Positive psychology (the study of happiness, wellness, and improving normal life) tells us that optimists (who are happier) tend to see themselves as empowered, and their accomplishments as resulting from their efforts and abilities. Pessimists see themselves as victims of fate, with no control over the bad things that happen to them. Self-help books like Steven Covey's "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" tell us to focus on that which we have control over, and not worry about that which we do not. ("Highly proactive people don't blame circumstances, conditions, or conditioning for their behavior. Their behavior is a product of their own conscious choice").

We cultivate a positive, empowered attitude by focusing on our power to change situations, rather than our susceptibility to fate. (This does not mean ignoring precautions against bad events - before the bad events happen, taking precautions is part of what we have control over).

Relatedly, children who believe their successes are due to their inborn talents give up more easily and do worse in the long run than those with the "growth-oriented" philosophy that their successes are due to their efforts. The latter is empowering because an individual can make an effort, while the latter is not because abilities are bestowed by fate and can't be changed. (ref)

In Free To Choose, my grandparents write:

The narrowly limited government of the late nineteenth century possessed little concentrated power that endangered the ordinary man. The other side of that coin was that it possessed little power that would enable good people to do good...they were attracted by the good that a stronger government could achieve...

These ideas began to influence government policy...They gained increasing acceptance among intellectuals in the United States but had little effect on government policy until the Great Depression of the early 1930s...government's responsibility for the depression was not recognized - either then or now. Instead, the depression was widely interpreted as a failure of free market capitalism. That myth led the public to join the intellectuals in a changed view of the relative responsibilities of individuals and government. Emphasis on the responsibility of the individual for his own fate was replaced by emphasis on the individual as a pawn buffeted by forces beyond his control.

(emphasis added)

In other words, the dominant paradigm became one of pessimism, rather than optimism. We became a fixed-mindset country, instead of a growth-oriented one.

In this context, libertarianism can be seen as a political philosophy based on optimism, focusing on the power of the individual to affect their life, rather than protection from fate. The nanny state, while it can be seen as more caring and compassionate in its desire to help those who suffer, is also deeply pessimistic in its focus on fate instead of power. It teaches people that what happens to them is not their fault.

Sometimes this is true - but I worry that it is poisonous to happiness and self-worth, and antithetical to a culture of striving and achievement.

My vision for seasteading is to be like the pre-Depression United States - a place where poor, honest, capable people from all over the world come for the opportunity to better their economic situation through hard work. Where people expect nothing more, or less, than the fruits of their labors. It's fine if the vast majority of people don't like this idea, or think it's "exploitation". I just want the poor optimists. Everyone else is welcome to stay at home, taking turns stealing from each other, wondering why their pensions are underfunded, and blaming fate for their problems.

(note: troll tag only applies to the previous sentence).