Actual knowledge does not mean that it will stay that way. Using your logic, I could argue that because our government is mandate happy on Vaccine passports and masks, that I would be realistic in saying "that's it, get vaxxed, wear your mask, and send in your absentee ballot for whatever blue check candidate in your district.
If I looked through sad moments in history, I imagine there were many similar sentiments to the way things were. How many people do you think were behind the mask mandates these past three years? Do you think it was eighty million Americans? What percentage thought up the mantras "build back better" "stay home/stay safe?" How many people actually buy into our "progressive energy policies?"
What percentage of Germans were really the evil behind the Genocide and how many went along to get along?
What percentage of Russians were ardent advocates of the policies enacted and explained in the book "Gulag Archipelego?"
How many North Koreans love all the ideas and policies perpetuated by their leader?
The Libertarian Party is not into unlimited immigration. Maybe parts of it are/were. As you know there are many different wings of each party. Again, doesn't this sound to your protests regarding critics of he Republican party? (I will beat you to the punch and assert that no, you don't think it is the same at all).
Yes, there is the sentiment "wish in one hand, s in the other and see which fills up first" but I know there are a lot of people that believe this way. Are we all "wishful thinkers?"
Look at it another way, a very small segment of our society actually believes in Wokeism. I imagine twenty years ago, the early intentions of less stigmatization of alternative lifestyles was considered "wishful thinking" but now look, Disney will probably come out with a 3D cartoon of a handicapped lesbian biracial trans princess.
Sadly, a lot of times, people think in terms of binary thinking. Did you ever stop and think that maybe the people who have a vision of the way things could be might not be merely wishful thinkers and or ignorant. That they may have actual experience of knowing how things are, but that doesn't stop them from seeing how they could be? And it starts with treating others as if it already was.
I know myself the problems with the libertarian party. You think Dave Smith, Tom Woods, and other libertarians I listen to don't talk about this or recognize its existence? You think they are teeming with wishful thinking and ignorance. I would be the first to plead ignorance, but I've known I was libertarian in nature as early as eighteen. The idea of a laissez faire government sounded great. To be left alone — sign me up.
Socialism and Globalism is as far from libertarian as Individualism is from collectivism. Those who have perpetuated globalism and socialism in its name don't know what it means any more than the left who talk about democracy also talk about policies concerning the tyranny of caring know what they are talking about.
When you were part of these different college libertarian groups, did you believe in socialism and globalism?
Freedom to make decisions means freedom to make bad decisions, unsafe decisions, etc.
At the center of it, libertarianism is into private ownership, how is that congruent with socialism and globalism? While all are welcome into this country, it is obvious they can't be simply allowed to walk in and go anywhere as that would infringe on an individuals right to do what they want on their property.
Also at the center of Libertarianism is free market/enterprise. It sounds to me that the type of libertarians you are hanging around sound like leftists, who in parlance of our time, have hijacked and attempted to redefine libertariansm in the same way that they have redefined vaccine, immunity, and a number of other words.
Just so we are on the same page, I googled libertarian and this is the definition I am talking about:
an advocate or supporter of a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
As opposed to socialism which is:
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
I am not evading these issues, nor am I ignoring their existence, just understand this is not what libertarian means. Just as the real policies of Covid that exist were predicated on Falsehood, so also the candidates who advocated for these socialistic and globalist policies were based on a false definition of what they asserted was "libertarian."
But the left is good at that, isn't it? Co-opting definitions and redefining them as the opposite of what they actually are.
Words like "safe and effective" describe something that is leaky and harmful.
"Inflation Reduction Act" is something that describes policies that will lead to more government bloat, and inflation.
I know liberals who are as against the Leftist agenda that has hijacked the democrat party, as well as Conservatives who are against the anemic response of the Republican party, and there is a growing grass roots movement of libertarians who resent the socialistic wing of those who have hijacked the libertarian party.
First things first, list all the libertarian candidates you have seen over the last 42 years.
Finally, if libertarians are a throw-away vote, then why should you care if they vote for pie-in-the-sky ideals. Consider this, they weren't going to vote for your candidate anyhow. I certainly have no overriding desire to vote Kemp "Let' extend the emergency powers just a little bit longer."
What am I diverting and deflecting? And isn't saying you are "busy" a deflection? What opinions am I spouting without research or experience?
What are the bad faith arguments? What is the projection in my case? What accusation have I made preemptively?
But let me see here if I have all the things you have called me thus far...
Ignorant
Leftist
Inexperienced
Supporter of Mass Immigration
Projector
Lazy
Clueless
Using Bad Faith Arguments
I do support immigration, but not mass immigration. While I don't like walls, they do work. If they didn't work, then why all the pushback against them? What do you define as mass immigration?
If you scroll up your original criticism was on "Tarring every single R with the same brush, e.g. Marjory Taylor Green & Steve Bannon, is a ridiculous, simplistic, self-serving excuse for doing nothing."
And yet here is what you said regarding libertarians:
'Voting "Libertarian" sure won't do it. The "L" stands for Loser (and spoiLer). And if there's no free elections, "Ls" would never be allowed to win anyway.'
Actual knowledge does not mean that it will stay that way. Using your logic, I could argue that because our government is mandate happy on Vaccine passports and masks, that I would be realistic in saying "that's it, get vaxxed, wear your mask, and send in your absentee ballot for whatever blue check candidate in your district.
If I looked through sad moments in history, I imagine there were many similar sentiments to the way things were. How many people do you think were behind the mask mandates these past three years? Do you think it was eighty million Americans? What percentage thought up the mantras "build back better" "stay home/stay safe?" How many people actually buy into our "progressive energy policies?"
What percentage of Germans were really the evil behind the Genocide and how many went along to get along?
What percentage of Russians were ardent advocates of the policies enacted and explained in the book "Gulag Archipelego?"
How many North Koreans love all the ideas and policies perpetuated by their leader?
The Libertarian Party is not into unlimited immigration. Maybe parts of it are/were. As you know there are many different wings of each party. Again, doesn't this sound to your protests regarding critics of he Republican party? (I will beat you to the punch and assert that no, you don't think it is the same at all).
Yes, there is the sentiment "wish in one hand, s in the other and see which fills up first" but I know there are a lot of people that believe this way. Are we all "wishful thinkers?"
Look at it another way, a very small segment of our society actually believes in Wokeism. I imagine twenty years ago, the early intentions of less stigmatization of alternative lifestyles was considered "wishful thinking" but now look, Disney will probably come out with a 3D cartoon of a handicapped lesbian biracial trans princess.
Sadly, a lot of times, people think in terms of binary thinking. Did you ever stop and think that maybe the people who have a vision of the way things could be might not be merely wishful thinkers and or ignorant. That they may have actual experience of knowing how things are, but that doesn't stop them from seeing how they could be? And it starts with treating others as if it already was.
I know myself the problems with the libertarian party. You think Dave Smith, Tom Woods, and other libertarians I listen to don't talk about this or recognize its existence? You think they are teeming with wishful thinking and ignorance. I would be the first to plead ignorance, but I've known I was libertarian in nature as early as eighteen. The idea of a laissez faire government sounded great. To be left alone — sign me up.
Socialism and Globalism is as far from libertarian as Individualism is from collectivism. Those who have perpetuated globalism and socialism in its name don't know what it means any more than the left who talk about democracy also talk about policies concerning the tyranny of caring know what they are talking about.
When you were part of these different college libertarian groups, did you believe in socialism and globalism?
Freedom to make decisions means freedom to make bad decisions, unsafe decisions, etc.
At the center of it, libertarianism is into private ownership, how is that congruent with socialism and globalism? While all are welcome into this country, it is obvious they can't be simply allowed to walk in and go anywhere as that would infringe on an individuals right to do what they want on their property.
Also at the center of Libertarianism is free market/enterprise. It sounds to me that the type of libertarians you are hanging around sound like leftists, who in parlance of our time, have hijacked and attempted to redefine libertariansm in the same way that they have redefined vaccine, immunity, and a number of other words.
Just so we are on the same page, I googled libertarian and this is the definition I am talking about:
an advocate or supporter of a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
As opposed to socialism which is:
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
I am not evading these issues, nor am I ignoring their existence, just understand this is not what libertarian means. Just as the real policies of Covid that exist were predicated on Falsehood, so also the candidates who advocated for these socialistic and globalist policies were based on a false definition of what they asserted was "libertarian."
But the left is good at that, isn't it? Co-opting definitions and redefining them as the opposite of what they actually are.
Words like "safe and effective" describe something that is leaky and harmful.
"Inflation Reduction Act" is something that describes policies that will lead to more government bloat, and inflation.
I know liberals who are as against the Leftist agenda that has hijacked the democrat party, as well as Conservatives who are against the anemic response of the Republican party, and there is a growing grass roots movement of libertarians who resent the socialistic wing of those who have hijacked the libertarian party.
First things first, list all the libertarian candidates you have seen over the last 42 years.
Finally, if libertarians are a throw-away vote, then why should you care if they vote for pie-in-the-sky ideals. Consider this, they weren't going to vote for your candidate anyhow. I certainly have no overriding desire to vote Kemp "Let' extend the emergency powers just a little bit longer."
"Wrong, Do Your homework"
At some point this all starts to sound like ad nauseam ad hominem attacks does not not?
What am I diverting and deflecting? And isn't saying you are "busy" a deflection? What opinions am I spouting without research or experience?
What are the bad faith arguments? What is the projection in my case? What accusation have I made preemptively?
But let me see here if I have all the things you have called me thus far...
Ignorant
Leftist
Inexperienced
Supporter of Mass Immigration
Projector
Lazy
Clueless
Using Bad Faith Arguments
I do support immigration, but not mass immigration. While I don't like walls, they do work. If they didn't work, then why all the pushback against them? What do you define as mass immigration?
If you scroll up your original criticism was on "Tarring every single R with the same brush, e.g. Marjory Taylor Green & Steve Bannon, is a ridiculous, simplistic, self-serving excuse for doing nothing."
And yet here is what you said regarding libertarians:
'Voting "Libertarian" sure won't do it. The "L" stands for Loser (and spoiLer). And if there's no free elections, "Ls" would never be allowed to win anyway.'