- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What happened to the libertarian movement re: immigration?
Posted on 1/17/26 at 8:37 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 1/17/26 at 8:37 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Neither extreme collectivism nor extreme individualism can survive long out in the wild.
These must be balanced.
0
Posted on 1/17/26 at 8:38 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Libertarians by nature are no borders and free immigration. Not sure why you are surprised.
This is not true at all.
Correct. Libertarians aren’t anarchists.
Posted on 1/17/26 at 8:41 am to BigPerm30
quote:
Libertarians by nature are no borders and free immigration. Not sure why you are surprised.
Libertarianism, like most other political labels, is a loosely organized school of thought. If they're honest, most people of any political persuasion understand the need for secure borders for their own property and, by extension, for their country. If they claim otherwise, they may be either a liar, an anarchist (used here to mean someone who literally wants disarray) or dumb.
This post was edited on 1/17/26 at 8:48 am
Posted on 1/17/26 at 9:02 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Existence of a massive welfare state is a nonstarter for open borders philosophy.
It is in the Libertarian Party's doctrine they believe in open borders and no state welfare. Which in theory should work.
However today, they harp more on the open borders than eliminating welfare.
Posted on 1/17/26 at 9:05 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
As MAGA I want targeted government intervention to prevent the average person from simply being a sheep to the wolves of the rich and powerful.
How is that not EXACTLY what I said populism was about?
The part that you left out is that you want to use government to " to prevent the average person from simply being a sheep to the wolves of the rich and powerful," AND SO DO THE PEOPLE ON THE LEFT.
The only difference—and it's a big one—is that they define the "rich and powerful" differently than you. According to them, YOU are the rich and powerful. If you're male and white, YOU are the wolf who needs to have government used against them.
That's why this:
quote:
you think you're being virtuous for fighting with one hand tied behind your back.
You're willing to let those with more access to the levers of power take advantage of you simply because of your "principles."
you're willing to let it wither to crony capitalism and corruption just so you can continue the illusion that your principles matter when others don't play by the same rules.
Is just silly bullshite.
In your world what you end up with is a situation which competing tribes who all hate each other and all think the other tribe is responsible for their supposed "ruin" (despite the fact that we live in the most comfortable society the world has ever seen) are constantly trying to use to force of government against each other. And you won't always win that war. In fact, you'll lose as often as you'll win.
In my world the government mostly leaves me and everybody else alone and I control most of the factors relative to my success in life, not the government, and not people I disagree with. In my world I retain the ability to resist government because the fundamental Constitutional protections for citizens against government remain intact. In your world they don't. They go away one by one.
So all of this, "You won't fight because you care about principes" reveals a low IQ that is incapable of examining history to see what the real threat is. The real threat is government. It always has been. Rich people—on their own, without government—have never rounded people up and put them in camps. They've never disarmed the populace. They've never publicly executed people for "sedition" when they were just speaking out against the government.
But government has done that a bunch.
So my stance is based on preserving the protections we have against the real threat, not giving it more and more power so that I can use it against my perceived enemies. Because it WILL turn around and bite you. You think you can be a snake charmer but eventually the cobra will turn on you. It always has and it always does.
You idiot populists can't fathom that, though. Your attention span is about three seconds long and immediate gratification is all you can muster.
You don't like crony capitalism? Me either. The way I would reduce it is to reduce the power that the government has to intervene in the situation so that government couldn't create that situation.
The way you would try to do it is to increase the power of the government and use it against the entities you deem Them.
Finally, the big factor that makes populism work is that it demands an unreasonable degree of discontent which it feeds with constant conspiracy theories and doomsday predictions. Despite the "crony capitalism," "disappearing of the middle class" sloganeering, we live in the most financially comfortable society that has ever existed. Our poor people live as well as middle class people did 100 years ago. Our middle class lives better than most rich people did 100 years ago. The average American has 30% more disposable income than the average European, and a similar greater percentage of living space. We have the least racism, the most redress for the government violating civil rights, the most egalitarian society in history, with the most freedoms. "Crony capitalism" didn't prevent any of that from happening, but you know what could have? Government.
All of that was achieved despite "crony capitalism" having existed for our entire history, from the framers of the Constitution right on up to what we have today. There's nothing different about the way the rich use government today vs ever except that the government is more powerful now than it ever has been in America.
In Europe they are arresting people for what they tweeted or said. Mind crimes. We'll end up the same way if conservatism doesn't make a comeback.
quote:
Many conservatives have fallen into the trap of idealism, but the world doesn't follow the rules they want.
Again, low IQ analysis. It's BECAUSE government doesn't follow the rules we would want that conservatives want to retain the protections against it. Populists for some reason think they can trust government. It's the conservatives who know that we can't.
This post was edited on 1/17/26 at 9:22 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:37 pm to CitizenK
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:41 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
One of the defining characteristics of the libertarian movement/party, at least historically, was an intense clash between those who supported open orders and those who did not.
The latter no longer exist within the movement
Most of those guys in the "latter" you reference fell victim to the libertarian to fascism pipeline so they're supporting different ideas these days
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:42 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
As MAGA I want targeted government intervention to prevent the average person from simply being a sheep to the wolves of the rich and powerful.
Differentiate this from Bernie Sanders or AOC
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:45 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
The libertarians who believed in borders joined the MAGA movement and went over the wall as republicans. The libertarians who still believe in abolishing all borders, labor laws, or occupational licenses, entitlements, etc took the money from China and the left and have joined them.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News