I don’t, libertarian ideals like that book die the first time they meet an organized group of bears[1]
Also if I recall they were in underground cities in that book and not clinging to the edge of a mountainside like invaders would be doing in regards to the content of the original post
Oh I’m sorry, that was a tongue in cheek reference to a known event that I assume /u/ancapistani is familiar with unless you have the luckiest random user name ever.
The point was that libertarian ideals fail whenever faced with a problem that requires a societal level response since the members are incapable of working together due to their own selfishness, e.x. Someone feeding the bears that were causing their neighbors harm
And the state hasn’t managed a solution to bears? They mustered the banners and had their hunters kill them all back when it was a problem.
The libertarians are the ones arguing that I should be allowed to run a bear farming factory next to the kindergarten with a suspiciously high number of bear related deaths per capita for children.
I’m quite familiar with the failings of these sorts of social experiments. I followed the Free State Project from its inception, watched Anarchon happen in real time, etc. I get what you’re saying. I have two points to make in response.
The first is that libertarian experiments in the last 20 years or so in the Western world have tended to draw the most extreme and outspoken members of the group. Those people also tend to value what they consider to be ideological purity over effectiveness, and tend to have strong/abrasive personalities. There’s a good deal of selection bias happening here.
The second is that I personally believe that the more extreme an idea is, the more consistently educated and motivated the participants must be in order for it to work. As an extreme example: I want to see the US government disappear. That’s a bold statement, but hear me out for a moment. If we all woke up tomorrow morning and government at all levels from municipal to federal were gone, it would be a disaster. The same would be true of any sort of coup. The only way for a stateless society to exist and be functional is if the people no longer need or desire a state. To put it another way - I don’t want a government that we can “drown in a bathtub”, I want us to move toward a world where one day we realize it’s no longer serving a purpose.
I’m in no way threatened if you disagree with me here, I’m just compelled to clarify when I see libertarian beliefs being dismissed because a specific problem exists when the same problem exists in the status quo.
No political system is perfect. Our current system _certainly_ isn’t. It’s intellectually lazy to oppose a change on the grounds that it doesn’t solve everything.
As long as you aren’t claiming the corporate boot actually tastes great it’s only government issued boots that can’t be licked, I tend to be fine with libertarians but, especially after the Mises Caucus takeover of the party and its collapse in many states, those types are exceedingly rare and you will excuse me if I don’t extend the benefit of the doubt to someone who wears parts of their ideology as a name
Now that the furor has died down: "how easy it is to win when you can just let go of a rock and it’s guided to your enemy by gravity"
...that's literally the main plot point of the book: "The Moon lets go of a rock and it's guided to Earth by gravity."
Libertarian ideals aside, if you want a better introspection into political ideologies by the same author, "Starship Troopers" provided lots of food for thought.
