Have you ever met someone who went from being a Libertarian to a Leftist?

[RP Supporter]

Just something I'm curious about. I've known a few people who have made this change, and have never really understood it. It just seems bewitching to me that someone could go from believing in individual freedoms to believing that the government should run your life in all sorts of way. I've seen a few lefty blogs where people claimed to be former Libertarians, but now believe a Libertarian society would only benefit the super rich. Because a society with a strong and powerful government has done such wonders at taking care of the poor and middle class.

On a similar note, have you known any people who became Conservatives from Libertarian? The only ones I've known there have been the types that "9/11 changed everything" for. And they were arguably not Libertarians to begin with.

[The Goat]

Some people just want to be on the winning team. fan boy bandwagon mentality. lot more followers than leaders.

[thequietkid10]

I think your missing something. For most Americans it's not about freedom it's about creating a better life

Most leftist (at least outside the beltway) don't wake every morning and say "I wonder how I can increase the size of government and decrease my freedoms today" They think "they're is this "problem" how can I fix it." And the answer is usually more government. Big government is the means to the end and if they have gone from "libertarian" to leftist (assuming of course they aren't just someone who rages against the machine) it's because they've lost faith that the market can solve their problem.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Just something I'm curious about. I've known a few people who have made this change, and have never really understood it. It just seems bewitching to me that someone could go from believing in individual freedoms to believing that the government should run your life in all sorts of way. I've seen a few lefty blogs where people claimed to be former Libertarians, but now believe a Libertarian society would only benefit the super rich.

I'll take a quick shot at why... which is often how people become marxists, etc. They realize there is a problem (which seems to be a mental feat in itself these days) and then wrongly decide on a solution. They partially misidentify the problem, then provide an inadequate solution. They misidentify the problem because they equate wealth with power. Then they wrongly decide on a solution because they have been told that government is by "the people" and "the people" should be reigning in "the super rich." It seems they fail to look at the history of governmental abuse.... by the rich, or people who become "the rich" through abuse of government power.

Marxists are idealists, usually well intentioned. It works well on a family level, which is what they may have personal experience with.

As far as "I used to be... but now I'm..." A lot of those are possibly fake testimonials aimed at a target audience.

[Brian4Liberty]

Yes, people can be bought. Government dole changes people. Greed is good.

[tttppp]

My guess is that the majority of people who make that switch didn't really understand free markets in the first place. Obama and his supporters always point to the Bush era as an excuse for more regulations and justify it by saying less regulation didn't work for Bush. Obviously they are wrong because the problem with the Bush era was that we were already overregulated, not underregulated.

[Indy Vidual]

If you are a real Libertarian (understanding the NAP, etc), then it's hard to ever change, IMO.*
*Ironically, you are asking the question in a venue where a significant number of real Libertarians are getting down and dirty with impure, evil Republicans.

[Indy Vidual]

...
On a similar note, have you known any people who became Conservatives from Libertarian?...

Based on some detailed reports, young Michelle Malkin used to be a genuine large-L libertarian, in Seattle WA.

[specsaregood]

Some people just want to be on the winning team. fan boy bandwagon mentality. lot more followers than leaders.

At the same time, some people just want to be on the underdog losing team.

[Indy Vidual]

At the same time, some people just want to be on the underdog losing team.

The underdog does not always lose.

[Carson]

How to trap a wild pig.

[heavenlyboy34]

Just something I'm curious about. I've known a few people who have made this change, and have never really understood it. It just seems bewitching to me that someone could go from believing in individual freedoms to believing that the government should run your life in all sorts of way. I've seen a few lefty blogs where people claimed to be former Libertarians, but now believe a Libertarian society would only benefit the super rich. Because a society with a strong and powerful government has done such wonders at taking care of the poor and middle class.

On a similar note, have you known any people who became Conservatives from Libertarian? The only ones I've known there have been the types that "9/11 changed everything" for. And they were arguably not Libertarians to begin with.

Libertarianism comes to us from the classical left liberal tradition, so your premise is rather flawed. I don't know any "conservative-turned libertarian" folks except myself. I had to abandon conservatism because it's so full of poor logic and immorality. The saving grace of the conservative movement is the "Old Right". Otherwise, it would have no significant utility in the push for greater liberty.

[Sola_Fide]

Just something I'm curious about. I've known a few people who have made this change, and have never really understood it. It just seems bewitching to me that someone could go from believing in individual freedoms to believing that the government should run your life in all sorts of way. I've seen a few lefty blogs where people claimed to be former Libertarians, but now believe a Libertarian society would only benefit the super rich. Because a society with a strong and powerful government has done such wonders at taking care of the poor and middle class.

On a similar note, have you known any people who became Conservatives from Libertarian? The only ones I've known there have been the types that "9/11 changed everything" for. And they were arguably not Libertarians to begin with.

Sadly, I think many people today who call themselves libertarians are leftists on a wide range of issues.

[LibForestPaul]

If you are a real Libertarian (understanding the NAP, etc), then it's hard to ever change, IMO.*
*Ironically, you are asking the question in a venue where a significant number of real Libertarians are getting down and dirty with impure, evil Republicans.

bingo.

read the comments from tech site(above avg intelligence) about ron paul
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...1#comments-bar

bricewgilbert wrote:
When your view is that the government can do no good ever it's tough to come to some common ground on issues such as this.


Agreed, to put a different point on it I believe that a government should serve its people. If it doesn't then the answer is to fix it so that it does, not do away with it as a concept.

[LibForestPaul]

NAP and then Voluntarism should be espoused by every libertarian whom wants others educated.
Forget labels to divide. Ideas win wars.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Just something I'm curious about. I've known a few people who have made this change, and have never really understood it. It just seems bewitching to me that someone could go from believing in individual freedoms to believing that the government should run your life in all sorts of way. I've seen a few lefty blogs where people claimed to be former Libertarians, but now believe a Libertarian society would only benefit the super rich. Because a society with a strong and powerful government has done such wonders at taking care of the poor and middle class.

On a similar note, have you known any people who became Conservatives from Libertarian? The only ones I've known there have been the types that "9/11 changed everything" for. And they were arguably not Libertarians to begin with.

Sounds like a Bill Maher type:

He used to think Libertarian meant "legalizing weed and stuff".

I doub't they understood the libertarian philosophies.

[DerailingDaTrain]

The underdog does not always lose.

Rocky 1

[LibertyEagle]

Libertarianism comes to us from the classical left liberal tradition,

Uh... NO. Classical liberalism was not leftist. Not even in the tiniest little bit.

so your premise is rather flawed. I don't know any "conservative-turned libertarian" folks except myself. I had to abandon conservatism because it's so full of poor logic and immorality. The saving grace of the conservative movement is the "Old Right". Otherwise, it would have no significant utility in the push for greater liberty.

[asurfaholic]

How to trap a wild pig.

Good read, thanks for posting. Very relevant.

[MelissaWV]

Being aware and active is difficult, and frustrating. There are people out there who simply have lives clogged with other interests, and politics is the everlasting decision of which leg to have amputated with a rusty steak knife. People ignore it because it's a terrible choice. You may say that you don't want either leg cut off, that you disagree, but ultimately the sawing is going to begin, because your fellows have said "LEFT" or "RIGHT" with great enthusiasm, and you are carried along for the pain.

I find most people really aren't in agreement with either extreme, but that's the easiest way to discuss politics, and after all they're all corrupt and no one worth a damn will ever win the presidency and very few wind up in Congress. I find it more and more difficult to dig up counterexamples for them.

[fisharmor]

Yes, I have a very good friend who was trying to get me involved in the Libertarian Party back in the 90's.
Probably because we smoked pot together a lot and she figured I was also the type of person who wanted to legalize it.
(I am now, but I wasn't then, because I didn't respond to the "I want to do this so it should be legal" argument.)
Then she had her first kid who ended up being autistic.
Now she can't wait to get medical handouts.

And the worst part is that she won't engage her brain on the matter at all. At one point I told her "So you never even thought to ask me for help with your problem, after all we've been through, yet you're willing to send armed goons for my money so you can have it?"
Answer: "Absolutely."
($#@!ing atheists.....)

I assume there are lots of "libertarians" like this. "I want my free stuff and don't bother trying to figure out if there's a philosophically consistent ideology behind me asking for it."

[luctor-et-emergo]

It is only those Libertarians which do not subscribe to voluntarism that will switch between leftist and libertarians IMO.
I know a couple of leftists here that agree with me on most issues, but are not yet capable of understanding the principles voluntarism and why that would be better. They are issues based libertarians. They care about their own personal freedom but lack the knowledge and understanding - or common sense - to understand that freedom means something different to everyone else, and in order to protect their own freedom, they need to protect other peoples freedoms too...
In these specific cases (in my experience), there is some form of dependency on government. I can see this as being bought, however, sometimes it's a sort of personal protection racket.
People know that without the government they would not have these 'benefits' but instead they would have opportunities. Yet they fear change. Especially when they have kids. I can understand it can be hard for people, and I can't blame them, but I try to educate them on voluntarism.

[KingRobbStark]

I knew a guy who switched over. I believe his name was Bull $#@!.

[RP Supporter]

Thanks for the replies. I just can't believe that people can see the excesses of the Bush and Obama administrations, with the patriot act, the endless wars, and then turn around and conclude "Yeah, what we need is even bigger government, but in the right hands. That will solve our problems."

Ah well. The good news is I think these sorts of people are a very small minority. Thankfully many people are starting to wake up to the dangers of that sort of thinking, that giving the government more authority will magically make the world a better place.

[VIDEODROME]

Maybe I'm on the fence and just willing to explore "Safety Nets". In my own experience I have collected State Unemployment Insurance, but for me the key part is it was a state level program. Same for other emergency services.

So I lean on the enumerated powers to the Federal Government and the 10th Amendment. Domestic initiatives belong to local government and my understanding is that even in Canada their health program is actually Provincial. At most maybe the Federal government is used to coordinate funding, but the real authority should belong to local government.


I also consider Taxation as a related side issue. I loath the IRS and income tax and would like to find a way to get away from that. For example event taxes or Excise tax like Gasoline makes more sense.

But in the end if I discuss this with Liberals I still say I want a more Libertarian Federal government. We don't need the Federal government to create safety nets though those should be organized and voted on locally.

[Brett85]

I can't think of anybody. I personally went from neo-conservative to libertarian-leaning paleo conservative.

[angelatc]

And the worst part is that she won't engage her brain on the matter at all. At one point I told her "So you never even thought to ask me for help with your problem, after all we've been through, yet you're willing to send armed goons for my money so you can have it?"
Answer: "Absolutely."
($#@!ing atheists.....)

I assume there are lots of "libertarians" like this. "I want my free stuff and don't bother trying to figure out if there's a philosophically consistent ideology behind me asking for it."

Your mistake is in thinking that all people will believe in the non-aggression philosophy if it's only explained to them.

That sums up two of our biggest obstacles.

[torchbearer]

Your mistake is in thinking that all people will believe in the non-aggression philosophy if it's only explained to them.

That sums up two of our biggest obstacles.

right, because nap only appeals to people who believe in the golden rule.
treat others in the way i want to be treated.
i don't want someone killing me, so i won't kill others.
i don't want someone to steal from me, so i won't steal from others

you also have the anti-social part of our population who are so egocentric that the idea of other people being like themselves is foreign.
other people are objects to be used and abused by the anti-social.
those types of people will never agree with nap, even if they understood it.

[angelatc]

right, because nap only appeals to people who believe in the golden rule.
treat others in the way i want to be treated.
i don't want someone killing me, so i won't kill others.
i don't want someone to steal from me, so i won't steal from others

you also have the anti-social part of our population who are so egocentric that the idea of other people being like themselves is foreign.
other people are objects to be used and abused by the anti-social.
those types of people will never agree with nap, even if they understood it.

Yes, there's a huge divide between people who think that it's perfectly acceptable - desirable even - to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran even though they have never, ever been the aggressor in any of the skirmishes they've been involved in. Because, you see, they might someday be an aggressor.

Bullies gonna bully.

[Origanalist]

//