por que no los dos? technically speaking he's both since he's an anarcho-capitalist, lol
I'd be inclined to agree if not for the fact that he's constantly changing his narrative when it suits him
which just so happens to be a classic tactic in the fascism playbook, funny that
Personally I find it difficult to call him a libertarian when there are so many existing liberties that he wants to make illegal (see the parts of his agenda labelled 'homophobia' and 'misogyny').
Not that a label being misleading would ever have stopped a politician from applying it to themselves as long as they think it gets them votes...
Personally I find it difficult to call him a libertarian when there are so many existing liberties that he wants to make illegal (see the parts of his agenda labelled ‘homophobia’ and ‘misogyny’).
well, that's just most right-libertarians (and especially anarcho-capitalists) if we're being honest. the practice decidedly does not correspond with their stated principles for most of them--to the point where it might be more dishonest to describe them by their principles than not.
the practice decidedly does not correspond with their stated principles for most of them
No argument here. It just bugs me how some people misappropriate words. It's a bit like Swiss neo-Nazis having resorted to calling themselves "patriots". Being a racist bellend doesn't make you a patriot, just as wanting to roll back several decades of gender equality doesn't make you a libertarian.
I just wish that people would understand that if you're afraid to call yourself what you really are in public, you should probably reconsider your ideology, not the word you use to describe it. Yes, I'm aware that that's asking too much.
far right* candidate
por que no los dos? technically speaking he's both since he's an anarcho-capitalist, lol
I'd be inclined to agree if not for the fact that he's constantly changing his narrative when it suits him
which just so happens to be a classic tactic in the fascism playbook, funny that
Personally I find it difficult to call him a libertarian when there are so many existing liberties that he wants to make illegal (see the parts of his agenda labelled 'homophobia' and 'misogyny').
Not that a label being misleading would ever have stopped a politician from applying it to themselves as long as they think it gets them votes...
well, that's just most right-libertarians (and especially anarcho-capitalists) if we're being honest. the practice decidedly does not correspond with their stated principles for most of them--to the point where it might be more dishonest to describe them by their principles than not.
No argument here. It just bugs me how some people misappropriate words. It's a bit like Swiss neo-Nazis having resorted to calling themselves "patriots". Being a racist bellend doesn't make you a patriot, just as wanting to roll back several decades of gender equality doesn't make you a libertarian.
I just wish that people would understand that if you're afraid to call yourself what you really are in public, you should probably reconsider your ideology, not the word you use to describe it. Yes, I'm aware that that's asking too much.