United States Why Do Libertarians Always Lose?

[CarlManvers2019]

None of these politicians, celebrities, or businessmen are willing to take on the underlying root causes of homelessness: mental illness and a broken housing market.

I don’t think that’s simplified enough for their underdog institutionalized bigotry & social-darwinistic society narrative

Also, what exactly causes the mental illness? Homelessness & poverty? Because lots of poor people in my country aren’t crazy and get employed. Though I think those guys are mostly living in slums with support from their neighbors

As for broken housing markets, also too complicated and probably whatever the root cause, doesn’t fit with their narratives either and they would feel that more government intervention is necessary

Say, any idea about that piece of news about some guy who built small houses worth $1200 but ended up seeing the government confiscate them after being given to homeless people

 

[The Name of Love]

I don’t think that’s simplified enough for their underdog institutionalized bigotry & social-darwinistic society narrative

Also, what exactly causes the mental illness? Homelessness & poverty? Because lots of poor people in my country aren’t crazy and get employed. Though I think those guys are mostly living in slums with support from their neighbors

As for broken housing markets, also too complicated and probably whatever the root cause, doesn’t fit with their narratives either and they would feel that more government intervention is necessary

Say, any idea about that piece of news about some guy who built small houses worth $1200 but ended up seeing the government confiscate them after being given to homeless people

What causes the mental illness is biology. Some people are more prone to it than others. The solution to that is mental hospitals.

The problem of the broken housing market can be solved by geolibertarian housing policy. Remove the government restrictions on homebuilding, remove the rent control, and implement a proper taxation policy so that landlords and land speculators don't jack up the price.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

What causes the mental illness is biology. Some people are more prone to it than others. The solution to that is mental hospitals.

Makes some sense, I think living on the streets can do a number on someone's mental health

 

[The Name of Love]

Makes some sense, I think living on the streets can do a number on someone's mental health

Actually, I believe the order is backwards. They are living on the street because they were mentally ill. Being mentally ill means that you have a hard time holding down a job, taking care of yourself, etc., especially when there's nobody that can care for you. You get the idea?

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Actually, I believe the order is backwards. They are living on the street because they were mentally ill. Being mentally ill means that you have a hard time holding down a job, taking care of yourself, etc., especially when there's nobody that can care for you. You get the idea?

Okay, though I guess there maybe a difference between those homeless people and other people down on their luck

 

[The Name of Love]

Okay, though I guess there maybe a difference between those homeless people and other people down on their luck

Well, the mentally ill are more likely to be down on their luck, so I think you'll see more of them represented among the homeless population. Nothing I've seen of their behavior really contradicts this.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Well, the mentally ill are more likely to be down on their luck, so I think you'll see more of them represented among the homeless population. Nothing I've seen of their behavior really contradicts this.

Just want to make this point across, I’ve met a number of poor to working class people in my country, barely any were ever crazy

And I sorta blame their bad luck more on circumstances & economics than ever being mentally ill to begin with

Though, the homeless of your country or even the West, may have something wrong with them indeed....if they’re JUST satisfied with BARELY living on welfare checks

I think there’s a difference between South American illegals coming for dirt cheap pay work in the USA to the ones coming for some barely living-situations in places like California

 

[The Name of Love]

Just want to make this point across, I’ve met a number of poor to working class people in my country, barely any were ever crazy

And I sorta blame their bad luck more on circumstances & economics than ever being mentally ill to begin with

Though, the homeless of your country or even the West, may have something wrong with them indeed....if they’re JUST satisfied with BARELY living on welfare checks

I think there’s a difference between South American illegals coming for dirt cheap pay work in the USA to the ones coming for some barely living-situations in places like California

There's a difference between poor working class people and homeless people. The kind of homeless people you find shitting on the streets and shooting up heroin in West Coast cities are not the same people you find working hard to barely make ends meet.

 

[LordsFire]

So, I've been homeless before. I've stayed at a homeless shelter before. It kind of sucked.

One of the things that stands out to me the most, is that the most part of the people at that shelter, were visibly making bad decisions and/or had horrible attitudes. Several of them were literally comparing the shelter to a prison, because it had rules (no fighting, no weapons, etc), and also, some of them were visibly massively fat.

There were also some people who clearly were just in a bad spot, and actively looking for jobs/trying to get out of the situation. Those tend not to be the kind of people who end up as chronically homeless.

The reason I was there myself, was a mixture of rough circumstances, and me making bad decisions in response to those rough circumstances.

I saw far too many people though, that were obviously chronically staying at such places, and were outright resentful of the people providing them.

Simply put, some people are unwilling to accept any kind of rules that they don't decide for themselves, and some people are not willing to work a lick more than they have to to survive.

Yes, some people are poor, unemployed, or outright homeless because of circumstances beyond their control. Most people though, if they are in those circumstance long term, are in them because they made (and usually are continuing to make) bad decisions, and they refuse to learn.

 

[The Name of Love]

So, I've been homeless before. I've stayed at a homeless shelter before. It kind of sucked.

One of the things that stands out to me the most, is that the most part of the people at that shelter, were visibly making bad decisions and/or had horrible attitudes. Several of them were literally comparing the shelter to a prison, because it had rules (no fighting, no weapons, etc), and also, some of them were visibly massively fat.

There were also some people who clearly were just in a bad spot, and actively looking for jobs/trying to get out of the situation. Those tend not to be the kind of people who end up as chronically homeless.

The reason I was there myself, was a mixture of rough circumstances, and me making bad decisions in response to those rough circumstances.

I saw far too many people though, that were obviously chronically staying at such places, and were outright resentful of the people providing them.

Simply put, some people are unwilling to accept any kind of rules that they don't decide for themselves, and some people are not willing to work a lick more than they have to to survive.

Yes, some people are poor, unemployed, or outright homeless because of circumstances beyond their control. Most people though, if they are in those circumstance long term, are in them because they made (and usually are continuing to make) bad decisions, and they refuse to learn.

Out of curiosity, where were you homeless? Because the homeless populations differ from place to place, I'd imagine.

Also, I hope you managed to find your way out of such a terrible situation.

 

[Lanmandragon]

How do you define safety?

Because based on criminal and violent crime statistics, we're at a fifty year or longer low. Based on geopolitical circumstances, there's no real threat of full scale war with a peer power like there was in the 1950s... and the military deployments that the US is involved in are dramatically less lethal for our people than those of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s (to say nothing of the 1940s). When it comes to natural disasters we've greatly improved our forecasting and response capabilities due to technological advancement.

So you must mean something different by "safety" than what most people think safety is? Because by most measures, everyone is more safe today than they were in the 1950s...

Well your family was less likley to implode in the 50s. Because your wife decided she wasn't "in love". Your also far more likely to flat it be denied access to your kids now. I'd say either of those is worse then death personally. Death islnot really that scary anyway everyone dies so why fear the inevitable?

 

[Terthna]

I think I've discovered why the Libertarian party is going to lose this time (aside from all the other reasons of course):


They can't even pretend to believe in core Libertarian principles, and are instead trying to court regressive leftists.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

I think I've discovered why the Libertarian party is going to lose this time (aside from all the other reasons of course):


They can't even pretend to believe in core Libertarian principles, and are instead trying to court regressive leftists.

I’ve seen Randites who were also pretty Far Left or at the very least “Never Trumpers” on reddit and youtube

Compared Donald Trump to “Jim Taggart”

 

[Abhorsen]

I think I've discovered why the Libertarian party is going to lose this time (aside from all the other reasons of course):


They can't even pretend to believe in core Libertarian principles, and are instead trying to court regressive leftists.

Every year, the libertarian party balances two interests: getting elected and getting our ideology out there. Vote share is incredibly important, as hitting the 5% level of popular vote gives access to federal campaign financing, which would be huge if slightly hypocritical. Even lower amounts matter, as they allow for ballot access for the libertarian party, sometimes including downballoters.

But we also want someone who symbolizes our beliefs, lest the libertarian party get even less support from libertarians. There are countless big name libertarians who refuse to participate or are banned from participating/disinvited. The party is shit, but it's there.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Honestly, I think a Libertarian Party or Libertarian Government would be sort of Oxymoron

Ideally it would be better to get the idea out there and actually thought of without all the “they’re fucking Nazi’s” slander I’ve seen on reddit

 

[Floridaman]

Every year, the libertarian party balances two interests: getting elected and getting our ideology out there. Vote share is incredibly important, as hitting the 5% level of popular vote gives access to federal campaign financing, which would be huge if slightly hypocritical. Even lower amounts matter, as they allow for ballot access for the libertarian party, sometimes including downballoters.

But we also want someone who symbolizes our beliefs, lest the libertarian party get even less support from libertarians. There are countless big name libertarians who refuse to participate or are banned from participating/disinvited. The party is shit, but it's there.

The problem is every time, they do something which drives libertarians away. Take 2016 Gary saying to “bake the cake” implying he would Violate individual rights to association. That quote drove away a lot of ibertarians, and didn’t even get the goal of getting democrats to defect to the libertarian ticket.

 

[almostinsane]

Libertarians fail because they fail to realize that humans are built to depend on and maintain a social order. They tend to embrace libertinism, which devolves into intersectional social justice for lack of moral meaning.

The Non-aggression Principle inevitably fails when violence is redefined as unequal outcome.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Libertarians fail because they fail to realize that humans are built to depend on and maintain a social order. They tend to embrace libertinism, which devolves into intersectional social justice for lack of moral meaning.

The Non-aggression Principle inevitably fails when violence is redefined as unequal outcome.

Honestly, I think one of the failures of Libertarianism is not accounting for one thing: “purpose”

It’s NOT enough to have all your physical needs met and to have fun

People want to go join or make a “cause” and feel REALLY fucking self righteous while at it, preferably one where they’re unlikely to actually get shot or deal with actual opposition though

Simply dedicating yourself to ACTUAL charity or trying to get really good at some skill is NOT something that pops up in their heads

No, they want to follow some charismatic dictator who thinks their thoughts for them and has much involvement in their everyday lives. Actually, no need for him/her/it to be so smart and charismatic, just have the right talking points and these “leaders” come in large numbers more than enough to account for demand

AOC was just a bartender

 

[almostinsane]

Honestly, I think one of the failures of Libertarianism is not accounting for one thing: “purpose”

It’s NOT enough to have all your physical needs met and to have fun

People want to go join or make a “cause” and feel REALLY fucking self righteous while at it, preferably one where they’re unlikely to actually get shot or deal with actual opposition though

Simply dedicating yourself to ACTUAL charity or trying to get really good at some skill is NOT something that pops up in their heads

No, they want to follow some charismatic dictator who thinks their thoughts for them and has much involvement in their everyday lives. Actually, no need for him/her/it to be so smart and charismatic, just have the right talking points and these “leaders” come in large numbers more than enough to account for demand

AOC was just a bartender

People want some sort of moral order. A way to be virtuous. When libertinism does away with traditional morality, you create a vacuum for a new religion to fill.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

People want some sort of moral order. A way to be virtuous. When libertinism does away with traditional morality, you create a vacuum for a new religion to fill.

Honestly, I think it would happen even without Libertarianism

Why? Because you will look “cool” and “edgy” if you take a dumb on the Church and call the Priest a pedophile and go on about the Crusades and the Inquisition

And the local religious people and said Church will just lie down and take it

Well, at least in the West