No, all I did was point out that you made an ad hominem attack on a bunch of people you don’t know and tried to claim it as truth.

I agree. The Libertarian Party has become a haven for the crazies. It’s sad, really. But every party has dumbasses in it.

Ah, so my guess is that you are perfectly happy with the (I presume) Democratic Party is now? So you have ideals that you are in general agreement with them about, and they are the perfect embodiment of those ideals? You are lucky

OK, I’ll bite. How about “Libertarians want just enough government to make sure they can economically exploit the fuck out of you without someone telling them how they can and cannot go about that exploitation. They basically want the government to be the dirty prison guard who holds back a rival gang from intervening…

Like I said elsewhere, that cuts both ways though. While they would not support equal rights legislation, they also would not support Jim Crow laws, laws restricting abortion, the NC bathroom bill, etc. Government can be bad at civil rights as well, you know

I agree with that, and that lies more along with my personal views. I am heavily involved with the foster system, which desperately needs more money. As a libertarian, I guess I’m supposed to be opposed to it, but I’m not because there’s a desperate need. I believe we need government at times, but I also believe it…

Remember it goes both ways. They may not champion legislation guaranteeing social protections, but they also are against legislation restricting civil rights. So no, there would be no ERA but there would also be no Jim Crow laws and enforced segregation

I agree entirely

Ding-ding-ding, we have a winner!

A very good point.

Was that sarcastic?

Unfortunately, you’re right. It’s become something of a haven for militia types and conspiracy theorists. It’s pretty embarrassing, really

You are correct, libertarianism is not “progressive”. That’s sort of the point. “Progressive” means a lot of different things to a lot of different people.

You should go study some more and then come back for an actual informed debate. Or don’t, no skin off my back

Could be

I agree with you, actually, though I fall in the camp of trying to restrict the government where possible while also conceding it’s not possible all or even most of the time.

Yep, you are one of those many people who have no idea what libertarianism is about. Nor, apparently, do you care to learn

And they also, in this hypothetical world, are not going to exclude gays from the military, restrict abortion, perpetuate the war on drugs, etc

No, they don’t generally believe in passing laws where social pressures could do the job. When word got out about the bakers who wouldn’t bake cakes for gay people, they came under tremendous scrutiny and pressure from the majority of the public. You may think laws are needed, others don’t.

That’s because it’s a relatively new, fringe party that has shown absolutely no skill whatsoever in getting its message out. I don’t see why minorities would have issues with their policies, per se. They’re not anti-immigration, they’re pro-civil rights, etc