Many of them are more libertarian-leaning, and in no universe does libertarian = authoritarian. Trump represents the authoritarians.
They’re a front for big money interests. They are worthless and weak and should be pissed on at your e-v-e-r-y convenience.
On the other hand, their platform fits on a post-it note :
- More money for us
- Fuck you
That’s it.
They’re not libertarians; libertarians are socialists.
They advocate some sort of laissez-faire capitalism, which is an authoritarian slave system.
In their minds they equate freedom with freedom from the social safety net and freedom from government regulation of business.
yes, freedom to cheat, freedom to pollute, freedom to act like a greedy bastard.
Libertarians are just passive-aggressive authoritarians.
You are no plagiarism fighter, sir.
You don’t need to be an auto mechanic if all you want to do is hit a car with a sledge hammer.
They want to get rid of government interference; or at least up to the point where it bumps into their own paychecks and health insurance.
Exactly. Red-flag code words, every one. Also, words like "research, “institute”, or “council” can be introduced to lend an official-sounding and sciencey aura. Something like the “Family Research Council”, for instance. They do no research and have nothing to do with families, but it sounds ever so much better than “Gang of Homophobic Bigots”.
Sure it does. Libertarians only object to authoritarianism in the hands of the Evil Gubbermint. They appear to be deeply offended by any kind of law or regulation that supports the public interest. But libertarians have no problem at all with authoritarianism in private hands, like gouging, discrimination, and general malfeasance and abuse by corporate monopolies and powerful individuals.
Well, you gotta hold a caucus race to dry all those lib tears
Rotflmao
Don’t forget
- Heritage.
Good one.
Toss the word “global” in there.
There’s a specific strain of “libertarianism” in the USA that specifically objects to federal power, even if the feds are reducing the power of a state to harm individuals. If a federal court prohibits a state government from criminalizing homosexuality, they view that as a reduction of liberty. I’m not sure libertarian is actually a good word for this, but it’s very common to see people with these views (like Ron Paul) described as libertarians.
You clearly have no idea what the word “authoritarian” means, and I would strongly suggest paying a visit to your local library for a Merriam Webster’s dictionary. You clearly dislike the Freedom Caucus, given your hyperbolic comparison of them to slaveowners, which is fine. But nothing they advocate could reasonably be considered “slavery” in any way, shape or form. They believe in capitalism and the free market, and that the economy works best when we aren’t over-regulated, when there are limited but reasonable regulations that don’t stifle business growth.
They are hardline conservatives and budget cutting crusaders, yes, as they believe it is necessary to eliminate as much wasteful and unnecessary spending as possible in order to help pay for Trump’s reasonable upcoming tax reform, including lowering corporate tax rates as we have one of the highest in the world.
No Freedom Caucus Republican has ever told anyone to starve to death or blindly “do what their capitalist masters” tell them to. They believe in putting more money in the American people’s pocketbook to help the economy grow, who will then be able to do whatever they want with the money after lawfully paying their taxes. Their “capitalist masters” don’t tell them what or how to spend their money, so that notion of yours is also false.
Lord have mercy.
Never mind that your entire post is missing the point of this thread, I will address this part.
In case you didn’t notice it, the hilariously failed attempt to repeal ACA had money going back to the most wealthy Americans at the cost of insurance for the poor. Now, an attempt to shift even more of the tax burden away from wealthy and corporate entities seems like a good idea? You often hear politicians talking about the importance of the middle class, yet shit like ‘tax reform’ is destroying the middle class, expanding the lower class and enriching just a handful. Is that what you stand for?