I have no more patience for the “lazy libertarians”.

A lazy libertarian responds to everything with one of 3 messages:

  1. The government could never do that correctly. Their proof is usually something unrelated… like the long lines at the DMV.
  2. If someone disagrees (and heaven forbid proves them wrong by example), they change their argument and start to claim that the government shouldn’t do that kind of thing in the first place. They never admit that the government could do it; they just change the subject to arguing that the government shouldn’t. You know you’ve won the argument when they switch to this tactic.
  3. If someone says, “Ok if you’re so smart, what should we do instead?” their answer is to do nothing. This takes many forms: don’t do anything; there’s nothing we can do; there isn’t a problem; any action will make the problem worse. They never say the truth: they’re too lazy to think of an actual solution.

Sometimes the above 3 arguments happen in a different order, but its all the same broken record playing over and over.

Why is this lazy?

A. It lazy to critize without proposing a better solution. You can go through an art gallary claiming every item you see “sucks” …let me see you make something better, you lazy jerk!

B. It is lazy to say “doing nothing is better than trying”. That’s denying that there is a problem at worst, and denying that the situation is worth improving at best. Denying the problem is worth fixing is toxic and cowardly because it lets you fake concern and pretend that you care, when you don’t. It is insidious (Insidious: adj. proceeding in a gradual, subtle way, but with harmful effects.)

C. It is lazy to say “My ideas would work perfectly” but only suggest solutions that can’t be attempted, or aren’t politically viable. This is called “moving the goal-posts” and is an invalid debate technique. Sure, you’re solution would work if first we [fill in the blank], but since that’s not possible, you’ve basically wasted our time. “My solution would work but first you’d have to eliminate the 2-party system”. Well aren’t you lucky to have such a luxury! I’d be a movie star if only Tom Cruise would marry me and have me co-star in his next film, but that ain’t likely to happen either.

D. They’ll hold your solution to an unreasonablely high standard, but not hold themselves to the same standard. You’re solution may help millions of people, but they’ll point out that there is one person that it won’t work for, therefore the entire solution is invalid. Meanwhile their solution will only work for a few people (amazingly enough, people like them) but if you point that out they’ll explode with accusations that you don’t value their freedom. This is intellectually lazy.

Lazy Libertarians have a tendency to claim that their solutions are the only thing that will work, but since nobody has tried them you can’t be proved wrong. I call BS on that. In fact, that’s the game that the entire Libertarian Party plays: “Our solutions are better but because none of us have ever been elected, we haven’t been able to prove how well they work. Oh, and we’ll never be elected either, but we’ll still shit on everyone else who actually participates in reality politics.”

Libertarians remind me of virgin teenage boys claiming they’d be great in bed because they’re really good at masturbating. Politics deals with reality. A “perfect” plan that can’t be tried is not a real plan. It is verbal masturbation.

What’s the opposite of a Lazy Libertarian? It is a person that acknowledges the problem and proposes a market-based or non-governmental solution. The government role would be to create the conditions for such a market-based solution to thrive; perhaps by being the referee that makes sure there is an even playing field. This is what libertarians used to do in the 1970s before their party was taken over by crazy conspiracy nutjobs and corporate fascists.

The real shame of the Lazy Libertarian is how selfrightious they are. They believe they are the only people in the world that are right. They believe that everyone else is wrong. They constantly tell people this, too. What jerks! Heck, they even argue with people that agree with them because the person doesn’t agree with them them for the same reason.

This creates a vicious cycle: Their condescending attitude pisses poeple off so non-libertarians go away, unfriend them, or ban them. As a result, the only people left that the lazy libertarian talks to are other lazy libertarians. Soon they’re in a bubble where nobody disagrees with them, so they assume they really are right.

Lazy Libertarians think that having the last word means they’ve won the argument, but that’s not how discussing things on the internet works. If you act like a Lazy Libertarian, eventually everyone will leave the discussion because they’ve given up talking with you because its like talking to a wall. The last person standing hasn’t won the argument, they’ve bored everyone else to death.

The Lazy Libertarian can’t see this vicious cycle because they’re so full of themselves. If they looked around they’d see that they never actually win an arguement. They’ve just pissed off everyone that sees them for what they are. Now they are loney losers who only hang out with other lonely losers.

That, in a nutshell, is the Lazy Libertarian.