What do you call the opposite of a libertarian?

[darklordoftech]

?

[HillGoose]

A communazi

[User156728683354]

In general that would be a populist. In a more extreme degree, National Bolshevik.

[darklordoftech]

In general that would be a populist.

Absolute monarchy wasn’t populist.

[sparkey]

Wrong.

[S019]

A good person

[Mr. Smith]

Correct.

[dead0man]

authoritarian

[Goldwater]

I prefer the term "Communitarian", it sounds the least biased.

[Vittorio]

The idea of politics as a literal spectrum with physical dimensions, such that one individual can be the "opposite" of another, is one of the most ridiculous elements of the Democratic mythology.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Nazbol gang.

[John Dule]

Authoritarian, which is why I'm always so confused when the politically illiterate conflate libertarians with the alt-right.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Someone over the mental age of 12

[DC Al Fine]

I prefer the term "Communitarian", it sounds the least biased.

This

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

"Communitarian" is the appropriate term when comparing nuts-and-bolts policy and philosophy, I would imagine. "Authoritarian" sounds, as Goldwater described, biased, and stresses the ridiculous one-dimensional dichotomy that libertarians (and the liberal right in the West) would have us unquestionably embrace.

In general that would be a populist.

Absolute monarchy wasn’t populist.

Both statements are unnecessary.

Populism is a political style, rather than a coherent set of political stances. Reagan, for example, was a populist, as were his rhetorical idols and political antitheses FDR and Truman.

Monarchy wasn't necessarily communitarian. While monarchies emerged prior to what we call modern capitalism, they at that point upheld feudalism, which is generally irrelevant to contemporary political discourse. It's not beyond imagination (or personal experience) to hear libertarians argue in favor of a monarchy or some other undemocratic government structure (talk to John Dule or, for older folks here, wormyguy). "Libertarianism" is not simple small-l classical liberalism for that reason (among others). While it might be appropriate to generally place monarchy (in the traditional, European, pre-1848 sense) under "authoritarian right" in our little picture-based political matrix memes, it would be inappropriate to juxtapose it as the opposite of libertarian since then we're comparing apples and oranges.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Authoritarian, which is why I'm always so confused when the politically illiterate conflate libertarians with the alt-right.

You yourself are evidence of the generally odd association people make between libertarianism and the far right. You're uncomfortable with democracy since it allows others to vote on what happens to your things. But this stems from a few other sources as well (see below).

1. The more generalizable reason for this conflation is the resort to authoritarianism as the last stand against communism. There are reasons for this, of course, and sometimes good reasons (capitalist development, even authoritarian capitalist development, leading to better long-term outcomes than that seen in big-C Communist societies), but for whatever reason hardline capitalist libertarianism is seen as a step away from fascism. (I recall some Internet picture showing a YouTuber's evolution from diehard libertarian/ancap to fascist, with the presumed outside pressure being the existence and perceived threat of Internet communists)
2. The fact that the "Ron Paul" crowd of 2012 essentially melted away and (per the popular narrative) a number of former Paul supporters were in the Trump camp. Sanchez himself is a good example.
3. The fetishization of Constitutional liberties can lead to a strident opposition to efforts to "impose" any other "liberties" (for example, Goldwater's opposition to the CRA on constitutional grounds). One of the many battlefields for this is over the legacy of the CSA and the American Civil War, but there is also opposition to modern-day social engineering, which is a key source of angst (so we are told) of the "alt-right" (think hatred for feminism).

[They not like us]

An adult

[Senator Incitatus]

A good friend and potential life partner.

[MarkD]

Authoritarian.

[Person Man]

Collectivist?

[Goldwater]

An adult

In that case, and considering your social views, I take it that you are still a little bit of a child at heart?

[They not like us]

An adult

In that case, and considering your social views, I take it that you are still a little bit of a child at heart?

I mean, I still watch Spongebob and eat sugary cereals, so yeah, for sure

[darklordoftech]

Authoritarian, which is why I'm always so confused when the politically illiterate conflate libertarians with the alt-right.

You yourself are evidence of the generally odd association people make between libertarianism and the far right. You're uncomfortable with democracy since it allows others to vote on what happens to your things. But this stems from a few other sources as well (see below).

1. The more generalizable reason for this conflation is the resort to authoritarianism as the last stand against communism. There are reasons for this, of course, and sometimes good reasons (capitalist development, even authoritarian capitalist development, leading to better long-term outcomes than that seen in big-C Communist societies), but for whatever reason hardline capitalist libertarianism is seen as a step away from fascism. (I recall some Internet picture showing a YouTuber's evolution from diehard libertarian/ancap to fascist, with the presumed outside pressure being the existence and perceived threat of Internet communists)
2. The fact that the "Ron Paul" crowd of 2012 essentially melted away and (per the popular narrative) a number of former Paul supporters were in the Trump camp. Sanchez himself is a good example.
3. The fetishization of Constitutional liberties can lead to a strident opposition to efforts to "impose" any other "liberties" (for example, Goldwater's opposition to the CRA on constitutional grounds). One of the many battlefields for this is over the legacy of the CSA and the American Civil War, but there is also opposition to modern-day social engineering, which is a key source of angst (so we are told) of the "alt-right" (think hatred for feminism).

4. People who hate “welfare” because they hate the groups that they think use it and/or think “If we kill the people who use welfare, I’ll get to keep my taxpayer dollars.”
5. People who fear that certain demographics will vote for “socialism”.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The most logical term would be "authoritarian" since authority is more nearly an opposite of liberty than community is.   One may take a libertarian position for communitarian reasons, or have a communitarian account of what a more libertarian society could look like.  One may support an expansive, interventionist government for Hobbesian reasons, rather than any belief in a substantive, organic community. 

The problem is of course that "authoritarian" is a pejorative word, associated with awful regimes of past and present.  For example Pinochet, whose economic policies were influenced by libertarianism rather than following a "big government" program.   Still, if someone finds themselves unwilling to be designated "authoritarian," perhaps that shows they are not truly opposite to libertarian themselves, but rather see libertarian concerns as needing to be balanced?

In terms of a label for the upper left quadrant of a political matrix - I don't see an obvious answer.  The fact that this matrix originated with libertarians is clear here, as this quadrant represents less of a particular political tradition than the other quadrants, existing only as a compliment to the test's libertarian anchor.

But if I had to come up with a term  ... perhaps "protectivist" ?    That is, expressing an impulse to protect society and individuals from threats  - physical, economic, social, cultural - through active government.

[Person Man]

The most logical term would be "authoritarian" since authority is more nearly an opposite of liberty than community is.   One may take a libertarian position for communitarian reasons, or have a communitarian account of what a more libertarian society could look like.  One may support an expansive, interventionist government for Hobbesian reasons, rather than any belief in a substantive, organic community. 

The problem is of course that "authoritarian" is a pejorative word, associated with awful regimes of past and present.  For example Pinochet, whose economic policies were influenced by libertarianism rather than following a "big government" program.   Still, if someone finds themselves unwilling to be designated "authoritarian," perhaps that shows they are not truly opposite to libertarian themselves, but rather see libertarian concerns as needing to be balanced?

In terms of a label for the upper left quadrant of a political matrix - I don't see an obvious answer.  The fact that this matrix originated with libertarians is clear here, as this quadrant represents less of a particular political tradition than the other quadrants, existing only as a compliment to the test's libertarian anchor.

But if I had to come up with a term  ... perhaps "protectivist" ?    That is, expressing an impulse to protect society and individuals from threats  - physical, economic, social, cultural - through active government.

Or collectivist. Since you advocate that more decisions are made by a collective  of voters, taxpayers, and lawmakers than by just “some dude” regarding said dude’s affairs.