Kulturkampf

[benji]

the argument isn't "anyone" who joins it, it's about sheer numbers and physical force supplanting a culture which might be better than the other in every other aspect; nor is it about "weakness," that is changing the terms when the conversation is about superiority vs. inferiority

if I believe in feminist ideals and then a bear kills me, this does not prove that the bear's philosophy regarding feminism is superior to mine, simply because he overpowered me; you don't get to say "hah, looks like your precious feminism isn't an effective ideal at all, if you can still be murdered while adhering to it"

You're doing exactly what the tweet told you not to do. Take your emotional attachment out of it and evaluate it purely on objective grounds, the superior one is the one that wins which was proven by how it won*. Feminism is an inferior method to stopping a bear. Abandoning libertarianism for socialism is an inferior method of bringing about libertarianism and thwarting socialism. If Islam overruns your culture as Islam always did, your culture is inferior to Islam because they converted more of the population before you converted more of them.

If you have doubts about your superiority at doing the latter, then you'll turn towards protectionism, which is then an open admission of the inferiority when the grounds are equal. It doesn't need protecting, especially by abolishing any opposing or limiting all others, if it was superior. It would just be adopted. That's the argument for capitalism and free trade that Angela wants to abandon by conceding the entire argument up front. She thinks it's "different" in this case for the same reason you do, you imagine your preferences to be superior. Right, we know, that's the argument for all forms of protectionism. It's not different at all. Libertarianism is supposed to reject that premise, not use it to oppose liberty.

*

you are essentially saying that one man who has somehow stumbled upon the best set of philosophies in the world, primed to transform the world into a utopia if they could be adopted by everyone, actually has bad and terrible inferior ideas because 500 barbarians showed up at his doorstep and killed him without even asking to hear those ideas

which, in an alternate universe where he isn't killed and instead sees his ideas gradually adopted, suddenly become the best, superior philosophies, even though they are the same exact philosophies in both scenarios

Right, yes, your edit is correct. We evaluate the real world by the real world, not the pre-determined results of a hypothetical.