United States Why Do Libertarians Always Lose?

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Osaul
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Reaction score
2,947
I could go on for pages and hours (and have in the past), but I won't overly belabor this thread with that. The bottom line is that when you start out denying the existence of God, you're putting yourself down Nietsche's path whether you like it or not. Every time humans start trying to redefine ethics for themselves, it ends in tragedy, personally, culturally, and for humanity as a whole.
To cut a long argument short, I have looked at proofs for the existance of god extensively, and haven't found them very convincing, with perhaps Godel's coming the closest, but it fell well short. And even if you do show a god, why your god? Why should your morality follow from proving a god exists?
When you stand on the ideological void of secularism, there is no metric by which to separate truth from falsehood, except for hard material reality.
Exactly, and that's what I need. I accept the axiom of private property, and derive my morality from that.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
5,502
sorry should have been more specific. There may be a time when the pendulum swings causing the right to be more concerned about Social conservatism as opposed to constitutionalism. I've seen monarchist and catholic zealots popping up on alt media complaining about how the constitution and liberty have failed.
I expect if the pendulum swings to Christianity being in the cultural center, the left will be pushing those policies, not the right.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Osaul
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Reaction score
2,947
@Abhorsen its hilarious you say Libertarians are winning in the face of the Corona Virus shutdown. Absolutely hilarious.
I was taking a long view, but yes, the shutdowns are a huge step in the wrong direction.
 

FriedCFour

PunishedCFour
Founder
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
5,096
Location
Mother Roof
I was taking a long view, but yes, the shutdowns are a huge step in the wrong direction.
It absolutely factors into the long view though. You can see it in just how horribly the right to free speech has been violated. You can only legally gather if it’s for a left wing cause in so many cities, and then riot and be let go without consequence.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Osaul
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Reaction score
2,947
It absolutely factors into the long view though. You can see it in just how horribly the right to free speech has been violated. You can only legally gather if it’s for a left wing cause in so many cities, and then riot and be let go without consequence.
At the time I posted this, it wasn't that bad. In addition, lawsuits are going to come about the unequal orders, and hopefully fix this. If it's like this six months from now, yeah, I'll be incredibly worried. It does point out that even the first amendment doesn't go far enough though.
 

liberty90

Evil Neoliberal Cat
Joined
Apr 12, 2020
Reaction score
78
Location
Poland
If you're going to make that kind of argument, we should abandon debate altogether, and start stockpiling guns and minions.

Just because people claim a thing is true, does not mean it's true. Just because people claim the Bible says something, does not mean that it actually says that something.
But your interpretation of the Bible is not obvious to anyone besides niche circles of you and your ideological friends. Even the Catholic Social Teaching enjoy more power. Not soldiers, but money, priests and journalists.

You think that your interpretation of the Bible is "true", but to people outside of your circles it's a claim identical to claims of any religious or secular ideology. You are no different to outsiders, exept you have less power than many other interpretations. Your belief in your interpretation of the nature of God gives you exactly 0 additional power to rule effectively.

It's possible that secular libertarians are richer and could hire more journalists than christian libertarians (though both are VERY niche), and yet you criticise their ideology as less feasible than your ideology. Only because you feel that your ideology is more "true". Kind of irrelevant to outsiders when it gives no results.

Look, I would love a more libertarian system, but I'm pretty sure, from looking at the world and evidence, that your religion is not an useful tool for this goal (if any is possible - human nature tends to make art of politics statist and highly pro-regulation, as I mentioned before in this thread).

So, as a tool, not useful. As a "truth", my apologies, but I honestly think that you are mistaken and that Christianity is not true.
 
Last edited:

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
5,502
But your interpretation of the Bible is not obvious to anyone besides niche circles of you and your ideological friends. Even the Catholic Social Teaching enjoy more power. Not soldiers, but money, priests and journalists.

You think that your interpretation of the Bible is "true", but to people outside of your circles it's a claim identical to claims of any religious or secular ideology. You are no different to outsiders, exept you have less power than many other interpretations. Your belief in your interpretation of the nature of God gives you exactly 0 additional power to rule effectively.

It's possible that secular libertarians are richer and could hire more journalists than christian libertarians (though both are VERY niche), and yet you criticise their ideology as less feasible than your ideology. Only because you feel that your ideology is more "true". Kind of irrelevant to outsiders when it gives no results.

Look, I would love a more libertarian system, but I'm pretty sure, from looking at the world and evidence, that your religion is not an useful tool for this goal (if any is possible - human nature tends to make art of politics statist and highly pro-regulation, as I mentioned before in this thread).

So, as a tool, not useful. As a "truth", my apologies, but I honestly think that you are mistaken and that Christianity is not true.
It's one thing for you to argue that Christianity is not true. I've had that argument many times. Your argument would carry more weight if it was evidence-based, rather than basically an appeal to truth not existing, because 'anybody can argue for anything.'

For you to argue that the sort of understanding of Christianity that leads to Libertarianism isn't useful for a Libertarian system, that's blatant historical ignorance, since that is specifically and explicitly the ideology that underwrote the Constitution of the USA and the most effective Libertarian nation that has ever existed. It's only been in the 20th century as Progressivism has encroached on that ideological foundation that the US has become increasingly less Libertarian.
 
Last edited:

liberty90

Evil Neoliberal Cat
Joined
Apr 12, 2020
Reaction score
78
Location
Poland
True statements exist as much as they make falsifable claims. There are more true than false, statistically, ways to build bridges and treat cancer than others. You know this out of statistical patterns in accident/death rates. And, for sure, there are more true than false ways to increase economic growth, and I feel already persuaded that these ways are mostly economically liberal.

As to your particular rare "understanding of Christianity that leads to Libertarianism", I see no increased utility betweet it and secular version.

Also, I thought that "ideology that underwrote the Constitution of the USA" was more Deist than Christian. The Second Great Awakening happened afterwards, if I remember right.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
5,502
Also, I thought that "ideology that underwrote the Constitution of the USA" was more Deist than Christian. The Second Great Awakening happened afterwards, if I remember right.
That's revisionist Propaganda. Every single Founding Father except for Thomas Jefferson was a Christian. Benjamin Franklin very briefly flirted with Deism, but he rejected it as foolishness very shortly thereafter. Jefferson also explicitly believed in the moral principles that Christianity taught, even if he didn't believe in the divinity of Christ.

Back in the first few decades after the Constitution was ratified and the USA was formed, church services were regularly held inside US government buildings. The nation was explicitly Christian, and as de Toqueville noted, part of the USA's success as a nation was inextricably tied to how strongly Christian it was.


If you think that Secular Libertarianism is as useful as Christian Libertarianism for achieving a Libertarian end, can you name for me a nation founded on Secular Libertarian principles?

Because I can't think of any.
 

Fleiur

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Reaction score
740
Yeah, I’ve met douchebags on reddit and youtube comments who were pretty eager to have lots of entertainment banned and saying how immoral it all was and how essentially people had to be forced to go and make families and such

Talked to some who seemed to be actual fucking homophobes

I can tell those Conservatives weren’t gonna get along with any New Blood in the present and future
Can you say that they are wrong in every aspect?
Porn has done more damage to men in particular and families in general than any drug or Marxist brainwashing.

If conservatives are meant to conserve the family, they were right to want to ban the proliferation of pornography.

Even you have stated a preference for hentai over real women.
 

CarlManvers2019

WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT MY HAIR!?!?
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Reaction score
11,635
Location
Philippines
Can you say that they are wrong in every aspect?
Porn has done more damage to men in particular and families in general than any drug or Marxist brainwashing.

If conservatives are meant to conserve the family, they were right to want to ban the proliferation of pornography.

Even you have stated a preference for hentai over real women.
These guys weren’t just about porn but banning stuff like videogames and scifi-fantasy series more-or-less if only to force people into what they liked all while essentially claiming the same old “Turns you into a serial killer/rapist” shit I’ve seen from those types

I don’t want either SJWs or Moral Guardians around trying to force society into a mould

And if either think they can take control, well then it’s to the black market or underground we go. Just like the prohibition, but with stuff that the cool kids won’t like
 

Fleiur

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Reaction score
740
To cut a long argument short, I have looked at proofs for the existance of god extensively, and haven't found them very convincing, with perhaps Godel's coming the closest, but it fell well short. And even if you do show a god, why your god? Why should your morality follow from proving a god exists?
Despite our differences, there is a common morality that arises in each society across time and space. Murder, theft, endangering the life of others, etc. are prohibited.

Now, you may say this comes from evolution. Yet, you live as though there is objective truth, namely that people cannot perform aggression against you and your property. Without objective morality, this isn't the case your beliefs are mere beliefs, valid as long as you can enforce them. If you can't, you have no inherent right to complain. You lost the evolutionary race.

Without God, morality is just opinion. Backed up by guns.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Osaul
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Reaction score
2,947
Without God, morality is just opinion. Backed up by guns.
I mean, that's an argument that things would be better if your God exists, not an argument that God exists. And quite simply, I cannot with any honesty believe in God. At which point, I have to build a morality, but I have little to no framework to put it on. I wish I could believe in a god, and just have a reliable source of knowledge about morality. But as it is, I don't.

In light of this, I know that Capitalism, which is the respect of private property, does increase prosperity. I also know that the morality of an Ancap and basic 'evolutionary/instinctual' morality (for lack of a better term, what humans default to) line up fairly well in what actions one should do. So I'll go with Private Property being the basis of my morality, and build from there. Maybe I should read some metaphysics and see if I can connect my foundation to some sort of reality, but I haven't had the time to do that yet.
 

CarlManvers2019

WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT MY HAIR!?!?
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Reaction score
11,635
Location
Philippines
I mean, that's an argument that things would be better if your God exists, not an argument that God exists. And quite simply, I cannot with any honesty believe in God. At which point, I have to build a morality, but I have little to no framework to put it on. I wish I could believe in a god, and just have a reliable source of knowledge about morality. But as it is, I don't.

In light of this, I know that Capitalism, which is the respect of private property, does increase prosperity. I also know that the morality of an Ancap and basic 'evolutionary/instinctual' morality (for lack of a better term, what humans default to) line up fairly well in what actions one should do. So I'll go with Private Property being the basis of my morality, and build from there. Maybe I should read some metaphysics and see if I can connect my foundation to some sort of reality, but I haven't had the time to do that yet.
There’s also taking into account that there are people, like myself, who just don’t have that feeling or intensity towards a belief in God or even if he did, don’t have said intensity

And yeah, private property as a basis for morality sounds pretty nice, though it has to deal with people who feel it is impossible to attain said private property through honest means and that not everybody with private property will respect others rights to theirs and wish to take theirs even if it means resorting to underhanded means

The rule of “I don’t bother you, you don’t bother me” is kinda hard to do
 

Fleiur

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Reaction score
740
These guys weren’t just about porn but banning stuff like videogames and scifi-fantasy series more-or-less if only to force people into what they liked all while essentially claiming the same old “Turns you into a serial killer/rapist” shit I’ve seen from those types

I don’t want either SJWs or Moral Guardians around trying to force society into a mould

And if either think they can take control, well then it’s to the black market or underground we go. Just like the prohibition, but with stuff that the cool kids won’t like
Well, who holds these institutions? Marxist SJWs. You seems to be equating them with Conservatives who are fighting against the degradation of men and women and the family. They are not one and the same. It is normal for conservatives to push back until it's slowly accepted. It keeps the truly vile stuff away.
SJWs, meanwhile, criminalize people for being normal.
 
Top Bottom