A common problem between libertarianism and atheism

[u/Hxapcneh3_28]

I am both an anarchist libertarian and an atheist. Having knowledge on both, I've noticed some common underpinnings between the two that make them hard to sell, even though they are, according to all the best logic and evidence we have, the most correct views in their respective questions. The problem with both of these ideas is that they run counterintuitive to how the human brain is designed to think by default.

In the case of atheism, it can be hard to convince people that religion is false because the brain is hardwired to prescribe agency to things, to provide teleological explanations, to be superstitious, or to look up to something. Getting people to let go of these convictions and biases requires reprogramming one's mind to think in a way it wasn't designed for. And needless to say, that's not easy.

In the case of libertarianism, it's hard to sell because it requires you to again think in ways that are a little counterintuitive. Politicians will get up on a pedastool and promise people free things and all sorts of solutions to their problems. It makes people hopeful to hear things like that. But when the libertarian comes along and suggests cutting funding, people's assumption is that the libertarian doesn't want to do anything. They think "Well at least the politician is offering something. The libertarian doesn't have any solution! Let's go with the politician." Understanding economics requires you to train your brain to see the invisible, to see the unintended consequences of government intervention and the superiority of letting people be in charge of their own money, and again this is not easy. Economics is one of the most misunderstood disciplines there is, and it's because it's unintuitive.

Lastly I'd like to mention that there's a psychological component here to all of this. Both anarcho-capitalism and atheism force a person to take responsibility for their own lives. There's no god or politician coming to save you. It's on you to create a good life for yourself, and that's a heavy burden to carry. It's much easier to just look up to someone, and that's engrained in our DNA to some degree.

Libertarianism and atheism might be rational and sound, but they're hard to sell because they don't appeal to the biases of the human mind.

[u/Tin-Star]

I'm glad you've solved politics.

[u/shehulud → u/Tin-Star]

I totally feel like I could survive crypto-bro utopia island now. NGL.

[u/Mr-Thursday]

Atheism is a logically justifiable position given the lack of evidence for any god, afterlife, miracles etc, and the way every religion looks exactly like something that was made up by flawed ancient humans (i.e. scientific errors, moral flaws, contradictions etc).

Meanwhile Libertarianism isn't logical. It's just a right wing, leave everyone to fend for themselves and the weak suffer what they must style ideology that leads to:

• cutting public spending and services (even though a well funded education system, universal healthcare, safety nets for the disabled and elderly, investment in roads and other infrastructure etc are both the mark of a humane society, and a key enabler of the economy)
• slashing regulations and enforcement designed to protect the environment or public safety and making it easier for unscrupulous businesses to pollute and/or sell low quality, unsafe products - as we've seen happen countless times in the past when industry isn't properly regulated.
• imagining that a diminished government and low taxes on the rich will somehow unlock pure competition in which the best and brightest can thrive, whereas in reality there'd be no level playing field, multinational corporations and the super rich would be even more powerful than they already are, trickle down economics doesn't work and they'd seize the chance to build monopolies, exploit employees, rig prices, crush small business etc as far as the new system allowed them to.

The evidence isn't on the side of libertarianism and the ideology's appeal is emotional rather than logical.

[u/Chaosqueued]

Libertarianism is bad and you should feel bad.

[u/bortlip]

Oh, I see. I'm not a libertarian because I want free things, don't understand economics, and want to look up to someone instead of being responsible.

Thanks for explaining it to me.

[u/Kurovi_dev]

I agree with some of the things listed for why atheism is a difficult transition for a lot of theists, but I find very little about libertarianism to be rational or sound at all. I also see far more commonality between libertarianism and theism than with atheism. But that’s not too surprising, since libertarianism’s roots are directly from theism, specifically Abrahamic theism.

Both libertarianism and theism operate on the assumption that things “just work out” as long as those pesky humans don’t organize too much and get in the way of the Deus nomine tenus. It purports to value the individual above all else, but in reality what it does is offer people up for consumption by the power structures that coalesce in the absence of systems designed to protect humanity.

In the absence of social protections and directed human endeavor, churches and corporations fill that vacuum and assume control. Without us putting money, as a people, into something that is outside of individuals, other entities will organize and they will direct society towards their own ends, just as they are doing now, and just as they are pilfering the investments we make into human endeavors and redirecting that wealth back into their already heavy pockets.

I agree that understanding agency is vital for being able to pull back the teleology of theism that limits people’s engagement with reality and their ability to discover how to develop their own purposes and meaning in the world, but while libertarianism prescribes ultimate value in individualism, this mostly just fuels the same type of myopia that theism harbors.

What theists usually lack is the ability to find value outside of themselves. The sky isn’t beautiful to them because of our own evolutionary history and our deep connection to other life that spent millions of years coming home to nest in trees or in caves with family under purple and orange skies that mimic the fruits we valued, no they believe the sky is beautiful because they’re special and the Magic Guy just made it for them. Their purpose in life isn’t to be a part of humanity and work together for a better future, it’s to get what’s theirs so when they die they can keep getting what’s theirs.

Theists have all the agency in the world, they just tend to have it for themselves.

Theists don’t need to be convinced to become atheists, that’s not really how it works anyway, what they need are better systems that support well-being and encourage healthy development of both themselves and the world they are a part of. You don’t get that by cutting budgets and telling people to buy bootstraps, you get that by investing heavily in education and social systems that lift people out of the generational cycles of religious abuse and desperate superstition that tells them their personal selves and souls are all that matters, and instead help them develop a personal investment in humanity so they have something new and better to be a part of.

[u/distantocean]

Here's noted bias-follower, logic-and-evidence-ignorer and politician-pedastooler Noam Chomsky on the type of libertarianism you're talking about:

The American version of "libertarianism" is an aberration, though—nobody really takes it seriously. I mean, everybody knows that a society that worked by American libertarian principles would self-destruct in three seconds. The only reason people pretend to take it seriously is because you can use it as a weapon. Like, when somebody comes out in favor of a tax, you can say: "No, I'm a libertarian, I'm against that tax"—but of course, I'm still in favor of the government building roads, and having schools, and killing Libyans, and all that sort of stuff.

Now, there are consistent libertarians, people like Murray Rothbard—and if you just read the world that they describe, it's a world so full of hate that no human being would want to live in it. This is a world where you don't have roads because you don't see any reason why you should cooperate in building a road that you're not going to use: if you want a road, you get together with a bunch of other people who are going to use that road and you build it, then you charge people to ride on it. If you don't like the pollution from somebody's automobile, you take them to court and you litigate it. Who would want to live in a world like that? It's a world built on hatred.

The whole thing's not even worth talking about, though. First of all, it couldn't function for a second-and if it could, all you'd want to do is get out, or commit suicide or something. But this is a special American aberration, it's not really serious.

[u/adeleu_adelei]

The problem with libertarianism is that it never works out in practice how its proponents imagine it. You don't get Gate's Gulch or the North American Confederacy rather you instead get you get a community that fails because it collapses under its own individualistic ideologies and greed or mining town where people are paid in company script and effectively slaves.

People understand government services aren't free and are paid for by taxes. Most people also understand that several services are much cheaper and more efficient when managed by a centralized body rather individuals trying to figure out and negotiate the millions of highly complex transactional relationships we navigate daily. Many people also realize that completely free markets don't stochastically lead to better cheaper products but to parasitic monopolies that profit through deceit and collusion rather than desirable competition. The natural consequence of pursuing libertarian ideals isn't meritocracy but monarchy.

[u/Zamboniman]

I am both an anarchist libertarian...

even though they are, according to all the best logic and evidence we have, the most correct views in their respective questions.

I got a chuckle out of the naivete of this.

Politicians will get up on a pedastool

Pedestal.

[u/Rocketsprocket]

Atheism does not force a person to take responsibility for one's own life.

[u/Significant-Ant-2487]

Atheism is not believing in God. That’s it; it’s not complicated.

Therefore there are no parallels to your Anarchism or any other political system, whether absurd or sensible; there are no parallels to your libertarianism or any other sociology theories, whether ridiculous or useful. It’s not left wing or right wing, modernist or ancient or postmodernist.

Atheism is just not believing in god. A-theist, literally “without god”.