Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

RageFuel Why Are So Many Men Libertarians

Eremetic

Eremetic

Neo Luddite • Unknown
-
Joined
Oct 25, 2023
Posts
3,784
Most women seem to enjoy the benefits of big government, they enjoy having the unlimited access to other mens tax dollars without having the need to fornicate with them, the laws in place to protect them from harm (examples such as Obama's domestic violence laws and the equal rights amendment), however, if you noticed a lot of men, conversely, take up libertarian stances, there's probably a reason why. A lot of men enjoy being able to keep the entirety of their paychecks, which if it were allowed, and no government oversight wouldn't force them to pay their fair share, women would essentially have to rely on men directly for their commodities. Of course no (gays excluded for obvious reasons) man is going to let this pass unless he gets something in return (voluntary exchange) for his services, barring internet onlyfans simps, which is a part of modern decadence mostly reserved for the most simpy of zoomer kids and some late millennials. He would at least require compensation right? Obviously you know what I mean when I say this.

However, going further, lets say a shitload of laws were repealed too. The further the state removes its presence, the more barbarous men will become. Obviously Thomas Hobbes warned of this, but like Aristotle’s concept of polis everything will end up re-arranged according to natural virtue. At that point in time, there will be a rapid reorganization of society that (in all likelihood) would be a lot like the primitive era, regardless how much technology we've accumulated. Then women would have to acquire security by marriage, instead of prostituting themselves like they do in the modern era. This in which has run counter to Karl Marx's assumption of history that mankind began as collectivist entity. What Marx fails to realize, is that, he doesn't account for sexual behavior in any of his writings (im just assuming here) or that essentially he's borrowing from Rousseau's concept "man in nature good person" which post-Romantic thinkers like Nietzsche and Proudhon, sought to remove from discourse. Essentially, there is a trade-off between male happiness and female happiness which I think only people like Sigmund Freud (yes I know he's a jew) ever entertained, though I tend to think its not just intrinsic human nature but also extra-psychological qualities like the role of the state in human affairs and the general zeitgeist (borrowed from Hegel) of the current era, depending on which era it is. Today we live in a very feminized time and place so the idea so those kinds of concepts will probably never be entertained by the academic mainstream for some time until possibly way after most of us are gone and gerontocracy has kicked the bucket. It doesn't seem like they're willing to let it go just yet.
 
Dmwugsw004931

except all the “men” like this
 
They all believe themselves to be temporarily embarrassed millionaires, just like they believe themselves to be temporarily embarrassed Chads whenever we talk about our issues. They believe that if only something was different in society, they'd be drowning in money and pussy.
 
Libertarianism is not the way, though.

To prevent the government from becoming socialist, you just have to prevent women from voting, because women are natural socialists, they are wired to seek a provider. They make the government their sugar daddy.

Actually, I wouldn't bother giving anyone the right to vote. Instead of deciding things by vote, what if we decided things by reason? Most people are too stupid and ignorant to choose rightly, so an elite of exceptional intelligence and reasoning skills might be the way forward.

Some things could be decided by the majority, of course. But in general, people shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 
Instead of deciding things by vote, what if we decided things by reason? Most people are too stupid and ignorant to choose rightly, so an elite of exceptional intelligence and reasoning skills might be the way forward.
And who, pray tell, will get to decide who belongs to said elite? Conveniently ignoring the initialization for the moment, if it's the elites themselves, what's to prevent them from hiring people who agree with them, thereby turning the whole thing dogmatic, thus undermining its initial purpose? This'll never work.
 
And who, pray tell, will get to decide who belongs to said elite? Conveniently ignoring the initialization for the moment, if it's the elites themselves, what's to prevent them from hiring people who agree with them, thereby turning the whole thing dogmatic, thus undermining its initial purpose? This'll never work.
Okay chink, so what's your alternative system? Democracy clearly doesn't work. So what's going to replace it?
 
All Foids are worthless sponges and parasites on society
 
Okay chink, so what's your alternative system? Democracy clearly doesn't work. So what's going to replace it?
How quaint of you to assume I'm a chink. To answer your question, I think the real problem is the baseness of human nature. As such, I think politics is largely cope. If you want to repress certain aspects of human nature, you need some form of religion, not politics. FYI, I'm construing religion rather broadly here -- e.g., wokeism is a religion of sorts.
 
How quaint of you to assume I'm a chink. To answer your question, I think the real problem is the baseness of human nature. As such, I think politics is largely cope. If you want to repress certain aspects of human nature, you need some form of religion, not politics. FYI, I'm construing religion rather broadly here -- e.g., wokeism is a religion of sorts.
Makes sense. Of course culture/religion is more important in shaping behavior than the government, so the change should begin from the bottom to the top, not from top to bottom. And I remember you said something about being a son of East Asian immigrants, but that might not have been you.
 

Similar threads

DarkStarDown
Replies
11
Views
467
LeFrenchCel
LeFrenchCel
T
Replies
18
Views
371
based_meme
B
leafblown
LifeFuel Ghostcel
Replies
3
Views
397
leafblown
leafblown
WorthlessSlavicShit
Replies
46
Views
2K
greggymex7
greggymex7

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top