[Technology]

Instead of the standard liberal justification for property rights as being "natural rights", militarianism would couch private property as being only as good as its common defense of the property of citizens. A circular justification? Militarianism isn't interested in how property began, only in justifying present possession. It's a framework based theory. You take advantage to have liberty within the framework, you had better to defend the framework,

The survival of the national cultural tradition is what is seen as most important. Good upstanding people, ready to sacrifice themselves for the national cultural tradition are those fit to own private property, and all who wish to do so must be ready to make the same sacrifice.

Militarianism is therefore a non-univeralist "warrior classed" pseudo-libertarianism. Pay your dues to your community in the form of national service, and you'll get the full right of freedom (the full expression of the "Freedom isn't free!" meme). If you do not, or cannot, then you will be either a slave subject to whatever vigilante or legal domination, or a ward of another unfit to own property and possess the right of liberty.

Such an ideology differs from standard conservatarianism in that it does not see property rights as being legitimate simply because you economically labored to get them. Instead it sees property rights as legitimate because you labored as a warrior to protect the common standing of society from subversion, and have as compensation the respect of the product of your work in free entreprize within the framework you defended. Parents therefore endeavor to pass on a warrior culture to their children and prepare them for military service. Youth groups would be started giving a similarity to the fitness obsession in fascist nations. Such a state would necessarily be a dictatorship run by generals.

Is this a possible mutation of the Tea Party through a military populist turn? The military obsession part winning out over the capitalist part? I think they are too old and funded by too many fat CEOs who have never seen combat for this to actually emerge.

[warsmith17]

This just sounds like a more extreme version of the ideology in Starship Troopers (the book)f

Essentially in that book there are residents and citizens, the only difference I can think of is that citizens have the right to vote, while residents don't. The right to vote is gained in exchange for national service. Whether or not this is military service is debatable since the book only mentions military service, but Heinlein later stated that in his vision only a minority would gain citizenship via the military.