Why are libertarians being attacked by liberals now?

[KayossZero]

The mainstream media is an arm of of the democrat party. Not the libertarian party. The function of the mainstream press is to promote the democrat party. Why wouldn't they attack libertarians?

I wasn't aware any MSM or FauxNews were owned and controlled by Democrats, more like they're owned by corporate interests who's only goal is more $.

Cute spiel though, I'm sure it works on low IQ'ers.

[Deleted]

in the 2 major American parties represent only a small fragment of the actual political spectrum: Democrats->central right,Republicans->far right

the left wing has no representation at all and the terms 'free' and 'liberty' are abused by pretty much everyone

personally i feel that most Americans can't tell the difference between: "i'm free" and "none gives a shit about what i do" , with free markets being 10% the first and 90% the latter

also the term democracy is abused by everyone... you can't have democratic beliefs and distrust a democratically elected goverment UNLESS you do not believe that you live in a democracy(which may be the case,it certainly looks more like ploutocracy to me)

also i'd be willing to bet a ton of money to the fact that if i stop a stranger in an american street to ask him he will hate communism and will not be able to specify what exactly commusim is,remnant of the McCarthy era...

as such the political debate in the USA is poisoned...it mostly evolves personal attacks, random shows of how good of a family man the candidate is, and pointless speeches using alot of the words the voters seem to consider 'good' everything that evolves freedom,family,opportunity,democracy,justice,God usually

as such i do not believe that a healthy political group can coexist with the rest of the Republican party and that the Democrats are a 'neccescary' compromise for anyone without a hole for brain

[artemishunter1]

I just don't believe that social pressure would be strong enough in certain geographic areas of our nation that need it most, personally.

But forcing someone to apply their trade is not right either.

[Jackmoves]

Since the ideas of classical liberalism has gained somewhat momentum it has become a word that gives positive associations, the result, as always, is that people try to hide behind it in order to ride on said momentum. A lot of people who call themselves libertarians are way off mark. They are fake as shit and need to be shot down(verbally).

[Gheld]

Because there's a million issues that libertarians could have started with, which are extremely important, but instead they were hijacked by the "420" movement and the "They're taking our guns!" movement. So important issues such as privacy concerns, police over-stepping their bounds concerns, etc have taken a back seat. Libertarians will chirp about it every now and then but then it's back to the Pot-Gun rally.

And I'm a moderate anarcho-capitalist at heart, but anybody who takes the American Libertarian Party seriously scares the fuck out of me.

[Kraenen]

I remember when liberals were more than happy to side with libertarians and support gay rights and women's rights. There was even a time when Democrats (Dennis Kucinich) and libertarian Republicans (Rand Paul) ran on the same presidential ticket (2008). Now it seems like every other comment on MSNBC/Polico/HuffPost is all about how Rand Paul, Gary Johnson, etc. are "racist" and "homophobic."

Yet out of all of these comments, I haven't seen a single shred of evidence posted that supports either claim, nor a single criticism of any of their policies, especially not Gary Johnson's policies. Are Democrats afraid of libertarians, since they are the future of America? Or are they just trying to help their party's candidate in 2016? Why are liberals attacking libertarians, when in the past, they were supportive of libertarians?

So you look at random forum posts and from that derive that the whole of american liberalism is attacking libertarians?

[Garnier Fructis]

Which is possible and I would not be thrilled if that turned out to be the case. It's really an ideal on my part, that people should be free to do most whatever they want and social pressure is the primary force for change rather than restrictive legislation. I know the south is famous for pervasive racism, but I don't spend enough time there to actually know if it's well deserved or just a stereotype perpetuated by occasional stories about how those crazy southerners are at it again being all backwards and stuff.

Social change is really the only thing that will eliminate racism, but I think creating situations where you experience other people creates opportunity for people to see their own racism as unfounded. I've known racist people who stopped being racist after finding out that the people they were racist against were decent people too.

But forcing someone to apply their trade is not right either.

The first civilizations on Earth believed the world to be flat (before anyone yells myth, note that I'm talking about ancient civilizations and not medieval civilizations). The Greeks and those after them believed the world to be a sphere. Both were wrong, but they were not equally wrong.

Same principle here. This legislation is less wrong than allowing racism to run rampant.

[ZeroWashu]

because Libertarians might get too popular, can't have that can we?

[KingHorse]

They believe in everyone have freedoms that they believe in but restricting freedoms they don't.

"They" being every politician ever, in every country.

[mvaliz]

I've said it in a long post back prior to this, and have been saying this would happen for over a year now:

Libertarians are being shunned now because the Republican nutjobs are noticing your name getting bigger, and are self-declaring themselves as "Libertarian".

Remember the Tea Party? They used to be different ideals too... but when they got media attention, the nutters like Rand Paul and Sarah Palin jumped ship hoping to use them to skip past the Republican party to promote their ideals.

The EXACT same thing is happening with the Libertarian Party. Rand Paul is declaring himself a libertarian, as well as FOX News commentator Bill O'Reily - who's right up there with Sean Hannity on the fearmongering insanity scale.

The Libertarians don't stand for those policies you say? Well, guess what... neither did the Tea Party people or the Regan-based republicans... but now, due to the voices of the top...

My advice - PUBLICALLY DENOUNCE THOSE FOOLS! Get rid of the Rand Pauls and Bill O'reilys who jump ship the moment they hear of another political opportunity or the ability springboard their careers. It's fearmongering fools like THEM that will be your face America will see and their messages they will hear in the guise of your own, whether you wanted it or not. UNLESS you willingly and publicly KICK THEM OUT!

[Zarc]

I think you're thinking of the democrats. It was the democrats that established global banking systems to create a super elite class of ultrawealthy people. The democrats run these systems. Go look at who runs the IMF, world bank, and goldman sachs. Its all democrats.

The key is the left runs the mainstream press. So they control the image of democrats and republicans. Democrats do not have to help the little guy. They can just control the image. The goal is to get you to draw the conclusion that, no matter how many promises democrats break, no matter how many times they break your heart, the republicans are far worse and unelectable.

Once they have you in that mindset, they can do what they please, build their own personal wealth, while the little guy is worse off with each passing generation.

So basicly what you are saying is that among the Democratic, the Republican and the Libertarian Party the American people can choose from:

1) A party that openly doesn't give a shit about the little guy, and are conservative on social issues = Republican Party

2) A party that openly doesn't give a shit about the little guy, and are liberal on social issues = Libertarian Party

3) A party that say they are for the little guy but secretly is not and tries to hide it by controlling the media, and are liberal on social issues = Democratic Party

Well... then I'd still go with the Democratic Party because they might do some good for the little guy here and there in order to fool us with this false image, while the other two wouldn't even bother doing that much...

[mvaliz]

because Libertarians might get too popular, can't have that can we?

That's the problem... the classic Regan Fiscal conservatives ARE trying to become popular - but as they gain popularity, the Right-Wing Nut Jobs are starting to declare themselves as Libertarian, despite not believing in ANY of those ideals.

[Rizendragon]

I just don't believe that social pressure would be strong enough in certain geographic areas of our nation that need it most, personally.

This is where I think you're wrong. Having moved from the north (Syracuse, NY) to the south (Raleigh, NC) I can tell you that racism is no more prevalent here than it it is there. Our country's mindset has changed. There are race riots in every part of your country for things that aren't really racism; It's normally a bigoted group of x race (you can have both black and white bigots) that feels they were wronged on something when in reality they weren't.

[Garnier Fructis]

This is where I think you're wrong. Having moved from the north (Syracuse, NY) to the south (Raleigh, NC) I can tell you that racism is no more prevalent here than it it is there. Our country's mindset has changed. There are race riots in every part of your country for things that aren't really racism; It's normally a bigoted group of x race (you can have both black and white bigots) that feels they were wronged on something when in reality they weren't.

Oh, we're getting there alright. And that's exactly why we should not let up and risk slipping back into the dark ages:
Link

Many are becoming less racist. But some are just getting better at hiding it.

[Deleted]

Libertarians advocate a return to the robber baron plutocrats and wage slavery of the late 1800s. If that's not what you stand for, you're probably more a liberal than a libertarian.

People never run out of strawmen. Wage slavery... what the hell does that even mean? Either you work voluntary and it is therefore no slavery, or you are a slave and you are not working voluntary.
Also inb4 Strawmalia.

[Pitkanen]

The biggest issue with Libertarians and these topics...
First - States rights. If you favor a system where you let the states do as they please, aka restrict the federal government's power and decision making, and some of them would prefer to do racist/anti-gay things, then you are in fact helping those racist/anti-gay things along.
... case in point - Voter Right's Act... Libertarians were joyful when it got struck down by the supreme court.

Second - They caucus with republicans. They support the republican judicial candidates who are all anti-minority/gay. Consider the fact that the majority of "social issues" are decided by the gavel not by congress, which judges your Libertarian candidate votes yes for tells you more about their stand on social issues than whatever comes out of their mouth.

Third - Their economic policies would disproportionately injury the quality of life and potential social-economic mobility of minorities.

[THE Bigzoman]

anti-minority

Stopped there

[DarkstarG]

So basicly what you are saying is that among the Democratic, the Republican and the Libertarian Party the American people can choose from:

1) A party that openly doesn't give a shit about the little guy, and are conservative on social issues = Republican Party

2) A party that openly doesn't give a shit about the little guy, and are liberal on social issues = Libertarian Party

3) A party that say they are for the little guy but secretly is not and tries to hide it by controlling the media, and are liberal on social issues = Democratic Party

Well... then I'd still go with the Democratic Party because they might do some good for the little guy here and there in order to fool us with this false image, while the other two wouldn't even bother doing that much...

#2 is misleading because the libertarian platform is all about the individual (i.e. little guy) and please remember that they go by the classic definition of liberal (liberty) not the modern version that has been twisted.

Please keep in mind, we do not live in a Democratic country as often as people use the word. We have a Constitution Republic which has been twisted by the Rep & Dem parties into something that barely resembles the country that our forefathers created.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Who's "they?" I've yet to talk to someone who claims to be Libertarian that believes the things you're claiming.

You seem unaware that there are a large number of Republicans who have placed the Libertarian name tag on their shirts. I've had a large number of people tell me they are against gay marriage, abortion, etc. essentially socially conservative then with a straight face tell me they are Libertarians and are for personal freedoms.

That's why the Libertarian party has become a joke.

[Naxere]

You seem unaware that there are a large number of Republicans who have placed the Libertarian name tag on their shirts. I've had a large number of people tell me they are against gay marriage, abortion, etc. essentially socially conservative then with a straight face tell me they are Libertarians and are for personal freedoms.

Just because they claim to be something doesn't make it so. Just look at the President. Claimed to the the antidote to the Bush era politics, then went out and not only continued most of Bush's policies but expanded some of them.