Would libertarian fascism be the ideal system for the future ethnostate?

Title says it all.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism#Authoritarianism_and_totalitarianism
professorfekete.com/articles/AEFWasCarlMengerJewish.pd
youtube.com/watch?v=gCxC-PJzsZU
youtube.com/watch?v=qmUlN3p8qK8
youtube.com/watch?v=cVM91WzUeXk
youtube.com/watch?v=Hncuy0bZ9YE
eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/1f669eff-bc82-49d1-a27c-2624e4cab8c6
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarky#Historical_examples)
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yes.

Libertarian fascism? Take all my keks /pol for mine eyes have seen the top of mount retardation...

fascist fascism is the ideal system

We can worry about that after we actually achieve the ethnostate.

Elaborate, kike.

No. Outlier whites would fuck it up.

Like you niggers wouldn't? Also, Couldn't we just kick them out like we did the kikes years ago?

>libertarian
>fascism
That's even more schizophrenic than national-bolshevism. There was a joke once about "anarcho-fascism", now nu-pol retards take it seriously. Not even surprising though.

Yes, either that or natsoc. I do like the idea of a fascist ethnostate with rights protecting firearms, property rights, and a relatively free market without the degeneracy that comes with it.

Although, National Socialism did protect property rights and firearm ownership, so National Socialism would be fine I guess. I would also want regulation of architecture, and women's employment.

Fascism doesn't have to be totalitarian you retards.

all anarchy is facistic and totalitarian.
everyone has to play along

OP confirmed for brainlet:
-Libertarian = minimal non-interventionist state
-Fascism = all peoples lives are organized around powerful state. "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state"

So like good ol' Oswald suggested then ?

>not communist capitalism

maybe try generous judaism ?

Yes it does. Apparently you don't know the definitions of those terms and operate on memes exclusively.
Come on now, a jew can do way better sophistry than that.

Oxymoron.

Fascism is anti-capitalism.

Read:

Fascism: Total Society By H R Morgan

lets say, we jews decide to defend our self by forming a state. what would the anarchists do?

>nothing
then it's no longer anarchism or a state less society.
>demolish the state
then it's totalitarian as you are forcing us to be anarchists.

Not that stupid honestly. Democracy is the antithesis of liberty as we have seen, and as the founding fathers predicted (hence why they founded a constitutional republic with limited suffrage).

Is fascism the answer? Maybe not, but liberty requires an alternative to democracy.

Britbong fascism is the only real fascism.

>libertarian fascism

You're retarded. Fascism is not defined as being totalitarian, you don't know what fascism is. How about you read Mein Kampf, or essays on Fascism by Oswald Mosley and Mussolini.

You use the word "totalitarian" but apparently don't understand what it means. Look up the definition.
Happy Hanukkah btw.

Stop being a fucking retard and actually read some ideological literature you utter lump.

Or militarist pacifism, or White American.

Read Mussolini's definition of Fascism. He explicitly calls it a totalitarian system. You're fucking retarded.

libertarianism = judaism
so NO

also look at the pathetic state of libcucks in 2017, they don't even know their basic ideological ideals and fundamentals

>Fascism is not defined as being totalitarian
Yes it is. Unless it's some snowflakey kind of "fascism" that exists only in the heads of teenage retards raised on memes.
>uses Mein Kampf as an argument while discussing fascism
Once again confirmed uneducated retard.

yes

Nationalist on trade, ethnonationalist on immigration, and libertarian on everything else.

It is totalitarian. But it's populist totalitarianism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism#Authoritarianism_and_totalitarianism

Fuck off, libertarianism is trash

Austrian Economics was founded by Carl Menger, a Roman Catholic. John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Jean-Baptiste Say, Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, etc., could all be called founders of libertarianism, insofar as libertarianism is related to classical liberalism. They are not Jewish.

professorfekete.com/articles/AEFWasCarlMengerJewish.pd

Libertarian fascism sounds like an oxymoron

I want right wing people with no degeneracy mostly open markets no gays no Jews no blacks no trans no feminists no drugs no anti-nation businesses a strong army to defend ourselves anti-globalism no communists no communist propaganda with communists and people who disagree with the state being regularly searched for with police having the powers to investigate these people and these people to be imprisoned and killed for having different views no race mixing and race mixers to be imprisoned or killed or sterilized no Muslims even converts and women to remain in the household or to be pushed in the direction of the household

But i want a small limited state and lots of freedom

Choose one

If you take the economic doctrine of fascism (privatized profits, socialized costs), and just slide it down the vertical axis into the libertarian region, you end up with mutualist anarchism. That is not an ideal system in any sense of the term.

If you're talking about something like the Pinochet regime, just call it Pinochetianism or something like that.

>t. kike commie

Fascist economic theory; Corporatism and Syndicalism, is not like Mutualism.

If you slide Syndicalism down, it's anarcho-syndicalism. And you can't slide Corporatism down, because it's an economic system predicated on state oversight.

Why don't you convert to Islam and move to a Muslim country? It would be paradise for you.

silly fool

everyone knows that National Anarcho-Corporatized Falangist Bolshevism is the pure ideology of total accelerationism.

libertarian fascism would be the same as saying up down, or fast slow, right left.

The biggest voices in libertarian thought are literal kikes lol.

I never said I was Muslim.

I just said a state which does all of that cannot be small and limited or libertarian in the slightest

Nazbols are honestly miles ahead of the game than fucking lolbergs.

No degeneracy
Safe
Free

>captcha terrace pepe

Libertarians tolerate degenerate, and promote them, so no.

see
Also, Hayek, Hoppe, Rockwell, Tom Woods, Tom Di Lorenzo, etc. Guess what? There are Jewish Fascists too. Mussolini's mistress was Jewish. Guess that means you can't be a fascist.

But I assume the first part was what you want.

When did you convert to Islam?
>Drugs are degenerate, ban them.
>Prostitution is degenerate, ban it.
>Gambling is degenerate, ban it.
>Alcohol is degenerate, ban it.
>Pornography is degenerate, ban it.
>Video games are degenerate, ban them.
>Television is degenerate, ban it.
>Movies are degenerate, ban them.
>Fiction books are degenerate, ban them.
>Sugar is degenerate, ban it.
>Smoking is degenerate, ban it.
>Not exercising is degenerate, ban it.
>Sup Forums is degenerate, ban it.
>Music is degenerate, ban it.

hnng

Oh yeah? Well fuck you, I'm anarcho-corporatist now!

>But I assume the first part was what you want.
I was giving an example of the doublethink of """""libertarian fascism"""""

That's why at the end I said "choose one"

Only christians and pagans will be tolerate in the ethno-state, cuck.

Yea the world seems ripe for a new zeitgeist. This one seems legit.

Nice guy national socialism uber alles

this gave me a good chuckle

Mussolini's mistress so fucking what? The ideological kingpins of fascism were not jewish.

Depends if you believe that Jewish supremacism is a problem. Capitalism allows people with the most money to have the most influence over a society.

Classic liberal theory developed from European mercantilism.

Guess which ethnicity created Merchantilism?

youtube.com/watch?v=gCxC-PJzsZU

I don't believe in a 'jew world order' but I do believe that Jewish Supremacism exists. And I would be wary of an economic system heavily pushed by Jewish intellectuals; Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard.

That doesn't render the ideas false, but Capitalism like Merchantilism leads to Jews rising to the positions of influence in a society through finances.

For the record, I don't hate Jews. I fucking love Jewish women.

Why are you fronting in anarcho-capitalist flag while calling it libertarian socialism you piece of shit anyone who has half a mind will research it and realize your fucking propaganda

Looks more like the two strands added to the gay flag

Jewish supremacism exists and is a problem. There a couple possible reasons why some Jewish intellectuals were drawn to libertarianism (although more went the opposite direction with Communism). Either they were people of good character who valued freedom, property rights, and economic prosperity or they were purely self-interested Jews who viewed the system as being favorable towards them because it's inherently meritocratic. Either way, Jews moving to their ethnostate of Israel would be best.

>I don't believe in a 'jew world order'
>I don't hate Jews.
Retard.

I feel Libertarian-Monarchy would be the best but this is definitely a close second

But you hate degeneracy. You would be happiest just converting to Islam and moving to a Muslim country. It's faster than waiting for the ethno-state.

Regarding economic prosperity and free market capitalism, that's a huge myth that is not based on economic history.

What Libertarians do is look a modern economies, look at an economic freedom index, and draw the correlation. Then they make the correlations causal like this; Economic Liberalization = Economic Prosperity.

If you read a few books, I can guarantee that you'll abandon the notion that Libertarian economic theory = prosperity.

You'll see that protectionism and state management develops economies, economic liberalization is the outcome, not the means.

The books are:

Bad Samaritans By Ha Joon Chang

Free Trade Doesn't Work By Ian Fletcher

(Intro vid for above, the book goes in way more depth;

youtube.com/watch?v=qmUlN3p8qK8

The Enterprenurial State By Marianna Mazzucato

(Intro vid for the above, book goes in way more depth...

youtube.com/watch?v=cVM91WzUeXk

A friendly challenge to read those 3 books (all 3) and walk away believing in Libertarian Economic theory.

>Have a dictatorial ruler
>Not have him abuse power
You are basically saying "your guy" that you put in power will be uncorruptible and completely moral.
Just like when you see hysteria for a politician that "this is the politician who will turn things around." It never happens so you can see why we laugh and have our doubts.

...

Lmao all of those countries on the right side are already highly developed, of course growth is low.

>Title says it all.
then put it in your post you goddamn faggot

Please read the books, you literally did exactly the same confusion of correlation with causation which Libertarians do.

Also, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan are small countries (Hong Kong is an autonomous territory), with a high IQ population (literally the highest in the world).

If you look into the correlation between IQ and economic development, you'll see that there are other variables to take into account when looking at stats...

youtube.com/watch?v=Hncuy0bZ9YE

The economic history presented in the books, is broader and covers a variety of countries. Not just small high IQ countries.

You have nothing to lose by challenging your belief in Libertarianism. If the ideology is 'rock solid' then 3 books won't challenge it in the slightest.

I agree about protectionism, in that a country being as self-sufficient as possible is a good thing but saying that justifies significant state management of the rest of the economy is false and just leads to the misallocation of scarce resources.

>The Reich Food Estate, the state-controlled corporation responsible for agricultural production, regularly failed to feed its people. Agricultural output rarely surpassed 1913 levels, in spite of 20 years of technological advancement. Demand outstripped supply by 30 percent in basic foodstuffs like pork, fruit, and fats. That meant that for every ten German workers who stood in line to buy meat from the state-owned supply depots, three went home hungry.

Good point that I missed!

Protectionism is state management.

Public enterprise into key industries for the future (eg. Green Tech, Automation) would also be a form of state planning.

State management doesn't have to mean micro management.

I'm not proposing the establishment of a Nazis Germany economy.

Libertarian fascism is technically an oxymoron and not a real thing. But the sentiment behind it is legitimate. The idea of "Libertarian fascism" is trying to grasp at some new political theory that hasn't been formulated yet. It will be though. Now that the overton window has been smashed and establishment institutions discredited, the time is ripe for radically new ideas to start emerging. Liberals are going to shit themselves when the new political theory starts taking shape.

Libertarianism is incompatible with ethnicity as an organizing principle.

You looking for SOCIALISM as an organizing principle. That's what its Nazis.

Fascism is ultra-nationalism heavy government.
Libertarian in little government borderline anarchy; a degenerates paradise.

explain

>Protectionism is state management.
Never said it wasn't. That's why I said I'm a nationalist on trade.
>Public enterprise into key industries for the future (eg. Green Tech, Automation) would also be a form of state planning.
That's where it gets a bit trickier. Often times, billions are wasted on projects that are either economically feasible in the long run or actually feasible in reality.

*aren't economically feasible

It can be hit or miss (like Marianna Mazzucato points out), that's why she makes proposals in her book to try to make them more hits than misses.

I highly recommend her book.

You said that protectionism and state management develops the economies but those are countries that are growing (developing) quite fast. So are you saying they would be growing and developing would be even greater with large amounts of government spending?

They may be highly developed but does that mean they have no more room for GDP growth?

>Libertarianism is incompatible with ethnicity as an organizing principle.
Simply untrue.

>ing (developing) quite fast. So are you saying they would be growing and developing would be even greater with large amounts of government spending?

I don't know why you are equating state management with government spending.

Singapore and South Korea (if you look into the history of their economic developement) was far from economically liberal for the first 3/4 of it's development. (Singpore is literally called a benevolent authoritarian government, to this day. They have universal healthcare, and have you looked into the law regarding land ownership? eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/1f669eff-bc82-49d1-a27c-2624e4cab8c6 That is far from Libertarian.)

I'd rather read history.

>Fascism is anti-capitalism
lul

But they are extremely high on the economic freedom index currently which means that they are experiencing these huge, recent GDP gains with low levels of state management.

>I'd rather read history

So you only read history, no political or economic theory?

I'm just trying to point out that graph doesn't show low government spending = higher economic growth per se. It might be true in certain circumstances. Those high growth counties are basically run by globalist corporations and so have had a huge capital influx to take advantage of the lax laws.

I also think that once a country is developed, it inevitably leads to higher social spending. This is why you're seeing low growth with high guv spending. There is no way Belgium can grow at 7%. The graph also leaves out China, which turned from a backwater to the world's largest economy through extensive state planning.

That being said i'm not completely opposed to economic liberalism, but the conditions have to be carefully set beforehand. Libertarianism(ish) thrived in an all white, nationalist America. In today's america it'll just serve to enrich the kikes and megacorps.

Praxis > ideology

Also, fascism has no economic theory. It's just a sticky note that says "Just do what works and boorj want, nigga".

That's why Benny started with Alberto De Stefani, a laissez-faire liberal, as a finance minister. Before switching to corporatist protectionism with Volpe.

Seriously, what is your definition of Fascism then ?

Yeah. That doesn't mean that's how they got to their current state.

The 'infant industry' concept is about state mangement for the early and mid stages of a developing industry in an economy. Then once it's advanced, then the economics of the industry are liberalized.

The infant industry model intentionally temporary, it's not supposed to be the perpetual state of economy.

The Singaporean and South Korean states made sure their industries were robust (this is economic history) before they liberalized the market. Liberalization can arguably be a necessary policy once an industry has sufficiently developed, but it's suicide (or homicide) to open an industry to international competition when it's underdeveloped.

Free Market Capitalists want an internationalist economy, so they don't care if a nation's industry survives or not. Nationalists want robust nation industries, that's why they do things like protectionism (polices which are literally designed to protect industries).

Honestly, (and no offence) the questions you've been asking are all addressed in those 3 books.

(Sorry to go on about recommending them, but I'm going to bed now. Nice chatting with you.)

>I also think that once a country is developed, it inevitably leads to higher social spending.
Well, more wealth generated, more wealth to siphon.

>The graph also leaves out China, which turned from a backwater to the world's largest economy through extensive state planning.
But China has experienced their recent growth when they started turning to more economically liberal policies rather than state control.

>Libertarianism(ish) thrived in an all white, nationalist America. In today's america it'll just serve to enrich the kikes and megacorps.
That's probably true.

>Also, fascism has no economic theory

You think that because you've don't read fascist political philosophy. It does, and it's laid out by fascist theorists.

Tard, Fascism is capitalism vut instead of directed at personal gain it is directed for the state.

I'll read em.

Ah yes, the merger of corporate and state power. Aren't you glad that Goldman Sachs and Exxon Mobil and other corporations have permanent presence in the White House? How awesome that Jeff Bezos is going to be so much closer to the Pentagon. Isn't this what you wanted?

Fascists are useful idiots to corporations. That's all they ever were, and all they ever will be. March on Rome was funded by corporations to the tune of 20 million lira.

I'm with you op! heavy-handed totalitarian at the beginning to fix things and then as the ship rights itself you take more of a hands-off approach. this way the people live under the laws they want and deem fair and they forget they even have a fascist dictator as a leader.

>You've got the facts exactly backwards. South Korean growth was primarily export driven, i.e. trade driven, it did not involve import substitution. Rather than the government restricting trade to foster the growth of domestic industries ("protectionism"), it actually stimulated it through policies such as low-interest loans to exporters. The South Korean government did not "shield corporate giants" but allowed chaebol which failed in international markets to go out of business. Studies have found that relative prices in South Korea are similar to other Asian nations suggesting the policies did not distort the market very much. Your claim that developing countries didn't grow through free trade measures is false. The fastest growing economy in the world, Botswana, has implemented free trade policies. The Japanese industrialisation occurred during Meiji restoration involved free trade policies. Britain and Hong Kong also grew rapidly under free trade policies. If you want examples of extreme protectionism, look at the countries that attempted autarky (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarky#Historical_examples) – the effects are usually so disastrous the policies are quickly abandoned.
Found this about South Korea from a debate on free trade.

Leftist right-winger.
Communist capitalist.
Gay straight man.
Heterosexual lesbian.

This.
You fucking assholes have to STOP FORCING THESE RETARDED MEMES.
Fuck off with your Ancrap
Fuck off with your nazibol
And fuck off with this shit!

No, the ideal system has always been and will always be a benevolent, merit based monarchy

The corporations that fascist corporatism refers to has nothing to do with the joint-stock corporations you think of in capitalism. The fact that you don't know this is revealing of you really know of the subject. But then what else should I expect from a meme flag.