-to-day life.


Catullus13

Good luck, bro.


SouthCoach

The GOP of today is fighting to preserve DNC victories of yesterday. In 10 years GOP dudes will be protesting school board meetings about the free market days of only having to wear one mask.


JobDestroyer

>The GOP of today is fighting to preserve DNC victories of yesterday. And libertarians are largely doing nothing. The only place they're doing something is in NH, and surprise surprise, in NH we *are* the GOP.


Dawg1shly

What libertarians are you talking about?


JobDestroyer

The libertarians who are accomplishing things that I'm referring to are in NH. We have largely taken over the state GOP, the house majority leader is a rothbardian. We have been lowering taxes, legalizing stuff, having a grand ol' time.


bibliophile785

> [Libertarians] love the ideas of liberty, they think those are awesome. They read Rothbard and Mises and can tell you all about business cycle theory. They will wax poetic about what the "Proper Opinion" is, whether such-and-such violates the nap, they're evictionist, have theories about age of majority and contract laws, and are "in" the community, but they don't actually *do* anything to push for liberty. Look, JD, most of us aren't going to start harassing shopkeepers by trespassing despite posted signage and forcing them to confront us. I know, I know, dumb libertarians who care whether or not we're violating the NAP when we act. Silly us.


ASquawkingTurtle

You could protest city hall, and inform other of a different way of thinking... Hell, just print out The Anatomy of the State and hand it out to anyone who seems respective to new ideas or ways of doing things. How can anyone be expected to think differently if they must go out of their way to do so while the main parties are passively interacting with them via every media platform. Think about how many of democrat's stances are riddled throughout Hollywood, anyone watching a movie slowly absorbs that information and takes it as the main or only way of thinking. How many people simply don't realize other ways of viewing government than big daddy? I'd imagine most...


bibliophile785

> inform other of a different way of thinking... Hell, just print out The Anatomy of the State and hand it out to anyone who seems respective to new ideas or ways of doing things. You caught the part where he was shitting on people who are engaging in that sort of behavior, right? Just look at the block quote I provided. People engaging with others to give them new insights and ideas are very specifically what JD *isn't* interested in seeing. He has recently become a big advocate of the "you're only a real libertarian if you're ignoring people's property rights" school of thought.


Anen-o-me

Rothbard called it right-wing opportunism. The reach for achieving any small victory during your lifetime. It grows more attractive the older one gets. Rothbard himself succumbed to it in his last three years of life that we generally don't talk about, when he sought to partner with anyone and tried to reach out to David duke types. The most important work of liberty has been done in the last decades, and that work is the conceptual development by knowledge and idea generators. The David Friedmans, Rothbards, and Hoppes of the brotherhood. They have laid the conceptual foundation like technology scientists. Now what remains is implementation by mechanical engineers. We could say political engineers need to now build societies that reflect the concepts those visionaries built. NH is one attempt at this, so is seasteading. Probably the two leading attempts in our day and age. But spreading ideas and training up new libertarians is still very important. We have a lot of opportunities in that area to, especially in south America and Asia today.


TheBastiatinator

> David Friedmans, Rothbards, and Hoppes One of those is not like the others. > But spreading ideas and training up new libertarians is still very important. We have a lot of opportunities in that area to, especially in south America and Asia today. Spreading ideas is very useful. Sure, libertarianism will ultimately win not by superior numbers but by superior strategy. More libertarians do make the task easier though.


Anen-o-me

It's not unreasonable for libertarians to compromise and live peacefully under states today, because there is no other choice. Such should fuel our zeal for liberty and towards supporting ways to live stateless one day, and to get out ourselves if we can. That said, moving to NH is not living stateless either, so anyone saying 'you're not a real libertarian if you don't move to NH' is wrong.


JobDestroyer

if no one executes a strategy then your strategy fails, flat out.


TheBastiatinator

Why can't I execute my strategy and simultaneously try to persuade people that liberty is the best? All known libertarian strategies are complementary, not mutually exclusive. Doing one strengthens the others.


JobDestroyer

You won't do a goddamn thing for liberty, ever, at all. Prove me wrong.


cnnr_g

I can’t speak to the reality on the ground but what you’re saying does speak to a few things I think about a lot: 1) Personally, I’m skeptical of the LP, as I’m sure a lot of AnCaps are. I do think the free staters have the right approach though because what we need is… 2) More experimentation. I was listening to James Lindsay today explaining how communism is a joke since it claims that it doesn’t have all the answers right now but everyone should still get on board. That’s also a common talking point for AnCaps. The two aren’t perfectly comparable, but the only way we’re gonna get anywhere is by spending more time on action even if Ancapistan isn’t fully planned or whatever. Secession is going to be a huge debate in the future, hopefully.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JobDestroyer

you can be, sure. There are other strategies out there, just make sure you're doing something for liberty instead of nothing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JobDestroyer

that would be awful, correct.


OwlProfessional1185

Every chance republicans get, they reduce liberty. Even if libertarians do nothing, they still have a better track record when it comes to liberty than conservatives. In general, people can be divided into intellectuals or activists. Activists have a lot of passion and do a lot, but they don't think much and often end up doing harmful things. That said, I don't think it's true that libertarians don't fight for liberty. Most people, regardless of political persuasion, are primarily concerned with living their own lives. Most people aren't activists and libertarians aren't exceptions to this. Libertarians are a minority group, and it's not surprising that the total effort made by libertarians is dwarfed by the activity of non-libertarians. I also think you downplay the value of ideas. Writing ideas is not just preaching to the choir. Many libertarians did not start out that way but became libertarian because they were exposed to libertarian content and were eventually persuaded into it.


jjduhamer

Could someone eli5 what the free state movement is? I’m very libertarian but currently live in India. I’m a US citizen and planning to move back to the US within two years. No way am I moving back to CA (where I grew up). I’m interested in moving to NH but I have a few questions. What is this movement all about? Does this have even a 0.001% chance of succeeding? What laws has NH passed which make it an appealing place for libertarians?


JobDestroyer

The the Free State Movement is a migration of liberty lovers to the state of New Hampshire to help push for Liberty in our Lifetime. The goal is "Liberty in our Lifetime", we're not satisfied waiting around for some liberty to just pop into our lap for some reason, we're actively fighting to bring it about. >Does this have even a 0.001% chance of succeeding? It's currently succeeding, we've had many many successes. Right now, the major party in the NH State House of Representatives is the GOP, but the house majority leader is a Rothbardian libertarian. Libertarians make up the majority of the GOP in the state house, and that means that if libertarians don't approve of something, it straight won't pass. It also means that lots of libertarian legislation that we want pushed *does* pass. >What laws has NH passed which make it an appealing place for libertarians? Good question, it's hard to keep track because there are so many. Some that come immediately to mind is that we've reduced business taxes this year, and have gotten rid of the interest and dividends tax. We've also legalized window tint on vehicles, passed constitutional carry, got rid of our last gun law (no open carry on snowmobiles or something along those lines), banned critical race theory, passed school choice legislation, and other stuff. Recently there was a bill pushed to secede from the USA (not going to pass but hey, there it is). We've also banned vaccine passports and made it so cryptocurrency businesses are shielded from many regulations. There are too many to list them all.


jjduhamer

> we’ve legalised window tint 🙌 I’m in! Joking aside, it sounds amazing. Is NH a place I could let my four dogs run around alone off-leash in the forest?


JobDestroyer

Unfortunately I'm not familiar with leash laws in NH, but I'm not going to call the cops if I see them running around. You do you.


Handarthol

I'm not a free stater but NH has a very low tax burden, very good record on 2a rights, and generally leans more libertarian than other states due to the number of libertarians who infiltrated the republican party there. Some of that is why libertarians moved there in the first place; some is a result of the project itself.


MarriedWChildren256

r/libertyinourlifetime


SOADFAN96

How do you expect libertarians to fight back when there are maybe 3 "libertarian" senators? Hard to fight back in our political system when we have no political authority


DracosOo

Libertarians might be the fat one in your analogy, but conservatives are those trying to sell you snake oil and soup diets saying that will make you fit.


JobDestroyer

not in NH. Libertarians here flipped them and now the NH GOP is more libertarian than most states' LPs.


DracosOo

Well, then LP's are not libertarians.


JobDestroyer

It often depends on the person and the LP. Some LPs are run great and kick ass, some are run ass-backwards and are harmful to the cause.


psycho_trope_ic

Why do you think you are the arbiter of what 'doing something' is? When did it become acceptable to force 'liberty' at gunpoint? What a load of self-serving tripe. You can believe whatever delusion about yourself and your tribe you like but a little self reflection would not hurt you if you are strong as you claim to be. This is not to say there are not navel-gazers as you claim. That is true of any group.


JobDestroyer

>why do you think you are the arbiter of what 'doing something' is because I do stuff, lol. > When did it become acceptable to force 'liberty' at gunpoint? Where am I forcing people to be free at gunpoint? I notice a trend among lazytarians, they often accuse people of being "Coercive" when those people are doing nothing coercive whatsoever. The mere act of trying to convince people is somehow "putting a gun to peoples head". >This is not to say there are not navel-gazers as you claim. That is true of any group. Really? So you acknowledge these people exist, but then get righteously indignant at me for calling them out?


Crypto-anarchist7

Genuinely curious, what you do beside voting in NH elections? Many of us vote or used to. It just doesn't do anything because we live in jurisdictions where electing libertarians is nearly impossible. I think it would also be helpful if you stated what you wished more people would do. I care about other people's rights. I think it's wrong that the state is violating them. But I also believe it's their responsibility to fight back when their rights are violated to a large extent. I fight back when mine are violated. Although I can't say how since I would be admitting to breaking the law.


JobDestroyer

>Genuinely curious, what you do beside voting in NH elections? You know that "Hoot" thing? I manage that project and host the infrastructure. I also run this subreddit. I also am the board member of a libertarian community center. I also provide assistance for people moving to NH. I also am active in the local county GOP and push it towards liberty. In the last week I've showed up in a town zoning meeting to assist a local small business getting screwed over by the local zoning board. In the past I've knocked on doors to hold political representatives accountable, and shown up to protests in regards to lockdowns. I'm not the most active libertarian in NH but I'm definitely active. >I think it would also be helpful if you stated what you wished more people would do I think people should move to NH, but in lieu of that I don't have any specific call to action beside "Do something instead of nothing". > think it's wrong that the state is violating them. But I also believe it's their responsibility to fight back when their rights are violated to a large extent. I fight back when mine are violated. You don't want them on their own though, help a dude out if they're getting screwed and they might return the favor.


Crypto-anarchist7

I definitely try to help people out when they ask. It's a bit hard to just publicly offer advice on breaking the law though.


psycho_trope_ic

>because I do stuff, lol. Doing stuff makes you the arbiter of what doing stuff is. Holy circular logic batman! >Where am I forcing people to be free at gunpoint? You and your Republican friends are enforcing (or trying to enforce) your whims through the government. When did that become not coercion even if the result might be more palatable to you? How did you imagine these policies were being enforced if not coercion? >I notice a trend among lazytarians, they often accuse people of being "Coercive" when those people are doing nothing coercive whatsoever. I find that people who invent terms like 'lazytarians' are really shills for a larger political party. You certainly are advocating for coercion, and I suspect you are following through. If nothing else you voted. What do you think underlies that mechanism if not coercion? It is literally in the description of the action. You are lying to yourself if you think otherwise. Now, you might be OK with that coercion, that is a different conversation to have, but it is coercion non-the-less. >The mere act of trying to convince people is somehow "putting a gun to peoples head". Strawman much? The action you describe here is literally what you are complaining about people doing as 'not action.' You can't have it both ways. It is also both inaccurate and disingenuous to try and reduce my position or yours to this. > Really? So you acknowledge these people exist, but then get righteously indignant at me for calling them out? Certainly there are people who are only academically interested in subjects. There is no problem with that, and these people are, as I said, part of every group. They probably aren't a majority any more than people like you are. I see no trouble in acknowledging a stereotype exists with some hints of truth underlying it. Why do you? My 'righteous indignation,' what of it exists, is entirely directed at the conundrum of someone both smart enough, interested enough, and educated enough to know better being so proud of such obvious moral failings. Nothing more.


JobDestroyer

> Doing stuff makes you the arbiter of what doing stuff is. Holy circular logic batman! OK so what do you do? If your entire argument is based on the idea that not doing stuff is doing stuff and that "doing stuff" needs to be judged by some sort of non-biased third party then you're just too far down the rabbit hole. You seriously need to know by what authority I can claim to know what counts as "Doing something?" Hello! This is planet Earth calling! 3rd rock from Sol! Things exist! Some things do stuff! >You and your Republican friends are enforcing (or trying to enforce) your whims through the government. yeah, our whims include fighting the state. If you're not on board with that then you're not a libertarian. >I find that people who invent terms like 'lazytarians' are really shills for a larger political party. I'm a shill for the cause of liberty. I've no shame about being a shill for the greater cause of liberty. Why would I be ashamed of that? Why would you treat that like a bad thing? >>The mere act of trying to convince people is somehow "putting a gun to peoples head". >Strawman much? the fact that you'd call this a strawman when you literally just said: >You and your Republican friends are enforcing (or trying to enforce) your whims through the government. is humorous to me. If you want to be a lazytarian and not do anything to help the cause that's your choice, don't expect me to pat you on the back for it.


psycho_trope_ic

>OK so what do you do? Starting off strong through the gate with a false dichotomy, but to answer your question in short, Agorism. >If your entire argument is based on the idea that not doing stuff is doing stuff and that "doing stuff" needs to be judged by some sort of non-biased third party then you're just too far down the rabbit hole. You seriously need to know by what authority I can claim to know what counts as "Doing something?" You have a fundamental misunderstanding of my complaint. I asked why you think *you* are the arbiter. That does not mean there *is* or *should be* an arbiter, but you made a claim implying *you have some authority over what is action towards liberty* and I think that is absurd. >yeah, our whims include fighting the state. If you're not on board with that then you're not a libertarian. You can claim to want that, but there is both (1) no evidence you can achieve that through the state and (2) no difference in method from what you see as your enemies actions here. Further, at no point have I said I am pro-state (quite the opposite). >I'm a shill for the cause of liberty. I've no shame about being a shill for the greater cause of liberty. Why would I be ashamed of that? Why would you treat that like a bad thing? You should read carefully what I wrote. I have made a claim like 'you are acting as a shill for *political parties* (and not really even the Libertarian party even assuming we were to somehow assume that they represented a consistent librarian view)'. Why would you be proud of that? Exercising political power is antithetical to libertarian views. You can call it whatever you want. Your version of 'the cause of liberty' and mine don't seem terribly aligned and I would not accept your version (or mine) imposed at gun point and neither should you. >the fact that you'd call this a strawman when you literally just said: >>You and your Republican friends are enforcing (or trying to enforce) your whims through the government. >is humorous to me. You are seriously claiming equivalence between "the act of trying to convince" and 'enforcing or trying to enforce via the state'. I have no idea why you think this or why you think my questioning it is humorous. >If you want to be a lazytarian and not do anything to help the cause that's your choice, don't expect me to pat you on the back for it. I have never asked for or expected your approval in anything. You can call me what you want, just as I think you are merely a Republican with some self delusions. I will never physically coerce you to my preferences (aside from self defense) and you would/will try to coerce me if you could/can. That is all the difference that is pertinent. If you want to call my position 'lazytarianism' that's fine. I call it Voluntarism and Agorism amongst people who should understand the distinction and libertarian amongst others. People like you make me inclined to just use the first labels to avoid the baggage of you, and that is fine. I see no utility to continuing this particular thread, have fun with the last word.


Anen-o-me

>You and your Republican friends are enforcing (or trying to enforce) your whims through the government. When did that become not coercion even if the result might be more palatable to you? How did you imagine these policies were being enforced if not coercion? Agreed. It's ethically suspect at minimum, and violates the NAP at maximum. Ancaps should be seeking separation and self-rule for all people, not to become the new political lords forcing our will on the subjugated masses.


JobDestroyer

>It's ethically suspect at minimum, and violates the NAP at maximum. It's not a violation of the NAP to abolish interest and dividends tax.


Anen-o-me

If all libertarian politicians did while in power is abolish laws that could be considered ethical. I don't follow NH closely enough to know if that's what's been done solely so far. The charter school proposal isn't just abolishing laws.


JobDestroyer

>I don't follow NH closely enough to know if that's what's been done solely so far. ok, so you're too ignorant to have an opinion. Got it.


Anen-o-me

So you're claiming to know then, so based on your full and complete knowledge, are they only abolishing laws or are they making laws too. The latter is unethical from a libertarian point of view. And if they're making laws, are you endorsing that?


JobDestroyer

> The latter is unethical from a libertarian point of view. > > Your understanding of libertarian ethics is HIGHLY suspect, so when *you specifically* make this claim I can safely discard it until a real libertarian points something out.


Anen-o-me

Using State coercion on people via law is not ethical, that's not controversial from a libertarian point of view. Sounds like you're just unwilling to engage in a plain conversation about libertarian ethics.


psycho_trope_ic

Precisely.


JobDestroyer

"It's unlibertarian to be libertarian" It's crazy how you seem to be in 100 percent lockstep with commies on this one.


psycho_trope_ic

I think it is hilarious that you quote things and attribute them to me when they are not things I have ever said.


camerontbelt

Are they though?


defundpolitics

There's a lot to unpack there. There are a lot of libertarians and ild school liberal recovering Democrats fighting with the Republicans because they view that as the strongest way to push back, ie. RHINO, republican in name only. The problem is that politics are highly managed and manipulated from within. It blows mind when I stop to think about how evolved, organized and engineered state control of opposition is. We talk about the problems and where we need to go but we don't talk about how to get there. The overall problem is that people are scared to call a conspiracy a conspiracy because they get the you're crazy push back.


Anen-o-me

>A half-drunk republican who takes a stand for liberty is more valuable to the cause of liberty than a dude who has read Human Action 15 times but otherwise does nothing. Not if their idea of liberty is just 'their guy' in charge. That's just authoritarianism. The problem with republicans is they understand some of the problem but none of the solution.


fjik1623

Libertarians like to sit around and call everyone else stupid, which they are. But they don't like to take any real action, just sit on their intellectual high horse. This is one of the smaller, but many reasons we never win anything.


Wundei

Those NH free-staters have allowed their neighbors to achieve greater levels of freedom where cannabis is concerned. That issue is a good measuring stick for how much a state government actually values personal freedom and choice.


Pbake

Yeah, no libertarians are involved in crypto. 🤷‍♂️


[deleted]

[удалено]


bhknb

I'd move to NH pretty quick if I didn't have family here that I refuse to leave. Family comes before freedom, right now. If we can get some people together to form a free state in Wyoming, I'm all in.


Anen-o-me

How does NH get out from under the federal power? Until you have a real answer for that or actually accomplish it, NH offers only marginally more liberty than any other state, and isn't an ultimate solution to gaining liberty. Other strategies for change less developed than the FSP may also offer more likelihood of getting out from under the feds control, and therefore may be more attractive to some libertarians.


JobDestroyer

> How does NH get out from under the federal power? > > Take to the sea! I'm sure that the US federal government doesn't have any boats!


Anen-o-me

Can't answer a simple question.


Rational_Philosophy

JobDestroyer is like, my favorite reddit user.


JobDestroyer

d'aww, thanks


MasterTeacher123

GOP doesn’t do crap aside from scream about “the constitution” as the left laughs at them and increases state power


TheBastiatinator

So the morons shilling for closed borders, the war on drugs, power-tripping cops and the bloated military are fighting for liberty. Can I borrow your Newspeak dictionary?


JobDestroyer

They are in regard to the 'Rona.


jordontek

> Would you hire a fat personal trainer? Let's say you wanted to lose weight, and are in the market for hiring someone to help you out. All else being equal, would you choose one who is in shape, or is way too large around the middle-section, has a stoma in their neck, and smells a bit off? *A Reddit experience.* *Oh, about two months ago, approximately, I actually spoke out against this in a different subreddit, paraphrasing but topic being: I was assigned an obese personal trainer. Is there an acceptable way to ask for another instructor?* Where the paying customer didn't want the fat trainer and **The Perpetually Offended Hordes of Reddit** defended that the trainer could have the knowledge and *just not use it personally for themselves* (also inserted was the idea that the trained had their own unspoken health maladies), and its shaming and discrimination as a paying customer, who wants a trainer to look the actual part of physical fitness trainer. This was my response: >"They assigned you the equivalent of a broke, bankrupt financial planner. >Of course, you balked." And that was downvoted into the negative nearly two dozen times. Changing gears now... To me, conservatives pick and choose which freedoms they like, but there is still too much freedom for their taste. They also tend to be statist, when they are in power, and faux-psuedo-libertarian when they're not.


mattman119

>They will wax poetic about what the "Proper Opinion" is, whethersuch-and-such violates the nap, they're evictionist, have theories aboutage of majority and contract laws This is where you lost me - casually throwing in evictionism as if it is the default and "correct" libertarian stance on abortion. As a pro-life libertarian, I reject evictionism as a valid position. This is also a good example of another HUGE factor impeding the liberty movement: we are NOT united. There is a reason infighting is a meme among libertarians and not conservatives or progressives. We are all so busy pushing our own individual interpretation of libertarianism that we forget the most important quality of any political movement: it must balance principle with what is *possible* in the present moment. This is what the FSP did, and that's why it's working in New Hampshire. But the liberty movement will never succeed in the long term without its promoters uniting on a single set of principles, even if they don't agree with all of them. Otherwise we are embarrassingly easy to divide and conquer. GOP conservatives fight like hell for liberty because they are *united*. Libertarians come divided out of the box; we've lost before we even begin. We make perfection the enemy of progress. In my opinion, if you want libertarians to get off their keyboards and actually put their theory into practice, you need to force all the difficult issues. Make hardline stances official and tell people if they don't like it, then start their own movement. It sounds counterintuitive, but forcing the issue will not only unite those of common beliefs under one tent and diffuse all the bickering, it can also draw in others who would otherwise ignore libertarians over those issues. You can disagree, but to me a pro-life liberty movement would succeed much faster than a pro-choice one or the wishy-washy one we have now. At the moment, I am planning to move to New Hampshire within the next year, and when I do I will be working within local politics there to try and push the movement in a more pro-life direction.


Zadien22

That would be because the founders put forth the idea that politics was ultimately a battle between authoritarian collectivists and libertarian sovereign individuals, but that has been usurped in American politics by religious fundamentalists and religious secularists. Religious fundamentalists tend towards the sovereign individual more than the religious secularists, so they have more libertarian leanings. Both sides have their religious authoritarians (intersectionalist Marxists and white supremacists), one of which we have as a society realized the stupidity of, the other one is allowed to run rampant on society. This happens because tyranny always finds a way to corrupt government, no matter how much gridlock you design into it. What we are seeing now is a war of surreal untrue partisanship between two religious groups, whilst the actual battle should be between libertarians and authoritarians. Well, the authoritarians have found the right game to play in order to hijack the voters into a battle that empowers them at the expense of liberty.


justadude122

Politics isn’t my life. I’m interested in libertarianism and usually consider myself loosely attached to the “liberty movement” but I’m just trying to live my life. I’m very happy being an armchair warrior


sketchy_at_best

I remember when Rush Limbaugh died, there was a debate on this forum about whether he was a net positive for liberty. It kinds of reminds me of what you are saying. Here was a guy who has probably woken up more people to ideas about liberty (certainly not perfect on political philosophy by any stretch) than anyone in US history, and has been ringing alarm bells, grabbing people by the collar and shaking them about what the progressives are doing and how they operate and where it will all end, and we couldn't even agree that he was "good" here. Same with Rand Paul, who is of course much better than Rush but with a much smaller following. Whenever we have conversations like that, it just makes me think that it's why we never get anywhere. I agree that we all need to *do something* that we can actually commit to to either get the message out better or do something practical and positive for freedom locally. I need to figure out what that is for me, personally.


TKOtokyo

What if the personal trainer was ripped all their life and only recently got fat due to injury?


Carnot_u_didnt

Yikes…I’m late to the thread, but OP is doing more of a disservice to Libertarianism than all us “lazy”, passive Ancaps in here. You’re gatekeeping real libertarians? And pointing to the GOP’s handling of COVID as a positive thing?! You’re the obnoxious guy at a party screaming “Taxation is theft” while everyone just wants to get drunk and get laid. We live in a democracy, where persuasion is the name of the game (hint…you’re not getting high marks here). I voted for and donated to Ron Paul, who is a major reason people have even heard of Ancap or the Free State Project for that matter. I vote to shake-up the status quo in local elections. Mostly I just work for a private company, making products the market values highly. I’m doing my part. Seizing control of the NH political levers to create a more libertarian society is counter to ancap principles imo. The ends will never justify the use of state violence to get there. Ancap is primarily a passive philosophy when you fully embrace the NAP. But hey, that’s the beauty of it...you do you, I do me and neither of us is wrong if we don’t harm another. I dig your passion though. Might wanna pump the breaks in an ancap sub of potential allies instead just of putting us all on blast. And definitely tone it down when engaging more moderate folks. TLDR: You have in no way convinced me to move to NH. In fact, quite the opposite of you already live there 😉


klabboy109

The GOP literally isn’t a freedom loving group, at all. They just want their brand of “freedom” It just happens to agree with you because you’re probably white.


TwistedTripleHelix

Working as a collective to instill libertarian ideology is unlibertarian. The biggest issue with strong individualism is most people who think our way want very little collective power or oversight. We mostly want to be left alone lol. Centralised systems of government, right and left, necessarily have collective individual crushing tactics. They just do. The issue with Libertarianism is it has to overpower giant collectives with a few unorganised individuals.


JobDestroyer

>Working as a collective to instill libertarian ideology is unlibertarian. Like hell, there's absolutely nothing wrong with working together to achieve libertarian goals and limit state power.


TwistedTripleHelix

Making the case that the individual is the strongest fundamental unit and claiming centralised collective systems are tyrannical, while growing a collective to take down the aforementioned collective is contradictory from a purely logical standpoint. I'm not suggesting it's unlibertarian in an ideological sense. My point is most libertarians are strongly individualistic, we don't like collective structures or thinking or societies. It doesn't strike me as weird that libertarians - individualists - struggle to get any elective powers when the structure of our systems require nods and handshakes from two big collectives to ever get any sizeable vote.


JobDestroyer

a collective is just a group of individuals.


TheAzureMage

>The issue with Libertarianism is it has to overpower giant collectives with a few unorganised individuals. The numbers are a problem. The lack of collectivism is not. Our individuality allows us to attempt a great many tactics instead of concentrating on only one.


TalionTheRanger93

You realize a lot of Republicans fall on the libertarian spectrum, GOP≠authorian. Only some are authoritarian like Ron DeSantis.


JobDestroyer

I think it's wise to push that spectrum closer to liberty where you can.


TalionTheRanger93

Of course.


Crypto-anarchist7

How the fuck is DeSantis more authoritarian then most Republicans. I'm highly skeptical that "a lot" of Republicans lean libertarian. But DeSantis is far better then many.


FrostyFiction98

What are you talking about? Republicans don’t do a thing


mmirate

When are you nullifying the NFA, and when are you going to figure out how to manufacture vehicles that protect the occupants from cold weather without being computers-on-wheels?


JobDestroyer

>When are you nullifying the NFA I spoke to a representative on Saturday who said they are planning this for the fall session but need to work out some of the language. >and when are you going to figure out how to manufacture vehicles that protect the occupants from cold weather without being computers-on-wheels? This is not my area of expertise.


Lemmiwinks99

There’s more of them.


Princess180613

I'd move if I had the resources to. But we gotta work with what we got.


Charles07v

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."