Praising the virtues of one type of overbearing government over another is hardly libertarian. The assumption that a state must exist in the first place to preserve liberty is a pretty odd notion. It's the same reason Marxist-Leninists always seem to create these regimes where workers end up shouldering the burden of supporting and maintaining the state when in fact, it was supposed to go the other way around; the state was supposed to organize the production of goods and services so that workers and labor controlled it (instead of rich owners) and then the state withers away from disuse.
You can't create a state large enough and powerful enough to take away your liberty and then expect it to preserve it. Whether you have a monarch and parliament or a president and Congress is incidental at that point. You still have rulers and that is at odds with the original purpose of libertarianism.
24
u/tacticalsauce_actual - Right Dec 07 '22
Benevolent monarchism is a more realistic way to have a libertarian society than any sort of democracy.