Right-wing Libertarianism as a first world luxury

[Christopher Johnson]

Hello everyone!

I have a question, and could use some of your help:

I have noticed that right-wing "libertarian" thinking is popular in the US and Europe. However, I have not seen these ideas become very popular in the 3rd world. Sometimes I get the feeling that right-libertarianism is kinda like luxury for people that can afford to think like that. Nearly every right-wing libertarian I know either: Is a small business owner, is a freelance worker, or works for a "really cool" boss that pays him (I'm yet to meet female right-libertarians) well and "affords him plenty freedom". Do you have any better insight into this situation? Have you observed something different?

Let me know. I'm thinking this could be a good point to bring up when arguing with right-libertarians and ancaps. Although knowing right-libertarians, I'm sure they will give and absolutely ridiculous, racist, and oppressive explanation. Still, I think it is a good idea to channel the discussion this way, as right-libertarians usually don't like talking about the 3rd world.

Thank you in advance.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I wouldn't say right-"libertarianism" is popular in the US at all, and in Europe it is almost completely a non-issue. This sort of "libertarianism" might appear popular on the Internet, where the small minority of libertarians is extremely loud and obnoxious, but yeah, to steal a phrase from Strix I would guess there are more LaRouchites than right-"libertarians" worldwide.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

Some of the right-wing libertarians that I talked to conceded as an obvious fact that this ideology is exclusively for white, heterosexual middle-upper class males. I think it's rather obvious anyway. You can have some females or homosexuals in between, but ultimately it's dominated by the ones I've mentioned. It doesn't seem that they are hiding this fact, from my experience anyway.

[Christopher Johnson]

Thanks for the input.

Yes, I've only argued with 2 right-libertarians in person; the rest have been on the internet. I gotta say, the internet ones are a lot more condescending and have such crappy attitudes, one almost feels compelled to get them off their high horse.

Regarding their limited target audience. Do you know how they rationalize it? Do they even try to? And how do they ever think they could come to power if they are catering to such an exclusive group?

[tuwix]

Hello everyone!

I have a question, and could use some of your help:

I have noticed that right-wing "libertarian" thinking is popular in the US and Europe. However, I have not seen these ideas become very popular in the 3rd world. Sometimes I get the feeling that right-libertarianism is kinda like luxury for people that can afford to think like that. Nearly every right-wing libertarian I know either: Is a small business owner, is a freelance worker, or works for a "really cool" boss that pays him (I'm yet to meet female right-libertarians) well and "affords him plenty freedom". Do you have any better insight into this situation? Have you observed something different?

Let me know. I'm thinking this could be a good point to bring up when arguing with right-libertarians and ancaps. Although knowing right-libertarians, I'm sure they will give and absolutely ridiculous, racist, and oppressive explanation. Still, I think it is a good idea to channel the discussion this way, as right-libertarians usually don't like talking about the 3rd world.

Thank you in advance.

I don't know will you recognize Poland a first world country and especially 25 years ago? Unfortunately we have some idiots in Poland who follow that religion faithfully. And the reason of that is that some of state capitalist TV chiefs allow a one of right-wing libertarian guru to be on screens in hope that he would disgust a classic capitalism in eyes of public opinion. The effect was opposite and it was happening in times when state capitalism was falling down and classic capitalism was overtaking a country.

I think the popularity of this free-market religion is dependent upon possibility to advertise it. It's the case of all ideologies. If Bakuninism were stronger advertised than Marxism, now we'd have more Bakuninists than Marxists.

[Kingfish]

kinda like luxury for people that can afford to think like that.

Its funny that’s a claim I often hear being used against members of the left.


Onto the main point of your question; for the people in the position you described it is only natural for them to adopt libertarian views as based their experience capitalism really does reward initiative and hardwork and its the big bad state who is holding them back or bogging them down in red tape.


Not only that but it offers easy and simple solutions and is an ideology that can be adopted/accepted without too much work or deviation (in fact it could be seen as the true vindication) from those ingrained cultural values.
Honestly I would be more surprised if people of the category you mentioned were not libertarian or at least conservative.



Let me know. I'm thinking this could be a good point to bring up when arguing with right-libertarians and ancaps. Although knowing right-libertarians, I'm sure they will give and absolutely ridiculous, racist, and oppressive explanation. Still, I think it is a good idea to channel the discussion this way, as right-libertarians usually don't like talking about the 3rd world.

Not really they will just argue that its government or “socialist” intervention that is bogging down the third world, which will then be followed by comparisons to China and Singapore. Hence unless you really know your history and statistics regarding globalisation youll be unlikely to make any real progress.


Likewise don’t get into a moral argument with them as those subjective and emotional areas are ones that cant be swayed by an argument with an entirely different foundation. Fortunately Marxist analysis isn’t based on a moral argument so you can safely avoid this ugly and unfruitful area without any detriment to your reasoning.


The trick is to engage them in using their own reasoning and values. For instance demonstrating to them that
- a libertarian society is not efficient
- resources under capitalism are not distributed based on merit
- the corporatism we see today is the inevitable result of capitalism
Will have a far more powerful effect on them than any argument you can make on morality

[Prole]

Libertarianism and other "free-market will save everything" ideologies are usually made up of people who, usually incorrectly, believe they would do better by themselves without society at large. The people that take these ideas to heart usually don't question HOW it is they received their wealth or ability to support themselves and incorrectly believe they did it all by themselves.

Frankly in today's age, where information is made available to everyone freely, if you are unable to understand at least the basics of the symbiotic relationship between all things within this universe you are incredibly ignorant to the connections around you. Ironically these are the same connections that define an economy. I guess this explains why those who deny symbiotic relationships also deny the need for a collaborative economy.

In case it isn't obvious glaringly obvious enough in my post I believe the future of humanity to be one of mutual collaboration and technological progress, not radical individualism that merely serves to cut off the nose to spite the face.

[Christopher Johnson]

Its funny that’s a claim I often hear being used against members of the left.


Onto the main point of your question; for the people in the position you described it is only natural for them to adopt libertarian views as based their experience capitalism really does reward initiative and hardwork and its the big bad state who is holding them back or bogging them down in red tape.


Not only that but it offers easy and simple solutions and is an ideology that can be adopted/accepted without too much work or deviation (in fact it could be seen as the true vindication) from those ingrained cultural values.
Honestly I would be more surprised if people of the category you mentioned were not libertarian or at least conservative.




Not really they will just argue that its government or “socialist” intervention that is bogging down the third world, which will then be followed by comparisons to China and Singapore. Hence unless you really know your history and statistics regarding globalisation youll be unlikely to make any real progress.


Likewise don’t get into a moral argument with them as those subjective and emotional areas are ones that cant be swayed by an argument with an entirely different foundation. Fortunately Marxist analysis isn’t based on a moral argument so you can safely avoid this ugly and unfruitful area without any detriment to your reasoning.


The trick is to engage them in using their own reasoning and values. For instance demonstrating to them that
- a libertarian society is not efficient
- resources under capitalism are not distributed based on merit
- the corporatism we see today is the inevitable result of capitalism
Will have a far more powerful effect on them than any argument you can make on morality
Well, I've heard this claim being used against liberal "out-of -touch" college students who apparently live in a bubble and don't have to deal with "big government", "taxes", and "undocummented immigrants taking their jobs", "minorities invading their neighborshoods", etc.

I don't see why how this accusation could be seriouly used against Marxists or Anarchist, especially by right wingers who support the preferred system of the most privileged in the world.

[Christopher Johnson]

With regards to the identity of right-libertarians, you are right. I can see how they can relate to this ideology, inside their small bubble of privilege; I guess these people find self-evident what I would see as mental acrobatics.

And yes, I agree that the moral argument isn't a great route. I've seen many liberals struggle to argue with right-libertarians because: 1. They accept the premises, 2. They resource to moral argument.

I have seen some keynesian liberals "own" right-libertarians (cause honestly, you don't even need to be a revolutionary leftist too see how flawed right-libertarian ideology is).

But yes, I usually rejected their basic economic and political arguments, and try to frame the discussion my way, putting forward a materialist class analysis, and focusing more on the circumstances in which their "rational actors" operate. They certainly don't appreciate it when I do this and get a little bit irritated.

[barbelo]

What are you saying, they are very popular in Latin America, from Chile to Brazil.

Libertarian economics had a big influence on Chile formation, for example.

EDIT: Also, I would say that right wing libertarianism have a big "populist" and lumpen-proletariat appeal that touches many low and low-middle class brazilians and argentinians. I just traveled to Rio Grande do Sul and Montevideo this summer and I saw a poster written "Less Marx, more Mises" on it, plastered in a bus stop in the middle of nowhere. It made me laugh a lot.

[Redistribute the Rep]

Here's the demographics. Hardly surprising:


Compared to Americans overall, libertarians are composed of a much larger portion of men than women. More than two-thirds (68 percent) of libertarians are men, while 32 percent are women. They are also racially homogeneous, with nearly all (94 percent) libertarians identifying as non-Hispanic whites. They also skew significantly younger. More than 6-in-10 (62 percent) libertarians are under the age of 50, including one-quarter (25 percent) who are under the age of 30.

Literally the KKK might be more diverse.

http://publicreligion.org/2013/11/libertariangotw/

[The Modern Prometheus]

The only right wing Libertarians I've talked to are basically Conservatives who think that the government (especially the evil Obama, Socialist, Anarchist, Communist, etc Liberal regime) should stay out of their business unless it's to benefit them. They tend to fall into 2 categories either middle class kids who have had it beaten into their heads by generations past the Capitalism is good and that is about as far as their thinking goes. They may have had a few "easy" jobs but overall they are rather new to the workforce and rather naive as well as they haven't been around much and know next to nothing about the world outside their normal group of people. They usually end up as just bitter old Conservatives once they realize that their Utopian right Libertarian dream will not come through.

The second and most annoying group are your upper middle class brats who have coasted through life on their parents money and influence without ever having to put in a honest days work in their life. Now i am not the type to bash on people just for lucking into money but when you luck into a fortune without doing any of the work to obtain the capitol you certainly have no right to complain about how the government is using your "hard earned tax dollars" on people on government assistance, helping those damn illegal immigrants who come here and take our jawbs :rolleyes: and those damn Socialists who want to put controls on their lovely free market. When the only reason you aren't on the welfare line is because you fell ass over heels into money you certainly have no right to rag on some poor person for collecting assistance so they don't starve to death. Not that you have a right to do that anyway but when your getting your income from your family you really have no right to open your mouth about it. Few things piss me off more then the upper classes raging on the working class when they haven't the foggiest notion what it's like to have to do without once in their life.

Right Libertarianism seems to be a entirely North American phenomenon which is funny because you get people who say Libertarian Communism is not a ideology. Despite Libertarianism outside the US and Canada being almost exclusively left Libertarianism and of course Libertarian Communism outdates so called Right Libertarianism by a few centuries.

They are a sad bunch of losers really who tend to shout the loudest and say the least. That's the reason why it seems like there are more of them now when in reality there is not. In fact outside of one upper class brat who my now ex g/f briefly dated i have never even actually talked to one. It's sort of like 3rd world Maoism in that regard in that it's only a internet sensation with no roots at all in reality much less having any history of a movement.