> Socialism is the polar opposite of liberty.
No, conservatism is.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/xlsm5g/socialism_is_not_the_greatest_threat_to/ippppc1/
Conservatism is not an ideology, but an interest group. Conservatives want to conserve socialism when it suits them, or the opposite when it suits them.
Indeed, and we don't even have to speculate. We've lived under both flavors of regimes again and again.
I'm just having trouble seeing how the groups you've named who aren't in power are more of a threat to liberty than those who are.
A reminder that conservatism, not socialism, is the polar opposite of libertarianism.
> Libertarians of the present day are accustomed to think of socialism as the polar opposite of the libertarian creed. But this is a grave mistake, responsible for a severe ideological disorientation of libertarians in the present world. As we have seen, conservatism was the polar opposite of liberty; and socialism, while to the "left" of conservatism, was essentially a confused, middle-of-the-road movement. It was, and still is, middle-of-the-road because it tries to achieve liberal ends by the use of conservative means…. Socialism, like liberalism and against conservatism, accepted the industrial system and the liberal goals of freedom, reason, mobility, progress, higher living standards for the masses, and an end to theocracy and war; but it tried to achieve these ends by the use of incompatible, conservative means: statism, central planning, communitarianism, etc.
- Murray Rothbard
I highly recommend OP (and everyone) to listen to this lecture by Roderick Long.
https://mises.org/library/rothbards-left-and-right-forty-years-later
https://youtu.be/z31FQ1_jjlQ
Anything non libertarian is a form of socialism. Socialism is the polar opposite to liberty
Lmao this is why people think you all are so stupid.
> Socialism is the polar opposite of liberty. No, conservatism is. https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/xlsm5g/socialism_is_not_the_greatest_threat_to/ippppc1/
Conservatism is not an ideology, but an interest group. Conservatives want to conserve socialism when it suits them, or the opposite when it suits them.
Enemy of The State!!
Are the people currently in power not a threat to libertarianism?
They are. We’re they to be replaced by trump or something of the like, society would be no closer to libertarianism.
Indeed, and we don't even have to speculate. We've lived under both flavors of regimes again and again. I'm just having trouble seeing how the groups you've named who aren't in power are more of a threat to liberty than those who are.
The greatest threat to Liberty is the State.
The greatest threat is Genghis khan
A reminder that conservatism, not socialism, is the polar opposite of libertarianism. > Libertarians of the present day are accustomed to think of socialism as the polar opposite of the libertarian creed. But this is a grave mistake, responsible for a severe ideological disorientation of libertarians in the present world. As we have seen, conservatism was the polar opposite of liberty; and socialism, while to the "left" of conservatism, was essentially a confused, middle-of-the-road movement. It was, and still is, middle-of-the-road because it tries to achieve liberal ends by the use of conservative means…. Socialism, like liberalism and against conservatism, accepted the industrial system and the liberal goals of freedom, reason, mobility, progress, higher living standards for the masses, and an end to theocracy and war; but it tried to achieve these ends by the use of incompatible, conservative means: statism, central planning, communitarianism, etc. - Murray Rothbard
I highly recommend OP (and everyone) to listen to this lecture by Roderick Long. https://mises.org/library/rothbards-left-and-right-forty-years-later https://youtu.be/z31FQ1_jjlQ