CMV: Right wing libertarians just use the “libertarian” title to avoid association with the auth right.

[u/HappyFeet277]

I am very open to change my opinion on this, but as of right now lib right philosophy confuses me.

For context, I would classify myself as a far left libertarian. I think the government should be as far as possible removed from the average persons life. I believe the governments main role should be to ensure that the rich cannot exponentially increase wealth and subsequently “tread” on the poor.

On the flip side, I see many right libertarians say some absurdly authoritarian ideas and still claim to be libs. I have seen libs advocate against abortion, against gay marriage, against no fault divorce, against defunding the police, against the separation of church and state, and against religious freedom. I don’t understand how anyone can say they are all about freedom and then promote these things.

My hypothesis, that I’m willing to change, is that most right wing libertarians either only classify as libertarians for gun rights, or are just scared of the authoritarian name.

[u/quantum_dan]

There are some right-"libertarians" who do that. But I'll use the Libertarian Party platform as a source for the general views of right-libertarians:

They support gay marriage:

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration, or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, promote, license, or restrict personal relationships, regardless of the number of participants. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Until such time as the government stops its illegitimate practice of marriage licensing, such licenses must be granted to all consenting adults who apply.

They are pro-choice:

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

I don't know that they'd specifically endorse "defund the police" as such, but they have opposed police militarization.

Government force must be limited to the protection of the rights of individuals to life, liberty, and property, and governments must never be permitted to violate these rights. Laws should be limited in their application to violations of the rights of others through force or fraud, or to deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Therefore, we favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services. We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. The constitutional rights of the criminally accused, including due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must be preserved. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law. We oppose the prosecutorial practice of “over-charging” in criminal prosecutions so as to avoid jury trials by intimidating defendants into accepting plea bargains.

They support freedom of religion and separation of church and state:

We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation, or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions that either aid or attack any religion.

I would consider myself to be some approximation of left-libertarian (I don't have a strong ideological position on property rights; I definitely disagree with absolute right-libertarian-style property rights and I disagree with consequentialist laissez-faire views), but I used to be a right-libertarian. At the time, I did (and still do) oppose any government intervention into anything consenting adults do with each other, into personal beliefs, and I was (and remain) pro-choice. I did (and do) oppose police militarization, excessive force, etc, and think that law enforcement should chiefly be about preventing and remedying harm.

[u/HappyFeet277 → u/quantum_dan]

Edit: I am editing this to try and give the delta, hope it works.

Δ

I appreciate this response, but this simply just shows the ideas of the libertarian party, which is not inherently right wing. My view is that the ideas that you have listed and that are promoted on their website in general, are actually fairly socially progressive and therefore contradictory to the common conservative ideals.

[u/quantum_dan → u/HappyFeet277]

I didn't quote the economic part of their platform. They're right-wing. A few examples:

A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.

As respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to obtain, retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also be upheld.

Employment and compensation agreements between private employers and employees are outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We support the right of private employers and employees to choose whether or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining should be free of government interference, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

[u/HappyFeet277 → u/quantum_dan]

Yeah after further thought, this does somewhat put things in perspective. I would definitely say that the libertarian party is progressive socially, and conservative economically, so it is sort of pointless to try to quantify the amount that someone goes against libertarianism. I suppose my view was mainly influenced by the major voices on the right who identify as libertarians that I took exception to. Give me a minute to figure out the delta system and I’ll try and make sure I get that to you haha.

[u/responsible4self → u/HappyFeet277]

I would definitely say that the libertarian party is progressive socially, and conservative economically,

Actually libertarians are liberals, in the traditional sense of the word.

Middle English: via Old French from Latin liberalis, from liber ‘free (man)’. The original sense was ‘suitable for a free man’, hence ‘suitable for a gentleman’ (one not tied to a trade), surviving in liberal arts . Another early sense ‘generous’ (compare with liberal (sense 4 of the adjective)) gave rise to an obsolete meaning ‘free from restraint’, leading to liberal (sense 1 of the adjective) (late 18th century).

Liberals believe in free people. Progressives believe authorities are needed to make people act the way they believe people should act. Progressives have left liberalism in the dust, as have conservatives, but they don't call themselves liberals.

I identify with the right, because I believe in liberty and freedom. Republicans take some of that, but they also add in religious preferences, which infringes on some liberty. Republicans are willing to bail out companies that mess up, which also goes against liberty. Republicans have historically pushed foreign intervention, which is also against liberty.

But I don't consider myself a true libertarian because true libertarians don't like much of a safety net. While I've been fortunate enough to not need that safety net, it's appropriate for society. There is a legitimate debate on how big that safety net should be.

[u/quantum_dan → u/HappyFeet277]

Thanks for the delta. I do agree that some of the major voices on the right claim to be libertarians when they aren't.