The vast majority of American libertarians do not seem to be in favor of being the world's sole superpower and be actively involved in conflicts (Ukraine-Russia, Israel-Hamas, China-Taiwan, etc.). This is a rather understandable perspective since a) libertarianism is opposed to huge governments and b) being the sole superpower comes with costs as well.
However, a lot of non-American libertarians such as Javier Milei are more pro-West and pro-Ukraine. I've also seen this sentiment on various libertarian discord servers as well since the status quo in Europe/Asia is considered "freer" than a Russian-dominated Europe or China-dominated Asia.
Which brings the question, is there a case to be made that a West/USA dominated global order will be friendlier to freedom/democracy/capitalism. I'm not saying the USA fights for democracy, I'm positing that if Russia or China become the dominant power instead, socialism and authoritarianism will be more widespread than it is in OTL. Another reason is, for example, if Taiwan were to be invaded, then another free (kinda) capitalist country becomes unfree all of a sudden.
To be clear, I don't live in the US and thus see US dominance as a necessary evil in order to ward off authoritarian dictatorships from expanding. In an ideal world no superpower is the best of course, but I feel like the USA and the West should still work hard to contain China and Russia with minimal force (I still think tariffs and sanctions don't work though). Also American meddling in MENA/LATAM have proven to be disastrous so far.
By - FixingGood_
Comments