These extremist billionaire libertarians are such cowards because they're not really libertarians. They're all for fascist, authoritarian regimes in which they are in control, have power, and make all the money. They are for freedom and liberty only in the sense that they just want the U.S. government and its regulations and laws to get out of the way so that they can do their bidding.
It's about power and control to them. They are actively against freedom and liberty.
These billionaires and corporations have long been a threat to the U.S. China actually recognizes this and does not allow billionaires and corporations to dictate.
Right it just allows unelected officials answerable to no one pull all the strings indefinitely then puts you into a labor camp if you practice religion.
They're libertarians in the sense that believe everyone is entitled to as much liberty as they can secure with their own resources.
They want a kind of feudalism where everyone is "free" to choose whichever Lord to serve, exchanging their life for whatever liberty and resources the Lord deems them worthy of.
Don't like Lord Musk's policy of prima nocta? You are free to pack up all your shit and travel (with proper papers, of course) to the court of Lord Bezos... assuming they are not currently in conflict, otherwise you could be turned away as a traitor or otherwise made an example of.
It's important to note, that in their ideal future, you would also have the freedom to move to (or found) NoBillionaireLand, where, as the title suggests, no billionaires are allowed, and you are free to implement as many taxes and social programs as you like. And with smart contracts powered by the blockchain, there would be no such thing as tax evasion, and wealth distribution can occur automatically and algorithmically every time taxes are collected. Doesn't it sound great?
You are conflating democracy and classical liberalism. Democracy is a decision making mechanism that can produce any decisions - democratic cannibals might vote on who to eat.
Most people think, and I tentatively agree, that democracy was the best way to achieve liberal outcomes. However, overall they are in tension. You can see it in the endless 1st amendment cases over the centuries - people really, really want to limit all kinds of speech by the power of the majority, but there's an absolutist undemocratic rule usually preventing them from doing so.
I think on the net classical liberalism (esp. free speech and markets) are more important than democracy. I don't think there's enough tension between them to ditch democracy completely, I guess thiel disagrees. But he's not a coward or a hypocrite, he said so explicitly and openly.
I think some people may be misreading what you wrote to mean China is freer than the US, but I think you are saying that China does not allow billionaires to threaten its government, which is probably accurate.
> They are for freedom and liberty only in the sense that they just want the U.S. government and its regulations and laws to get out of the way so that they can do their bidding.
Pretty sure that is where Libertarianism always ends up. I think you want Utopianism.
I honestly think there is a violent revolution waiting to happen here. Look at Trumpism - what happens if people realise they don't need the orange idiot in order to make changes?
It's about power and control to them. They are actively against freedom and liberty.
These billionaires and corporations have long been a threat to the U.S. China actually recognizes this and does not allow billionaires and corporations to dictate.