Thoughts on Lolbertarianism?

[The Foxtrot]

How about this one regulation where any leftover food for the day HAS to be thrown out? That's wasteful as hell. Give the food away, take it with you. If people can do that in their own home, why shouldn't restaurants be allowed that luxury? I'm sure some random shelter would appreciate it.

Having worked in a grocery store as a teenager, I can tell you that officially we'd take the chicken tenders, BBQ wings, etc. we'd make for that day in the deli and throw them away. Unofficially, it was an extra meal or two I didn't have to pay for. I think it's absolutely wasteful since that food is still perfectly edible and there's plenty of people who are poor that would appreciate a free rotisserie chicken.

 

[Angry Alt Right Nerd]

Libertarians operate under the mentality that obtaining power is something that simply just happens, like the roll of a die. Their warnings are empty - "Oh be careful what you do with that power, the die roll might land in my favor next time!" The die will never roll in their favor, their loser mentality makes them incapable of having any chance at obtaining power.

 

[Audit]

Libertarianism is a fool's ideology that rests upon a flawed understanding of the nature of power. Put simply, the power to enforce control over one thing or another doesn't disappear when you forbid the government from possessing it. The power still exists and will end up under the control of some other entity. The government has at least the nominal expectation of working for the benefit of the population. A corporation or plutocrat is expected to work to maximize their own benefit (e.g. profits, politics, illegal coomerism for degenerate elites). This will over time work to minimize the wealth and rights of the working class and small businesses in favor of the extremely wealthy and large corporations. As such, a well functioning libertarian country will trend toward brutal corpocracies and oligarchies with little to no non-violent options to unseat the new powers effectively operating as the government. It's a silly ideology that somehow manages to be even worse than communism, which usually at least holds a no-fag and no-tranny policy.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Libertarians are Republicans who are too ashamed to admit they're Republicans. They typically do nothing but defend Republicans and Republican policy, even when it conflicts with Libertarian policy (i.e. banning abortion and drugs).

Thinking that the free market will solve everything is laughable. Corporations will take all the power they can and the only thing that can stop them from doing so is the government. If you haven't learned that the past decade, you are legit mentally retarded

 

[The Last Stand]

Libertarians are Republicans who are too ashamed to admit they're Republicans. They typically do nothing but defend Republicans and Republican policy, even when it conflicts with Libertarian policy (i.e. banning abortion and drugs).

Libertarians don't like to be told what to do. Republicans want to control everything. I can see why they clash heads.

 

[Mothra1988]

Libertarians operate under the mentality that obtaining power is something that simply just happens, like the roll of a die. Their warnings are empty - "Oh be careful what you do with that power, the die roll might land in my favor next time!" The die will never roll in their favor, their loser mentality makes them incapable of having any chance at obtaining power.

Just replace the word libertarians with stormfags and this would be accurate. Your chances of obtaining power died with the gay vegan.

 

[SwanSwanson]

The only argument there is for libertarianism is that its better than the current regime and actually allows for change. It can either be something positive, like regular people actually banishing corporate rule, or something negative, like things reverting back to the previous system.

 

[Mothra1988]

The only argument there is for libertarianism is that its better than the current regime and actually allows for change. It can either be something positive, like regular people actually banishing corporate rule, or something negative, like things reverting back to the previous system.

Libertarianisn doesn't have to be installed like that. You can just adapt it where it makes sense and not adapt it where it is not feasible. It's an ideal imo. For example, do you really want the government telling you you can't have a gas lawn mower? California is doing that right now and other states want to adapt it. Just flushing any sense of liberty being important down the toilet over memes will just result with you living in a nanny state.

 

[Wesley Willis]

Populism and demagoguery have replaced ideology and principle. This is true for any school of thought. The words liberal and conservative no longer have any meaning, while libertarianism and progressivism have followed suit in the last decade.

 

[The Ugly One]

I recently applied for a job, and its COVID-19 vaccination policy reminded me of a massive failure of the lolbert mind-virus on the right. Lolberts simply have no response to the use of mass-scale economic power to control people if it isn't directly tied to a government threatening to put someone in prison. The WEF isn't a government, Pfizer isn't a government, and the company I just applied at isn't one, either. But they all collaborated to force people to get that fake vaccine, not because it did anything valuable, as it's the least effective "vaccine" the pharma industry has probably ever produced, but they could, just so they could show that they're in charge.

At the time, the lolbert/conservatarian response to any call for a state government to do something to protect its citizens from one of the largest violations of bodily autonomy in history was BIG GLUBBERRMINT, and they all cried and shrieked that telling a corporation they can't act as velvet gloves for the WEF's iron fist is a violation of the sacred right of the free market to tell you what goes in your veins. As a consequence, despite the various soft and hard measures to coerce people into "vaccination" being massively unpopular in red states, Florida was the only state in the country to take a real stand. Greg Abbott in Texas, shucked, jived, and issued a half-assed EO, but a measure to actually restrain corporate power died because the lolbert-leaners cried about Muh Bizness Fweedumb.

You bring up the prospect of passing--gasp--a LAW--to tell corporation to mind its own fucking business when it comes to my own basic health decisions, and lolberts piss and shid and fard about how the government has no right to tell a corporation that it has no right to tell me what to do.

This is, of course, aside from the fact that corporations can't even exist without laws. They are purely a legal construct, and their unique ability to gather up mass-scale economic power comes from their unique legal definition, so the idea that the government can define corporations, but not define any limits on their power, is a special kind of insanity. This is usually when lolberts bring up some stupid "two wrongs don't make a right!" argument, as though any day now, lolberts are totally going to end the 17th-century legal foundations of the capitalism they pose as the champions of.