There are many -isms today, words we use in political talk referring to groups of people or ideas. In order to best communicate, it is important that we are all on the same page when it comes to these important terms. I make no claims of authority or extreme expertise in the matter, but I will do the best I can to share what I know, or at least what I think I know...
As a Libertarian, you can rest assured that I am NOT part of the establishment. My most mainstream connection would probably be Gary Johnson, and he was all but shunned by the mainstream media, so it's safe to say, the shadow government will not be helping me to take power.
Anti-corruption goes hand in hand with anti-establishment. As a Libertarian, I have seen, felt and been infuriated by the levels of corruption in mainstream politics. It is truly insane, and it's said that political corruption was a major contributing factor to the fall of Rome. I admit, it's possible and maybe even probable that the Libertarian Party will be subject to corrupting forces and people after it really catches on and gains power. But at present, I firmly hold that we are average people and concerned citizens, set on returning the government to its constitutional limitations and thereby preserving our freedom and way of life for generations to come.
The main champions of "equality" are generally purported to be the Democrats. Some of what they push in the name of Equality, however, directly opposes real Equality. Laws and programs made for one racial group or minority, by their very design, discriminate against everyone outside of it.
Libertarians push true equality by supporting the absolute minority: THE INDIVIDUAL. Every single human is unique, and guaranteeing the same rights to everyone, regardless of race or other genetic traits is the way to go.
One aspect of equality not championed by either half of the establishment is Political Equality. In some states, such as Illinois, it is all but impossible to participate in the process without ascribing to either the R or D parties. These two parties didn't even exist at the nations founding, but now they pass laws which unfairly prohibit other parties and individuals from election.
Many Conservatives hear "Libertarian" and think "Liberal". In fact, Libertarians are Liberals, but Liberal might not mean what you think it does. The common linguistic root of Libertarian, Liberal and Liberty is the Latin "Liberalis" meaning literally:
"of freedom, pertaining to or befitting a free person," from liber "free, unrestricted, unimpeded; unbridled, unchecked, licentious."
A Liberal is simply someone who does not want life and society to be regulated by government. By definition, modern Democrats and leftists are NOT liberals, as they seek greater and greater control over your paycheck and means of livelihood. More laws for gun control is also not a Liberal position.
By definition, conservatives seek to conserve or moderate the use of government to its original confines and preserve the traditional intent of the American system. The highest end of government and the central theme of our founding is the guarantee of free life for citizens.
There are two main areas where the Republican party has totally departed from conservatism: War & Financial Policy.
The founders spoke and wrote redundantly about the dangers of "entangling alliances" with other nations, warning against them and preferring simple friendly relations with other friendly nations. We haven't heeded their words and our nation has already seen 2 world wars, some of histories greatest losses of life, at least partially a result of entangling alliances. Today, organizations like NATO continue this dangerous policy. They undermine security abroad and disparage other sovereign nations. NATO was recently a contributing factor to the loss of life in Ukraine, but this is only a small part of the problem.
The Republican electorate has been propagandized into wanting more and more and more and more military. Any mention of a cut in military spending is immediately seen as unpatriotic and bad. But at what point is too much too much? In 2016 we budgeted over 50% of all discretionary spending to the military, and this doesn't even account for many other defense-related items and organizations. While some items are being cut in 2017, overall spending is on an increase, chiefly because of a 10% increase to "defense" spending. This idea of "let's budget half of yearly spending to the military" is one of the greatest forces bankrupting our nation, and there is NOTHING conservative about it. There is nothing conservative about the trillions of dollars spent and thousands of American lives lost defending the borders of Asian and Middle Eastern countries. All too often, these wars and conflicts are based on motives that are hidden from the public, such as "containing China." We have lost immeasurable wealth and life trying to contain China, since Vietnam, while the CIA's and Pentagon's policy has proven ineffective in some regards, destructive in others. One can hardly argue that the Founders intended for the government to levy exorbitant taxes on the people to maintain hundreds and hundreds of military bases around the world and fight many wars so far from our own borders.
Endless military spending by the Rs (coupled with endless and inefficient welfare spending by the Ds) has lead to our current monetary policy. Without the proper reforms, it's only a matter of time until we see how bad and destructive this policy is. Truth told, neither established party has ever truly cut spending from one fiscal year to the next. It always increases with little/no resistance. We have trillion dollar budget deficits, we pay trillions in interest on our debt, and we inflate our currency by printing trillions of new dollars to pay for Washington's irresponsibility. This is not conservative, yet the average Republican goes with this flow.
The bottom line is, if we aren't free, then we aren't much at all. If government must manage our money, lives and interactions, if they must provide for our well-being, then we'll really be up a creek when one day the government fails.
Two main tenants of Libertarianism are the Non Aggression Principle and Voluntaryism.
Would you tread on a porcupine?