EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
Libertarianism with preferences
This article is part two of the series "Who's More Left-Winged: A Critique of Conservatives and Libertarians." You can read the first part here.
Libertarian beliefs, on the other hand, rest less on the idea of a guardian state than on the idea of an impartial state—one that would protect rich and poor alike without providing “more protection” to the rich. Even if we assume that this is realistic in practice, they offer few solutions for how we can most quickly and sustainably reach this enlightened state. Or at least they begin to support cultural trends that have proven to be ineffective in achieving it.
Libertarians are falling into the same intellectual trap that gave birth to the modern left. In their case, the otherwise fair dogma of “equality of opportunity” has evolved into “equality of outcome.” Equivalently, modern libertarians are beginning to delude themselves that just because people are born equal, they are the same and interchangeable, as long as they don’t commit (yet) crimes. They are allowing politics to influence their culture. That there are no inherent differences between a German, a Bulgarian, a Russian, and a Ghanaian, as long as they don’t have a criminal record, and therefore borders, even state borders, are unnecessary. If they commit a crime, we’ll just deport them, which, as we know, has always been a smooth process.
The importance of IQ for freedom
This type of cultural Marxism can become very toxic for the movement in the future. A number of studies indicate that an IQ of 97 is the lower limit needed to establish a rule of law and a free economy. Literally not every nation is up to it. The average IQ in Africa is 70, and the US army does not hire people with less than 83, because in 100 years of experience it has established that such people cannot be trained to perform constructive operational tasks such as handling explosives without harming themselves or their comrades. Freedom requires abstract thinking, which not everyone has. To be able to see that if some money is not stolen with taxes and spent on some nonsense, then it will go to some private factory, for example. It is not lost.
Personal preference for one's own ethnic group does not contradict libertarianism and is not collectivism. But without this preference, the average person would be disgusted by libertarians and hence by their messages. Even if borders become lines of private property, you don't have to be a cultural Marxist and let everyone in. Here, libertarians can learn a cultural lesson from conservatives. That allowing low-intelligence migrants from the Third World into your country is not preemptive violence against them, but a privilege that they have to earn and for which much more is needed than a mere criminal record and an ID card. Ultimately, if we are talking about a sustainable civilized society and a true preservation of even the values that libertarians claim, monoethnic authoritarian conservatives may outlive diversified libertarians.
In fact, it may turn out that cultural Marxism can be an obstacle to the establishment of a libertarian order. If, for example, in an ethnically pure neighborhood of complete private property, one of the neighbors decides to sell his house to foreigners and ethnically dilute the neighborhood, his neighbors may vote to prevent him, because, for example, they cannot offer him a price that exceeds that of the foreigner. In this way, they will violate his property rights, and in the future they may form a state specifically for the purpose of preserving the integrity of their environment. Libertarianism does not have to mean atomism.
A future is built with conservative values and waste-free policies
In the same vein, libertarians should not tolerate degenerative practices that undermine the future of our communities and nations, such as homosexuality, which is nothing more than an additional fetish excuse for some people not to pass on their genes and IQ to the next generation, thus further reducing our birth rate and making us vulnerable to invasions from outsiders. Gays are smarter on average than the rest of the population. This does not contradict libertarianism, because ostracism should be voluntary, not forced, and in no case should their marriages be recognized and the message sent to them that their lifestyle will be accepted. It weakens us as a society. The pressure on them should at least be to have families with their own children, as was the case in the past.
Overall, this series of two articles was not intended to criticize conservatism and libertarianism, but conservatives and libertarians. If both groups claim to be bastions of neo-utopianism and the natural order, then they cannot accept policies, but also lifestyles, that are degenerative, technically unworkable, and unnatural to the inner self of people.
