Why do libertarians support Republicans?

[cannabineer]

… but they're both authoritarian control cunts, run by fascists.

fify

 

[HGCC]

I would argue it's because "libertarian" isn't really a thing. The vast majority of folks that loudly make the claim are just republicans embarrassed by their party. Libertarianism is some unicorn shit. It fails under the most basic of scrutiny when you consider real world application. It is a silly contradictory belief system.

 

[cannabineer]

I would argue it's because "libertarian" isn't really a thing. The vast majority of folks that loudly make the claim are just republicans embarrassed by their party. Libertarianism is some unicorn shit. It fails under the most basic of scrutiny when you consider real world application. It is a silly contradictory belief system.

But it has just enough viscerally attractive content to subsume people smart enough to know better, by rights. We get the occasional illustration right here in our corner of the net.

 

[HGCC]

It doesn't though, its based on nothing but words that make them get feels. So it's all about protecting individual liberty or whatever from the state. Who granted that liberty? It's the state, the stuff they view as basic human rights have existed for a few hundred years and were put into place and protected by the governments the libertarians view as threats. I guess you can argue the days of the coal barons or actual slavery were better if you want, but the libertarians rely heavily on the idea that government should get out of the way blah blah blah...we already did that, shit kinda sucked, we sent kids into mines and whatnot, the rules and regulations they seek to roll back were put into place for a reason. People are shit, we aren't good enough in a moral sense to not trample on others as we pursue our own goals. History has shown that.

Libertarianism is just the name to sell rubes on corporatism.

 

[EmeraldØsiris]

she now has a
big
sister

View attachment 5259282

Nice hooters

 

[EmeraldØsiris]

Probably because republicans tend to be for less government and bureaucracy, and are pro business.

 

[Dryxi]

There are only 2 parties, all people support one or the other . For a group of "show me the facts" people, I am finding very little shown in this thread that shows libertarians support the Republican party. A quick google search on Libertarians and DeSantis show that many of the LP responses to DeSantis are less than supportive. Is there some new poll that came out that shows libertarians overwhelmingly support the reps over dems?

What exactly is a libertarian, do most people who self-identify as one register as part of the party? If they don't, would they not just be independents, considering the green/LP parties are not real things? Do most self-described libertarians actually vote? Can someone show me a poll where self-described libertarians state which of the two main parties they support? The only one I can find is from Reuters in 2015, but interestingly enough the article states 22% were Dems and only 18% Reps, with 25% calling themselves independent.

 

[cannabineer]

Probably because republicans tend to be for less government and bureaucracy, and are pro business.

they’re not so much “pro-business” as “anti-people”. “Less government” is one of the worst shams perpetrated in our nation since the South blocked writing slavery out of the nascent Constitution. It conceals the bottomless cruelty of a sort of Calvinist social Darwinism.

 

[cannabineer]

There are only 2 parties, all people support one or the other . For a group of "show me the facts" people, I am finding very little shown in this thread that shows libertarians support the Republican party. A quick google search on Libertarians and DeSantis show that many of the LP responses to DeSantis are less than supportive. Is there some new poll that came out that shows libertarians overwhelmingly support the reps over dems?

What exactly is a libertarian, do most people who self-identify as one register as part of the party? If they don't, would they not just be independents, considering the green/LP parties are not real things? Do most self-described libertarians actually vote? Can someone show me a poll where self-described libertarians state which of the two main parties they support? The only one I can find is from Reuters in 2015, but interestingly enough the article states 22% were Dems and only 18% Reps, with 25% calling themselves independent.

Their agenda still converge on the unholy trinity:

small government/inadequate taxation
states’ rights to implement bigoted law
unfettered plutocracy sold as free market

so the stuff you mention is a surface phenomenon concealing the push for minority rule by landed white Protestant males, with representation of all the people i.e. a republic the prime casualty.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

There are only 2 parties, all people support one or the other . For a group of "show me the facts" people, I am finding very little shown in this thread that shows libertarians support the Republican party. A quick google search on Libertarians and DeSantis show that many of the LP responses to DeSantis are less than supportive. Is there some new poll that came out that shows libertarians overwhelmingly support the reps over dems?

What exactly is a libertarian, do most people who self-identify as one register as part of the party? If they don't, would they not just be independents, considering the green/LP parties are not real things? Do most self-described libertarians actually vote? Can someone show me a poll where self-described libertarians state which of the two main parties they support? The only one I can find is from Reuters in 2015, but interestingly enough the article states 22% were Dems and only 18% Reps, with 25% calling themselves independent.

I personally don't care who they support, the entire "party" is built on lies and unsustainable theories, so i don't support them if they lean left, right, or straight down the center. They're just more liars, hoping to gain some control, so they can force their brand of idiocy upon other idiots...

 

[Fogdog]

"Lobbyists from big corporations WRITE some of the bills that Republican Congressmen submit. When they aren't writing it, they are suggesting changes to benefit their big corporate clients. Who do you think is behind Republican efforts to fight bills addressing climate change? Ever hear of Exxon?"

I don't see where we are disagreeing. That is exactly what I stated. Republicans want tax cuts for the rich, and their big businesses (Exon, Big Tobacco, NRA, etc) to be left alone so they can make money, or better stated, keep their money, as much of it as they can.

You seem intent on disagreeing so I'm going to call you a purple banana from the planet Pluto! You've got four arms, I know this because I was there when you were born from your father's mouth. Nothing can be more true!

I could be reading it wrong. If not, he seems to be saying (let’s stick with Republicans) seek to minimize government interference in the way businesses operate, which includes taxation, employing domestically, worker and product safety standards, antipollution regulations including carbon control, putting the brakes on ecocide e. g. fisheries, et cetera.

If that is so, I don’t think it is all that divergent. It would help to see response to my question a few posts back. (He has posted rightie alt-sense before.)

Where it gets interesting is that this small-government principle disappears when the megacorporation, here Disney, blasphemes against Republican Morality. Then it’s take over, divide et impera.

What that says to me is that the “libertarian” ethos Republicans like to use in campaigns is completely subordinate to advancing the party’s agenda of cultural demonization and demolition. Which means that under the libertarian glove we once again find the iron fist of authoritarianism.

Let’s see if he speaks to my question that Roger so neatly put into perspective.

Yep, that's my read of it too.

By his logic it's consistent. Exon SHOULD write the laws. Anything else is government interference. Regarding culture wars, government has no business interfering with acts of racism or protecting vulnerable minorities. There shouldn't be public schools anyway, so, Don't say Gay is a big don't care.

 

[cannabineer]

Yep, that's my read of it too.

By his logic it's consistent. Exon SHOULD write the laws. Anything else is government interference. Regarding culture wars, government has no business interfering with acts of racism or protecting vulnerable minorities. There shouldn't be public schools anyway, so, Don't say Gay is a big don't care.

oh and f the poor.

 

[Fogdog]

oh and f the poor.

Von Mises, who formulated the libertarian philosophy, said basically the same thing when, as an economist under Mussolini, wrote in his book, Liberalism

All human power would be insufficient to make men really equal. Men are and will always remain unequal. It is sober considerations of utility such as those we have here presented that constitute the argument in favor of the equality of all men under the law. Liberalism never aimed at anything more than this, nor could it ask for anything more. It is beyond human power to make a Negro white. But the Negro can be granted the same rights as the white man and thereby offered the possibility of earning as much if he produces as much.​

​

If one is poor, it's because they don't have the capacity that wealthy people do. The Negro can be granted the same rights as the white man but proof of unequal ability lies in his being poor.

Not just in their acceptance of this circular logic are Republicans and libertarians the same but especially in this belief. The assumption of unequal ability as the reason for poverty is used to justify not only economic inequality but also racial inequality in the US.

I think this thread accomplished its objective. I understand now that there is no contradiction in libertarian support for Republicans

 

[Dryxi]

Their agenda still converge on the unholy trinity:

small government/inadequate taxation
states’ rights to implement bigoted law
unfettered plutocracy sold as free market

so the stuff you mention is a surface phenomenon concealing the push for minority rule by landed white Protestant males, with representation of all the people i.e. a republic the prime casualty.

For some reason, your response seems to be biased and misrepresents the views of either libertarians or republicans.

Von Mises, who formulated the libertarian philosophy, said basically the same thing when, as an economist under Mussolini, wrote in his book, Liberalism

All human power would be insufficient to make men really equal. Men are and will always remain unequal. It is sober considerations of utility such as those we have here presented that constitute the argument in favor of the equality of all men under the law. Liberalism never aimed at anything more than this, nor could it ask for anything more. It is beyond human power to make a Negro white. But the Negro can be granted the same rights as the white man and thereby offered the possibility of earning as much if he produces as much.​

​

If one is poor, it's because they don't have the capacity that wealthy people do. The Negro can be granted the same rights as the white man but proof of unequal ability lies in his being poor.

Not just in their acceptance of this circular logic are Republicans and libertarians the same but especially in this belief. The assumption of unequal ability as the reason for poverty is used to justify not only economic inequality but also racial inequality in the US.

I think this thread accomplished its objective. I understand now that there is no contradiction in libertarian support for Republicans

You have yet to show any proof there is libertarian support for Republicans. Not only that, but your assertion that republicans or libertarians follow the belief that people are poor because they do not have the ability to be anything else is simply false. All we have seen in this thread are people who have their own biased beliefs espout them as if they are facts. It appears your ability to argue is simply in your ability to put words into other's mouths.

 

[cannabineer]

For some reason, your response seems to be biased and misrepresents the views of either libertarians or republicans.

You have yet to show any proof there is libertarian support for Republicans. Not only that, but your assertion that republicans or libertarians follow the belief that people are poor because they do not have the ability to be anything else is simply false. All we have seen in this thread are people who have their own biased beliefs espout them as if they are facts. It appears your ability to argue is simply in your ability to put words into other's mouths.

to the bolded: show an independent analysis that demonstrates otherwise, proceeding from sound principles.
(Example: do not invoke the debunked doctrine of natural law or intrinsic rights.)

To the rest of it, it sounds like sentiment.

 

[Antidote Man]

I hope we're not talking about me. I do not want Exxon in power. I'm the last person to hate on the poor. I have no problem with gay people, as a people and certainly don't want their rights taken away. Abortions are great in my opinion. There's too many people on this planet. I've been with women who've had them with mine. And nobody decides what I am for me. Period. You can decide what you think I am for yourselves but I wont be playing along. The way some of you jump to conclusion and turn things around baffles me. It's like your only intention is to argue. And I guess stating you're not republican anymore doesn't mean dick. You have to prove it through deductive reasoning and showing your current assessment of what's happening in politics vs how you interpret the definition of various political strategies and where they overlap. I think its obvious there are connections between republicans and libertarians and also some similarities between libertarian's and liberals. To call it a cognitive process is to challenge the psyche and collective conscious and say the problem is in the wiring of brain matter and/or perhaps a chemical imbalance which I think discounts how people's minds are shaped by #1 - what they were brought up to believe and #2 - on their life experiences. Let's just agree to disagree, oh, but we can't do that anymore, because that's agreeing which seems to be the entire point of this discussion, is not to.

 

[Dryxi]

to the bolded: show an independent analysis that demonstrates otherwise, proceeding from sound principles.

It is you who made the claims, not I. Please show me proof in the correctness of your own statement.

The statement is a highly subjective and skewed interpretation of the political views of libertarians and Republicans. While it is true that some individuals who identify as libertarians or Republicans may hold these views, it is not accurate to paint all individuals who hold these political affiliations with the same broad brush.

Many libertarians and Republicans advocate for limited government and low taxes because they believe that it promotes individual liberty and economic freedom. This does not necessarily equate to a desire for minority rule by landed white Protestant males. In fact, many individuals who hold these views believe in the principles of equal representation and democracy.

Regarding the second point, states' rights have been a long-standing principle in the United States, and it is not necessarily a reflection of bigoted beliefs. The idea is that states should have the power to govern themselves and make their own laws, as long as they do not violate the Constitution and the rights of citizens.

Finally, the notion of unfettered plutocracy is a misinterpretation of the free market principles espoused by some libertarians and Republicans. A true free market economy allows for competition and equal opportunity for all, not just a select few.

In conclusion, the statement fails to accurately represent the beliefs and values of libertarians and Republicans and is based on a limited and biased understanding of their political views.

 

[cannabineer]

It is you who made the claims, not I. Please show me proof in the correctness of your own statement.

The statement is a highly subjective and skewed interpretation of the political views of libertarians and Republicans. While it is true that some individuals who identify as libertarians or Republicans may hold these views, it is not accurate to paint all individuals who hold these political affiliations with the same broad brush.

Many libertarians and Republicans advocate for limited government and low taxes because they believe that it promotes individual liberty and economic freedom. This does not necessarily equate to a desire for minority rule by landed white Protestant males. In fact, many individuals who hold these views believe in the principles of equal representation and democracy.

Regarding the second point, states' rights have been a long-standing principle in the United States, and it is not necessarily a reflection of bigoted beliefs. The idea is that states should have the power to govern themselves and make their own laws, as long as they do not violate the Constitution and the rights of citizens.

Finally, the notion of unfettered plutocracy is a misinterpretation of the free market principles espoused by some libertarians and Republicans. A true free market economy allows for competition and equal opportunity for all, not just a select few.

In conclusion, the statement fails to accurately represent the beliefs and values of libertarians and Republicans and is based on a limited and biased understanding of their political views.

Since you made the counterclaim, tag! You’re it.

States’ rights were slavery’s consequence. They remain divide et impera.

A true free-market economy necessarily turns into this.



You’re spouting a bad dogma.

 

[cannabineer]

It is you who made the claims, not I. Please show me proof in the correctness of your own statement.

The statement is a highly subjective and skewed interpretation of the political views of libertarians and Republicans. While it is true that some individuals who identify as libertarians or Republicans may hold these views, it is not accurate to paint all individuals who hold these political affiliations with the same broad brush.

Many libertarians and Republicans advocate for limited government and low taxes because they believe that it promotes individual liberty and economic freedom. This does not necessarily equate to a desire for minority rule by landed white Protestant males. In fact, many individuals who hold these views believe in the principles of equal representation and democracy.

Regarding the second point, states' rights have been a long-standing principle in the United States, and it is not necessarily a reflection of bigoted beliefs. The idea is that states should have the power to govern themselves and make their own laws, as long as they do not violate the Constitution and the rights of citizens.

Finally, the notion of unfettered plutocracy is a misinterpretation of the free market principles espoused by some libertarians and Republicans. A true free market economy allows for competition and equal opportunity for all, not just a select few.

In conclusion, the statement fails to accurately represent the beliefs and values of libertarians and Republicans and is based on a limited and biased understanding of their political views.

I did ask for a derivation from sound principles. Instead you provided a reprise of unfounded and harmful totalibertarian dogma. That will not do.

 

[Fogdog]

For some reason, your response seems to be biased and misrepresents the views of either libertarians or republicans.

You have yet to show any proof there is libertarian support for Republicans. Not only that, but your assertion that republicans or libertarians follow the belief that people are poor because they do not have the ability to be anything else is simply false. All we have seen in this thread are people who have their own biased beliefs espout them as if they are facts. It appears your ability to argue is simply in your ability to put words into other's mouths.

Antidote Man explained it quite well. What he said squares well with the man who wrote the book on libertarian ideology. I don't know what kind of proof you want but I'm satisfied that the subject has been covered.

I've always understood their commonality is in doing away with government involvement in big business and trimming down social security.

Would like to offer a counter argument that libertarians do not support DeSantis's actions?