This thread is for Discussion of Libertarianism, Capitalism, Anarcho-Capitalism, 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
Videos:
>What is Physical Removal?
youtube.com
>hoppewave | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | physical removal
youtube.com
>hoppewave | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | the argument (右翼死刑囚)
youtube.com
>h o p p e w 𝓪 v e | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | end democracy
youtube.com
>Based Hoppe physically removes democracy
youtube.com
>Drop it like it's Hoppe
youtube.com
>Let's Get Physical
youtube.com
>I Need a Pinochet
youtube.com
>Hoppe's Kitchen - How to make Wiener Schnitzel
youtube.com
>Leftists getting Physically Removed, So To Speak
youtube.com
/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL - Hoppepe Edition
Other urls found in this thread:
liberalstudies.ca
mises.org
il-rs.org.br
iea.org.uk
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
archive.lewrockwell.com
lewrockwell.com
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
mises.org
pastebin.com
youtube.com
discord.gg
twitter.com
GENERAL READING LIST:
>The Law - Frédéric Bastiat
liberalstudies.ca
>Economics in One Lesson - Henry Hazlitt
mises.org
>Free To Choose - Milton and Rose Friedman
il-rs.org.br
>Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty - Eugene F. Miller
iea.org.uk
>Liberty or Equality - Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
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
ROTHBARD READING LIST:
Articles by Murray Rothbard:
>Big-Government Libertarians
archive.lewrockwell.com
>Race! That Murray Book
archive.lewrockwell.com
>More on LewRockwell.com
lewrockwell.com
Books:
>Man, Economy, and State with Power & Market
mises.org
>Anatomy of the State
mises.org
>Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, and Other Essays
mises.org
>The Ethics of Liberty
mises.org
>What Has Government Done to Our Money?
mises.org
>America's Great Depression
mises.org
>For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto
mises.org
Mises Reading List:
>The Mises Reader Unabridged
mises.org
>The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality
mises.org
>Marxism Unmasked
mises.org
>Profit and Loss
mises.org
>Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis
mises.org
>Human Action
mises.org
>Omnipotent Government: The Rise of the Total State and Total War
mises.org
>Bureaucracy
mises.org
>Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition
mises.org
How do we push for more libertarian candidates when the Libertarian Party is so fucked up?
They spent time arguing about driver's licenses at their fucking convention.
>physical removal of communists
That violates the NAP.
I would say the libertarian party is completly lost to left libertarian. There is not much to do
Communists and democrats aren't protected under the same rights as libertarians
Communists don't want NAP, so they shouldn't mind when someone violates their NAP.
Rights must be reciprocated. Historically, communists don't do that, and if they denie that private property is a right, they are deniying their own self ownership rights, therefore they should be physically separated and removed, so to speak.
What if my private covenant has the written rule "no communists"?
There is the pauls.
I desperately want Rand Paul to do well during a campaign, but he doesn't seem to be aggressive enough. He is amazing at refuting bullshit, but he doesn't seem to rile a crowd up as well as he should.
I think Rand has the philosophy down quite well, but he needs to really work on his campaigning so that he can actually be competitive.
As much as some people hate dumbing themselves down for the public, that's the harsh reality of it. He can go back to normal when he gets elected.
As you can see, I'm one of those favela nigger-monkeys, and I am not so familiar with the libertarian party because I belive that changing the system from within is hardly effective
People who are ideologically opposed to Non-Agression are infact coercive forces that must be defended against by any means necessary.
Start a new Industrial Party or Technocratic Party.
The Soviets hated and eventually destroyed their Prompartiya by using the membership's engineers and doctors as convenient scapegoats when shit went south. And we all know shit went south constantly in the USSR. Basically, bad harvest? Monkey trial and send the agronomist to Siberia. Dam floods some collective farms? Show trial, send the engineer to Siberia. Etc.
I have come to deliever my wares. as requested in a previous thread.
...
...
>Rand Paul
Permanent second-stringer.
Libertarians need to find people who will stake out workable ideological and policy positions.
>member of any libertarian think tank goes on Question Time
>repeatedly referred to by other panelists as 'far right' or 'right wing'
Literally what do they mean by this? The vast majority of them are basically classic liberals.
Is there anyone you would point out as being first-stringers?
The fact that a huge cuck like Gary Johnson even managed to become the nominee over his own VP, who was far more well spoken, shows me the Libertarian party is pretty shitty in its current state.
For the love of kek, this are just as good as the last ones!
McAffee for starters. Peter Thiel, too. Run most of a new IndParty by encrypted online voting and knowledge management. Try to capture money, bias and influence at the software level.
The modern LP is fucking embarrassing. Naked fat gingers dancing across the stage? Really?
Why is this?
Under what authority do you have to say this? What if someone disagrees with how you use your rights? Do they have the right to "physically remove" you?
>denying self ownership rights
But I thought that was a undeniable right of all mankind according to Libertarians? Is it just anyone who disagrees with you who no longer has these rights? Where is the cutoff? Just people who deny private property as a right? In that case, who is to prevent lesser socialists from having slightly less extreme views and ruining your utopia, bit by bit?
I was under the understanding that "When NAP applies to them as well as to normal people, as supporters of NAP agree, critics state that logically NAP should apply to all life forms with similar characteristics", so shouldn't all humans have those rights, even if they say they don't? It would be very hypocritical to say no, wouldn't it? Under a "true" Libertarian society, wouldn't it be impossible to do something to a Commie unless they try something first?
Hoppe Libertarianism is simply mob rule, where the majority are assumed to make correct decisions. This is in line with the rest of Libertarians, where once again the people are assumed uncorruptable. Since the U.S has declined from a Libertarian society into the society we have now under a certain (((influence))), would that not be setting up a society to fail? It's utterly naive to think that people can't occasionally make wrong decisions, especially when regarding how things are dealt with politically.
Would it not be better to have large, but not unrestrained, freedom, but also an ironclad government document which allows the "physical removal of communists and leftists"?
Thank soon i'll do a ron paul.
If you're not cool with mass surveillance, passive eugenics and tax money underwriting the ghettos you're seen as a Mr. Mean NeYo knotsie in their eyes.
It's an abstract kind of Funhouse.
because communists are ideologically opposed to private property, and justify violence against us to "end capitalism". This is an example of agression and we feel it justifys self-defense or "physical removal", so to speak.
I now collect libertarian pepes, never thought this would become reality
>why is this?
In today's society, if someone started telling everyone they were making a bomb, started buying materials for doing such, and had a history of crime, odds are they would be arrested.
Here, known communists would be arrested too, as intention to use force is in violation of the NAP along with the use of force, and communists use force to try and push their delusional theories.
In short, communists will try to violate the NAP and have to be physically separated from the rest of society to prevent that, so to speak.
>captcha contains 'road'
fucking awesome
Good point about McAffee. He's a perfect example of someone who is intelligent, well off due to his knowledge, and is well spoken as well. He's also got a good personality for tackling the campaign trail.
Approaching politics with software and data is already something a lot of parties do, but never quite follow through on. A technocratic approach would be powerful.
>because communists are ideologically opposed to private property, and justify violence against us to "end capitalism". This is an example of agression and we feel it justifys self-defense or "physical removal", so to speak.
That assumes all communists are violent, and thus would not be a viable excuse to "remove" them, because there are exceptions to this. Under the NAP, wouldn't you first have to have some kind of reasoning that someone would do you harm beyond "they are a Communist?"
Same argument as above.
pastebin.com
youtube.com
pic and vid is for (((civic nationalists)))
Libertarians need to do the hard work of running for city councils, state legislatures, etc if they every want to have a national presence. This is true of any minor party. It can't be done from the top downward.
Physical removal would be self-defense. Every Antifa asshole I've talked with pretty much want a civil war. And they're proven themselves to be aggressors numerous times.
Digits confirm. This has been a consistent problem with the Libertarian Party. They seem to be a collection of stooges that aren't actually elected to any position, except for a handful of them. They keep running for President anyways, though. They should focus their money and effort for a decade getting local positions.
Fuck man, I ignored the ride for a bit but I'm starting to wake up to it again. It boggles my mind sometimes.
>self defense
Not until they personally harm you, no it's not.
It's retarded to both be a Libertarian, and hunt down people based on ideology. You can't claim to leave people alone and want to be left alone while actively seeking and causing conflict. Under a society based on those principles, it's a ludicrous statement to make. And once more, when you are judged for murdering a man, do you honestly believe that most people would say you are justified in doing so "because he was communist"? I would, but do you think that your community would? Libertarianism, once more, proves to be naive in thinking that most people are 100% rational machines.
>no sneks
sad!
The LP has only 146 elected officials in office nationwide.
>That assumes all communists are violent.
If they don't believe it is just to overthrow (with violent or coercive force) the capitalist system then they are not communists.
Yes all communists advocate violence against us.
I'm making flags today. Here's yours.
no retard coercion is threat and therefore and act of "agression"
Ill point a gun at your head and say "you cant defend yourself until i pull the trigger" thats a childs understanding of libertarian principle. get removed cuck.
What will you do if communists buy some of the land surrounding your property?
How do Hoppeans feel about NatLib (national libertarianism)?
What would you do if people who want to eradicate you surrounded the borders of your property?
A dank and well memed ideology
Reporting in for memes.
Thanks to burgerbro for providing the font for his memes.
Those who oppose the concept of property are subject to physical removal from the property covenant.
I would report them to the local brownshirts.
Tell me, in detail, what you would do.
Don't tread on me
Libertarian/pol Discord:
discord.gg
They do not believe in the NAP, they preach violence against anyone who ever owned anything, and they are a pain in the ass.
Your country was never communist, so you wouldn't know.
No other ideology has killed as many white people as communism.
dumb meme shit. symbolism is fascist and not even nationalist, which would differ from nation to nation. step your game up newfag
>Under what authority do you have to say this? What if someone disagrees with how you use your rights? Do they have the right to "physically remove" you?
Me and my folks, well knowing about the threat of communists would have prevented them from occupying strategic positions in the first place, as I'm sure my neighboring covenants would do because they also own property and are threatened buy communists as well.
The madman actually delivered.
>George Lincoln Rockwell
wow, some faggot who offered literally nothing but petty racism. Shallow edgy joke party.
>well knowing about the threat of communists
>as I'm sure my neighboring covenants would do
Once more assumes that people will make rational decisions and will think EXACTLY like you do. What if some "neighboring covenants" don't see it fit to get rid of the Communists simply because they are Communists?
>reddit spacing
>didn't watch video
>naive
>not an argument
Libertarians on Sup Forums summarized in one post.
>that pic
Dude, we're not civic cucks.
Trying to *le redpill xDD us with shit we already know is futile.
The property covenant maintains that you should live by Hopppean philosophy.
If you start opposing capitalism, then you're subject to removal. Hoppe says that basically there will be tons of small merc groups and private security guards hired to do things like this - also citizens themselves can remove you with force if they don't need help.
If you don't like capitalism, why would you come to a property covenant region to begin with?
>showing your cards
Well I guess statists will just have to keep the state going if libertarians want to pick fights in a minarchist society... Btw tax day April 18th pay up chumps.
bump board war gas the leddit Donald dick suckers
>>not an argument
I just posted an argument, that Rockwell isnt even political because he talks about nothing but race and is irrelevant and accomplished nothing. Stormshills are getting desperate.
Its funny watching you try to argue as if your LARPing ways are in any way relevant.
I noticed a lack of Bastiat in the reading list. Menger as well.
...
This.
I forgot to mention that Hoppean Libertarianism is de facto (subtly) white nationalist leaning. We're not cucks, and we realize that whites and some East-Asians are the most civilized races for maintaining a good libertarian society.
Shitskins are naturally-Marxist and anti-individualist, and barbaric. Hoppe himself has defended immigration resctriction and traditional conservative culture, because he says it makes for the most stable society. Just because you're a "libertarian", that doesn't mean you have to condone or tolerate all lifestyles or people.
The libertarian right to exclusion basically means that you and your white nationalist buddies can form your own white nationalist property covenant, and ban all niggers if you want to.
pic related, Hoppe is redpilled
...
Physical Remawooval
...
>pic
Libertarianism advocates for self-defense.
Rothbard and later Hoppe started a conservative movement within libertarianism, going as far as to physically remove those who'd be a dead weight to their covenants. Hayek proposed a dictatorship transitional period, and Mises thanked fascism for keeping commies out of Europe.
So no, we're not a bunch of delusional liberal cucks. We value life, liberty, and property, and hate anything that threatens them.
Now about your point that freedom "destroys" us - only if you're inferior, and in that case, you deserve to be subordinate. Natural hierarchy arises from freedom of individuals' association - this can be applied to expelling degenerates from your communities as well.
TL;DR - where the hell do you think you are?
...
>PHYSICAL REMOVAL of COMMUNIST FAGS
lolno
>Once more assumes that people will make rational decisions
Covenant communities are based on contractual agreements and are hierarchical. They will have a leaders that will call the shots. they will organize military force as they see fit. At the end of the day your furher IS a person capable of making rational decisions.
>What if some "neighboring covenants" don't see it fit to get rid of the Communists simply because they are Communists?
Then our covenant would oppose them. likely non-violently until they themselves are violently opposed to our property rights.
Based.
You're basically us.
...
>not killing them yourself and harvesting their organs
Yeah, your ideology is too weak for Sup Forums.
>Covenant communities are based on contractual agreements and are hierarchical
so basically, the world just ends up being what it is now already, with people forming countries.
This entire idea is really dumb
...
...
...
...
Stop larping as a fascist, when in reality, you're just a degenerate who wants to be free to engage in hedonistic, society decaying acts without rules or punishment.
IE: I don't care if society, culture, arts, etc burns to the ground so long as I can keep my crack den and Abraham tank.
There's a reason why ancap memes were so over the top. It's because your childish anarchist world view is fucking ridiculous.
Oh and one more thing. Stop disgracing Pinochet's legacy with your cringe worthy nonsense. Especially since he has nothing to do with it at all.
yes but "countries" based on contractual agreements and not threats of violence.
...
People who don't fight against communism don't deserve to live and as such shall too be genocided.
Too bad, they could have lived, but alas.
To adress your pic - that Aussie is too weak to be free. Wanting a boot on your neck just so that you won't succumb to degeneracy is laughable.
We Hoppeans believe that if a person is not willing to better themselves, they do not deserve to get better, and if they are not willing to fight for liberty, they do not deserve liberty.
Anybody who doesn't care about morals, community, culture, or his people, has no place in my covenant. Neither does a "person" who can't imagine life on their own - if such a word as "their" even applies to them.
>Stop not being the strawman I think you are.
Off yourself. If you don't want take our word on what we stand for then why even bother talking to us, faggot.
>fascists
How so?
Killing commies does not violate the NAP.
Also helicopters and physical removal are two different things, TRS.
>If you don't want take our word on what we stand for then why even bother talking to us, faggot.
Because you're like rats who spread around and shit up everything. And I'm sick to death of you shitting on the grave of a great man like Pinochet.
You're literally no different from left wing anarchists. You think and behave like stupid immature children.
...
...
>Also helicopters and physical removal are two different things, TRS.
>even though we make no distinction whatsoever so as to sucker in the gullible by appealing to a popular idea/meme
It's no surprise that literally every ancap I've spoken with has been among the most dishonest people I've ever had a conversation with. They lie and use Alinsky tier tactics every time they open their mouths.
What if you don't directly oppose Capitalism, but simply "tolerate" Commies? What will you do about your neighbors then? Remove them too?
Self defense does nothing if people think something will be reasonable. It's subtle changes that people must be wary of as well. Going off of whatever most people "feel like doing" at the time is idiotic. How the hell do you think we got to where we are?
>At the end of the day your furher IS a person capable of making rational decisions.
Yes, but are all people, not just one, capable of relying only on self made "covenants"? Why do you think everyone will have the same policies on everything?
>Then our covenant would oppose them. likely non-violently until they themselves are violently opposed to our property rights.
You're missing the point completely. If you act in a way that people think is unjust with no authority, then you'll only gain sympathy for the other side, causing more problems to pop up. You can't even agree on things like this! Take a look at this guy
who ruins your entire argument. If someone who is too extreme is in the "covenant", other people will most likely distance themselves from their views. This gains more and more sympathy for the "oppressed" people, as it looks more and more as if they were removed for no reason. It looks to me like you'll be shooting each other before the Communists.
>you're stupid and make things shitty.
Thank you for stopping by, please fuck off now.
...
...
...
>>you're stupid and make things shitty.
Precisely. That's why you'll be treated no differently from the communists in any kind of "war".
>please fuck off now.
You need a safe space now too you drug addict degenerate?
>tfw half of "libertarians" are thinly veiled "helicopter" "nap doesnt apply to leftists" fascists
...