Lolbertarianism is not a viable path forward and it never could have been. Because it is incapable of accepting, or dealing with, the reality that is bad faith.
I think libertarianism is a good framework, but needs to be tempered with reality. Something, as you say, too many libertarians miss.
Libertarianism isn't the solution, but I personally think it should be something of a guiding principle, just not the sole one. Libertarianism for libertarianism's sake is retarded, as they so often prove.
"Libertarianism" is a naïve anachronism built on trying to drag the medieval peasant into a post industrial world. I say this as a wishful fan of of Distributivism.
Lolbertarianism is not a viable path forward and it never could have been. Because it is incapable of accepting, or dealing with, the reality that is bad faith.
They still believe assimilation is possible despite thousands of years of precedence.
I think libertarianism is a good framework, but needs to be tempered with reality. Something, as you say, too many libertarians miss.
Libertarianism isn't the solution, but I personally think it should be something of a guiding principle, just not the sole one. Libertarianism for libertarianism's sake is retarded, as they so often prove.
"Libertarianism" is a naïve anachronism built on trying to drag the medieval peasant into a post industrial world. I say this as a wishful fan of of Distributivism.
Oh that's a rare one. How'd you come to that (at least in theory)? You never hear about it anymore.