Libertarian Civil War

Hahahahahhaha pffff good one like jo had a chance

This meme is a reference to the Mises Caucus fighting against the communist infiltration of the Libertarian Party. As for Jo I originally supported her, but her support of terrorist Garret Foster who f**ked around and found out made me reconsider that. How deserving a candidate is of support shouldn't just be on whether or not they can win, many candidates can win that don't deserve to.

If anyone is going to run for libertarian candidate theh should focus more on what they want done then calling everyone commies and socialist

The only reason why I am calling them commies is because they are, I have no idea how or why this phenomenon of radical SJWs coming into the Libertarian Party occurred but the fact is still that it happened. There are actual figures within the Libertarian Party that are supporting the Anarcho Communist terrorist group Antifa, Garret Foster and his supporters are those people. Those same people have been actively witch hunting people as "racists" "sexists" ect... These dipshits are why various people in the broader libertarian movement wanted and still want nothing to do with the Libertarian Party. The bad reputation of the Libertarian Party is directly harming the broader movement which is why the commies need to be given their walking papers. Cultural Marxism is completely and totally diametrically opposed to liberty because it is a form of collectivism that fetishes eternal victimhood in the name of "equality" or "social justice."

Totally not justa strawman

The Moses Caucus is cancer. Tbh libertarian socialists shouldn’t be organizing inside the LP because they should oppose party politics entirely.

The Mises Caucus are the rational adults in the room, the so called "libertarian" socialists need to stop lying about being libertarians and admit that they are statist authoritarians.

How are libertarian socialists statists at all?

All socialists are statists because being a socialist requires massive centralization of government power. The only forms of socialism I can think of that don't fit this description are the ones that involve voluntary communes.

I would argue that capitalism results in centralization and concentration of wealth and power into a few hands, and that a strong centralized state is necessary to deprive indigenous of land, and lay down private property and protect and maintain this property as well as the privileges and status of the ruling elite.

Because the state’s function is to retain these social privileges in the form of imposed class rule, the state has no purpose under the socialist society and mode of production. The workers own their own destinies and manage production all on their own.

There has never been any time in history where socialism has reduced the size and scope of government, in many cases it has replaced one corrupt elite with another while in some cases increasing poverty and mass starvation. You also seem to confuse capitalism with corporatism which is socialism for corporations.

Consider the Makhnovists, a federation of 7 million anarchists controlling the territory of Ukraine from 1919-1921. They practiced anarchist communism and fought the Bolsheviks.

The Spanish anarchists acted against the Republican government and expropriated large estates and private property, collectivizing their workplaces for themselves and squatting churches and different buildings to be repurposed for giving items in need to peasants through a voucher system. They did this without the use of the state.

The libertarian communists in the Zapatista rebel territories rebelled against the Mexican government and the US trade agreement and established their own commune which today holds more than 300,000 comrades. They try consensus democracy and hold popular assemblies, plus practice a decentralized network of mutual aid to provide to all. No leaders, no government.

I think capitalism necessarily results in corporatism, as even our founders and Abraham Lincoln foresaw the dangers of something like our present day multinationals. Understand that capitalism requires the state, so to make a distinction between corporatism and capitalism is foolish.