Who /liberty/ here?
NEWS
Ron Paul Liberty Report
ronpaullibertyreport.com
Foundation for Economic Education
fee.org
Mises Institute
mises.org
Zero Hedge
zerohedge.com
VIDEOS
Ron Paul Amazing "What If?" Speech
youtube.com
Libertarianism: An Introduction
youtube.com
Gary Johnson's funniest moments
youtube.com
Donald Trump Would Be Wrong to Appoint Bolton or Giuliani | Rand Paul
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
oll.libertyfund.org
lewrockwell.com
twitter.com
Your liberty is my enslavement
I would like to know, how?
In 1000 years how will America be remembered? As a bastion of freedom, or a warmongering superpower?
I'm liberty
>ITT
Another resource:
The Online Library of Liberty
oll.libertyfund.org
Find hundreds of writings, books, essays, etc. on classical liberal thought.
There is no more land to homestead, being fucked simply for being late is not an option I desire.
Geolibertarians are okay, ancaps are just feudalists in denial.
I would describe myself more as a minarchist, I think we can hold the feet of corporations to the fire with effort, without government assistance.
How many people still consider themselves part of the libertarian right here?
Why can't libertarianism take hold in Europe? Are there options in your countries if you support it? (besides the US, obviously)
I know there's a party in Canada and Russia, but otherwise don't know.
>Russia
oh wow, that's pretty out there. Can kind of understand considering how they've been fucked by big governments literally their entire history.
Not many.
You see, the moment you start thinking of yourself as part of an ideologic group, you will let this group do your thinking for you.
I'd rather have a prehensile dick that can hold up a sheet like that guy.
It's hard when most of you guys don't have a written constitution or some document that outlines what liberty is or basic rights and individual has. You need serious social reform right now before that can happen.
>it's hard because you guys won't become American
Fuck off, yank.
I'm *mostly* libertarian. Somewhere between libertarian and conservative.
>No Fed
>No meaningless bureaucrats
>much less regulation,
>as much as I hate the FDA, just limit it as well as the patent office.
>flat tax
>Federal funding reform
>funding roads is fine, Its too late, lets just stick with it, its really not that much budgetwise.
>no interference with marriage.
>charter schools
>strong military, strong legal system. strong police force
and so on and so on.
Libertarians went full retard in the US this year. The naked guy, Johnson throwing away the gun, having Weld as his vp, being anti gun, being open to immigration without repealing any entitlements.
I hate being in between. Both groups end up hating me.
I really wish there were libertarian or hell even strong conservative groups in my town. but there isn't and so i'm alone :(
There was some local libertarian official who was elected there despite government corruption in the area, Andey Shalnev I think.
it's complicated, because our "constitutionalism" is basically a set of gentlemen's agreements taking place over the course of a thousand years. As such it's a very deep part of our national tradition so very difficult to get any kind of movement for a codified constitution going.
As such there is no real line drawn in the sand where government should or should not be, and that's worrying.
The rights we like to shout and cry about are guaranteed rights. Rights from God, that predate government, and government only exists to protect them and a few other duties. They have no right to intrude or infringe upon them. At all, they do not have that authority.
There is no ancient legal precedent that prevents your government from walking all over you. Everything is up for grabs and to change.
Eat shit, theres a reason why you will get arrested for simply saying nigger.I didn't say you have to build walmarts and shit your pants in the mall, you don't even have freedom of speech which is kind of important for transitioning into a libertarian society
The only real libertarianism is right libertarianism. We got hijacked in the 60s my dude.
The left egalitarian, anti War leftists united with libertarians to protest the status quo at the time. Right libertarians overestimated these people's intelligence and knowledge of economics, and, unsurprisingly, the modern libertarian movement has been attached to degenerates, professional and personal failures, and plain losers.
Real libertarians can separate the "noise" that clutters our society with the transcendent and everlasting natural order of kinship, private property, and the traditional family.
Any libertarian who seeks to undermine the traditional family in the name of tolerance or progress is a wolf in sheep's clothing
Many of the Marxists (sometimes so-called "left libertarians") I've encountered call the totalitarian regimes such as the USSR "not real communism". If they want to try voluntary socialist communities, perhaps once they collapse they'll be more open to right libertarianism.
Indeed. Not only that but the current libertarian movement is infested with the product of the welfare state: the new class of permanent adolescents. The multiculturalists, the egalitarians, the rude, the vulgar, the uncivilised, the parasitic, and the integrationists.
It's a shame Sup Forums immediately associates libertarianism with open borders and cultural downfall when the precise reasons for cultural downfall and the moral degeneration of society has been the tremendous state growth and the creation of the welfare state during the 19th century and up until today.
If only more people read Hoppe, Rothbard and Lew Rockwell...
I consider myself an ultranationalist libertarian
due process, habeas corpus, bill of rights, as little taxes and government as necessary, no executive agencies, no hate speech laws, no income tax, absolute property rights, absolute self defense and bear arms rights, no federal reserve, jury nullification, end of the war on drugs, no welfare,...
combined with a complete ban on foreign immigration, a ban on marriage with foreigners, a ban on foreigners owning land, a ban on adoption of foreigners, a ban on foreigners owning arms, isolationist policy, a number of set national holidays, voting rights only to those over age 25 with voter ID, requirement to serve in the military if you want to vote or be able to run for an office, mandatory duty of states to have a proper national guard, allegiance to the flag,...
What is the difference between right and left libertarianism? I've always seen it as kind of a third way ideology.
>mfw this entire post
Left libertarianism was a hijack of mainstream libertarianism during the 1960s and after by the anti war, world peace and egalitarianism hippies.
Fuck off cucks.
>NEETs ftw!
left wing libertarianism are just deluded. they are unrealistic and do't understand that libertarianism can't work if you combine it with globalist/leftist policies.
if you would magically have a libertarian country. and you combine that good, free,.. country with a policy of f.e. open borders what will you get? you will get an surge of immigrants, you will get a destruction of culture, a ruthless competition, you will get ethnic strife, if they are muslims they will hate your libertarianism and when they outbreed you they will establish a theocracy, too much negroes and unassimilated immigrants will vote for handouts and seek to subvert the very foundation of your liberty....
it is just utopian. it will after a few generations destroy any identity or cultural, economic, viability.
and honsetly, if you have libertarians like the fucking libertarian presidential candidate calling for gun control, you know the libertarian movement is completely cucked beyond belief and in dire need to be layed to waste
If you want to read right wing libertarianism, read Hans Herman Hoppe, Lew Rockwell, and the classics like Tocqueville, Bastiat,...
I see /r9k/ has found the thread
thanks Afonso
Who /Hoppean ancap/ here?
Oh, so right libertarianism is basically just real libertarianism and left libertarianism is just Gary Johnson bullshit. Got it.
I do, but libertarians usually don't post threads like this one, so you wouldn't really know how libertarian the board is. Unlike how you would with the natsocs.
I would consider myself more of a minarchist. the ideas of the founding fathers, jeffersonian liberty and states rights combined with hamiltonian ethnonationalism would be the best combination
I guess I just am too much of a nationalist to completely let go of the state and national unity.
too radical 4me Magnus
Yeah I've never heard a particularly good argument for privatizing the police or army in particular. There are few things I wouldn't privatize, most of them related to physical safety.
Why don't we keep a general? I notice NatSocs have a general.
that's a containment general though
I think most of Sup Forums is still pro-liberty so having a recurring or running general is kind of redundant and would probably just become shitposting like TrumpGen
exactly. The history of the united states in that view is really sad to see.
the patriots of the revolution went mental over british tea on dumping prices, imagine the outrage they would have over today's taxations, corporatism, "patriot" act,....
maddening.
for the USA a good military policy would be to get rid of the federal national guard but make it completely a task of the states, and maintain a small, very professional national army, something like the bundeswehr in interbellum Germany, an elite force of mostly officers and leaders.
concerning police I would abolish the CIA, FBI, NSA desu, and no federal crimes but national treason full stop
Present.
bump
Only in a society that first Chief Justice John Jay describes can libertarianism work:
>“Providence has been pleased to give us this one connected country to one united people -a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by they their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.”
I suppose an ancap general would be more necessary than a libertarian general, but I don't know how many ancaps are here. I'm not an ancap, and it'd probably devolve into an ancap memes general anyway.
Would you be in favor of breaking up the states into even smaller states, especially states such as California? It would certainly make government more local.
If they themselves vote to do that then why not?
>I ask not for tighter pussies but for a wider cock
Not only states, but every person should have the right to secede along with his private property from any State. Society would reform in the form of covenants and communities, each specifically tailored to what group of private property holders believes in and promotes.
you cannot be libertarian when you don't have a high iq, high trust, low crime, homogenous country. That will never work.
So one hand,in today's America yes. But on the other hand, I am also a nationalist. And I could never see the Union so destroyed by
the best thing is deportation of all non Whites, including jews.
and a hunting season on neocons, sjw's,....
after this purification the libertarian and nationalist, true USA can be established. And I can garantee that no state would want to sccede from that one.
but that is just dreaming so for the moment yes.
I find that ancapism just too strong. You might say I am lukewarm, but how will culture, nationalism, traditions,... survive such an onslaught?
also, would it not result in major corporations buying everything up and effectively taking over everything?
Libertarianism is a Jewish conspiracy to neutralise high IQ white men and lure them away from the truth which is fascism
Sieg Heil you liberty cucks
Nationalism, culture and tradition are all destroyed under statism and not the other away around, my friend from a pretty much non country (sorry couldn't resist Kek).
The growth of the State has been historically accompanied with a vast centralization and encroachment of state power into every aspect of private life: private relationships (marriage), private gatherings (clubs) and private property (more taxation and more expropriation in the name of the public good).
Moreover, the rise of the welfare state has been the major catalyst for the destruction of tradition, of family and of natural authority: the social elite by which the unwashed masses should guide their lives. Men need no longer work for and in order to prepare themselves for old age, for illness, for the future or for their children. Women need no longer rely on the sacredness of marriage and of starting a family to secure a comfortable life and propagate their genes. People are not able to repel and expel those who are deemed rude, uncivilized and detestable. The State has indeed corroded all aspects of private life that allegiance to one's family authority, natural social hierarchy or fellow human peers is no longer necessary.
Read the book Democracy The God That Failed by Hoppe.
Not only that, but worse. Imagine every holiday, every tradition, every fucking greeting being trademarked and Disney-ized. Because it's coming.
"Why is it in particular the small minority of white, heterosexual males, and especially its most successful
members that owes some extra-kindness to the vast majority of all other people? Why not the other way around? After all, most if not all technical inventions, machines, tools and gadgets in current use everywhere and anywhere, on which our current living standards and comforts largely and decisively depend, originated with them. All other people, by and large, only imitated what they had invented and constructed first. All others inherited the knowledge embodied in the inventors’ products for free. And isn’t it the typical white hierarchical family household of father, mother, their common children and prospective heirs, and their ‘bourgeois’ conduct and lifestyle – i.e., everything the Left disparages and maligns – that is the economically most successful model of social organization the world has ever seen, with the greatest accumulation of capital goods (wealth) and the highest average standards of living? And isn’t it only on account of the great economic achievements of this minority of ‘victimizers’ that a steadily increasing number of ‘victims’ could be integrated and partake in the advantages of a worldwide network of the division of labor? And isn’t it only on account of the success of the traditional white, bourgeois family model also that so-called ‘alternative lifestyles’ could at all emerge and be sustained over time? Do not most of today’s ‘victims,’ then, literally owe their lives and their current living to the achievements of their alleged ‘victimizers?’
From that article I sent you.
Get a job
yes, but why not just make a strong constitution? why not make an amendment that forbids the government from making debts, borrowing money?
why not make an amendment that forbids the government to handout welfare/ food stamps/...?
why not make an amendment that allows for all sorts of currency instead of a monopoly of a official/national currency?
why not make an amendment that defnies marriage in proper natural traditional terms?
why not pass a law that gives a cheated husband the right to kill his adulterous wife and her lover?
why not make an amendment that gives the freedom to discriminate/ freedom of association?
why not allow, besides public courts, private arbitrage like today is already practiced in financial cases?
why the need to be so radical, so disregarding, so destructive?
honestly, the flaw I see in Hoppes work is that todays society will only deteriorate by privatisation (privatisation of marriage lol; you really want women to marry dogs, trees etc? because that is what will happen). and corporatism. the Hoppean society will be ruled by corporations, and that is very dangerous.
And also that, though you may have very comfy local communities, you will not have a nation, not a greater "heimat".
thanks, will certainly check it out when I find the time. Hoppe is based, I read an essay of him about property that was very interesting.
You can still have nationalism under libertarianism
In regards to a constitution, it's still a State constitution. A constitution is essentially a document that APPROVES State expropriation and taxation. No ammendments can ever predict or stop the growth of the State. The United States is the prime example of this.
Read Hoppe's book. One of the first things he dispels is the fiction that a constitution is somehow a definite stumbling block to state growth
ok Joao, will do
No problem. I can understand why someone would at first glance find more liberty even more destructive to society than the liberty we have today. Only when one reads Hoppe and Rothbard one understands that this massive and radical elimination of the State would give rise to more freedom -- not libertinism. Society would be on path to restore its natural order -- of traditional, monocultural, hierarchical, patriarchal, intolerant, discriminating and patrician social lifestyles.
we need national libertarianism.
it shits me when libertarians advocate completely open borders. good luck preserving liberty when jamal and pablo outvote you 2 to 1.