Brandon LeLeux

I’d like to hear your argument on the other side. I believe collectives can be okay in some circumstances, but prioritizing them over individuals is wrong and the definition of collectivism.

As long as the associations are voluntary, as long as no force is involved, it's libertarian. Collectivism VS. Individualism is entirely a preference. Either can be libertarian. Either can be antithetical to libertarianism. Apples and oranges.

And the fundamental point of libertarianism is individual liberty. It’s always about the individual. I don’t agree that collectivism vs individualism is just a preference. Collectives can exist, but if the fundamental individualism isn’t there, then you don’t have libertarianism

Then you must not understand libertarianism fully. Maybe you do, but you're projecting your own preferences onto it.

Maybe we’re approaching this from different spaces. Collectivism by definition is a political governing ideology. I’m not talking about people having groups with similar interests. It’s going to be state initiated. There will be force and coercion.

Okay I will concede this point as the more I have looked it up, the muddier it gets. Many dictionaries are straight up giving it the definition of communism. Do you not agree that self autonomy/ownership is the heart of libertarian philosophy?

Libertarianism has everything to do with voluntary association and the rejection of the initiation of force. This can absolutely fit in with any ideas or preferences one may have. Also, sure. Doesn't exclude someone from being a libertarian if they have certain ideas or pref.