While I share many views with libertarians, I don’t consider myself one. I do think that the non-aggression principle is a good standard to live by, for example, but that it only covers half of the second greatest commandment: love your neighbor as yourself.
But libertarians themselves seem to have fallen into irrelevancy of late, which is unfortunate. I think this is largely because while they squabble over what constitutes consent or aggression, our entire country and society is being thoroughly dismantled by Moloch worshippers.
Of late, I have noticed a sharp divide in the libertarian movement. Mostly, this revolves around the Left-Libertarians, who appear to be only interested in sex, drugs, and promoting anti-discrimination laws, and the Nationalist Libertarians, who are more concerned with the imeding collapse of the United States and the destruction of the culture of freedom.
It looks to me that the Left-Libertarians have, by and large, won the Libertarian Party. This was solidified when Gary Johnson took the nomination and when that jackass danced naked live on C-SPAN. My brother, who supported the Libertarian party, disagrees and argues that the Left-Libertarians are only a fringe group.
I argue that the Libertarian party and the greater movement has been successfully converged by Social Justice Warriors who seek lower taxes so they can rape children.
That’s probably an exaggeration but the evidence of convergence is fairly clear to me. At Porcfest, a annual libertarian conference in New Hampshire, the focus appears to be oriented around sexualizing children, promoting prostitution, orgy tents, and gay slow-dancing.
It seems to me that many libertarians get lost on trying to use rational thinking to apply the non-aggression principle to immoral actions.
And there lies the problem with libertarian thought: applying rational thinking to the inherently irrational concept known as morality. Look, you can rationalize morality all you want. But at the end of the day, the non-aggression principle cannot be created using mathematical proofs, scientific methods, or Socratic methods.
There is no logical reason to not murder someone. It simply is wrong in the same way that 1+1=2. The reality of the situation is, that while customs and practices are cultural, morality tends to be universal in many different ways.
I have yet to come across a culture where theft is legal, where murder is considered godly, save a few obscure cults, and lying is considered a virtue. While I am not an anthropologist by trade, I think I’d have heard of some civilization or society somewhere. And in the rare cases where morality is inverted (like holding up sodomy as the highest virtue), those societies usually collapse within a few generations.
And this is the crux of the libertarian movement as a whole: it seeks to impose a kind of moral code through logic, reason, and evidence without understanding that morality is, at its core, irrational. Because of this, the movement is doomed to be converged by drug addicts looking to avoid jail time, child rapists seeking validation, and nutcases trying to subvert reality.
Like the anarchists of the 1800s, I suspect that the libertarians of the 1900s will continue to fade into obscurity as the decades of this century pass. Those who seek to shift the reality of morality and society through political movements often do go the way of the dodo.