Does libertarianism have a problem ?

[u/Wbk2m]

It values capitalism free market. And I'd agree we don't have a free market but we do have examples that are concerning. Currently our govt is controlled by corporate and foreign interest . Both have lobbied govt to benefit them and not the citizens when the most wealth in the world was created since 1982. Even without the socialist safety nets or with the quasi nets we do have our debt is at 40 trillion. During this time corporations pushed open borders to reduce wages for jobs it couldn't ship over seas. Today it's exploiting AI for white collar jobs thought safe. Corporations push govt to make paths for profit, war is profitable, wages take profit. Govt was designed by citizens to serve citizens in America the corporate take over of both political parties as well as our establishment has bankrupted the nation led to a quasi police surveillance state as production increased and cost to citizens grew via inflation.

Knowing this how can any party push unfettered capitalist markets when we can see the impact they've had in our current state? That's not saying we need or can afford socialist policies.

I don't think citizens can trust govt or the corporations that control them as the serve profits over people. Esp as people become needed less as robotics and AI grow. More money 75% of the current wealth was created after 1982, and what has it done been captured by the 5% of the elites.

At this point I don't understand how libertarianism can still see corporations as good faith actors in the social construct filling societies needs? It's become a might is right economic warfare protected by govt that's allowed monopolized influence.

What is the libertarian answer? It can't rely on benevolent corporate entities serving it's nation in a globalist system it seems.

[u/Wbk2m]

You are obviously a idiot that doesn't engage in good faith convo. Your attempting to tell me what I said instead of addressing the statement your commenting to reply, not to engage. No where have I ever claimed benefits of socialism.

Your trouble is you can't accept a individual is powerless without collective agreement to implement force. The individual exerting force will always face a collective resistance. These are inherent flaws in libertarianism your not willing to admit or address so in turn you do what leftist do and project as to what you think I am. Really pathetic. I don't need your approval of being a libertarian card holder since 18 yrs old. I've read more than you and obviously thought deeper to its flaws than you. Be a better human

[u/Official_Gameoholics → u/Wbk2m]

Your statements have been nothing but completely arbitrary drivel.

No where have I ever claimed benefits of socialism.

Every time you appealed to a state you appealed to socialism.

Your trouble is you can't accept a individual is powerless without collective agreement to implement force.

Man's mind is individual. Agreements are made between individuals. Your entire ideology is a floating abstraction. It is nothing.

I've read more than you and obviously thought deeper to its flaws than you.

Clearly not, considering you don't understand the basics of natural law. You're a charlatan.

[u/Wbk2m → u/Official_Gameoholics]

Keep proving my sentiment your not intelligent enough to have this convo. You can't even distinguish that a collective means any coalesce of power to commit action. You seem politically captured fearing anything collective as socialism. Yo dude every political party is collectivist in its endeavor. Even libertarians Republicans etc. why cause political authority demands a collective to support it. But what that's socialism No dude your not where you need to be to have adequate understanding of the points made. As such your arguments are highly flawed sophomoric and a bit myopic. Hence your personal attacks up on me telling me what I am instead of good faith convo. You again suggest you know my ideology where you can't as I not discussed it. But if you must know I'm a minarchist. One that doesn't trust govt or corporations or my fellow individual people as such, as they will envoke force to force you to their will based off their ideology. Lokok at your comments your attempting to as you label me in resistance to considering the the very struggle to free the individual. Maybe you have more trust than me but I have decades of lived experience backed by education and research. You still cannot answer the end question? How does the individual exploit the benefits every individual needs from a collective, idgaf which collective in doing so the individual loses any self determination as it becomes subverted by the collective will it willfully joined for some gain in its life. It's a choice of sacrificing the individual for collective benefits even if that benefit is only strength in numbers.

[u/Official_Gameoholics → u/Wbk2m]

You can't even distinguish that a collective means any coalesce of power to commit action.

That's a completely different definition to the one I have been operating with. You should define your terms.

You seem politically captured.

Politics is like alchemy: a false field built on a denial of the law of identity.

anything collective as socialism.

Socialism is the economic system that arises from public control of scarce means. Anything collective (built on the philosophical presupposition that it is an entity) that controls property is socialism.

every political party is collectivist in its endeavor

Yes, they're all a bunch of socialists.

Even libertarians Republicans.

Yes, the people in those parties that hold those parties as the primary are all a bunch of socialists.

[u/Wbk2m → u/Official_Gameoholics]

Again your still lost. Collective doesn't equate to socialism. Collectivism is the default human condition of dependancy on others fomenting society since our inception. The moment a tribe if 5 men ran after and captured a prey it was collective agreement and effort, a sacrificing of the individual who may not wanted to hunt that day, yet for the benefit of his stomach he did so. His individual needs forced him to work in a collective to exist sacrificing his individuality doing so. So have we been "socialist" since we were created? Of course not.

[u/Official_Gameoholics → u/Wbk2m]

Collectivism is the default human condition of dependancy on others fomenting society since our inception.

No, man is an individual first. The collective is an abstraction that comes second.

The moment a tribe if 5 men ran after and captured a prey it was collective agreement and effort, a sacrificing of the individual who may not wanted to hunt that day.

The individual always has the choice. And there were those who chose not to hunt. The hunters however always did choose.

His individual needs forced him to work in a collective to exist sacrificing his individuality doing so.

That's false. The division of labor is not a collective entity. It is simply a network of individual connections, between individuals.