Photograph via //r/Libertarian

Welcome to /r/Libertarian, a subreddit to discuss libertarianism. We are not a generic politics sub. We are a libertarian sub, about libertarianism. We do not owe you a platform to push anti-libertarian ideologies such as socialism/communism. This sub is explicitly against Communism/Socialism as it is antithetical to libertarianism

Welcome to /r/Libertarian

Welcome to /r/Libertarian, a subreddit to discuss libertarianism. We are NOT a generic politics sub. We are a libertarian sub, about libertarianism.

We do not owe you a platform to push anti-libertarian ideologies such as socialism/communism. This sub is explicitly against Communism/Socialism as it is antithetical to libertarianism. In addition everyone must follow the rules below.


View the full Moderation Policy here

Most Important Rules:

0 Follow all site wide rules, NO EXCEPTIONS

1 No promotion of anti-libertarian ideologies (Socialism, Fascism, Communism, etc.). We do not owe you our platform to do such.
2 No Reddit Drama, pretend other subs do not exist.

Editing/Deleting your content post-ban will result in a non-appealable permanent ban. Your content cannot be reviewed as it was, so all appeals are denied out of hand on edited/deleted content.

More Resources

New to Libertarianism? Want to learn more?

There is lots of great info along with links to free books, videos and more in the Libertarian WIKI Here

Have questions about Libertarianism? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions

Want to know if you are a Libertarian? Take the political quiz and find out!

Libertarian Podcasts

Helpful Comment Macros

List of automated comment macros available for use


Libertarian Memes have their own subreddit:


Libertarian subreddits













Topics - Blockchain & Tech:



Topics - Drug Policy Reform:





Topics - Gun Rights:





Topics - Individual Freedom & Civil Liberties:







Topics - State Power & Corruption:









505,626 Subscribers


What do libertarians think about abortion?

I'm not a libertarian myself, but I'm curious about what the libertarian position is on this very contentious issue.

00:54 UTC


What game's campaign is it?

00:14 UTC


Michael Malice interviews Angel Mcardle.

23:49 UTC


Such a relatable post 🎯💯

23:36 UTC


What does everyone think about emergency services?

Should 911 services / first response be provided by the government? Managed by the government but paid for on a case by case basis? Or some other solution?

19:14 UTC


Undeniably true 🎯😂😂

15:39 UTC


My promise to you 🤝🎯😂👇

15:20 UTC


I just wanna keep my paycheck, man 😂

15:09 UTC


There isn't a simpler way to put it 🎯👇

15:04 UTC


Ron Paul was right

12:29 UTC


Rand Paul tells Antony Blinken that hawkish foreign policy strategy has failed miserably

12:28 UTC


Porcfest 2024 Question

Hey all,

I'm a New Yorker who is thinking of heading to Porcfest this year. Due to prior obvligations I can only attend from Thursday until Sunday of the festival. Is it worth the trek or should I just wait until I can experience the entire week?

11:58 UTC


Why Democracy needs to be Replaced

Firstly, let us level the playing field, bring everything back to zero, and imagine building a political system from scratch. From this zero position, we can ask the most basic political question: what is governance, and why do we need it?

The answer is that we obtain certain benefits from cooperation and living in close proximity. For this reason, we need ground rules so that we are not living in a system of "might makes right." All politics begins with systems of group choice. Early humanity started with the simplest system of all: the strong man's word goes. If you disagreed, he'd kill you. This was not freedom, because you could not choose for yourself. You were told what to do under threat of death.

Even monarchy was just an advanced version of this one-man rule, systematized and ritualized to the extreme. Every possible variant of this has been tried historically. Eventually, we get the modern experiment with democracy. It was tried briefly in ancient Greece and found to lead to tyranny every time. Democracy replaced one man's rule with the rule of all by all. Instead of the king choosing for you, the 'group will' as determined by a majority, was choosing for you. This was still not freedom because you could not choose for yourself. You only hoped that the group agreed with your choice so that you would end up in the majority. You were still told what to do under threat of death.

But no one can be in the majority all the time when enough questions are considered and voted upon. As a wise man pointed out, because people are not choosing for themselves but the group will is choosing for them, the incentive to become educated in the choices is completely robbed for all people, and the group will becomes an idiot's choice. People substitute the study of the people and issues with a heuristic.

A heuristic is a thinking shortcut. Instead of reading up on a candidate and what they believe, people choose the most likable candidate with the most appealing name or the tallest candidate. These are things that have nothing to do with success in the job. People will vote for or against a proposed ballot measure based on the title and the stated intent, without reading it or the gotchas hidden inside it. Or they may simply vote the way some organization they like suggests to vote. Democracy's issues can never be solved while there is no incentive to become informed in group-voting systems.

I would like to suggest a new political system is possible and even desirable. It uses a radical new means of creating majorities, indeed unanimities. The only ethical form of group choice is not merely obtaining a majority but a unanimity because then we are not violating the rights and choices of anyone in that group. But a unanimous group is famously hard to form. So how can this be made practical?

The solution is actually rather simple. It's built into the process of voting. Take any measure or question up for a vote, separate the 'no' group to one side and the 'yes' group to the other side, and you now have two unanimous subgroups. After just one vote, each now-separate subgroup is significantly more ideologically aligned than before. Each group gets the policy they chose and continues separately from the original group.

By this means, unanimity is easily achieved through group-splitting. This concept is my original contribution to political theory and practice and turns unanimity from something many considered the gold standard but impractical into a practical system as long as we embrace decentralization. The creation of many sub-groups would further decentralize that society, which is, in my opinion, and that of most libertarians, a desirable outcome.

Imagine that we have asked these groups a full range of political questions and they have separated themselves into multiple groups. They now form separate political systems based on these unanimous choices. We now have functioning cities made up of people in this experiment.

Now you, I, or anyone else can find a full range of political possibilities to choose from. This is Unacracy. We find a city that made the same political choices we would have made, and we ask to join that city. We don't need to go through the system of questions and answers again. That's already been done, and now systems exist that reflect essentially all possible ethical and reasonable choices. We merely need to learn which city reflects our values and choices and join.

Let's say that we live in a city of 100,000, but that 100,000 are each split up into 12 cities of 8,000 people each. Surely there are some things we all agree on, like believing in innocent until proven guilty, a guaranteed speedy trial, and most basic rights and guarantees. Things that today are contained in constitutional law. Several of these cities may have one constitution they all agree on, several more have a similar one but don't allow gun ownership, and several more have another that requires everyone to contribute to social safety nets. Any mix of such policies is possible. Much like the US states today, we can still have one overarching identity while differing on various policies and laws. We can live nearby without war, as the US states do, and we can freely visit and move between them.

In such a system, there is no need for representation because you choose for yourself. There is no need for politicians to make choices for you. You make your own choices! That is the definition of freedom: to choose instead of being chosen for. Ultimately, that is why democracy must go because it is a system of control, a way to determine who chooses for you. Choosing who chooses for you is not the same as choosing policy for yourself. Only choosing policy for yourself, directly, gives you freedom.

06:50 UTC


Air alliances

Air alliances are a structure in which separate airlines cooperate on routes to smooth out operations and reduce aircraft turnaround time.

Immediately on learning of this structure all I could think of was “how doesn’t this break anti-trust laws”. Turns out it does, but some time ago they got a carveout/amnesty and are amongst the few industries where anti-trust laws are nullified.

Since it can be seen that air alliances(trusts) are the most efficient operators, why even have anti-trust laws that have worked to hamper such efficiency in other industries?

1 Comment
05:25 UTC


Patrick Deneen (Notre Dame philosopher) gets fiercely attacked from all sorts of libertarians (Reason, Mises.org, Acton Inst.), and with good cause. But I think there's something poignant about his overall critique. The advice he gives here should, IMO, be very welcome to libertarians/decentralists.

03:11 UTC


Liberalism... What is it?


On a side note; To answer the above: 1. "Liberalism" is the modern Democrat and Liberal of today. Aren't they the ones who want to do away with the electoral college? 2. I've made support in the threads of why the Conservatives are bad too... 3. Nearly everyone that I had the pleasure of encountering was confrontational in the commenting at best. I was even called a dildo, lol, but alas that comment has not been muted for violating community standards.

If this is not allowed here please remove. I'm just checking to see if Liberalism, is in fact, the modern Liberal of today?

02:23 UTC


Alternative to Police

I’m looking for a good source for how private policing works. Any reading or video suggestions?

Here’s a scenario that comes to mind: Todd steals a smart phone from Jim’s car while they are at Mike’s house.

Whose private security investigates the crime? Can Todd be compelled to take any actions in concern to the crime (forced to answer questions, pay fines, etc)?

What if Todd and Jim use different security forces?

If Todd had committed a crime worthy of imprisonment, who would lock him up and where? Or are there real world examples of alternatives to prison?

00:17 UTC


If it wasn’t for the police, who would assault you and send dogs to maul you in your own lawn?

Someone needs to be unemployed

22:34 UTC


What makes me libertarian?

I feel like the libertarian party supports most of my views but not all. Like I'm completely against abortion and disagree with the LGBTQIA+ for religious reasons. I like the idea of healthcare for all, public transit, and less military spending. I do agree with capitalism and support it fully though. I currently vote republican but hate having two choices that I don't fully agree with. I shared where I'm grouped for https://www.isidewith.com/profile/5104684516/parties.

I'm not coming here to troll or anything of that nature. I would just like to see if the Libertarian party is a good fit or should I cast my vote else where. I just want more options.

EDIT: I did vote for a libertarian candidate in 2020 (not for the presidency) but for another office in South Carolina. I apologize for not mentioning that. So please don’t think I’m against or hate anyone here. I’m just trying to find a common ground.

20:43 UTC


How would you fund public services like libraries, postal offices, law enforcement, and fire departments without taxes?

Would donations and charity really be enough? Or would you expect the privatization of these services?

20:30 UTC

Back To Top