What do we do about the lolbertarian crisis?
Sup Forums has been infested with degeneracy-enabling cucks who are naive enough to think they can live in peace with the leftists. How can we save them from themselves and give them the fash redpill?
This is a problem that affects us all.
Other urls found in this thread:
gotoquiz.com
twitter.com
What do we do about the natsoc crisis?
Sup Forums has been infested with lefty-enabling cucks who are naive enough to think they are right wing and not leftists. How can we save them from themselves and give them the hoppes redpill?
This is a problem that affects us all.
When the communists come and take everything you have, you'll regret thinking that way.
Government is the question of what man can do.
Philosophy is the question of what man should do.
If you take over the culture, doesn't matter who's in power, you'll be running the show. That's why even as a generally conservative nation politically leftist control of TV, film, art, media, etc., makes the masses think a certain way.
the yellow-black scourge are the reddit refugees
Libertarianism is literally autism: the philosophy.
They can´t take shit if they have been already physically removed, so to speak.
>when people can't even differ economically but agree every other way on your board because you need a hug box
exactly. National socialism is simply removing the cancer of society.
>be libertarian
>go to doctor to get spot on skin checked out
>it's melanoma
>doctor recommends excision
>refuse because the tumor has """"""""natural rights""""""""
>Be Ayn Rand
>RRREEEE Government out
>Oops, I grapped social security and medicare :^) I guess government isn't that bad after all
Ask them "if libertarianism is so great, then why has there never been a successful libertarian state?"
If libertarianism truly is a great ideology, somewhere in the course of history, it would have popped up and would have prevailed over other ideologies.
The only example of libertarianism is the US and look what that has led to.
>"Not understanding who Hoppe is" the post
More like
> be libertarian
> one of your spermiatic cords twists
> your ball hurts
> assume it is attempting to cease your means of reproduction
> shoot your ball off with 45.ACP
Anarchy capitalism has been in place in a number of geographical areas for several hundred years at a time.
America has been a world power almost since it's inception.
Also you can ask that question about anything that didn't exist before it existed.
Where?
Every country started out as ancap if you go back far enough, but eventually it evolves into something else every single time.
Ancap is just temporarily.
No, at first it was tribalism with some form of communal rule. If you notice, with time we have gained more and more rights.
The further humanity advances the further it frees itself from itself.
There's never been a time when so much of the population had so many rights.
Ancap is the social evolutionary destinstination.
Sup Forums was libertarian long before the natsocs showed up. And what's up with equating us to ancaps? We're not ancaps and the two are completely different.
America will soon fall apart thanks to it's vibrant diversity.
>Also you can ask that question about anything that didn't exist before it existed.
That's true to some degree. But if you look at nat.soc. for example, it did not exist before it existed as you say, but it did share a lot of values with ideologies that were very successful in the past. E.g. Catholic Europe was anti degeneracy, supported marriage and the family unit, was nationalistic, was religious, was totalitarian,...
Unless they're completely bat shit retarded libertarians are radically anti-egalitarian. All I've met have been.
One Authoritarian state is just as bad as another. Besides, the Communists beat the Fascists.
" In addition, the anarchistic upshot of the libertarian doctrine appealed to the countercultural left. For did not the illegitimacy of the state and the nonaggression axiom (that one shall not initiate or threaten to initiate physical force against others and their property) imply that
everyone was at liberty to choose his very own non-aggressive lifestyle? Did this not imply that vulgarity, obscenity, profanity, drug use, promiscuity, pornography, prostitution, homosexuality, polygamy, paedophilia or any other conceivable perversity or abnormality, insofar as they were victimless crimes, were no offences at all but perfectly normal and legitimate activities and lifestyles? Not surprisingly, then, from the outset the libertarian movement attracted an unusually high number of abnormal and perverse followers. Subsequently, the countercultural ambiance and multicultural-relativistic "tolerance" of the libertarian movement attracted even greater numbers of misfits, personal or professional failures, or plain losers. Murray Rothbard, in disgust, called them the "nihilo-libertarians"
and identified them as the "modal" (typical and representative) libertarians. " - Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Stupid nigger, read Hoppe
What do you mean? In ancap there are no rights as there is no government. Are you suggesting that after more and more rights were/are added, they should ad one point just all disappear simultaneously?
Also, collectivism and cooperation are natural however you look at it.
*at one point
I'd say more like Hoppean Libertarianism/Ancap, with a previous phase of Authoritarian Capitalism if necessary, physical removal of democrats and communists.
You guys really need to read late Rothbard and Hoppe, forget about Jeffrey Cucker.
This test is not that accurate but it gives you a hint of where you sit on the alt-right spectrum:
I'm a small 'el' libertarian, and I'll fucking cut your guts out before I leave. Fuck you.
>"never been a time with so many rights"
Medieval serfs may not have had rights, but they had no usury debt and were married with children by age 17 at the latest.
> america will fall apart
Yeah, if left or right retards keep voting for reduced rights in some vain attempt as doing it for the good of mankind.
>catholic europe
Yeah it worked so well it plunged europe into the dark ages, caused most of it's homogenic population to die and was ultimately removed from power by reactionaries
The only reason it was in power for so long is because it's hard to learn how to fight with a sword and the state had a monopoly on training so the oeasents couldn't rise up. Gun powder is a gift from the gods.
The NAP has all the rights you will ever need and more.
Collectivism is only found in totalitarian ideologies. It's not about working together it's about conforming to the ideology.
People organizing is not anti-ancap..
...
/Pol was never libertarian, it just jumped on Ron Paul as a good meme.
Sure you stormweenie
> wow I could have kids younger because I had nothing to worry about and I also died younger
You're free to sign a serfdom contract in ancap land and live your dream life as human cattle.
Natsoc isnt right wing its a third position, and gas yourself lolberg
>storm-weenie
Crypto-leftist CTR shill confirmed. You guys need new memes if you want to blend in.
Libertarians do not realize that demographics make their ideology ineffective
>muh based minorities
Just look at what's happening in the US and you'll see why libertarianism will always fail
Libertarianism is the opposite of degeneracy.
I don't know why this is so hard to understand. I suppose there's too much nuance for most of you.
Under a mostly hands off government, people have to care for themselves. They have to have discipline and responsibility to succeed. People will rely more on the family unit than the government, bringing things back to more traditional values.
It is precisely big government that is the problem. Big government has caused the migration crisis. They break apart families.
The free market and private property are not the problem. They are the solution. Because people are inherently tribal, when they are free to associate (and not forced by the government), they will choose to mostly be homogenous.
There is only one God - the free market.
>implying
>projecting
Which is it?
The migration crisis is CAUSED by government. You really think that if people were able to decide on immigration, it would have gotten this bad? All of the governments in the West are now actively against the interests of their own citizens. The government brings them in. The government feeds and houses them with tax dollars.
>(((hoppe)))
>lol poor people should die in the street I only care about my property
>of course I wouldn't be poor in an ancap society because I have high IQ lol
We are not shils, if you try to enact fascism or communism I will stab you.
Liberty is my only creed.
>The NAP has all the rights you will ever need and more.
Who will enforce the NAP, if there is no state?>Also you can ask that question about anything that didn't exist before it existed.
Also, i'm not saying that there is NO chance it would work, i'm just saying that an ideology which never emerged in the past, has a very low chance of working.
It's an ideology that is very full of itself basically.
Imagine if someone came up with a new boxing punch for instance. If the punch is indeed very effective, it would be VERY likely someone came up with that punch (or a punch similar to it) in the past as the sport has existed for a very long time.
There is a small chance that punch was never thought of before and you are a genius for inventing it, but that chance is VERY small indeed.
>The migration crisis is CAUSED by government.
Not really. The migration crisis is caused mostly by economical differences, since Europe has far more jobs and better wages than Africa, as well as better living conditions.
In a truly free market with small government you'd get flooded by middle class poo's, chinks, africans, sandniggers, etc. in a heartbeat
>All of the governments in the West are now actively against the interests of their own citizens. The government brings them in. The government feeds and houses them with tax dollars.
Absolutely. Most of the current governments are shit. Yet that's not an effective argument against strong centralized governments
Totally legitimate opinion, refreshing honesty.
>rights must be conceded by a superior force that owns you
>rights aren't inherent to your human condition and exist regardless of how or whether they are they enforced
slavespeak.txt
You're confusing international Marxist Jewry with the state. We don't even have a real state anymore. (((Capitalist))) kikes are the reason for immigration, the whole agenda makes perfect market sense.
>workers ask for a raise
>kike boss hands their job over to poorfag shitskin
>boss doesn't care if the end product is twice as shitty if it's four times cheaper to produce, and people have no choice but to purchase the product from his monopoly.
Like-wise, feminism is the product of market forces.
>workers getting to powerful to control
>kike media introduces "woman's liberation"
>now both sexes work for half the pay, so they both HAVE to work.
Libertarianism is just leftism without the virtue-signaling.
The problem with the libertarian movement in general is that they don't understand libertarianism well.
The state should not stop people from doing what harms no one else is different from "as long as it doesn't harm anyone else, it is morally right".
For libertarianism to work, you need people who are self-governed. Yet, how many libertarians say there is nothing wrong with using drugs, promiscuity, etc?
You fags use textbook CTR leftist memes and expect us to believe you're not shills? Can't wait to gas you kike-apologists.
>shillz
There is no entity to enforce NAP. NAP is a cover word for rule by gun. NAP is a cover word for survival of the fittist social darwinism.
>muh shillz
Also to expand on this. What stops business owners to just bring in shitloads of the poorest and most desperate Africans to work in their businesses for a lower wage? Are libertarians willing to work for 1 Euro per day like many niggers do?
What happens when the millions of niggers get uppity and demand rights? End of libertarianism beginning of communism
>In a truly free market with small government you'd get flooded
No you wouldn't, because most people wouldn't want it.
In the history of Western countries, more immigration is always caused by government
>Be national socialist
>Vote for your favorite candidate
>He oppresses shitloads of people in favor of your values
>Economy tanks because "for the country lulz" only works on the initial stage of infrastructure and basic needs, after that creativity drains
>Next election comes
>Oppressed People+guilt
>80 years of cuckery because we cannot repeat mistakes of the past
Such a sustainable ideology
True, this is something most people don't get. Mass immigration is a government program.
Mass immigration doesn't occur naturally without forced integration policies and welfare.
There's a reason why all the immigration problems in America started in 1965.
>one of your spermiatic cords twists
is this what they call Testicular Torsion?
>think they can live in peace with the leftists
Is that why they keep bringing up Pinochet and talking about killing leftists?
youre the shill here
>because most people wouldn't want it.
You are wrong however. Most people who own any form of business would love mass migration, especially in absence of a welfare net that would otherwise result in increased taxation.
>be factory owner in France
>bring in 2 million starving somalis because you can pay them 1 euro rather than 10
>somalis breed
>create demographic bomb
And the same principle applies to small businesses as well.
As long as third worlders won't demand welfare, many people would want to bring them in.
Nat.soc. only failed because of the war. If there was no war, it would have been very successful.
The people never thought they were oppressed by the gov (in general)
The military and the police.
Ancap is inevitable. In the past it was impossible because of the logistics of overthrowing the state. It's why communism happened so late.
Technology is putting more and more power in the hands of individuals. Sooner or later we will have the means to break off our chains.
And now you have rights how ? From God ?
They would be shot on sight if they attemlt to cross the border.
You mean just like the government is doing now ?
Wanna see my new helicopter ?
Because they would have to break the NAP and nobody with power would side with them because they would lose their power in the process. Also there if there is no state there can be no socialist party.
>Because they would have to break the NAP and nobody with power would side with them because they would lose their power in the process. Also there if there is no state there can be no socialist party.
>implying lolberts will stick to their "principles"
Scratch a lolbert and a fascist bleeds.
They can't do it withou the government and you need welfare to bring them here to begin with.
>ancaps unironically think pinochet's ITT vassal state was better than Hitler's Germany.
>The military and the police
Who rules the military and the police?
where do the "somalis" live?
I have a feeling you are 12 and have no idea what logistics are
>If there was no war, it would have been very successful.
until you elect angela merkel
>Sooner or later we will have the means to break off our chains.
Ancaps are literally just individualistic communists in denial
You give them the same treatment you would a communist or any other stupid anarchist.
>Nat.soc.
>Elect (a woman)
>my solution is to have an immovable monopoly that can be taken over by fascists
scratch a statist and a retard bleeds
>implying any type of authoritarian system whatsoever is worth living under for more than a week before you become so incredibly bored at the lack of state-approved non-"degenerate" recreational activities that you take to domestic terrorism, unless you are either
A. a high-ranking official who can easily cover up his degeneracy a la Hitler's cabinet and their boy toys
or
B. a fucking normie with no opinions or interests of any kind that would be of concern to the state
>You mean just like the government is doing now ?
yes, because current governments are liberal and don't respect regulations
>They can't do it withou the government and you need welfare to bring them here to begin with.
How so? As long as there would be demand there will be traffikers willing to sell the equivalent of modern slaves. In fact that's what is currently happening, but instead of being business owners doing it it's the state.
In a libertarian society the exact same would happen, but you wouldn't have to pay the welfare needed to sustain them, as long as they don't revolt and demand a welfare safety net (which is pretty much what happened in the Americas with slaves)
they dont think either is better
they want to take the best parts from both
>What stops business owners to just bring in shitloads of the poorest and most desperate Africans to work in their businesses for a lower wage?
First of all, bringing where? You're projecting your statist view into a libertarian hypothesis and it just doesn't compute.
Private property has walls and doors, libertarianism is about private property, therefore, if business owners want to bring thousands of Africans, they need to do so in their property, of in the property of someone who is willing to accept it.
Now, think about what landlords want: Their properties value to grow or remain equal. We all know what bringing thousands of Africans does to the value of your property. With discrimination, which is forbidden under the state, landlords will be able to reject people on their skin color, which will either force blacks to start behaving good or force them to areas nobody wants to live in.
Having that in mind, is it so strange to think that someone will offer a "safe" (aka white) village? No, right? And what will happen when other landlords realize how quick the value of that "safe" property is rising? Emulate it would be the most obvious answer.
Anarcho Capitalism is a market of ideas, and the one you described fails compared to other ideas in the market, so you will just not see it happen.
this isn't even an argument you're just saying that human history happened and we will become anarcho-capitalist because
>amor fati
yes
now you understand why we dont have "ekections"
>a fucking normie
this is the goal
It's hard with a state. It's harder without one.
>keep bringing up Pinochet and talking about killing leftists?
Yeah. About that.
Nat soc had war because centrally planned economies, after the initial phase of building infrastructure, food plantations and housing, fails to serve society's needs, which leaves you only one way out to put people to work: War.
>where do the "somalis" live?
anywhere. In france they live in shitty barracks that they build themselves. See Calais as an example.
>I have a feeling you are 12 and have no idea what logistics are
Adhoms are not a very strong argument
You haven't been here long enough to remember the Ron Paul days, have you?
fuck off, nu/pol/.
Sup Forums was either libertarian or ancap with a small, but loud nazi minority for as long as it exists.
most nazis eventually grow out of it. those who don't should join the commies on their helicopter rides.
DO NOT FUCKING TREAD ON ME
yes it IS harder to subbjugate without a state!
thanks for the convession
>>implying lolberts will stick to their "principles"
This
>b-but muh morality-instilled society would never break the NAP
Kek like billionaire Mr. Goldberg who is only motivated by profit would give a shit about a magical NAP enforced only by peasants and psuedo-intellectuals
So the truth finally comes out. You libertarians, just like liberals, are only interested in reshaping society so that your degenerate, destructive habits are no longer punished. Leftist confirmed.
Precisely this.
There can be no mercy on these idiotic cockroaches.
>bully a kid for years
>he shoots up the school
>act innocent and say twas all for bantz
>Nazis eventually grow up and become libertarians
Topkek
It's the other way around.
>lmao you can't be libertarian if you kill people that try to take your liberty
Whatever power structure they have.
Your question really is why doesn't the military cease power.
Why doesn't it do it now ?
Because it's compartmentalized, because it would mean gunning down their families, because the economy isn't bad enough, because the people support the state.
Ancap isn't against organization, borders, co-operation or charity.
It is agains state and collectivism.
Ok so they come here. How do they get to stay without being thrown out ?
They need property to sleep in, or to stay on, but since there would be no public property they can't form camps and since there is no welfare they can't be housed by the state. Not to mention that they don't have citizenship.
> you're wrong
> wtf I love the state now
MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUISINESS
Oh come on autists. We called a truce already that hasn't expired yet. Commies are still running wild, brothers.
>First of all, bringing where?
on public ground. Unless you plan on privatizing every inch of the country they will assemble everywhere they can
> of in the property of someone who is willing to accept it.
Which is what is already happening in countries like Italy. People who own shitty and old industrial complexes rent them out for very cheap (since they have no other use) to house niggers
>Their properties value to grow or remain equal.
Which requires capital to mantain. in countries with falling housing prices and degradation a lot of people are desperate to rent out old crappy buildings which would cost too much to fix
>Having that in mind, is it so strange to think that someone will offer a "safe" (aka white) village? No, right? And what will happen when other landlords realize how quick the value of that "safe" property is rising? Emulate it would be the most obvious answer.
True, but you ignore the demand aspect. you eventually run out of "safe space" or of customers who can afford your to live in your safe villages. It's kind of what's going on in South Africa
Us libertarians were here way before you retards started unironically larping.
They're just the same to me as a communist or leftist anarchist.
>We called a truce already that hasn't expired yet.
I am not going to ally with degenerate scum who are no different from anarcho communists.
Amen.
Triggered. You know it's fucking true.
The push pull is getting a bit annoying desu. Half the time it's "we are natsoc we are your friends", the other half is "we hate you, you must be d&c". I don't care. You're all commies
You're a larping retard. Your idelogy didn't last 2 decades.