Why do libertarians gradually become far right?

[Bootes Void]

This seems odd and strange doesn't it? What the mindset or ideological worldview that causes libertarians to turn against liberty gradually(though not all of them, alot of them do)

[If my soul was made of stone]

Plenty of them were reactionary all along and just used "libertarian" as a convenient disguise, or were only ever "libertarian" on a few choice issues like drugs or same-sex marriage that became less prominent to them with time.

[John Dule]

I reject the premise. There are a ton of people in this country who refer to themselves as "libertarians," but use the word as a smokescreen of sorts to mask their true beliefs. These are the people who stick "Thin Blue Line" flags on their trucks right next to the "Don't Tread On Me" bumper sticker. They often oppose gay marriage, legal weed, and immigration, and define "freedom" as "Being able to go about my day without having to put up with liberal policies." They oppose the federal government for reasons that have more in common with Confederate State's-Rightsism than any genuine libertarian philosophy or convictions.

I can almost forgive the left-wingers who think that these people are "libertarians," because they so often define themselves that way. However, if these people are libertarians, then the Nazis were "socialists."

[Santander]

I reject the premise. There are a ton of people in this country who refer to themselves as "libertarians," but use the word as a smokescreen of sorts to mask their true beliefs. These are the people who stick "Thin Blue Line" flags on their trucks right next to the "Don't Tread On Me" bumper sticker. They often oppose gay marriage, legal weed, and immigration, and define "freedom" as "Being able to go about my day without having to put up with liberal policies." They oppose the federal government for reasons that have more in common with Confederate State's-Rightsism than any genuine libertarian philosophy or convictions.

I can almost forgive the left-wingers who think that these people are "libertarians," because they so often define themselves that way. However, if these people are libertarians, then the Nazis were "socialists."

I am this type of socialist libertarian.

[ElectionsGuy]

Many of these people were politically homeless and felt something in common, so they latched onto it and thought that was their political home when it wasn't. I reject the idea that this just happens with far-right people. There's a lot of libertarian to Bernie Bro people. Some of them just have a values change, others find out their ideology has values that don't represent them, so they move on. You see a lot of "libertarian to ___" pipeline critiques because there are usually aspects for any dissident voices to appreciate in libertarianism.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A lot of good points mainly the main streaming of many of the libertarian social views and discrediting/reality check/values shift on economic policy means that you run into the evolution left or right/search for new vehicle to express edgy views.


Also a lot of politics is dictated by crowd/scene/identity and thus there is a lot of following the crowed going on in select demographics. This applies here as well as to other areas also.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

There is a personality type that is attracted to expressing extreme or unusual political beliefs, regardless of their character, which is why we could ask the same question about erstwhile Occupiers who became active in Alt Right organizations. Or, for that matter, of erstwhile libertarians who have moved on to DSA-style democratic socialism.

But the assumptions here deserve questioning: Has libertarianism in the US has lost its vitality over the past ten years? The Libertarian Party remains by far the most prominent and organized third force in US politics, Reason has grown into a publication with as much mainstream credibility as any other political magazine in the country, and polling generally shows as a high percentage of the public as ever identifying as libertarians and embracing the most prominent libertarian ideas. Far from being moribund, libertarianism is mainstream.

Libertarian views are no longer unusual enough to support the delusion that they are a substitute for a compelling personality, especially among young people. Someone looking to distinguish themselves as a "character" by virtue of their politics must move on to harder stuff.

Moreover, both major political parties have become more tolerant of extreme beliefs, so there is less need to look toward other political groupings and their organizations as vehicles for that expression.

In addition to those who use outrageous or exotic politics to gain attention, of course, are those who have been disappointed in life and console themselves by thinking how much smarter they are than everyone else that they can see the real truth, while the rest of the world is blind to it. Of course this necessitates an extreme worldview that would appear bizarre to most people, hence the constant slide to the right (or the left) by this bitter malcontents.

[TDAS04]

I reject the premise. There are a ton of people in this country who refer to themselves as "libertarians," but use the word as a smokescreen of sorts to mask their true beliefs. These are the people who stick "Thin Blue Line" flags on their trucks right next to the "Don't Tread On Me" bumper sticker. They often oppose gay marriage, legal weed, and immigration, and define "freedom" as "Being able to go about my day without having to put up with liberal policies." They oppose the federal government for reasons that have more in common with Confederate State's-Rightsism than any genuine libertarian philosophy or convictions.

I can almost forgive the left-wingers who think that these people are "libertarians," because they so often define themselves that way. However, if these people are libertarians, then the Nazis were "socialists."

Great post.

Some people use the terms “free” or “freedom” in truly bizarre ways.  “How can I be free if the homos are allowed to run around and get married?”  

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

This seems odd and strange doesn't it? What the mindset or ideological worldview that causes libertarians to turn against liberty gradually(though not all of them, alot of them do)

The core of libertarianism is the idea that in a free (as in speech, not beer) world, everyone can make the most of themselves without any outside support, particularly without any government support (drawn from taxes, etc). The big catch is that this is only true at all if you already have an advantageous socioeconomic position, typically by virtue of birth (inherited wealth, race, class, etc). The core of the far right is a desire for themselves and people like themselves to occupy by an advantageous socioeconomic position vis a vis everyone else (people with different language, skin, culture, political beliefs, etc). To someone who is already in an advantageous position, any sort of practical equality, even something as simple as unbiased equality of opportunity or meritocracy, or an emergent equality of outcomes from equality of opportunity, can easily look like a threat to their own "achieved purely on merit" relative prosperity. 


tldr; most libertarians are privileged white guys with little self-awareness who freak out when they see people who aren't privileged white guys succeeding, which drives them into the arms of the far-right, which has always been about perpetuating entrenched power of the ruling caste.

[John Dule]

This seems odd and strange doesn't it? What the mindset or ideological worldview that causes libertarians to turn against liberty gradually(though not all of them, alot of them do)

The core of libertarianism is the idea that in a free (as in speech, not beer) world, everyone can make the most of themselves without any outside support, particularly without any government support (drawn from taxes, etc). The big catch is that this is only true at all if you already have an advantageous socioeconomic position, typically by virtue of birth (inherited wealth, race, class, etc). The core of the far right is a desire for themselves and people like themselves to occupy by an advantageous socioeconomic position vis a vis everyone else (people with different language, skin, culture, political beliefs, etc). To someone who is already in an advantageous position, any sort of practical equality, even something as simple as unbiased equality of opportunity or meritocracy, or an emergent equality of outcomes from equality of opportunity, can easily look like a threat to their own "achieved purely on merit" relative prosperity. 


tldr; most libertarians are privileged white guys with little self-awareness who freak out when they see people who aren't privileged white guys succeeding, which drives them into the arms of the far-right, which has always been about perpetuating entrenched power of the ruling caste.

Libertarianism may attract "privileged white guys," but there are a sizable number of "self-made" minority businesspeople and professionals who lean libertarian. Whereas people who are born into "privilege" often turn down a more self-loathing path and become far-leftists, someone who built themselves up from nothing is highly likely to support meritocracy. In other words, able and intelligent people are more likely to be libertarians.

[dead0man]

This seems odd and strange doesn't it? What the mindset or ideological worldview that causes libertarians to turn against liberty gradually(though not all of them, alot of them do)

The core of libertarianism is the idea that in a free (as in speech, not beer) world, everyone can make the most of themselves without any outside support, particularly without any government support (drawn from taxes, etc). The big catch is that this is only true at all if you already have an advantageous socioeconomic position, typically by virtue of birth (inherited wealth, race, class, etc). The core of the far right is a desire for themselves and people like themselves to occupy by an advantageous socioeconomic position vis a vis everyone else (people with different language, skin, culture, political beliefs, etc). To someone who is already in an advantageous position, any sort of practical equality, even something as simple as unbiased equality of opportunity or meritocracy, or an emergent equality of outcomes from equality of opportunity, can easily look like a threat to their own "achieved purely on merit" relative prosperity. 

most libertarians believe that there are some people in society who need assistance from the state to survive.  Very few libertarians believe there should be no govt support for mentally incapable people or the seriously physical handicapped.  I know it's easier in non-libertarian head's to think that way about them, but it's not true.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This article partly answers that question. There were alt-right roots even within prominent libertarians. I guess the best example would be Hans-Hermann Hoppe, but the paleo-libertarians (including Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, and Lew Rockwell) also laid some seeds that bore really ugly fruit in the libertarian/paleocon movement. But the idea espoused by Hoppe, that libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism can only work in a society of 'superiors' of common stock, which in his mind excludes immigrants as well as homosexuals, does not make him or his kind dissimilar from fascists despite identifying as libertarians or ancaps.

[HisGrace]

Paulite libertarianism was the trendy contrarian/edgelord political philosophy in the late Bush/early Obama years. When it became less cool people who were just there for the hottakes moved on to the alt-right. Or even became Bernie Bros. in some instances.

[Tartarus Sauce]

There is a personality type that is attracted to expressing extreme or unusual political beliefs, regardless of their character, which is why we could ask the same question about erstwhile Occupiers who became active in Alt Right organizations. Or, for that matter, of erstwhile libertarians who have moved on to DSA-style democratic socialism.

But the assumptions here deserve questioning: Has libertarianism in the US has lost its vitality over the past ten years? The Libertarian Party remains by far the most prominent and organized third force in US politics, Reason has grown into a publication with as much mainstream credibility as any other political magazine in the country, and polling generally shows as a high percentage of the public as ever identifying as libertarians and embracing the most prominent libertarian ideas. Far from being moribund, libertarianism is mainstream.

Libertarian views are no longer unusual enough to support the delusion that they are a substitute for a compelling personality, especially among young people. Someone looking to distinguish themselves as a "character" by virtue of their politics must move on to harder stuff.

Moreover, both major political parties have become more tolerant of extreme beliefs, so there is less need to look toward other political groupings and their organizations as vehicles for that expression.

In addition to those who use outrageous or exotic politics to gain attention, of course, are those who have been disappointed in life and console themselves by thinking how much smarter they are than everyone else that they can see the real truth, while the rest of the world is blind to it. Of course this necessitates an extreme worldview that would appear bizarre to most people, hence the constant slide to the right (or the left) by this bitter malcontents.

This is also the impetus for conspiracy theory communities.

[John Dule]

There is a personality type that is attracted to expressing extreme or unusual political beliefs, regardless of their character, which is why we could ask the same question about erstwhile Occupiers who became active in Alt Right organizations. Or, for that matter, of erstwhile libertarians who have moved on to DSA-style democratic socialism.

But the assumptions here deserve questioning: Has libertarianism in the US has lost its vitality over the past ten years? The Libertarian Party remains by far the most prominent and organized third force in US politics, Reason has grown into a publication with as much mainstream credibility as any other political magazine in the country, and polling generally shows as a high percentage of the public as ever identifying as libertarians and embracing the most prominent libertarian ideas. Far from being moribund, libertarianism is mainstream.

Libertarian views are no longer unusual enough to support the delusion that they are a substitute for a compelling personality, especially among young people. Someone looking to distinguish themselves as a "character" by virtue of their politics must move on to harder stuff.

Moreover, both major political parties have become more tolerant of extreme beliefs, so there is less need to look toward other political groupings and their organizations as vehicles for that expression.

In addition to those who use outrageous or exotic politics to gain attention, of course, are those who have been disappointed in life and console themselves by thinking how much smarter they are than everyone else that they can see the real truth, while the rest of the world is blind to it. Of course this necessitates an extreme worldview that would appear bizarre to most people, hence the constant slide to the right (or the left) by this bitter malcontents.

This is also the impetus for conspiracy theory communities.

Not to mention religious fanatics.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There has been something of a reality check in recent years as who and why so many of those supporters of various libertarian figures were supporting them. The best example goes back to early 2016 when Massie was bemoaning that so many of "his people" in Kentucky had embraced Donald Trump. Many people might buy into aspects of a libertarian message against the GOP establishment in past years, but naturally are not libertarian themselves and are more closely aligned with Trump than Ron Paul. This may be foreign policy for instance, especially in regions of the country that are historic hot beds of isolationism or anti-war sentiments (large segments of the rural midwest).

Earlier Dule referenced neoconfederates labeling themselves as libertarian. A while back when the video was posted of Ron Paul addressing a group about the Confederacy I noted that a lot of libertarian figures, Paul in that case, love to criticize the excesses of Lincoln in the Civil War context, justify secession in isolation (all reasonable for a libertarian perspective true) but then fail to give a single word of critique to the various violations of civil liberties engaged in by the Southern states before or during the Confederacy. This imbalance obviously caters to a certain demographic with an eye towards bringing them into the fold, without stating the inconvenient aspects that would get in the way.

Its kind of like the Republican establishment and how they slowly created a Frankenstein that no one can reign in, not even Trump, over several decades. Libertarians incorporated a large number of proto-fascists/socialists, thought they had converted them but instead found themselves left high and dry

[progressive85]

It's a statist thing, maybe?  A lot of government controls and regulations people encounter in their daily lives seem that they are coming from Big Government and so the libertarians really hate that and they should because some of the rules are ridiculous and overbearing.  Libertarian is not just "I like pot, let's smoke it".  It's also economic and that might be the entryway into that kind of thought pattern.  If you have a small business and government regulations crush it into the ground in its first year, you definitely do have a problem with it and so that may be how you start to see the world - and the Republican Party these days is aligned with a very socio-cultural kind of far right but if they advocate for less regulations and less taxes then it's just where you go.

[CEO Mindset]

there seems to be two major paths u see libertarians taking... in my experience just as many if not more libertarians end up transitioning first to "bleeding heart libertarian" to more fiscally conservative/pro business liberals

libertarian -> "far right"(motivated either by taxes/wanting to be discriminatory legally)
libertarian -> more "centrist"/free market liberal(motivated by taxes/realizing corporate power is helpful for enforcing progressivism)

[HisGrace]

The simplest way to understand some of these people is that they are libertarians with respect to the federal government.

Trust vs. distrust of the feds is an underrated axis of opinion underlying US politics, and the root of quite a few mistaken assumptions.

You see this with a lot of paleocons, they don't care if gays in California can get married, they just want it illegal in their state. If I recall Ron Paul voted against a number of federal abortion restrictions like banning sex selective abortions and banning "interstate" abortions just because he didn't think it was a federal issue.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Not really rocket science. Propertarianism is a defence of privilege against the encroachment of the equalising modern state. It's only to be expected that some (I don't know how many) take it to the logical conclusion of supporting monarchical feudalism, like Hoppe does.

[Vosem]

Not really rocket science. Propertarianism is a defence of privilege against the encroachment of the equalising modern state. It's only to be expected that some (I don't know how many) take it to the logical conclusion of supporting monarchical feudalism, like Hoppe does.

The modern state is many things but in no 20th- or 21st-century incarnation -- whether liberal democracy, fascist, communist, theocratic, colonial -- has it been "equalizing".

[CEO Mindset]

Not really rocket science. Propertarianism is a defence of privilege against the encroachment of the equalising modern state. It's only to be expected that some (I don't know how many) take it to the logical conclusion of supporting monarchical feudalism, like Hoppe does.

lol

billionaires only exist bc of the modern state protecting their monopolies/cartels with things like the modern regulatory state, credentialism, "intellectual property"

[Statilius the Epicurean]

The modern state is many things but in no 20th- or 21st-century incarnation -- whether liberal democracy, fascist, communist, theocratic, colonial -- has it been "equalizing".

This is so absurd I don't really know how to respond. What do you think progressive taxation is?

billionaires only exist bc of the modern state protecting their monopolies/cartels with things like the modern regulatory state, credentialism, "intellectual property"

The modern regulatory state emerged in order to check the 19th century billionaire (in present money) industrialist robber barons who were forming cartels among each other. Do you actually believe premodern income inequality was low?

[CEO Mindset]

literal feudal or premodern landlords/nobles are a different sort of inequality than the kind of billionaires we've got now

not saying they're good but just that we need to do something about billionaires as a class. i figure taxing the hell out of economic rents, shifting taxation in that direction instead of income/sales/property taxes which billionaires can just buy loopholes in easily, getting rid of alot of regulatory stuff/credentialism they use to block competition and strong antitrust would help ofc

well that and making the economy/capitalism be more between consenting adults by attacking cost disease, popping asset bubbles, implementing national healthcare/ubi so that you don't see the kind of desperation that forces ppl to accept employment on bad terms

[Statilius the Epicurean]

literal feudal or premodern landlords/nobles are a different sort of inequality than the kind of billionaires we've got now

not saying they're good but just that we need to do something about billionaires as a class. i figure taxing the hell out of economic rents, shifting taxation in that direction instead of income/sales/property taxes which billionaires can just buy loopholes in easily, getting rid of alot of regulatory stuff/credentialism they use to block competition and strong antitrust would help ofc

well that and making the economy/capitalism be more between consenting adults by attacking cost disease, popping asset bubbles, implementing national healthcare/ubi so that you don't see the kind of desperation that forces ppl to accept employment on bad terms

Doctrinaire libertarians are opposed to most of that so I don't know why you "lol"ed at me. I don't think our politics are that different in what you just said.