What’s the best bang for your buck book to learn libertarian ideals.
Posted by Belleagle@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 26 comments
I mean I read Fountain head and Atlas Shrugged when I was in middle school, nevertheless what at the very least do you think exemplifies how feel?
Away-Opportunity-352@reddit
Anatomy of The State is pretty good. For a New Liberty is nice too
Somhairle77@reddit
Also, No Treason by Lysander Spooner.
Belleagle@reddit (OP)
Thank you
vodiak@reddit
Free to Choose by Milton Friedman.
Dalainana@reddit
Should’ve started with this instead of the numbery stuff in the theory of the consumption function.
PhilRubdiez@reddit
Ethics of Liberty. It’s a big Rothbard book, but it touches on economics and politics. It also has an audiobook podcast for free. Apple and Spotify has it.
Belleagle@reddit (OP)
Thank you
SANcapITY@reddit
PDF and epub are free from the mises institute as well. It’s an excellent book.
https://mises.org/library/book/economics-liberty?d7_alias_migrate=1
usually__lurking@reddit
Capitalism: the unknown ideal
OhMyNameItIsNothing@reddit
"The Problem of Political Authority" by Michael Huemer. Easy read with clearly defined arguments and interesting forays into things like the Milgram experiments and the psychological aspects of authority.
WindBehindTheStars@reddit
For fiction try The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein. FWIW, Heinlein believed that to fully grasp his ideas about liberty and personal responsibility one also needed to read Starship Troopers (bearing in mind that the movie was made by someone who utterly failed to grasp the point of the book), and Stranger In a Strange Land. And while it's also important to remember that not every ideal a society Heinlein wrote about was his personal viewpoint, I feel like Moon comes closest. All three are good and worth reading when you want to take a break from non-fiction.
Salomemcee@reddit
I don't think the director of the starship troopers failed to understand the book. He just made it adding his own interpretation which was fully within the theme of his police-state dystopian trilogy: Total Recall, Robocop and Starship Troopers.
WindBehindTheStars@reddit
Oh, he misunderstood it all right, if he thought that the society described was at all fascist. He mistook militarism for fascism, and simply having a military for militarism. Even worse, the society he showed the audience was inconsistent with the way the in-story characters described it. But then why should I expect good storytelling from the guy who thought Showgirls was going to be a work of art?
Salomemcee@reddit
Showgirls was satirical - although yes still problematic in some aspects. Regardless, the movie does a great job of showing how young man can easily get indoctrinated, radicalized and sacrificed by a fascist state for expansionist wars. The author might've not written that kind of book, but that's what the movie is which is a solid premise.
WindBehindTheStars@reddit
It would be if the screenwriter didn't turn out self-contradictory horeshit, which is what happened.
wormfood86@reddit
He didn't even read it.
Belleagle@reddit (OP)
Oh shit I hadn’t heard about that book in a very long time. I used to work with a guy that told me about that book stranger and strange land. Thank you for bringing it back up.
SadPhilosopherElan@reddit
On liberty, John Stuart Mill. Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick.
usernnameis@reddit
There is a book called libertarianism a primer. Its pretty good. Now not every libertarian will agree with 100% of the ideas expressed in the book. For example there is a decently large cohort of prolife libertarians such as the ron paul(esque) libertarians but the book comes from the prochoice perspective.
WindBehindTheStars@reddit
As a pro-life libertarian, however, I understand how a liberty-minded person would come to the pro-choice way of thinking. I think it's a faulty conclusion, but I understand it.
usernnameis@reddit
I am also prolife. I beleive that the child has rights from the time it first comes to exist. I know that the zygote is the first cell of every human being.
WindBehindTheStars@reddit
Right. And once I realized that I was a libertarian and not a republican I also realized that I had to drop any and all religious beliefs that I had and mostly still have from the matter. This meant I had to adopt some stances I'd previously opposed, oppose some stances I'd previously endorsed, and some stayed the same. Nevertheless, if I wanted government involvement on an issue, I'd better have objective reasons why.
usernnameis@reddit
I say people should be allowed to beleive what ever religion they beleive. I am christian but i shouldnt force my way. My job is to love. It is not my job to force others to be christian. And i shouldnt use government to try to force my ideal upon others. My arguments should be enough to convince them. If beleifes are forced then it wouldnt be real beleife any way.
I usually make secular arguments for most point i try to make because i understand many people do not beleive and they should not be forced to beleive or even placate my beleifes. I agree if there is something i think government should be involved in i should have objective reasons.
Fuck_The_Rocketss@reddit
Anatomy of the State
Belleagle@reddit (OP)
Thank you
AutoModerator@reddit
New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more? Be sure to check out the sub Frequently Asked Questions and the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.