Perhaps the most admirable thing about libertarianism is that it’s simple and for that reason, easy to understand. The core concept is that everyone ought to leave everyone else alone – so long as they are doing the same. It’s a reformulation of the Golden Rule, which – ironically – most people say they agree with and teach their kids.
At least, they used to.
Contrast the libertarian concept – the principle of leaving other people alone so long as they do the same – with the chaotic jumble of often-contradictory positions that don’t define what a Republican or a Democrat is, because nothing is defined when it is a constantly changing chaotic jumble of often-contradictory positions. One example is the Republican practice of “mending” – but not ending – authoritarian programs such as Obamacare. “Mending” in this context is a working synonym for agreeing with the basic merit of whatever the “program” is but saying we can make it “work” better. Another example is the “de-criminalization” – gaslighting, phone home! – of by definition not-criminal mere use/possession/sale of some “drugs,” such as marijuana (and alcohol, too). It is teeth-achingly incoherent to style a political party as being the “freedom” party when it meters the freedoms people are permitted to have. What you’ve got is a single party that has a slightly different take on which freedoms it will meter and for what purpose.
In other words, you have the same party.
That is why Voting Harder – whether for Republicans or Democrats – makes no meaningful difference. More people than ever before are beginning to understand this and have decided to stop voting altogether. They have figured out that voting is not just pointless but destructive, as it empowers and legitimizes the illegitimate.
By nature most people still act – in their day-to-day lives – in congruence with the leave-people-alone principle. They don’t pester their neighbors; in fact they try their best to be neighborly because they want to be treated neighborly in return. They wave and smile and even offer to help with things sometimes. They don’t march up to the neighbor’s door, ring the doorbell and hand the neighbor a bill for “services” the neighbor did not ask for or use. Yet these same neighborly people will vote to have someone else do that to their neighbor. This is profoundly morally schizophrenic when you think about it. An action almost everyone understands to be wrong when done by the individual – who would feel ashamed to do it – becomes just a part of the way things are when it is done at a distance, by people sanctioned to do it by this construct called the state. 
The libertarian concept is that it is wrong in every instance to use force against people who’ve abided by the principle of leaving other people alone. This latter can also be expressed as not having caused any harm to anyone else. That it is controversial to espouse the idea that people have a right to be left alone provided they are leaving everyone else alone – i.e., they have not caused any harm to anyone else – is remarkable in view of the fact that most people agree with this idea in everyday life and even teach it to their kids. Yet it all gets dumped when interactions pass beyond the boundary of the neighbor’s property line. The same person who would never march up to the neighbor’s door to demand money for “services” the neighbor did not ask for or use feels no shame in doing exactly the same thing to the neighborhood – via the ballot box. Rights are individual, which is why they are vitiated when things are collectivized. It is why those who want to vitiate individual rights use the collective to advance collectivism. 
How easy – and how hard! – it is to regard everyone as a neighbor, who has the same right to be left alone that you want for yourself and which you probably respect as far as your next-door neighbor.
That is the core of libertarianism. It is not libertinism. It is not freedom from responsibility. It is nothing more – and nothing less – than being a good neighbor, to everyone.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.Â
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!Â
Our donate button is here.Â
 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is: EPautos 721 Hummingbird Lane SE Copper Hill, VA 24079
Terror defeats reason.
Only Power can stop Power.
The individual is weak. Combination is necessary for Power.
We are only as moral as our culture allows us to be.
The masses are only as moral as their convenience allows them to be.
The few individuals of high moral practice and principled living exist within structures of Power that are diametric to High Morality, Libertarian ideals, independance.
Those who practice such modes of existence must be eternally satisfied with ruling their own actions, their own thoughts, their own desires. Culture or society or whatever you call it will never become Libertarian. And can not be made so, without Power.
Power corrupts. Without Power we only rule ourselves. Influencing others thru Right Action our only currency. Thus, those we judge to be righteous, honorable, and virtuous shall always and forever be the fewest of all species.
Humans are emotion based creatures. Emotional appeals will always win the mass majority over, no matter the argument.
The only Libertarian society is the one you make for yourself. As always, it lives only in your own mind. Looking anywhere else for such a world is a practice in futility.
Top of the morning Eric,
The temptation to control the lives of others seems almost genetic. As you have pointed out in the past, the Gladys Kravitz syndrome has been on full display, especially since the Covid hoax started. The most effective way to overcome this can only occur at the local level where, as an individual, one can treat other individuals with respect until the other party acts intolerably….any government above a small level will always run roughshod over individuals’ rights. That was evident even in the beginning of the American project and especially once Hamilton rose to power.