If your entire worldview is predicated on merely being against certain concepts - such as the state, free markets, or corporatism - then you’re simply not worth listening to. It is this brutal fact that makes the difference between a Libertarian and a Lolbert within the Liberty Movement. In my experience, the former is not just against various ideas and policies, but also contributes its own principles - support for private cities, a hardline stance in favor of free banking, and a strong desire for freedom of association - while also being unwilling to compromise on such core beliefs. It is for this reason that Libertarians, and not Lolberts, stick around with the Liberty Movement long-term. It is also for this reason that smaller outlets such as Hoppean.org are also beginning to swiftly gain traction with many non-libertarians on the right as they are not just uncompromising but also thorough in explaining their views on cultural and social issues. Meanwhile, Lolberts instead conform to the masses’ view of “Libertarianism” as preached by the Libertarian Party: a bunch of self-serving and unashamedly not well-read emotional individuals who are incapable of latching onto any bedrock principles whilst also only being able to state their aversion to taxation and “the state”. A major reason as to why these individuals do not stay in the Liberty Movement very long is because they then realize over time that certain Socialist, Communist, and even Third Positionist groups agree on such principles more than their misguided view of Libertarianism does, and therefore they jump ship at the earliest opportunity. It is for this very reason that the Liberty Movement *must* adopt a strong and bedrock set of cultural and social values in order to not just survive, but also thrive, in this new era of politics. Doing otherwise is not merely an impediment to the movement’s growth, but also suicidal as a whole.