Sup Forums is a libertarian board

Sup Forums is a libertarian board

Other urls found in this thread:

amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2015/10/is-the-death-penalty-the-answer-to-drug-crime/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>I am responsible for my own actions. I maintain my own moral standard.
History has shown that most people are utterly incapable of any kind of self-control or constructive behavior without some kind of coercion. We need a strong state to keep its citizens in line.

Just out of Curiosity what is the race/ethnicity of most libertarians? Case Closed

C'mon, now, no factionalism.
That's what fucked over the commies.

Nope a board of FREEDOM! now go kill yourself for freedom's sake!

it's whiter than atheism

Says who? You? Don't speak for the rest of us who aren't as weak as you are.

>Sup Forums is a Jewish morality board

The answer to all questions lies in our past. No society has ever accomplished anything of any significance (or maintained basic peace and order, for that matter) without a strong source of authority.

i'd say that it's mostly white due to faggots on the left strawmanning and calling it racist, thus ostracizing people of color and the lgbt communuity. are there racist libertarians? of course. there are racists in every camp. the only difference is, if one happened to get into office and was a libertarian, he or she would still leave people the fuck alone.

I wish. After the whole no captcha debacle Sup Forums became white nationalist reddit.

Too bad libertarians never win.

it didn't always used to be like this. libertarianism was incredibly strong and prevalent on this board until maybe 3 years ago i think...?

Your no taxes (((capitalism))) ensures nations cannot accumulate wealth for self defense (military), which allows the (((guy with the largest bank)))) to do whatever the fuck he wants.

Your (((libertarian))) dreams soon turn into a tyranny.

>judging yesterday's people by today's moral standard
so fallacious it's faggotry.

However yes, most people today also don't act within our moral boundaries of self control and discipline. We need decent education for that. We already have the philosophy and mindset required. All it takes is implementing that.

>child labor should be legal and in fact forced into the economy.
>making kids work while they learn is the best way to prepare them for working long term.

>without a strong source of authority
Calm down, Joseph. The free market working better than socialism is the perfect example of people not needing to be told what to do.

Except that's bullshit. Look at early America.

CODE RED, CODE RED. THIS IS NOT A DRILL, BRAZIL IS IN A PURGE:

People grew up and took the redpill.
Strong government is needed to fix society, libertarianism for fun until you destroy it again.

You could abolish national army right now. Is anyone in favor of that? No. Because people aren't as dumb as you think.

>people grew up by demanding someone hold their hand through life

christ, you people really are the shitposting kings, aren't you?

>hold their hand
No, to force the hand of shitters.

The reason is because of lack of a proper education.

Fix education, remove the people who are autistic niggers who don't want to follow the law.

The history part is not true, look at early America, we didn't have a strong government and we we're very prosperous.

You're falling for the "our ancestors were morally superior beings" meme. People 100 or 500 or 3000 years ago were just as corrupt, disgusting, immoral, and lazy as people today are. People don't change and never will. Evolution doesn't work that fast. The only difference between "then" and "now" is that penalties for those kinds of actions were greater in the past, therefore people had a greater disincentive toward immoral behavior.

>We need decent education for that. We already have the philosophy and mindset required. All it takes is implementing that.

I agree that a decent education is important, but its way too optimistic to think that will be enough. People will always work against each other (and themselves) unless coerced by a stronger authority. It's just due to human nature: selfishness and pride. Education can't fix that.

That's what I said.

The only true implementation of free market capitalism is one where personal property is 100% respected. That means no taxes.

Any other way is just social democracy, but with less taxes.

true. But a white nationalist libertarian board

spin it any way you want, kid. you people are goddamn infantile.

Nazis are gay

Sup Forums - Politically INCORRECT.

Yes and (((libertarians))) are all geniuses with an IQ of 180 and a 16 inch dick. They certainly aren't just rebellious children being contrarian.
Grow up.

...

>which allows the (((guy with the largest bank)))) to do whatever the fuck he wants
Sounds to me like you're saying someone like Soros could just topple the rest of the nation's military might combined. I don't think that's plausible.

>Look at early America.
Ok, I will. Early America was a far more coercive and less libertarian state than the modern US. Laws were far stricter; you could be hanged for theft. During the "industrial revolution" period there was a tremendous system of price controls, as well as extremely high tariffs by today's standards. And, of course, moral shaming was more widespread. Government wasn't afraid to judge people like it is today.

It is, when nobody is paying taxes.

Why do you think nobody would pay for it? What do you think all those planes flying over stadiums or Top Gun the movie are for? It's fucking advertisement to get you to pay for it. Except more than you need to. And people are well aware of the need for defense. They'll pay for it or get forced to pay by some alliance of militaries (like NATO) to keep the peace.

So they will basically establish taxes. Libertarian dream dies on its own.

>They will pay voluntarily
Yeah, except your FDV marxist fags, random gypsies and opportunists won't pay shit the moment they feel remotely safe.

This isn't gonna work, nothing but taxes will protect you from the jews.

You shoud stay on /lgbt/

Faggot.

The people who don't pay are a danger to me if they don't pay. That's the way I see it. If I'm the only one protecting a million people that's just begging to get steamrolled. So telling people to pay for their own defense isn't any issue for me. And I don't consider some outside entity checking to see if your defenses are adequate as a government. They're still operating under some sort of self-determination.

Once Civilization was defended by men, not by paying taxes just to pay it, without benefits.

>without a strong source of authority
That authority needs to be God, not an all powerful state

National libertarianism => Very strict immigration, only tariffs, no taxes on income or internal production.

Yea I see people still being loyal to their country no matter the system. But today there's problem because of technology. To avoid annihilation someone on your team needs nukes and some other machinery if possible.

>That authority needs to be God, not an all powerful state

That would be nice. Unfortunately without some mechanism to institutionalize the worship of God, the system would fall apart. It's naive to think that people are morally sound enough to always act correctly based on belief in God alone.
I don't disagree with you per se, but a State is still necessary.

Its right wing in general, some are facists while some are libertarians. Then you have the shills

>look at early America, we didn't have a strong government
yes we did you double nigger
>only property-owning white men could vote
>anti-obscenity laws
>fag marriage outlawed
>sodomy outlawed
>de jure segregation
>mainly white european immigration

Finally, a thread I can get down to

The government back then was very limited and the federal govt wasn't as intrusive.

>We need a strong state to keep its citizens in line
there is a chance that a strong state could be too overbearing.

given how the global economy is evolving, intellectual labor is more important nowadays, and it has been shown time and time again that the said people are motivated more by the carrot than the stick.

kek.

Jefferson, the most liberal of all the founding fathers presented a law that mandated castration for sodomites, which was rejected for being too soft. death penalty remained for sodomites.

stop being naive.

see It's true that spending was significantly lower; government was more efficient than the bloated bureaucracy of today. However LAWS were much stricter. Again. tariffs, price controls, even govt. ownership of industries were more common. And as far as "social" regulation, it was FAR greater as points out.

Not libertarian.

exactly.

>railing against social democracy all while enjoying the benefits of social democaracy.

Most libertarians owe a lot to our current tried and true system. They just want to block out all the good it has done for them and pretend they are being kept down by it.

What I'm saying is, libertarians and ancaps are really no different from edgy, middle class teenagers who believe in communism despite their well off lives.

Also
>"We should abolish social programs because I strongly believe that all welfare should be in the form of charity. "
>never donates anything meaningful to charity

These guys are a joke

THanks Mr Bong, that needed to be said.

This. All of these Nazi fags need to gas themselves. They're bringing a bad name to the cause. Basically the right wing equivalent to SJWs.

Libertarianism is astrology for white men.

And what benefits are those? Socialist programs stifle growth and encourage the growth of government. All those social democracies you're talking about are pissing away the gains made by capitalism through ever increasing taxes and waste.

National Socialism is not Marxian Socialism, fuckhead.

Socialist tards BTFO

Yea okay stormfag. The government that imprinted "mind your business" on its currency was national socialist. Sure thing.

See this logo? These are the factions of Sup Forums. OPs image is a classic kike divide and conquer tactic. Saged. Try something new fags this shit is old

The difference is that without the State you will not die, because it does not produce your food, in fact, the State never produces anything.

Obviously there needs to be some balance; no one wants "1984." But the fact remains that a significant part, if not majority, of the population would accomplish nothing without a "stick." Laws are needed to enforce order because people are incapable of doing so themselves.

The real question is: do we currently have too much or too little enforcement of order? Based on many of the problems currently faced by society (destruction of families, loss of jobs due to foreign competition, general degeneracy, disregard for property/rioting, and, especially, rampant drug abuse) it would seem we are far too lenient.

capitalism fosters a soulless consumerist culture where people become interchangeable cogs with no true identity in a global moneymaking machine

>Not a libertarian
>Therefore automatically a Nazi.
Holy crap, you people can't seem to get around your pathetic binary version of reality. Strict laws for maintaining social order =/= "gas the kikes."

And yes, compared to today laws were harsher in the 1800s. See . It's a simple fact.

Please explain how racially conscious white people are "Basically the right wing equivalent to SJWs".

They can believe in and disagree about all manner of policies, morals, spiritual beliefs, public ethos and tastes in art. SJWs go around banning everything and everyone they deem "racist" or "sexist". I don't see anything like that coming from race realists.

Also, I think you come from Reddit. No one around here uses "SJW" as a pejorative. It's just a label for a group of people. You use it as an insult.

...

>destruction of families
Caused by government fucking up marriage

>loss of jobs due to foreign competition
Jobs would be available if there was a free market. But I may agree on border control. Especially with a bloated govt.

>general degeneracy
None of your business. "I don't like this" isn't an argument.

>disregard for property
Violent criminals have always been subject to law. Except governments of course.

>drug abuse
War on drugs isn't working and it's counter productive. Also none of your business what a person does with their body.

>Government forcing people to act the way it wants
>not soulless

>"I don't like this" isn't an argument.
natural truths aren't an argument?
>Also none of your business what a person does with their body.
we should execute drug dealers
>people identify themselves by their favorite clothing brand or favorite car brand or type of music instead of by their faith and heritage
>not soulless

>Most libertarians owe a lot to our current tried and true system. They just want to block out all the good it has done for them and pretend they are being kept down by it.

>Most abolitionists owe a lot to our current tried and true system. They just want to block out all the good it has done for them and pretend they are being kept down by it.

>I'm a lolbertarian

>not national capitalist
physically remove yourself

Accountability is an unmentioned virtue.

It's funny how you morons hate blacks for chimping out. But look what you're doing. Exactly the same thing. No reason. Just "I don't like this" then procede to chimp out and want to kill people. Good thing you'll never have your day again. You belong in the garbage bin of history.

>the pol logo literally has a swastika in the center
>All of these Nazi fags need to gas themselves.

Kek has spoken

...

BTFO, get back to stormfront stormfaggies

...

would you rather live in nazi germany or brazil? in fascist italy or somalia?

>Violent criminals have always been subject to law.
Then why are people rioting in the street and burning down buildings without penalty?
>Jobs would be available if there was a free market.
Proof? I'm not a socialist but this seems like an unsupported statement.
>None of your business. "I don't like this" isn't an argument.
This is where you really disagree. You see, some of us actually care about more than our own little selfish cash hoard. Some of us truly love our towns and friends and communities, and don't want to see them go to shit because its "not my business." Humans are social animals; what's important to our neighbors should also be important to us. Retreating into your own little private hole and ignoring the state of the world around you is selfishness and cowardice. Pure and simple.

>Look, Mom! I'm projecting!

>not just letting the weak be crushed by the strong and manipulated by the clever

>libertarian
just grow up already and becoming right wing

1776 America
Now go away.

Dear god, send me to Dresden, circa 1933.

...

>War on drugs isn't working and it's counter productive.
It isn't working because the penalties are far too lenient. Hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl will literally kill you in due time. Dealers know this. They know they are killing the people they sell too. They are morally equivalent to hit-men; they murder people and making money by doing so. They should be treated as such.

>This is where you really disagree. You see, some of us actually care about more than our own little selfish cash hoard. Some of us truly love our towns and friends and communities, and don't want to see them go to shit because its "not my business." Humans are social animals; what's important to our neighbors should also be important to us. Retreating into your own little private hole and ignoring the state of the world around you is selfishness and cowardice. Pure and simple.
All that shit and not a single argument. Prove you're doing anything good then talk.

>Then why are people rioting in the street and burning down buildings without penalty?
Because your government is a bloated bureaucratic shit that can't be bothered to protect free speech?

>Proof
Higher liquidity of the job market. It's common sense. But I can dig something up if you insist. Or go look it up yourself.

>george washington wanted a one party state
>early america was a white man's utopia where you could lynch niggers with impunity
>nobody was doing drugs or depraved sex acts
>marriage was between a man and a woman
>strong, healthy family unit
sounds good to me, we're just gonna need a little help from the government to get back there.

Hmm, really makes the almonds twinkle.

Sounds good to me.

No Slovenians welcome.

>fentanyl
Maybe has something to do with there not being pharmacy grade heroin available?

>penalties are far too lenient
>There is no evidence that the death penalty is more effective at deterring drug crime – or any other crime – than a prison term.
amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2015/10/is-the-death-penalty-the-answer-to-drug-crime/
Keeping drugs legal and actually reaching the community and providing harm reduction is more effective and less costly than waging war.

CApitalists are scum

Reminder that libertarianism and private property go hand in hand with traditional lifestyles centered on the family, discrimination and the physical removal of undesirables that bring down the value of your property.

>I can't think of a good refutation so I'm just going to say "not an argument." Haha I win.

>Because your government is a bloated bureaucratic shit that can't be bothered to protect free speech?
On this point I actually agree. But doing so would imply stricter enforcement.

Degeneracy is self distructive. Humans are social animals, I don't like seeing my friends and neighbors destroy themselves. You're done.

>Degeneracy is self distructive
And you base that on what?

>still no argument

Roads