re: What’s your least favorite thing about libertarians?

How they ride the fence and tend to vote Democrat more often than not.

they make this board melt on a daily basis.

Theyre gutless

Wont run as a DIM where abortion, open borders, No voter ID, sparation of church/state, etc are the DIM platform

Wont run as a libertarian

So they run as an (R) in red states, then proceed to eff up the agenda. One of their own said it best:

quote:

---

Governor Jared Polis of Colorado, a libertarian-oriented Democrat, wrote in Reason magazine: "I believe that libertarians should vote for Democratic candidates, particularly as our Democratic nominees are increasingly more supportive of individual liberty and freedom than Republicans".He cited opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act, support for the legalization of marijuana, support for the separation of church and state, support for abortion rights and individual bodily autonomy, opposition to mass surveillance

---

The biggest issue is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. They often make policy decisions based on living in a very different world than the one we currently inhabit.

Sure, policy A would be the right choice if Policies C-F didn’t already exist. Until then, you need policy B to survive. Maybe after C-F are dealt with, then we can switch from B to A, but until then, A is a really stupid and unsustainable policy that cuts your nose to spite your face. Libertarians seem to take the idealist choice every time with zero regard to the actual situation on the ground.

The other issue is the “no true Scotsman” infighting within the big L and little l tents. There are voluntary socialists, an-caps, hedonists, small government conservatives, constitutionalists, and sovereign citizens all under that umbrella. The more “pure” one is, the more divorced from reality they become. Like all political philosophies and utopian theories, libertarianism completely falls apart when taken to its logical extremes, but can be incredibly useful in the right context. Since true believers are incapable of nuance, they default to absurdity.

My main issue is that there is not enough of us.

This reads like someone, sitting back in their recliner, making calls post-fact.

quote:

---

Is it that they pretend to live in a fantasy world where all decisions should come without consequences?

---

Wow. Just. Wow.

So decades of consequences due to our meddling overseas and the blowback generated by it has made you place blame on the one political belief that believes in non-intervention.

That is quite the step brother. But you go on keeping on with the same old policies and see where that gets you.

Some say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.

quote:

---

So decades of consequences due to our meddling overseas and the blowback generated by it has made you place blame on the one political belief that believes in non-intervention.

---

All of the world’s biggest players are meddlers. It’s a highly imperfect give and take scenario, but sometimes a necessary evil.

quote:

---

All of the world’s biggest players are meddlers. It’s a highly imperfect give and take scenario, but sometimes a necessary evil

---

Really? All the world is meddlers?

Funny. I do not see any of those other countries putting military bases everywhere, overthrowing elected governments and telling everyone what they can and cannot do. Hell, do you even know just how many terror organizations we have started and funded since 1950? Take a guess then get back to me. It was much, much better when it was only the Democrats doing this. Now we have Neo-Cons fully onboard with warhawking.

When I lived in SoCal in the early 90's, Orange County to be exact, they were all about being anti the Helmut Law, forcing motorcyclists to wear helmets. They were also about legalizing drugs. That is pretty much it.

No wonder Ayn Rand called them Marxists but dumber.