You must log in or register to comment.

ziq wrote

I don't see how a libertarian can willingly participate in an authoritarian institution, it's like asking an anti-logger which logging method is best.


dolly_wally OP wrote

Maybe so, but I would like to think that most Libertarians would understand that it would have to infiltrate from the inside, slowly. Anarchy is the other route, but anarchy against said institution will only be met with military resistance, a military resistance that would most likely easily mow over.

To be realistic, -but not to put words in other libertarians mouths - I would think that most libertarians would not want the complete destruction of our government that Anarchy suggests, but would rather to have the government, and some of its services in tact yet remain as small as possible.

I could be wrong on that assumption. But I am far from an anarchist, though I realize it can be effective as a vehicle for change. I still enjoy civilization, and I think that some government could aid in that, so long as it remains small in size and control.

I believe that if we had a formiddable candidate, with a clear, constructive message, that isn't so radical and far from the mainstream, we could win a major seat while slowly removing regulations that hinder freedom.


MoralOrel wrote

I didn't vote in this election, despite calls from many "Libertarians" to vote for Trump, which I view as completely asinine. By voting, you choose to uphold a large scale Federal system, that will only grow more authoritarian as time goes on, no matter which party is in charge. I think a lot of true believers in libertarian philosophy would prefer to see the system change by other means; namely the dismantling of the Federal system as a whole, to the point where there really wouldn't be a president to vote for.