This thread is for Discussion of Libertarianism, Capitalism, AnarchoCapitalism, and the physical removal of communist fags from our board of peace.
>Post sneks
>Bump for Life, Liberty, and Private Death Squads
>Vanilla /lrg/ pastebin- CREATE IF YOU DONT SEE ONE IN THE CATALOG
pastebin.com
>Safespace and Archive:
(((reddit.com
>New hoppewave track by base portubro:
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
liberalstudies.ca
il-rs.org.br
iea.org.uk
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
lewrockwell.com
mises.org
mises.org
riosmauricio.com
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
archive.lewrockwell.com
propertyandfreedom.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
GENERAL READING LIST:
>The Law - Frédéric Bastiat
liberalstudies.ca
>Free To Choose - Milton and Rose Friedman
il-rs.org.br
>Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty - Eugene F. Miller
iea.org.uk
>Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition - Ludwig von Mises
mises.org
>Man, Economy, and State - Murray N. Rothbard
mises.org
>Anatomy of the State
mises.org
>Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, and Other Essays - Murray N. Rothbard
mises.org
HOPPE READING LIST:
>Articles by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
lewrockwell.com
>The Economics and Ethics of Private Property
mises.org
>A Short History of Man: Progress and Decline
mises.org
>Democracy - The God That Failed
riosmauricio.com
>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism
mises.org
>From Aristocracy, to Monarchy, to Democracy
mises.org
>The Myth of National Defense: Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production
mises.org
>The Private Production of Defense
mises.org
>Economic Science and the Austrian Method
mises.org
>What Must Be Done
mises.org
...
I see you've already uploaded my new video, thanks!
Right on. I've got some video ideas myself and will be working on some smaller projects.
Nice image. There's some errors, tho: line 12 should be oppose instead of appose; line 16, you forgot the "be" in "not to be respected"; and the Hoppe quote is "...physically separated and expelled from society."
Other than that I love it. Good job. What video ideas are you thinking of?
...
Ok help me out. What does ancap break down to ? How would you hold "society" (if that still existed in your world) together ?
Oh right its not ancap ? its libertarian right thingy. I'm sorry, I misread. But still, question holds
Anarcho-capitalism boils down to the removal of the state—a territorial monopolist of ultimate decision-making (legislation) and taxation—, which is to be replaced by freely-financed insurance and defense companies with the sole purpose of protecting private property. It all boils down to property rights; and libertarians who are not anarcho-capitalists are inconsistent in their beliefs.
Yeah I fucked it up a bit im fixing it.
I wanted to make a video showcasing the libertarian party cringe clips like aleppo, naked guy, multicultural jew guy and then the hoppe revolution, ancap/antifa battles and other glory.
pretty much killing off the older commietarians and replace them with us.
feels good being in a general with real discussion and debate and not shitposting
also hella bros
Hail Hoppewave!
I see. So it's ... in principle something good. What place would religious institutions have in that society ? Because I could imagine that having some "morally superior" (pls don't crucify me for that, I lacked a better word) institution that, at the same time, nourishes the peoples' (or some at least) spiritual desires, could still benefit the people ... or is that just my biased view ?
I think my view of "ANARCHO"-capitalism is pretty much biased from the punk-type interpretation of "anarchy" ... kinda
addition:
Or would religion just not be something institutionalized anymore ? (like "abandoning the Church in general but have something localized" so to speak)
I feel being ideologically consistent counts for too much in the ancap worldview. It keeps you guys from addressing soberly some of the real problems with the model.
I sympathize with the sentiment behind it, mind you. There's just to many brown people in the world. :/
religious institution are 100% independent and (in principle) all the religion based on voluntarism are accepted (aka Islam is fucked)
You can join the religion and you can preach for it by using non-aggressive means AKA the contrary of leftist anarchist who wants all religion being destroyed (like capitalism) because somehow it oppress you
I'm bringing up the "morality" thing not for the sake of religious discussion but, because in theory ancap would allow for shit like gross pedo shit and so on as far as I've understood it ... correct me if I'm wrong.
The churches would probably exist exactly as they do today, they are mostly privately owned and funded by donations.
Potentially It could but would most likely be hated by most communities and shunned into dark corners of the world-just like it is now. I don't dont think you'd have rampant pedos. its not the state that makes us hate pedos, we just hate pedos.
I see. So to conclude my small set of questions, which one of the books would you recommend reading first ?
Judging from the "excitement level" of the titles, I'd start with Hoppes' "Democracy - The God that Failed" or "Anatomy of the State"
God I am sick of the statists on this fucking forum. Trump worshippers, anti-abortionists, ethnoreligious zealots, border control tards. Fucking keep your government paws off people minding their own business.
>which one of the books would you recommend reading first ?
this one
I would add "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority" by Lysander Spooner to the list.
>morally superior
Moral decay comes from the welfare state. If people don't have a state to fall back on for absolutely everything then the importance of family and community is elevated. So I'd presume religion would become very influential in many communities.
Who's importing human trash into Europe with taxpayer money? Who's fighting tooth and nail to stop Trump from limiting immigration?
Anatomy of the state is a good read.
The thing about the Hoppe branch in particular is the right of free association and discrimination. Communities will be formed by like minded people, so you would have Christian only gated communities. Because the owner of the community can decide what is done on his property, he can create rules how he sees fit, forbidding homosexuality, adultery, etc, but only within the borders of his community. Degenerates won't be allowed into society, since everybody has the right to exclude these lowlifes from one's property, nobody can force you to be tolerant and inclusive.
...
first "anatomy of the state" so you could get it for what ancapism stands for,then the "ethics of liberty" for going deeper in the idea,then "democracy the god that failed" for the apex
All nonhoppean lolbergs need to grow up.
All the "fast food and immigration" ancaps need to be gassed.
This. It blew my mind. It's also an easy and short read.
That's the spirit!
those fags believe in public borders and are dont understand private property
>and are dont
shit im retarded i meant "and dont"
Those AnCaps are as childish as Antifaggots. They want Anarchy for anarchy sake. They ignore the issue of what comes after that. They are just LARPers who don't want to be asscociated with violent lefties. And democratic libertarians are just socialists in disguise, just look at all the "classic liberal" parties all over Europe, who bend over for the welfare state, taxes and state interference.
I posted this in an Ancap thread yesterday but no one was able to answer me:
If in your Ancap society I hire someone to work on my property, that person more likely than not has to cross other people's properties (land, air, or even sea) in order to even arrive at my property. What stops these people from either outright killing my employee, or demanding an exhorbitant fee for the right to pass through their property?
...
The properties would most likely be connected by privately owned streets (still property like you said). People will demand a toll, but it would be stupid to make it so high that you couldn't or wouldn't want to pay it, since than it wouldn't be used and give you no profit. If somebody did this, people could see the opportunity, build an alternative street and make it way cheaper, having the profit all for themselves.
Thank you guys.
Maybe one last thing - and not to spark a shitshow, just out of curiosity:
What do you think could be downsides of that ? I mean from a general point of view. I can't think of too much beside the "mimimi civilized things and le shitlords"-thing. But I'm, too, not quite education in that particular field.
FDP seems to be a good example for that. Actually supported them but nowadays they're like
>EVERYTHING POSSIBLE FOR EVERYONE AND LETS ENFORCE IT VIA LAWS ;DDDDDDDDDDDDD
> What place would religious institutions have in that society?
Probably greater than now because they are organic community assemblies.
>Because I could imagine that having some "morally superior" (pls don't crucify me for that, I lacked a better word) institution that, at the same time, nourishes the peoples' (or some at least) spiritual desires, could still benefit the people ... or is that just my biased view ?
I'm not sure I get what you're saying, but it's entirely possible that some churches or religious institutions advocated some sort of political goal. If that goal only encompassed peaceful ways and freedom of association, like a religious covenant, that'd be perfectly fine; if it advocated violence (global Muslim caliphate), the insurance agencies would be ready to kill them since having a global Muslim caliphate with property expropriation would make premiums rise and enormous indemnification payments.
We're not at all people who say we won't vote for anyone but Ron Paul. Murray Rothbard (the godfather of anarcho-capitalism, who actually coined the term) supported Strom Thurmond, David Duke and Patrick Buchanan. Read his article on right-wing populism: archive.lewrockwell.com
I started dealing with anarcho-capitalism with Democracy. If you want a more broad and encompassing view of the world by Hoppe and other ancaps you should read his A Short History of Man: Progress and Decline, and then move on to Democracy. If you're interested in the philosophical nitty-gritty of things, read his Economics and Ethics of Private Property.
1)why they would do that shit ?
2)if the employer knew where does his employee come from he would normally try to know if others people property would let him pass because in another way around that would be a waste of money
...
Soory alberto barbosa already natsoc
A big problem is the transition into the system. People needed to get into the whole "do it yourself and use opportunities of profit" thinking. A way of avoiding this problem could be a transitional form of minimal government, in which a Mostly, since the government still exists) free market is guaranteed. People could accomodate before enetering Hoppe mode.
If a community wants to be secluded from society I think it's their right to do so. Like the Amish I guess. But I don't see it being wide spread. It's advantageous to just turn people away for no reason.
>killing my employee
The amount of secluded communities would be small. The amount of such that would disregard proportionality would be even more so.
*It's not advantageous
Derp
Also, I have to agree on FDP. The old FDP used to be really based, the were legitimatly libertarian but still had conservative values. Nowadays they are nothing more than egalitarian bootlickers who'd even enter a coalition with literal commies. A damn shame.
Streets would most likely be open to pretty much anyone but for outright criminals and vandals since having autistic restrictions on movement to that level would rise the costs of economic transactions by a bunch. So it's highly unlikely that there would be checkpoints at every street corner or passing. If there were though, people could simply complain, stop using them, or appealing to the owner(s). The restrictions of free movement really only come about in neighborhoods and covenants designed to specifically protect a given set of ideas.
first we need to make a metapolitical changing,if it's not the case during the transition of regime we unironically reach the "ancapistan" meme,redpilling masses of people is needed first
Hey does anyone have some dank transparent pngs of hoppe to make a collage for a hoppewave pic?
Checked. And yes, Hoppe says we should all support any and every separatist, anti-state, populist movements and uprisings designed to take away power from the state. He says that even if a free society is not achievable, then we should strive for a world of hundreds of thousands of classically-liberal states in competition with one another for clients and united through free trade.
Rapture WHEN ?
none pre made but I could cut one out for you if you want send it over.
...
If you want no government at all, wouldn't it make more sense to first strive to minimize its role piecemeal. Ancaps put a lot of people off who might otherwise be receptive to minarchist ideas.
Sorry breh, I forgot about your post.
I think I agree with that. So it's in principle:
Private (in a sense of not-institutionalized) charity - yes
Institutionalized welfare: nono
That seems quite reasonable anyway
r8 my compass lads
How would Ancaps deal with people like me who would want White Christian communes we enforce the death penalty within our community and such
Exactly, supporting people like Trump, front national or AfD is necessary. They might be protectionists and in favor of state interventionism (at least to some degree), but they have the potential of weakening the status quo. Supporting anti establishment parties and movements is always the better alternative than virtue signaling by voting nonsensical alternatives like Gary Memeston or "libertarian" parties for the sake of looking libertarian. Aleppo might be a bad example, since he isn't even a libertarian but you catch my drift. Also, seperatism and secessionism are indeed a wonderful way of minimzing state power, I hope it will see a rise across the world.
Also chzeched, dear portubro.
Yeah but if you start removing goverment at defense and borders while you still have welfare and taxes and other federal control you're an idiot. people will barge into your country and take your gibs and vote for more goverment action in favor of themselves. growing the overall size of the states power.
...
Send us the link for that test lad
Like I said here, a temoprary minarchistic system is probably needed and welcomed, since a raw transition wouldn't realistically be possible. The thing is, minarchism is inherently anti democratic, since it opposes democracy's bureaucratism and the possibility to change the libertarian frame work of the minimal state, so convincing people of that could be quite a challenge aswell, since everybody has been spoonfed democracy=freedom since birth.
Yeah, I agree with what you're saying. Although I'm not sure if Hoppe says we must spoort LITERALLY all separatist movements, since some are espoused by commies (like here in Portugal). I think he wants a balance of anti-statism with right-wing economic policies. Not sure what he thinks of Trump or Le Pen, but given that the mad man has written things that would make Gary Johnson or Jeffrey Cucker vomit, he might love them.
Hoppe will be giving a speech at this year's PFS called "Libertarianism and the alt-right," so I'm interested to see whether or not he can pick up the nuanced relationship between the two.
>state capitalism
>on the left
the fuck ?
also greetings my un-spooked friend
Oh, when is that going to go down ? I'm definitely interested.
I'm sure we'd say go for it, although the death penalty would most likely have to be boiled down to murder or something heinous, since most insurance agencies wouldn't sign contracts with you if you wanted for every criminal to be executed on the spot.
if the people joined your commune voluntarily no problem since you have the right to discriminate anybody of your private property
propertyandfreedom.org
I basically asked this question above, if you want to skim through the answers
Correct.
If you enforce laws on your own property no matter how harsh the penalties, I don't think people will interfere. You could get communities that would stop trading with you I suppose and you'd have to decide whether the lowered economic prosperity is worth it.
If on the other hand you're invading people's property, that's basically state action and you'd be cause for concern.
Chip away at taxes and entitlements first of course.
Besides, I see borders and defense as protection against force, theft, and fraud.
>libertarian
>right
Thought on Cantwell?Is he a pussy for tolerating natsoc?
thank you
Wasn't Peter Thiel supposed to be there last year?
Most ancaps are atheists who would allow pedophilia
I guess ancapism works with white protestants
But thats the beauty of ancap I can associate with my kind
Ultimately you can invade the pedos and kill them
And now for something completely different:
youtube.com
oh you are the natsoc autist from the last time ?
did you recover from your meltdown ?
I am indeed very excited to hear his opinion on recent developments concerning the new/alt right. I' d love to know what he thinks about the fact, that here in Germany a online magazin that he writes for (eigentümlich frei, somehwat translates into free property, it's a wordplay on two similar words only working in German) is thrown into a pot with the new right and third position, being viewed as a trick by evil nazis to get even more people on board with them by broadening their audience. People unironically start calling libertarians and right wing economists fascist, things start to get really crazy around here. It's like a left wing asylum at days. And yeah, I have to agree on your point on left wing seperationism, but the thing is, something like that can still be benefitial if done right. The kurds in Turkey for example aren't interested in global revolution and just want their own territory. Only revolutionaries who demand international influence (like those seperatists in Europe) are a immediate danger.
Beautiful reading list. I think you should list "Anatomy of the State" higher on there, since it's just an essay and it's actually an excellent insight into the AnCap mindset. It highlights the moral argument that should proceed all utilitarian arguments.
I have another
youtube.com
>You can't run, you can't hide, you get a helicopter ride
I love our autists
I'm a monarchist, but Nazis are still way more right wing than you degenerates.
He had to cancel because the (((SPLC))) and other cuck websites found out and started attacking him. He's definitely /ourguy/ tho, he said he came to the conclusion that freedom and democracy are incompatible and that women's suffrage was a blow to libertarian and conservative ideals.
He still stays true to anarcho-capitalism so i have no problems with him. he just sees them as an ally against the left.
Topkek
Libertarian left literally makes no sense. Do you think that we should be free of coercion, but somehow all decisions in the economy are constrained and controlled by some centralized democratic entity? What the fuck sense does that make?
Let me guess, you think socialism isn't left wing if it's national.
The "right" in libertarian right literally only refers to economics. The only reason we use the term is to try to separate our ideology from the morally bankrupt leftists.
feudal monarchy is closer to ancapism than Hitler worship
Ding ding ding ding
Another 15 year old fascist shitskin trying to provie his white
>Libertarian left literally makes no sense
Yet you are the bastard children of classical liberals and enlightenment thinkers.
>Yet you are the bastard children of classical liberals and enlightenment thinkers.
Was this supposed to be some kind of argument or... ?
these are beautiful examples of physical removal of leftists.
>liberal capitalism
>right wing
>Yet you are the bastard children of classical liberals and enlightenment thinkers.
the only leftist enlighten philosopher I know is Rousseau,but Voltaire is 100% /ourguy/
>feudal monarchy is closer to ancapism than
Let me just stop you right there, retard
Any Canadians here voting for Maxime Bernier? Obviously he will never go as far as we want, but it will be a step in the right direction.
Alright, buddy, you wanna give me an objective definition of "right wing"?
Why many libertarian prefer civic nationalism over ethnic nationalism?
I mean, would you like to live in a country crowded by blacks as long as they follow the rules? It makes no sense.
>ancap
>bottom right corner
I'm ancap and I never got into the corner. You always have to be in favour of things like gay marriage. Which is basically coercing a private institution or a government action. Neither of which I'm in favour of.