View source for The Chapo Guide to Revolution ridicules libertarianism.

<!-- you can have any number of categories here -->
[[Category:Chapo]]
[[Category:Unclassified Criticisms]]
[[Category:How Libertarian Ideas And Attitudes Are Spread]]
[[Category:The Chapo Guide to Revolution]]
[[Category:Hans-Hermann Hoppe]]
[[Category:Murray Rothbard]]
[[Category:Libertarian Ideas the Public Rejects Strongly]]
{{DES | des = Starting with a comparison to the recruiting methods of Scientology.  Then they justly slam the ridiculous excesses of [[Murray Rothbard]] and [[Hans-Hermann]] Hoppe | show=}}
<!-- insert wiki page text here -->

This is an excerpt from "The Chapo Guide to Revolution: A Manifesto Against Logic, Facts, and Reason", page 122:

One of the many ways in which libertarianism is like Scientology is that both organizations try to ease new recruits in. Scientologists don't bring up Xenu and volcanoes full of dead aliens until one has already signed the trillion-year contract; they start with e-meters and diet tips. Similarly, when libertarians make their pitch to skeptical youth, they tend to emphasize the commonsense, "economics 101" writings of Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek. Capitalism is just choice! Everybody loves choice, right? It's only later, after one has hosted an awkward campaign fund-raiser for Bob Barr and named one's firstborn Bitcoin that they offer up the hard stuff.

Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe took the fuzzy, freedom-loving logic of libertarianism to its logical endpoint, a place that most of the uninitiated would consider a nightmare of inhumanity. Rothbard, who didn't leave the island of Manhatten until his forties due to an intense fear of bridges and tunnels, realized that a political system based on property had a child problem: Children don't own property and they don't work, so what is the basis for their claim to rights? His answer was: they don't have one. Children are the property of their parents, who can dispose of them as they wish. They can't kill them, of course (that would violate the non-aggression principle), but they could starve them to death or, if they're angling for a trip to Branson, sell them.

For his part, Hoppe reached the conclusion--inescapable, but unspoken by most mainstream libertarians--that democracy is incompatible with liberty. Property is the basis for freedom, so society is, obviously, a mutual agreement among property owners. All functions of the state should be privatized. What about people who don't own property? asks the nerd. They don't have rights, bitch, answers Hoppe. Hoppe argued that the most "natural" form of government was feudal aristocracy, and that the imposition of the taxation and redistribution associated with liberal democracy was in fact far worse than the serfdom of an earlier era. Hoppe's biggest idea was that because democracy is majoritarian by nature, the majority of people will choose to be protected from oppression and discrimination. This, to Hoppe, was why democracy is a terrible evil that must be abolished and replaced with a system of unfettered private tyrannies.

Often libertarians will couch their arguments in terms of personal freedom and sell them based on the idea that if we would only abolish the capital gains tax, the EPA, and public schools, we would all be much freer to be you and me. Once big government is out of the way, we can all smoke weed and fuck whatever our 3-D printers can dream up, so the argument goes. But for some reason, serious libertarians like Hoppe don't cotton to the notion that their politics are about expanding the personal freedom of other people, particularly young people and racial and sexual minorities. Hoppe correctly realized that the total abolition of the state in favor of a strict regime of private property and laissez-faire economics would involve the brutal curtailment of the freedom of speech, movement, and bodily autonomy for the vast majority of people, and that was a good thing. He envisioned a society managed by a combination of large landowners, homeowners' associations, and insurance companies that would enforce the property rights of their customers and no one else's. What's more, Hoppe also realized that this society would necessarily involve the forced expulsion of anyone who thought differently. 
According to Hoppe:

<blockquote>There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They--the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism--will have to be physically removed from society too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.</blockquote>

This is the kind of stuff that would send a normie running for the hills, but once you've bought your third Penn Jillette book, you're pot committed. If any intellectual has laid the groundwork for where the Right is headed now, it's Hoppe: scorched-earth libertarianism fueled by atavistic hatred of minorities, queers, and Communists.