Why many gamers are libertarian

[dh_epic]

I'm not personally a libertarian. But I find that a lot of gamers (not specifically you) are quite libertarian.

I mean that in the sense that maybe 50% of people on game and technology forums are STRONGLY against most kinds of government intervention, with the other 50% splitting their opinion on what government is there for. Either to protect religious values on one side, or to control income disparity on the other side. Either to control the cultural homogeneity of the nation, or to control certain kinds of unfair competition and harmful products in the market. Either to solve the drug problem, or to solve the global warming problem.

Basically, when I speak of libertarianism,I'm talking about people who believe in the smallest government possible -- one that protects people and their property, but not much else.

Taking that assumption for what it is... why do you think a lot of people in technology are libertarian? Let's not get into bias of "they are smart, and libertarianism is smart", or "they are sheltered, and libertarianism is BS".

Here's my guess at the conditions that make geeky people more libertarian:

(1) They love technology. So, they trust technology. Science will make us healthier and fix problems like pollution. Institutions like governments and churches never have the answer -- let the scientists figure it out. (There's a hidden assumption that scientific progress can't be actively promoted.)

(2) Gadgets cost money. So, most geeks must be at least middle class. Generally speaking, someone with money wants taxes to be as low as possible. That means geeks will view government spending with lots of skepticism (unless it's in the name of national security).

(3) Love of the internet, which is largely self-regulating. Yeah, the moderators can ban whoever they want here, but they are civil and never seem to abuse it. And if they do, then a new website can just spring up. Not to mention that open-source projects have no strong hierarchy. Who needs a rigid structure? Who needs a rigid government?

(4) Video games are purely merit-based. May the best player win. Every player starts at the same point (although some games have badly balanced starting locations, which I think is more like real life). Skill will take you to victory. RPGs are even better -- the person who has played the most hours will be the strongest, which seems intuitively fair. As such, geeks tend to believe that equality of opportunity comes very naturally and easily. (But that illusion is finally starting to disappear when Billy's dad can buy him the best character in World of Warcraft. Meanwhile, they had to get that level 70 character with months of hardcore playing. Plus a lot of MMORPGs show that organizing a group is often more important than improving your individual strengths. This forces libertarian gamers to revise their opinions a bit.)

(5) Video games largely employ violence as the path to victory. Violence solves problems. (I'm reluctant to say that video games glorify violence. I really think video games are artful, smart, and amazing.) In most video games, you kill the evil guy responsible for all the bad things in the world, and thus the world is saved. So, geeks tend to see the government's role as restricted to keeping out bad guys with the legitimate use of violence. (However, since killing Saddam Hussein didn't really create a democracy in Iraq, game players are starting to realize that world peace is harder than killing bad guys.)

Anyway, I figure some of you might find my own little pet theories interesting. Discuss.

 

[Japanrocks12]

You painted quite the negative picture of libertarianism there. Though I do agree with you on one point: gamers are middle to upper middle class and generally those classes would want to have tax restrictions keeping in mind their own personal fortunes. Your other points are quite the stretch, though

 

[LightFang]

That's an interesting way of looking at it.

However, I don't think group efforts and organizing groups is really a deterrent to the idea of personal liberty. You have the freedom to be in a group if you want. Whether it's good or not is up to you. Which I think is intuitively right.

Yeah, your theories might have some merit.

 

[Japanrocks12]

Not to say that your analysis isn't interesting. indeed, this was the longest post that I've read completely recently.

 

[drachasor]

(1) They love technology. So, they trust technology. Science will make us healthier and fix problems like pollution. Institutions like governments and churches never have the answer -- let the scientists figure it out. (There's a hidden assumption that scientific progress can't be actively promoted.)

If this is their reasoning, then it is absolutely wretched. You can't have good science without government funding. That's a simple fact. A lot of science doesn't have immediate applications and would never be funded by businesses (and it is a pipe dream to suppose that voluntary funding would generate enough money for all the science -- or even a decent fraction -- currently funded by the Big G).

(The free market isn't generally very good at fixing problems like pollution either).

-Drachasor

 

[dh_epic]

Yeah, I'm sure some of those points are stretches. I'm only speculating. If I had to choose just one reason why gamers are libertarians, it would be (3) or (4).

I tend to be very skeptical of libertarians. Although we have lots of common ground, we are more passionate about our differences.

 

[CaptainF]

Clearly you aren't a libertarian gamer, even if any doubt of an insinuation was dismissed from the start .

All the points you mentioned except for number 5 are interesting. Number 5 is ******ed, primarily because it has nothing to do with tenets of libertarianism. I consider myself quite libertarian, and am firmly against the war in Iraq. A lot of other libertarians feel the same way, I'm quite sure.

 

[Arwon]

It's an interesting theory. My first thought was to point out that this is really only American gamers we're talking about, because libertarianism is mainly an American thing. I wonder, what are the politics of the average, say, Korean gamer like?

But you're right, there's a definite libertarian bias. I think it extends beyond the gamer subculture though, I think it's an internet thing in general, for precisely the reasons you outline. But I also don't think it's a purely libertarian mindset that gaming and the internet seems to promote, as you sort of recognise in point 5.

I submit this for discussion: Shutupicrat.

 

[dh_epic]

LOL shutupicrat -- I think this is actually pretty close to libertarianism. "Don't tread on me" is a pretty American attitude, and it runs through both conservatism and (modern) liberalism in some ways, but it's really a thread unto itself.

All the points you mentioned except for number 5 are interesting. Number 5 is ******ed, primarily because it has nothing to do with tenets of libertarianism. I consider myself quite libertarian, and am firmly against the war in Iraq. A lot of other libertarians feel the same way, I'm quite sure.

I think this is half the reason why I'm suspicious of libertarians. A lot of people SAY they want small government, but then I knew so many libertarians who were ready to cede all kinds of power in the name of security. But I can have civil and intelligent conversations with the kind of libertarian who opposed the Iraq war, because government power is government power to them. There's way too many self-proclaimed libertarians who seem to only care about taxes... oh and how feminists have too much power. They sound more like conspiracy theorists than anything.

 

[Ayatollah So]

Out of your hypotheses I think only (3) cuts much ice. But then, the geek<->libertarian link predates the internet. I offer hypothesis number

(6) Geeks tend to be loners by temperament. Loners are more likely to be sympathetic to the hyper-individualism of libertarianism. Hyper-individualist theories seem to provide justification of their instinctive attitudes.

I liked your comments on (4), but what you don't seem to consider is that such features such as
Video games are purely merit-based ... Every player starts at the same point
may be effects of the geeky-American individualist ideology, rather than the cause.

 

[dh_epic]

Cause and effect definitely blends together. I don't think video games would be the way they are if we didn't live in a competitive society.

I definitely see the loner<-->libertarian link. But I've always had trouble figuring out the loner<-->geek link. I'm obviously a pretty big geek just for posting here, but I have a pretty active social life too. Speaking in generalities, how does the link happen?

 

[Fifty]

I don't think it's that gamers are more likely to be libertarian, just that people in CFC's demographic (lots of teen-early20s guys who style themselves as intelligent) tend to gravitate towards something other than demo/repub, because they feel (unconsciously) that being something other than democrat/republican seems smarter and whatnot. So they tend to gravitate towards something, be it communism, socialism, libertarianism, eco-anarchism, etc. etc.

I think it has more to do with wanting to forge an intellectual identity than anything else.

Plus, if you get a kid who thinks he's smart, and who loves words like "logic" and "axiom" and "objective", while holding a pretty darn sophomoric understanding of those things, you end up with an Objectivist, and those guys are libertarians.

 

[CartesianFart]

I don't think it's that gamers are more likely to be libertarian, just that people in CFC's demographic (lots of teen-early20s guys who style themselves as intelligent) tend to gravitate towards something other than demo/repub, because they feel (unconsciously) that being something other than democrat/republican seems smarter and whatnot. So they tend to gravitate towards something, be it communism, socialism, libertarianism, eco-anarchism, etc. etc.

I think it has more to do with wanting to forge an intellectual identity than anything else.

Plus, if you get a kid who thinks he's smart, and who loves words like "logic" and "axiom" and "objective", while holding a pretty darn sophomoric understanding of those things, you end up with an Objectivist, and those guys are libertarians.

Also, there is a guy who likes to classify people in CFC into whatever respective categories for inorder to seperate himself from what he believes are intellectually inferior. He ends up being a maker of his own fantasy as well.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Libertarianism is nothing more than a fad, a way to say "I'm too cool to associate with conventional political labels unlike you squares." Serious people reject it.

 

[CartesianFart]

Libertarianism is nothing more than a fad, a way to say "I'm too cool to associate with conventional political labels unlike you squares." Serious people reject it.

Is it because it is conventional to say that it is a "fad" which also can be a fad of its own?

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Is it because it is conventional to say that it is a "fad" which also can be a fad of its own?

Stop trying to be "deep."

 

[LightFang]

It's an interesting theory. My first thought was to point out that this is really only American gamers we're talking about, because libertarianism is mainly an American thing. I wonder, what are the politics of the average, say, Korean gamer like?

Well you know, in Korea, the gang hierarchy and stuff (at least in South Korea that I know of; maybe it's the same in North Korea, once they're done worshiping Kim Il-Jong) is pretty dominant there. They do like recruiting out of high school and stuff. That's why Koreans kick ass at making MMORPGs (and why Japanese people suck at making multiplayer RPGs but own at singleplayer ones - see Final Fantasy.) A lot of it, I think, is based on the culture. I mean, Japanese culture is all about respect and debasing yourself, so it leads to those infamous otakus and social outcasts who do nothing but stay at home and do unsightly things with their favorite anime characters or whatnot.

 

[CartesianFart]

Stop trying to be "deep."

I didn't know that my attempt to be deep is one of trying?

Hell, I might as well be afloat on a life preserver since most of ya are sincere that one might not drown in the deep.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

I didn't know that my attempt to be deep is one of trying?

Hell, I might as well be afloat on a life preserver since most of ya are sincere that one might not drown in the deep.

No wonder English isn't America's official language...

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

I don't think gamers are more libertarian. Many people are libertarian... except in matters where it helps them or they feel better with government intervention.