Why did Libertarianism fail?
>>522583433Because it's a retarded ideology for teenagers
>>522583433Kikes use markets to replace you, thus the freer the market the more browns you get, simple as.
Nobody likes the color yellow.
because it didn't offer anything>how about we take cronyism, and replace it with cronyismlol who cares
>>522583433Because (((they))) paid money to make it fail
Because it doesn't make sense. You can't stop shitheads from acting like shitheads just by saying>woah buddy, really wish you wouldn't do that
>>522583433BITCH HAVE YOU SEEN THE GOLD PRICE LATELY?WHAT DO YOU MEAN "FAIL"?
>>522583433Klaus Schwab is OPhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYZz2thqAVU
>>522583433It didn’t. We’re here laughing at all of you.
>>522583433Failed? We’re all getting rich on gold, silver, and Bitcoin while you’re fighting for the “rights” of mentally illl men who get off on pretending they’re women.
>>522583433Libertarianism has never been tried.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6uVV2Dcqt0
>>522583433I've been a proponent of libertarianism / classical liberalism in my country since the 1990s, back when we had Orkut. I will not identify myself, but brazilians will know who I am and some here might even have read an article or a book of mine. Libertarianism was far more succesful in Argentina and Brazil than the USA, but the struggle is the same everywhere and everything branches off the Mises Institutes.Here's why libertarianism fail:>addiction to triviality. Libertarians waste too much time idealizing utopias and having to explain who will build the roads instead of asking why the state doesn't build roads>vanity. Libertarians use philosophy and economics as a tool for vanity (owning the libs), much alike atheists use atheism. This turned libertarianism into a tool for self-promotion, which results in a generation of new politicians that drop libertarianism immediately once it is done promoting their grift>oblivious to historical context. Libertarianism exists within principles exclusively. They ignore all historical theory and actual geopolitics and geography, and in this regard even marxists are better than libertarians. Sticking to libertarian doctrines today, per example, would mean defending open borders for 1.5 billion indians and thus, the ultimate destruction of the only society that can even entertain libertarianism>no moral stance. Libertarianism is another enlightenment mess which sells God for paradise. They want freedom from all unchosen bonds and commitments, such as standards, religion and community. They fall for the same trap of the Enlightenment, they do not understand only a handful of people in the world are civilized and that they need to protect themselves against the hordeLibertarianism itself is not truly special. Rothbard is the king of mid. Hoppe is right-wing Yuval Harari. And the entire philosophy sits atop a tautology that if people only acted to maximize their utilities, their personal utility would be maximized.
>>522583433Because we live in the collectivist timeline
>>522583433Unfortunate slogan but a great Metallica song
>>522583433no spine makes one corrupted by capitalism
freedom degenerates into tyranny - the seeking of one's own (or one's group) freedom at the expense of depriving others of it: capitalism is not a system of freedom, it is a system of enslavement
>>522583433
>>522583592This, they actually believe they’re live outside of society.
>>522583966This lol. Leader of the libertarian is now a kike. They also managed to convince people Trump and Vance are libertarians. There is no escape from Zog.
>>522583433Because>let each just do what they mayDoesn't work when you have meddlesome Jews and narcissists in society. Like communism, it's an ideal where if human beings weren't what they are, would work just fine. But you can't just pretend humans aren't what they are and hope the ideology changes them.
Libertarians know that they can't just make shit up so they manufacturered a pseudo-philisophical/political movement to act as the backdrop for everything they do. To be discarded once they've achieved what they needed. See Trump and his techbro billionaire cronies who all weirdly had a bleeding heart lolbertarian phase once upon a time.
True libertarianism has never been tried.
>>522586578you're retarded
>>522588004>>522587643Libertarianism, I insist, achieved its goals. It is a tool for self-promotion and vanity exclusively. It is the internet atheism of politics. It is not intended towards the betterment of society, but the promotion of libertarians who use it as a tool of vanity. It provides simple axiomatic solutions to complex issues and exists within an ahistorical context. Libertarians like Molyneux will even go as far as say, "Let's pretend history does not exist." Hoppe's book on a libertarian short history of the world is pathetic, Harari-tier of nonsense.Libertarianism has succeeded, in it libertarians have gotten to politics (and immediately abandoned everything), have rugpulled people into buying their meme currency, and have the luxury of remaining the exactly same since Rothbard decided to write his boring manifesto in the 1970s.The most succesful people who once stuck around the libertarian crowd are exactly those who have abandoned libertarianism once it was no longer convenient. And that is by design. You have the first libertarian president (a troglodyte autist who never read anything from non-libertarians and cites his favorite authors like one cites a list that might as well be Mises Institute writers or the local visitors to the nearest synagogue) banning free currency trade in his own country, ffs.The dream of libertarianism is a big grift for self-promotion among teenagers who want to win debates. Once you find a way to get rich with it, you quit.Libertarianism is another example of political philosophy as a tool for elite replacement rather than genuine sincere desire of change.
Because Americans hate freedom.
>>522583433It failed in 1929, everything before that was le epic chungus small (10% of GDP) government and everybody dropped that shit and turned to welfare state. It failed because inequality fueled revolutions and at some point poor people just refuse to shoot at other poor people so billionaires can have fresh (poor) children to molest, and also because the market by itself can't operate and can't get itself out of downward spirals. It's just not a working ideology, social-democracy is just what works
>>522583433Power goes to the organized minority, always and everywhere. The unorganized mass of individuals cannot compete. Simple as.
>>522583433Who would’ve thought giving corporations more power would be a bad idea.
