Anti-libertarianist strategies

Libertarians are an interesting breed, mostly because their ideology is based on ideas that will be accepted by most people. The concepts of individual inalienable rights, non-aggression and essentialist atomism are pleasant to many people. The solipsism inherent in the ideology leads to the view of the individual's mind as this self contained compartment that could produce what it currently does, even in absolute isolation from birth. I think Bakunin was on the mark when he made the point that the individual isolated from society is nothing but a brute. The group that the individual lives within and all the groups throughout history have a profound effect on the individual.

I am an ex-libertarian. A few years ago, I was somewhat of a reluctant libertarian as I intuitively hated my position, but I could not use reason to defend violence mostly because of my reliance on an atomistic view of humanity. Luckily, I have since found the position I intuitively wanted to embrace.

Some points for libertarians.

1) Should people get what they deserve? Should people be rewarded for morally arbitrary factors? If you have an amazing ability that you were born with, do you deserve to reap the rewards of that profit? Property needs to ultimately be trumped by what people deserve.
2) Economic power is de facto political power. The elite have greater purchasing power and thus more dollar votes . Simply, demand becomes disproportionately affected by the ruling class. What is made is determined not through democracy and need but through the power of the purse.
3) Would we hold a wage labourer bank robber responsible for his crime? Yes, we would, in fact we would punish him to a similar degree to the man hiring him. However, a wage labourer at a factory is not held responsible for his products. He simply becomes a tool, a cog in a machine. He is no longer a person has a such and thus has no right to his product, but the bank robber is held accountable. This accountability needs to go for both the positive aspect of production and the negative aspect of bank robbery. In, Justice we are always concerned with what people deserve, but in the economy that is wrong?
4) Prove the inalienable right to private property.

I have yet to see a person attempt the last one, mostly because their argument is based on the socially conditioned view that private property is this neutral tenet of philosophy. Property is a social construction meant to deal with a certain conditions and to solve them. It is not a necessity as a reflection of the metaphysic of the human mind.

PM me if something comes of this.

This is true; always attack the system of exploitation that they defend. I have found them to be easy to refute, and I have never been defeated by one of them. They will expose themselves as elitist reactionaries, especially the Randites.

And another crushing point: the bourgeoisie are not stupid enough to let the libertarians get their way with lassiez-faire capitalism. That would exacerbate the class struggle and greatly endanger their dictatorship.

How do they defeat you guys nine of out ten times? Even several years ago, with a much lower theoretical level, I was able to smash them every time with no problem. A key aspect is to expose their subjective idealist philosophical outlook.

If a libertarian regime were to exist, especially a Randite one, I personally think it would make the Third Reich look like an episode of the Care Bears!

I agree. The libertarians have no chance of taking power, they are just going to rely on the 'free trade' wing of the Republicans. They seem to want to guide their politics along Libertarian lines.

Read their specious claptrap (without contributing any money) and find holes in it. There are many. Then go after these tinfoil hat nuts!!!!!

No, it's not just the internet. The "libertarian party" was in full bloom in the 80s and Ron Paul was their candidate for the throne in 1988. They have a good propaganda sense, honed in thinktanks and workshops, but above all they have money and so they have the Cato Institute and other enterprises that give them a presence far beyond their numbers.

Libertarianism, rather like communism today, is widely considered by most people outside of the ideology to be dead as a door-knocker and has been since 1983, when the 'Miricle of Chilie' turned out to be a disaster rather than a miricle.

And now that Milton Friedman is six feet under, the ideology is as well; at least in terms of being taken serious by anybody worth talking to.

Nope, you don't need a strategy to deal with an ideology that is a complete laughing stock.

Really? Which western government has laws that say killing someone because of their political preference is justifiable?

By your logic, then Nazis can kill any Zionist, Communist, Anarchist, Democrat or Liberal he wants, and you cannot complain.