Morality and Libertarianism Idiocy

I find libertarianism an intellectually insulting ideology, its proponents often have preverse ‘moralities’ and justify a rampant selfishness under a bourgeois elitism masquerading as intellect; it is the type of movement that capture people that question the dominate narrative, funneling them into a movement even more supporting of the current paradigm.  Ironic.

To be clear, I consider myself somewhat of an ammoralist/pragmatist in that conventional morality is more of a control mechanism than anything good someone should subscribe too, that being said, I understand what is ‘good’ or ‘evil’ or what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, but merely chose to not engage in it (Beyond good and evil!) , whereas Libertarianism suffer for a dangerous self-deception that their ‘morality’ is ‘right/good’.

I’ve talked about some key Libertarianism ideals such as the myth of natural rights, but at its root their major belief is a type of ‘live and let live’ with a heavy capitalism bend to it, then money is intrinsically ‘good’.  Now, beyond the fact that any ideology worships money (how easy does the movement betray its jewish origins…) isn’t particularly adapted to life beyond the narrow capitalism bubble, it leaves the person very unable to process reality in any meaningful real way.

I have talked to a lot of libertarians, and they universally come from one of two paths: former military or lawyers, which despite the vast differences, I think it because they both elevate their own opinions far beyond everyone else around them.  I seriously haven’t met a lib. who wasn’t one of these two.  Anyway the supposed superiority is why they are lured to the movement.

The real question to ask oneself, is if they were so superior, would they NEED to justify it, or be ‘moral’ about it?  If you were the badest guy around you would just MAKE your kingdom, take what you want etc, what Libertarianism is, is a way for weak-bodied intellectuals to justify this magical kingdom where they alone get the rewards for HARD WORK without actually having to do…you know anything hard that makes you a MAN.  You can see this in their ‘golden rule’ of “do no harm to others” which is about the only rule they have.

I have argued at length with the utter stupidity where I have had them argue to me that it was ‘wrong’ for me to take an apple from a land owner that owns all the land around me because that was stealing, whereas it was somehow justified that he got all that land stealing it ‘legally’.  “Why is it ok he stole everything from me in business, and I can’t hit him or steal it back from him?”  I ask, but the question gets routed to a circular logic loop of that ‘business equals good, and do no harm (of which business is incapable of)’.  I was told that if I had a problem I should solve it through court.  Through COURT!  What a bourgeois conception of reality, it is inconceivable that violence is the ultimate answer one way or another, and to not want to elevate the lawyer class to even higher demigod-status is unthinkable in their worldview.

This is where the cowardice and ultimately its ‘morality’ is rooted in, it is afraid of violence, and its proponents want to eliminate the great equalizer FROM the equation, with the implication they think they will be able to thrive in this narrow confine.  It is kind of like playing a game and modifying the rules to benefit only you, to shore up your weakness.

Libertarians have espoused some pretty insane things to me, and I have asked others about these ideas and they tend to agree with them, one that comes to mind is that the government should basically be dismantled short of national defense, “including no roads?” I asked, yes, roads should be PRIVATE.  When I try to point out that roads serve a national interest, this holds no sway because if they were important the ‘market will see to it they are built’.  To them the market is literally a god-like entity.

The truly biggest problem is you are deceiving yourself.  Instead of just telling themselves they want to subjugate or take advantage of people, they lie that it is ‘fair’ in some sort of edited capitalism.  It’s similar to pre-pill men telling themselves they want to be friends with a hot girl, when in reality they just want to fuck her.  If lib. holds ANY sway for you, you need to think why this is, the game we find ourselves in is so fucked and corrupt that any ‘movement’ given to us has to be regarded with intense skepticism, and it’s a controlled opposition anyway, one that those with the money will continue to stay in power as the only equalizing of violence is completely outlawed.

I like this quote the best to sum this up:ek37


26 thoughts on “Morality and Libertarianism Idiocy

  1. Pingback: Morality and Libertarianism Idiocy |

  2. I enjoy your writings on a regular basis and usually enjoy pointing my browser towards your site. Respectfully I’ll say I can’t disagree with your summations about Libertarians strongly enough. My guess is you’ve associated with people who may look at Libertarianism with a narrow field of vision.
    I see Libertarianism as a political movement that embraces all tenants of freedom and not just the self-serving viewpoints. Capitalism, being the most free political system we’ve come up with, is chosen more or less as a default economic system. I believe it’s freedom from government over-sight that is the strongest point of libertarian philosophy.
    Much like the legion followers of socialism paint rainbows and blue skies over their oppressors; Libertarians wear rose-colored glasses in regards to the all-is-good belief in capitalism. But I think the mature intellects of the movement know it’s more about freedom of choice and the ability to carry on a life unimpeded by bureaucracy that drive Libertarians forward.
    Regardless of your root beliefs in pragmatism Mr. Knight, you have to admit that “Less government always equals more fun!”
    No hate here, just good-natured debate. Cheers!

  3. A funny quote by Rogers. Indeed, LOTR is a childish fantasy. I recommend the first reading of it as a child, not as a teen. As for Ayn Rand, I never cared enough to read Atlas Shrugged. Did I miss much? The thing with inventions is that sooner or later someone else would have the same idea. As for discoveries, it’s unusual for them to benefit financially their originators (beyond winning some prize that was set up beforehand).

    I recall that you were interested in the process that might be labelled as voluntary ‘positive eugenics’. Here is a link brought to my attention by someone that I am in a disagreement (about another matter – intangibility of immortality) with:

  4. You need to meet some libertarian licensed professional engineers. Most are self-made and integrated into local (capitalist entrepreneurial) power structures. Those that aren’t libertarian tend to live off public funds through state or federal contracts.

    Also, most STEM professional libertarians I know are gun nuts that trust neither large corporations or government. But perhaps that’s because I live in Arkansas.

  5. Never lie to yourself. About who you are, and what you want.

    I got a lot from Atlas Shrugged. WN might be considered a racial AS. And I agree with the idea that our struggle will be won when the lights of NYC are extinguished.

    John Galt, Fransisco and Dagnar are ideal revolutionaries. They have all the emotion of passion, tempered by intellect.

    • “And I agree with the idea that our struggle will be won when the lights of NYC are extinguished.”

      You have a nice utopian Island to sit and watch that happen from too? You probably won’t have internet…

  6. Rand (and Randians in general) doesn’t acknowledge that coercive forces can exist outside the realm of government enterprise. Atlas offered her characters a nice little utopian sanctuary to run to when the world collapsed. No infirm people in that sanctuary. Very few if any children either, for that matter. BUT she did offer an interesting perspective about social conditioning and problems inherent with the entitlement mentality. I’d say she got it approximately 33 percent right. If her work had been intentionally satirical, I’d give it a big thumbs up. Unfortunately, she considered it to be serious. All of it.

    I also think that she might have had a condition of autism at a time before it would have been properly diagnosed. Exhibit A: the circumlocutory, voluminous, and unbeliveably logorrheic John Galt speech as evidence.

  7. ” Instead of just telling themselves they want to subjugate or take advantage of people, they lie that it is ‘fair’ in some sort of edited capitalism.”

    Of course, moralistic preening is often key in ideologically blind rationalizations. It’s important to feel good about oneself while backing someone ELSE into the wet end of life’s toilet brush.

  8. I once had a meaningful conversation with a prostitute (before I fucked her). Actually, my sense of humor I think helped lighten the mood (even though I was paying her and could have just acted like a jerk).

    It’s possible to stimulate multiple areas of your brain. The world is not simply black or white.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s