What happened to libertarianism? It seems like libertarians all disappeared these last few years

It does actually, the reason for the current crisis is precisely government regulation in the economy. With all the regulation we have today, and all the government monopolies that exist today, it's far harder to compete with established interests, who are often colluding with regulatory agencies and politicans.

In addition, the major inhibitory factor is financial regulation. Financial tyranny is what stopped a lot of competitors to big tech from springing up. The reason there is no competition in finance is because its the most centrally-planned and the most regulated industry in the United States today.

IIRC Peter Thiel said that the PATRIOT Act would have made it impossible for PayPal to start if it had existed in the 1990's.

So the problem isn't the market, but governments incentivizing monopolies and obstructing competition that would restore the principles commonly associated with free-markets.

>Libertarianism doesn't have an answer for tech giants creating an oligopoly and destroying any semblance of a free market by killing any and all competition because they shit their pants when they hear the word "regulation."
this dumb fuck thinks corporatism is caused by businesses doing their own thing, instead of government coming in and squashing all of the potential independent competition through "consumer safety" laws, regulations associated to starting up new businesses, and an archaic patient system which rewards businesses for getting in bed with govt.

>you're a cuck
keep sucking the cock of corporatism.

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 21-17-23.png (418x193, 18K)

Libertarians misunderstood the point of the NAP:
It's not for the good of others, but rather for the good of oneself...

Libertarianism depends on having the world view that you will be the top dog when there are minimal rules. Unfortunately, unless you are among the richest people already, you end up having a massive reality check the first time life hands you your ass. So, yeah, they grow up and realize they need some protection from all the much much bigger fish out there.

This concludes the Leafs narrative on life
Enjoy your migrants, socialism, and lack of basic human rights

Personally, I realized that the tolerance of libertarianism is what has lead to the modern left.

and the dumbest people thought it looked like freedom

because free markets dont work

>promote a corporate agenda
you mean to promote the ability for individuals to start their own businesses freely without the influence of government and big business in their lives?
you mean to promote a system which doesn't reward people with shitty taxes and subsidies which squash out the little guy?
All that shitty practice sounds like the republican/democratic party to me.
Parties so obsessed with getting their grubby hands into other people's lives, all so their glorious dick-sucking leaders could give them "gib me dats" for 4 years.

>hurr durr free markets don't work
kys, you dumb fuck.
FUCK i hate these corporate retards. They don't even fucking know they're getting ass-blasted by those they YAAASSS QUEEEN over.

how'd that work out 40 years later?

Attached: 03f24dd0f45f0b2e1c7cf11db7388557.jpg (850x400, 68K)

Jow Forums became an authoritarian circlejerk, so most libertarians left.

They realized that it's pretty much impossible to convince a majority non-white voter base to leave people alone.

like we hadn't tried it because everyone said "libertarians are dumb potsmokers" all their lives.
leaf.

i said free markets dont work and you think im pro corporations?

>look at the poorly executed regulation of the market that America has
>this means the regulation itself is the problem and not anything to do with the current implementation of it
I don't think I've seen these levels of black and white thinking in a long time browsing this board, holy shit.

yes. explicitly so.
you are so retarded, that you don't even know it.

Attached: 1536921212358.jpg (1200x640, 94K)

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-18 14-51-46.png (506x607, 45K)

Libertarianism is rightwing. All that means is they want less government.

libetarianism is for the free movement of labor
>let the market decide immigration, the people vote with their feet

libertarianism just like Christianity both fail to address the fundamental problem of this age. fucking nobody wants more immigrants. legal or illegal.

Attached: 1481192905001 sociopath test.png (588x776, 160K)

Imagine unironically being a leaf lmao.
See:
Your founding fathers were Libertarians you absolute mutt.

>Implying governments will always have our interests at heart, and not cozy up with large corporations

You'll be stuck finding the "right" or "right amount" of regulation till the end of time, while also dealing with cronyism and special interests. It's far easier to engage with the free market, where people will be able to do with themselves what they want, and therefore it should be expected that outcomes will be best for both the individual and the group.

if the founding fathers are spinning in their graves. I can promise you they didn't want America to be a god mulatto shitskin nation.

Libertarianism is retarded

It doesn't work. The jews just jew the system and institute Marxism. You need righteous white men for the libertarian system to work.

>where people will be able to do with themselves what they want
You mean where corporations will rape the population as much as they want, with nobody to stop them? They don't care about the people, they care about the money.
The government's job is quite literally to serve the people. Corporations have no set objective. If I was going to take a bet of which one is more lenient towards the well-being of society, I would place it on the government.

>>look at the poorly executed regulation of the market that America has
>>this means the regulation itself is the problem and not anything to do with the current implementation of it
Correct. The current problems with regulation is due to the centralization of government. It has nothing to do with "Waahhh the dems/reps have subsidies that i don't want them to have."
This centralization leads to corporatism, which favors big business.
Political interest groups competing leads to more efficient taxation.
Deregulate the political system, and you will see less corporatism.
People should care more about their local neighborhood significantly more than who is going to be next president.
The reason why people still unknowingly pursue corporatism is due to them not feeling the costs to their political actions. Those costs have been socialized away, to the point where no one feels the significant effects. These retards valiantly continue to vote against their own best interest, simply because the MESSAGE is more important than the content of the policy. i.e. they're retarded.

it's surprising how much libertarianism resembles sociopathy

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 21-36-12.png (627x812, 94K)

This for the most part. I'm libertarian but I know it can't work in America. It's too big, too diverse, and too democratic. Libertarianism needs a homogenous population, a small government that isn't subject to the whims of the mob, laws against foreign nations influencing the market or seeing up businesses. There wasn't a single point in time where America had a chance at libertarianism.

Most libertarians aren't against governments. They agree that governments are instituted among men for the defense of life, liberty, and property. Corporations are of course a problem, and the hope is that a libertarian government would be able to deal with them as necessary.

With that being said, governments and corporations are alike in the sense that they have their own interests at heart, and one should not be fully trusted in any sense. A part of libertarianism is a mistrust of all government, even their ideal one.

>sychopath test
you mean a test which tries to assert freedom is associated with following whatever is popular with the masses? Because that's what psychos do.
Freedom is tied to the ability to make choices for yourself, and be responsible for those choices.

Still here m8, it’s just that the discussion has changed to economic right authoritarian “Conservatives” arguing against economic left “liberal” authoritarians.
There’s fuck all place left to chat about shit, short of “If you keep fucking with us we’ll literally just kill you all and start fresh”, and there’s not much to discuss about that, other than left and right wing authoritarians arguing that that’s impossible and we may as well just bend over and take it.
Also this. The moment you say the word “libertarian” expect a thousand stoner hippies to show up insisting the government needs to hold workers at gunpoint to pay for their weed.
Fucking idiots.

respecting self-autonomy is sociopathy?
fuck off, retarded leaf.

>laws against foreign nations influencing the market
none of what you said is true. demonstrably untrue. as in dumb arguments that have been made over, and over, again. have been clearly shown why they're wrong, then having people go "lolbertarians are just dumb".
free trade benefits your nation even if others are trying to "manipulate" the market.

Neither should be fully trusted, sure, but the government is still set out to serve the people. This inherently means they are an authority above corporations. This means a regulated market (one that doesn't have regulation influenced by corporate lobbying) is the optimum way to utilize the free market but not exploit the people.

>Liberty: To not have your freedom restricted by others while also not restricting the freedoms of others
>Libertarianism: Basing your views and morals around respecting liberty as the one true universal good

>Fucks in this thread: Here, I made a straw man of someone who’s saying they’re a libertarian restricting the freedoms of others, now I’m gonna call you a sociopath. Bet you feel real silly now, don’t you?

>Most libertarians aren't against governments.
governments are restricted to protecting against physical violence, and correcting market failure - that's it.
everything else is at the whim of the voluntary action of the people.

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 21-48-13.png (605x143, 17K)

yes, yes it is

>but the government is still set out to serve the people.

That's not necessarily true. It's true in the sense that the intent of government is exactly that. The benefit of corporations (in a free market) is that they have competition in the marketplace, that ensures that they meet market demand and consumer preferences.

>This means a regulated market (one that doesn't have regulation influenced by corporate lobbying) is the optimum way to utilize the free market but not exploit the people.

That is indeed an ideal yes, but not in the sense of being good, but in the sense of being impossible. Large governments have always faced influence problems with corporations and other special interests. With a large government, influence-peddling is common-place and cannot be banned.

Influence of course is speech, and if we believe in free speech, we believe in allowing influence-peddling.

But even regardless of free speech ideals, banning influence is impossible. Influence is for spreading messages, but a message can spread by either acting, or not acting. Well if a message can be made with and without acting, then anything is a message, and therefore anything can be influence.

Part of believing in a small government is believing in natural restraints on corporate interests, and essentially "forcing" corporations (in the sense that they have no other choice) to work toward the market and for the people.

Gary Johnson was the best 2016 candidate by far

nobody wants to live in your shitty libertarian distopias.

yeah to social retards and 13 year old white kids

youtube.com/watch?v=HoM0U8Sa2G0

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 21-56-45.png (623x446, 233K)

>With a large government, influence-peddling is common-place and cannot be banned.
that's why you reduce the federal government to fucking sheep-status, and give more control over to the states.
you walk it back. give more power to the states, then give more power to the districts within the states, then give more power to the local cities etc.
all of this decentralizes the government, and gives more options for people to live where they would love to live.

>Influence of course is speech, and if we believe in free speech...
No. When people feel the costs to their decisions, people have a hard time manipulating them. Idiots like to peddle the idea that prices are determined by "culture, fad, fashion" etc.
No. they are determined by opportunity costs.
The way the law of supply and demand function has no bearing on whether or not we can rationally make decisions.
When you directly feel those opportunity costs, you have a significantly hard time "manipulating" people.

>That's not necessarily true. It's true in the sense that the intent of government is exactly that.
Let me put it like this, people vote for the leaders of the government, while the same cannot be said for corporations. The government is influenced by the people directly, and corporations are not. The people tend to not act against their own interest. This all means more authority should be placed in the government. It is, by all means, an extension of the people.
>Influence of course is speech, and if we believe in free speech, we believe in allowing influence-peddling.
You are confusing freedom of speech with freedom of the press. I do not believe in the latter.
Freedom of the press is what causes the government to be subverted by corporations for their own interests.

To elaborate on the freedom of the press issue; corporations can control the press, they cannot control speech.
This is why freedom of the press was a terrible mistake. Corporations will always abuse this power they have to subvert the government in their own favor.

They were never really libertarians, they were just wingers who thought they could use the rhetoric of libertarianism to sneak through their racial agenda. Since 2016 they feel like they don't have to hide anymore and so the mask has come off. Not that it was all that convincing in the first place.

Attached: fake libertarians.png (1290x1290, 349K)

We're in hiding and prepping because society is about to fall apart.

Replying to yourself and not even reading the fucking preview text in your own fucking image

we uhhh all turned into fascists or something like Jow Forums says we dont exist anymore
shut the fuck up

This
m.youtube.com/watch?v=5WPB2u8EzL8
See you on the other side

it doesn't matter user, everyone I tell doesn't believe it. They don't believe me when I say world wide famine is coming in less than 10 years.
A lot of anons find it hard to grasp that if a truck misses two days of deliveries a grocery stores shelves will be completely empty. and that disrupting the just in time delivery model is extremely easy.
People don't realize how razors edge the whole economic system we have now is.

extremely dry,
youtube.com/watch?v=MyzCPD3TgKI
if you're into dry yotube videos, watch some space weather. waiting for a nice Carrington event to knock out our power and set us back to the 1800s.

They realized being held to impossible principles was a losing strategy.

Source, was libertarian.

Attached: pick a side.jpg (450x450, 27K)

libertarianism is worse than communism.
you can't call yourself a nationalist if you agree with libertarian scum in any way.

maybe the libertarian nightmare is over

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 22-58-18.png (624x516, 277K)

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 23-01-39.png (525x544, 241K)

twitter.com/VickieG05941139/status/1141541413106192386

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 23-02-53.png (526x542, 79K)

btw

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-19 22-56-30.png (523x444, 160K)

The Libertarian party became #NeverTrump'ers, while the Libertarian base wanted to #LockHerUp.

Attached: 1547870226360.jpg (500x423, 93K)

Libertarianism and Conservatism are both weak ideologies whose entire purpose of existing is to make their followers comfortable with losing

Attached: 1503665554058.jpg (1920x1080, 1.11M)

After the fiasco that was plant Johnson Im a yanger now

Attached: 1537670881872.png (900x1040, 717K)

This

Also, pic related

Attached: 42806E91-9CEF-4CD2-918B-C96F1E25E32F.png (1231x441, 52K)

>Libertarianism: If you get rid of all regulations the chaos will ultimately produce good things
I don't know OP, where did they all go?

Retarded leafs are the worst part of Pol

from my observations

>businessy libertarians (koch bros) go full neoliberal
>mainstream libertarians go either full ancap or evolve into anti-sjw, pro "free speech", classical liberalesque conservatives (shapiro, peterson)
>paleo-con pro ron paul libertarians become more right-wing pro white nationalist

Thought about this the other night.

I was like, wait... is a global homogayplex satanic pedofile ruling class really truly worse then small tribal/gang type street battles.

I concluded that historically yet, the regular joe would indeed be better off and more vigilant with no state.

I mean seriously... think about it.

You're on to something