Why are many libertarians so brainwashed?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by SpaceCricket79, Jul 1, 2013.

  1. SpaceCricket79

    SpaceCricket79 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2012
    Messages:
    12,934
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I won't speak for all libertarians, but a good chunk of libertarians and Ron Paul supporters come across as paranoid doomsday cultists and ranters. Not to mention they hold 'absolute fundamentalist views' on everything when it comes to their interpretation of 'freedom', so this leaves them totally unopen to reason.

    Most people are smart enough to know that you can't apply 1 rule literally to every situation, there are practical exceptions and each situation has to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the best solution. But libertarians want to literally apply their philosophy to every situation regardless of negative outcome.

    A lot of them even admit this themselves - ex. even when their ideas have negative consequences, they'd still support them just to be consistent to their philosophy. In a way this reminds me of extremist groups like PETA, etc - who'd probably rather the whole human race die off than experiment on lab rats just because they believe it's "animal cruelty", and therefore morally wrong 100% of the time.

    What I don't get is how average everyday people get brainwashed into developing such a paranoid set of beliefs? I find this really creepy. Is libertarianism the go-to philosophy for paranoid schizophrenics everywhere, or do they get 'recruited' by libertarian cult leaders and go insane after the fact?

    While I agree with some libertarian positions, I really hope this cult of radical libertarianism dies off along with Ron Paul's failed 2012 election bid. These radical liberatians don't add anything useful to politics and would be better off just pulling their money together, buying some island out in the middle of nowhere, and creating their own libertarian country, then in 20-30 years or so we can see if their positions were all they were cracked up to be.
     
  2. Sent

    Sent New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Though I often find that many conservatives are stupid, I've noticed that many libertarians reveal themselves to be beholden to a far deeper level of asinine.

    You hit the nail on the head, doomsday cultists, ranters, fundamentalist views, ect. Certainly there is some correlation to mental illness, for instance if you want to see how unrestrained libertarian lunacy utterly degrades peoples thought-processes and common sense, take a stroll on over to the 'David Icke' forums. It's a libertarian cesspool where they share and spread conspiracy theories. You know, like how the the black helicopters are circling their trailers, the FEMA death camps are being built, the medical community created cancer and is harboring the cure for profit, and Obama is a reptilian space-alien.

    Referring to libertarians as brainwashed is a huge understatement.
     
  3. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,298
    Likes Received:
    3,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess I don't get how libertarians are more radical then progressive liberals or conservative Christians. They have a set of beliefs and stand by them. I don't agree with some and do agree with others. That is because....they tend to be social liberal and fiscally conservative. What is radical about that??? I did not like Ron Paul as a presidential candidate because I did not share his views on our nations security. I'm not for legalizing drugs either. But I wouldn't call him radical.
     
  4. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't think that's true of libertarians in general. I would say the majority are not paranoid kooks. Of course, there are exceptions and they are well represented on this forum who are nuts in the same vein that Edward Snowden is. However I can't deny that there is a trend leading more and more into the tinfoil hat zone. That would be a shame.
     
  5. Dethklok

    Dethklok Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Dethklok endorses this opinion, along with Duncan Hills Coffee. Real black coffee, from the hills.

    One criticism of Immanuel Kant's moral system is that, since a person must never lie, when a murderer knocks on your door and asks "Where is Bob? I'm going to kill him?" a moral person can never say "Bob is in Brazil. Definitely not here in my apartment eating Cheetos."

    A counterargument to this line of reasoning is that, in a world where everyone behaves according to a Kantian moral framework, there may be some problems, but on the whole, things are better. If you reject a Kantian framework sometimes, you are saying that you don't believe the whole thing, because the principles and arguments Kant uses lead inexorably to the conclusion that lying is immoral, always.

    Now, I'm not a Kantian moralist anymore than I am a big-L Libertarian. But I don't see that bringing up a few situations where pragmatism is better than libertarianism is what disproves the general rule of Libertarianism. Without some framework for deciding what's right and wrong, or desirable and undesirable, how does a person choose anything without defaulting to stuff they just sort of, you know, feel has to be so?
     
  6. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not actually a doomsdayer, but whatever.
    I think that's actually why I trust libertarians moreso than I trust traditional democrats and republicans. The problem is that utilitarians, like the dems and reps, have no principles that they literally will not violate for a "good enough cause". What that ends up meaning is that you get a slow drift toward the government doing just about everything -- once the government decides they have a "good enough" reason. Spying -- well, I mean we have to "keep America safe from Terrorists". Forcing people to give contraceptives against religious doctrines "well, we have to make sure the womens have free birth control, so FU, Catholic Church". Stop the sale of Big Gulps -- we gotta stop the obesity epidemic! But there's no reason that it's going to stop where we are even today. Not because people are evil, but because without a firm YOU MAY NOT (or thou shalt not, if you prefer), people will eventually find an excuse to do what they want no matter how much lip service they give to limits. A line that you can only cross when the situation calls for it is a line that will, eventually be crossed. Then once you start, well, you're already doing so... The lines move, and eventually you have nothing left.

    Again it's because of mission-creep. Sure we make and exception "just this once", like some farm programs we started as an emergency relief in 1930. Of course, they haven't stopped yet, and we keep adding. It's the same thing with Peta -- they draw stark lines, but it's a good thing, lines prevent the hypocrisy of pretending to be for something while gradually extending the exceptions until PETA allows not only animal experimentation, but meat eating "so long as it tastes delicious". Without a line you won't cross, there isn't a stopping point. Unless "no animals" means no animals at all, it's not really "no animals", it's no animals until we make up a reason why your case is special enough for the exception.

    I'm not a cultist. I'm simply not a utilitarian. I don't believe in situational ethics or situational rights. You have the right to free speech -- no matter what. No opinion or words are "bad enough" to be banned. You have the right to free religion. I don't get to shut down your temple because I don't like your religion, no matter what you believe. You want to worship Cthulu, go for it. That's the thing, if your rights are only rights when other people approve, they don't exist. If I can only be Christian or Muslim up until it means going against society, I don't have the right to free exercise of religion. If I'm only free to speak so long as I speak in platitudes that don't offend anyone, I actually don't have freedom of speech. Utilitarianism turns that on its ear. You can take away my freedom of religion -- if my freedom of religion gets in the way of a "good idea", for example gay marriage or contraception or abortion or bacon sales (jewish and muslim). That's utilitarianism. I can force you to shut up, if you say something that people don't want to hear, for example that you think racism is good. Utilitarians would likely cry foul at that point -- after all, no one should be allowed to say those things. Not the point. The point is your right as a human being to speak your mind.
     
  7. Zosiasmom

    Zosiasmom New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    18,517
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think your only interaction with libertarians is via a very difficult online medium, and therefore your arguments about what we are like as flaccid and single-dimension.
     
  8. akphidelt2007

    akphidelt2007 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    19,979
    Likes Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's because they are desperate to be relevant. In order for people to want to live a 19th century lifestyle they have to believe the system is about to collapse. Libertarians are pure fear mongerers that need people to live in constant fear of the black helicopters and secret Gestapos. They are pretty much a cult.
     
  9. AceFrehley

    AceFrehley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,582
    Likes Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    0
    David Icke, Green Party spokesman, sounds more like a leftist liberal to me.
     
  10. Dethklok

    Dethklok Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Are you high? No really. Have you seen anything that I've posted anywhere on this message board that looks even remotely like fear mongering? What about Androgynous? I don't see what you are seeing, but I know I'm not blind, so maybe my problem is that I just need the right drug.

    But aren't you making utilitarian arguments? You're pointing out a negative consequence to utilitarianism, as a way of arguing against utilitarianism. It seems to me that you're accepting utilitarianism as de facto correct, and are simply arguing for a more principled brand of utilitarianism.
     
  11. My Fing ID

    My Fing ID Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    12,225
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Brainwashed, what a fun word. I don't see how that applies to the libertarians being that they simply believe in some base principles. They lack strong guidance, from anyone, and tend to come to similar conclusion based on their belief in personal freedom and a fiscally sound, non-aggressive government. Those who follow the two major parties on the other hand will believe whatever their handlers tell them to. Remember how Romney was not liked in the primary; how people didn't see him winning. Remember how he won the primary, and suddenly every Republican who was against him was now for him. Ever notice how the war protests stopped as soon as Obama was elected despite the fact that the war was still going on, Gitmo still exists, he killed a US citizens over seas without trial, and well the list of what the left now supports that they most certainly never, ever would have supported under Bush goes on.

    You want to talk about brainwashed then you need to look at the two major parties in this nation. I sure as (*)(*)(*)(*) am not seeing it on the libertarian end. All I'm seeing is people who actually believe in some common ideas rather than follow a political party around and support their actions while denouncing the actions of the other party regardless of whether they thought those actions were right or wrong before being told what to think.
     
  12. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think that's true, relevance comes from being right, not fear mongering. I think we'd do better to simply explain the system and why it's better to have the bright lines that cannot be crossed rather than the fuzzy lines that have very little stopping power. Deontology is the reason that the founders insisted on a written constitution rather than just trust that a people who swear they love freedom and flags won't find an excuse to violate human rights. It's not fear to point that out. It's not fear to say "hey wait, the constitution says you need a warrent to search my stuff, or to spy on me", it's the reason that right was written in the first place. It was a giant "you shall not pass" sign that meant that I don't need to fear that my email traffic is being read. I don't need a systems failure to advocate for a position that works by limiting what can be done -- I just need to tell you why that makes sense.

    Ron Paul is right on gold, but he's not my Muad'dib.
     
  13. akphidelt2007

    akphidelt2007 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    19,979
    Likes Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ron Paul is not right on gold. Very few educated economists believe Ron Paul is right on gold. This is exactly what I mean. And instead of providing empirical proof, evidence, facts, or math on to why he is right on gold you resort to ideological statements and fear mongering. How many times do I have to hear about the Weimar Republic and hyperinflation? You guys are wrong every single year. Your theories on the dollar, on money, economics, etc are so fringe that it requires fear mongering to get people to believe them. Exactly how a cult works. There is no proof, no facts... just pure "The dollar is going to collapse" type statements. There is a reason Libertarians get 1% of the populations vote.
     
  14. akphidelt2007

    akphidelt2007 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    19,979
    Likes Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not high at all. Just relying on reasonable assumptions based on what I've seen from Libertarians and what they say. Most of their rhetoric involves fear mongering. Sort of like them turning a database of phone metadata in to the greatest intrusion of Government ever and causing them to be traitors. They turn everything in to extreme ideological fear mongering.
     
  15. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I didn't say the dollar was going to collapse. i said that gold standard is better than fiat money. Your money is safe, it probably will be for a long long time, but there's always one advantage -- prices compared to an ounce of gold stay relatively stable over time. Meaning that if there's not any inflation. So if you took an ounce of gold, you could buy lets say 50lbs of pork in 1910. Since there's only so much gold on the planet, the price shouldn't change much, and thus an ounce of gold would still get you 50lbs of pork in 2010, 2110, 3010, and so on. Two items that are equally as rare traded against each other is the same thing. You can't do that with a dollar. A dollar in 1910 buys a lot more than a dollar in 1950, to say nothing of 2010.

    The Value of a Dollar 1910 VS 2010

    Would you rather have a dollar that could buy $97.50 (using the unskilled labor value of a dollar) in 1910, or the dollar in 2010 that's worth a dollar? I can buy a week of groceries with a 1910 dollar, I can buy 4 packs of gum with a 2010 dollar. Just for giggles, the same calculator puts the labor value of the $7.25 minimum wage at $0.98 in 1966. The actual minimum wage in 1966 was $1.60. Lost value ... nope, not possible.

    The other advantage is that it's not tied to the economic power of that nation. Danarii became worthless once there was no Caeser. Rubles became worthless once there was no USSR to back it. The US won't fall for centuries, but when it does, you're better off with commodities. It's not really a "conspiracy" considering that civilizations have all fallen up until this point. Alexander's Empire, the Romans, the Ottomans, the Japanese, the Mongols, the British -- all of these Empires have come and gone. History, not conspiracy. At least unless you want to claim the the Fall of Babylonians or Sumerians is a conspiracy.
     
  16. Dethklok

    Dethklok Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    No. God, no. You have only to read my posts to see this is totally wrong. You can plausibly call my positions naive, or annoying, or arrogant, or obnoxious, or even dumb. You could make a case for those things. Sometimes I wonder how much I really know is true, and how right I am about things. But I don't think that any sane, sober individual could read what I've written on this message board and interpret any of it as ideological fear mongering.
     
  17. Karma Mechanic

    Karma Mechanic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    48
    He is a lunatic...he holds both far right and far left beliefs.
     
  18. Zo0tie

    Zo0tie New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There's not much difference between the behavior of a brainwashed paranoid kook and an adolescent or post adolescent who has unresolved parental authority issues and has read one of Rands literary piles of excrement. Give them a few successful jobs fixing somebody's computer and suddenly they think they have the universal answer to the meaning of life. And everyone who thinks they're immature idiots is part of an evil conspiracy.
     
  19. SerenityJH77

    SerenityJH77 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    352
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting how frightened people get when others choose to hold ideals and beliefs that are not their own. Why, with only 1% of the vote, are you and this administration SO afraid of the Libertarian movement? And how is it that there are now several Libertarians that the people have elected holding office? And honestly I don't know how you can even maintain your position when so much of what some were concerned about is actually happening. But perhaps what the real issue is, is that the Conservatives have gotten way too much dirt on the Liberals now, and they need to try and find someone else to try to bully. Call it fear mongering if you wish..But you cannot stop the changing tide. And like it or not..Libertarian numbers are growing at a faster pace than the Presidents approval rate is dropping..and that's really saying something!! :)
     
  20. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I sense much butthurt in your words. Which libertarian destroyed your piecemeal ideas so badly that you had to create this thread?
     
  21. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is rich, so far we have a phony Economic expert, a GOP zealot, and a liberal loon calling libertarians brainwashed. It doesn't get any better than that. Gotta love low brow criticism.
     
  22. akphidelt2007

    akphidelt2007 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    19,979
    Likes Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yet you guys get 1% of the vote and think we are the brainwashed ones! Classic comedy!! No different then a cult that thinks they have all the answers to life despite what everyone else says. Time to start reevaluating your thought process.
     
  23. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) if we got .0001% of the vote. It's not my fault that you're a sale out that swings back and fourth between parties that give a flying (*)(*)(*)(*) about you. You're the one stuck in the rat race, not me. It's called having a set of principals and sticking too them, I'm sure you can't grasp such a thing.

    So have fun voting for two different sides of the same coin, while deluding yourself that you or your vote counts.
     
  24. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,298
    Likes Received:
    3,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    . Is that how you decide what values you hold dear? By looking to see what the majority is doing? What was the majority doing in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia? Should a Christian living in Saudi Arabia or Egypt give up Christ so they don't seem like a cult? Or an atheist should turn to religion like the majority? Do you call an Atheist in the Middle East part of a cult?? I think principals and values need more rationality then making decisions based on " what everyone else is doing."
     
  25. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Explain the connection you're trying to make between getting 1% of the vote and being brainwashed. Don't leave anything out...
     

Share This Page