My collection of “Libertarian Humor” is very ecumenical since I have “pro” jokes and “con” jokes.
Today, we’re going to add to the latter collection with three new items.
We’ll start with some satire about the theoretical Libertarian Party vs the real-world Libertarian Party. I get the feeling the guy on the right is an older version of Libertarian Doofus 1 or Libertarian Doofus 2.
Maybe this means we have to create a new type of libertarian. After all, the guy on the right doesn’t fit any of the 24 categories in this collection. Well, maybe three rows down and second from the right, but I don’t want to be judgemental.
For our second item, here’s some great satire from Babylon Bee about a libertarian driver’s heroic effort to avoid government-funded roads.
In a calculated move intended to demonstrate the power of the free market, libertarian man Patrick Wallace drove his SUV through dozens of other peoples’ back yards, across several open fields, over a stretch of rocky terrain, and even off a cliff into a small ravine in order to avoid using any government-funded roads, sources confirmed Thursday.
According to witnesses, the man got into his vehicle to head to work, started it up, and immediately barreled across his lawn, down his neighbor’s side yard, through a row of back yards, and right into an adjacent wood, all while carefully preventing his tires from ever touching any road built by tax dollars. “What would we do without roads funded by government coercion? That’s easy,” the man told reporters later as he attempted to push his car out of a creek. “We’d be able to drive straight to work through any obstacles we wanted, without the state telling us we’re not allowed to launch over a gully to get to the office on time.” …After getting his car moving again, Wallace reportedly hurtled down the brook, across a steep ski slope, and burst through a cemetery, waving at the groundskeeper to get out of the way, before launching off a homemade ramp over a county road to his office. At publishing time, Wallace had fashioned a rope swing at the office in order to help him get to the Dunkin’ Donuts across the street without walking on “roads funded by theft.”
Reminds me of the libertarian police officer who tried to chase a criminal without stepping on government sidewalks.
Another example of why it ain’t easy being libertarian. We need a Nirvana where all infrastructure is private!
Lastly, we have an observation about the ongoing challenge of trying to stop statism.
There’s a lot of truth to this image. Most libertarians in the real world don’t worry too much about theory. They just want more freedom.
But in the world of professional libertarians, there are sectarian fights between Randians, Austrians, anarcho-capitalists, Rothbardians, liberaltarians, and many other niche groups. And they oftentimes don’t get along with each other.
No wonder we have a hard time getting others to agree with our agenda.
International Liberty 
[…] Our first example points out that there’s sometimes a difference between libertarians in theory and libertarians in reality (very reminiscent of this image). […]
[…] can find even better versions of this meme here and […]
[…] To be balanced, libertarians can be mocked because of our disdain for public […]
[…] above image reminds me of the the Mel Gibson comparison I shared back in […]
Liberals are always saying that libertarians are hypocrites because they use government-funded roads and other “public services”. And the liberals say this on TV stations owned by huge corporations that they got to in cars built by huge corporations etc etc. I don’t suppose that a socialist living in a capitalist society is a hypocrite because he uses products and services produced by capitalism. What is he supposed to do? In most cases there are no government-run organizations producing equivalent products and services. He has to live in the real world. Ditto for the libertarian who uses government-funded roads. He doesn’t have other choices. It’s a nonsense argument.
I have libertarian leanings, but I don’t consider myself libertarian. And things like #1 are part of the reason why.
There are many issues on which the majority of Americans agree with libertarians, like lower taxes, free speech, and cutting bureaucracy. If libertarians hammered on these issues, they could probably get a lot of support.
But it seems like whenever libertarians get a platform, what they always want to talk about is either freak issues like gay rights and drug legalization, where most Americans are against them or uneasy; or they will give half-baked solutions to the toughest problems for an extreme libertarian view, like private roads and police forces, that just make them sound somewhere between extreme and impractical.
So the guy driving to work going through backyards, a cemetery and a creek has no problem with trespassing on private property in his effort to not use government funded rosds.
YES.. Pretty messed up…
we desperately need a viable third party… the libertarians have good ballot access… but they are fixated on drug issues and removing articles of clothing at public events… if they could settle on a pragmatic approach to messaging… and recruit candidates that present themselves as sane and reasonable citizens… working for the good of the republic… hell…. they might start winning……..
“No wonder we have a hard time getting others to agree with our agenda.”
As someone who has supported the Libertarian Party since its inception in 1972 and voted for the LP candidate since Ed Clark in 1980 until the phony baloney plastic banana Gary Johnson came along, I have to say I’m done with it because Libertarians as such are too stupid to actually win. Libertarians are too stupid to figure out that allowing millions of anti-libertarian foreigners in to America makes the libertarian situation worse, not better. Instead of helping their possible friends, libertarians strengthen their strongest and most committed enemies. Frankly it’s disgusting.
“Libertarianism” can’t mean “anything goes, no rules.” Libertarianism is supposed to be a political philosophy that follows DIFFERENT RULES, unlike the imperious forces of the Machiavellian power-builders. When Libertarians learn to fight our enemies, then I will once again think them worthy of consideration. Until then, Libertarians as such are stupid losers. Or worse, maybe, but I won’t get in to that here.
I still believe, more than ever, that the essence of liberty is the limitation of government. But I’m not one of the stupid idiots who thinks that flooding my nation with statist foreigners who strenuously disagree with that idea is a good way to get less government.
So true; it hurts.