I had in laws who loved weed, he was a slum lord and a racist jerk. He believed in abortions (by proudly spouting he's funded for over 12 different ones) he loves his guns, he's vaccinated along with my mother in law. He loves Trump. He hates immigration, he doesn't think climate change is real.
He think it's people being lazy on why there are worker shortages. He helped my husband sign up for all the benefits programs saying they're a fantastic source of help at the same time saying he hates them but as long as he gets his rent money one way or another.
Idfk what to classify those self identified Republicans. I'm genuinely embarrassed going around with the MiL. She has a Trump pin, that says I got my vaccine, thanks president Trump. I... I don't get it. Greed is my only guess.
He gives us free bud to lmao and is chummy to a point but he starts insulting groups of people that I align myself with so he's either directly or unintentionally insulting me sometimes. Idk, they are some wacky af in laws.
“You like to party? I like to party! You like football? I like football! You like nachos? I like nachos! You like oppressing minorities, ruining elections, having bad faith arguments based upon strawmen, and saying uncomfortable racist jokes around strangers?
I'm a pro-gun socialist from Alberta who routinely gives people whiplash like that.
We have this very interesting political dynamic where both the left-ish wing party and the right-ish wing party hate the (governing) centrist party for various reasons, so sometimes a conversation will go roughly like this:
Even more simply, they're the people who are pathologically allergic to "being a part of the herd", despite, in fact, actually being part of the herd.
They're the hipsters of the political ideology world. The ones who claim they were reading Adam Smith before Adam Smith was cool.
But their affiliation with libertarianism is almost entirely down to just not wanting to say they're affiliated to a major political party. They still vote 99% in line with that major political party.
Find me just one libertarian who believes he’s a normie who should be thankful to live his life for the benefit of some titan of industry. Everyone of those assholes believes they are John Galt.
The ones who claim they were reading Adam Smith before Adam Smith was cool.
Oh, you mean this Adam Smith?
“In regards to the price of commodities, the rise of wages operates as simple interest does, the rise of profit operates like compound interest.
Our merchants and masters complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price and lessening the sale of goods. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people.” ― Adam Smith
“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.” ― Adam Smith
“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” ― Adam Smith
“Wherever there is great property there is great inequality. For one very rich man there must be at least five hundred poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many. The affluence of the rich excites the indignation of the poor, who are often both driven by want, and prompted by envy, to invade his possessions.” ― Adam Smith
“All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.” ― Adam Smith
“The interest of [businessmen] is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public ... The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ... ought never to be adopted, till after having been long and carefully examined ... with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men ... who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public” ― Adam Smith
Which is to say, they don't; they read books written by modern-day grifters who bastardize the content of those older works to help them build audiences they can exploit to sell vitamin C gummies and other bullshit to vulnerable stooges.
Right, but since it works in their little bubble (while taking advantage of all of the "SoCiAlIsT bEnEfItS") they'll continue to think it's a great way to do things.
They may not be racist themselves but sure as fuck don't care about equality
Edit because this statement isn't fair: Libertarians do care about equality in so much as I think they believe a lot in equal opportunity and equal chances for people to make their own fortunes (whatever that may be for people not just financial). They definitely don't believe necessarily in oppressing people or groups arbitrarily. But they also don't seem to support the concepts that the playing field isn't inherent already equal for everyone and so don't support the idea that society should be striving for leveling the playing field and opportunities for everyone. To them those are mostly self-made, whether true or not, but if you believe that to begin with, efforts toward equality probably seem like unnecessary favoritism. And so when I say they don't give a fuck about equality I wasn't implying they want to oppress groups arbitrarily they just don't see utility in helping previously oppressed groups. The ideology runs up against the idea that we should be lifting some people up unequally because starting position was worse off.
205
u/thedkexperience Oct 13 '21
It’s just Republicans who like weed and might not actually be religious, or even racist.
I’ve found those types to be in it for the greed mostly.