/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL

/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL

This thread is for Discussion of Libertarianism, Capitalism, Anarcho-Capitalism, and the PHYSICAL REMOVAL of COMMUNIST FAGS from our board of peace. Reminder that this is the Libertarian RIGHT General. Aleppo Johnson-fags, Left-Libertarians, and other Shit-Libs need to fuck off. Voice your complaints to r/libertarian.

>Recommended Reading list
libertarianright.org/reading/

>Vanilla /lrg/ pastebin- CREATE IF YOU DONT SEE ONE IN THE CATALOG
pastebin.com/7K1EJYb8

>Bump for Life, Liberty, and Private Death Squads

>What is Physical Removal?
youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ5zOEkD2Lg

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4)
youtube.com/watch?v=nvc1hq2I49o
mises.org/library/1-european-miracle
mises.org/library/2-classical-liberalism
mises.org/library/3-john-stuart-mill
mises.org/library/4-class-and-conflict
mises.org/library/5-war-peace-and-industrial-revolution
mises.org/library/6-new-world-capitalism
mises.org/library/7-anti-capitalists
mises.org/library/8-planned-society
mises.org/library/9-first-world-war
mises.org/library/10-classical-liberalism-and-welfare-warfare-state
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>libertarian
>right

fuck off, educate yourself

so I've been trying to find my political party after I unintentionally found out the Left participated in the most abhorrent of scandals this election, so a question to further my understanding..
is a libertarian right society one that would essentially make all cities their own "territories?"

I was talking to a friend and she's a very intelligent anarchist as well who believes that small-city like territories are the closest we will get to a civilized society where each person gives in to the proportion of what they take.

If you think the right basically isn't exclusively about the abolition of government on righteous folk, you may be a fucking idiot

Libertarians are just fedoras who don't like the direction the world is heading but are too afraid to use naturalist, as opposed to economic arguments for morality.

okay leaf

>he thinks classical liberalism is right wing

>Libertarian RIGHT

so do you like this guy?

I have so much admiration for Ron Paul (he took my political virginity at the ripe age of 14 with this video youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4) and I'm sad there isn't any left of his kind.
Modern Sup Forums leads down a path of dead-end hate and frustration.

>hurr durr le ethno nationalism/fascism is so right wing even though right wing is defined by economic freedom and not muh white nation redpillz

I believe the preferred term is covenant, not territory.

Anyway, yes, libertarian thinkers like Hoppe advocate for a society comprised of small covenants that decide how to rule themselves, as well as who may enter and reside in the community.

I've been watching some of his older videos on Austrian economics and I've come to see that he's a very intelligent man and he honestly should've been our President in 2008 and 2012, because God knows we need a freedom-loving intelligent man to shrink our gov't to maximum efficiency. It's so sad that he was cheated out of the Presidency by the very forces which seek to enslave us. And I agree with you on modern Sup Forums: it's become an ideological backwater (not that it wasn't at any point. But it's gotten so bad that even Libertarians are looked down upon).

youtube.com/watch?v=nvc1hq2I49o

>right wing is defined by economic freedom

It must hurt being this retarded

>No-no! We can be racist too, if thats what you want.
>We'll also be totally supportive of minorities as well, you know, if that what you want too...

Libertarianism is a parasite on the back of successful cultures. The only reason it works today is a small number of countries is because we have a global society that allows them to exploit the governments that actual produce things of merit. Your system only works when a country focuses on finance, trade, or entertainment, in short, the forces that have layed waste to our western society. It is also necessarily decadent, as is any culture that views the individual's pursuit of pleasure as the consumate moral path.

Thanks for the link, looking forward to listening to this

>capitalism

There is absolutely nothing that is right wing about economic systems. I suggest you research the origins of the terms left and right. I further suggest you turn off Fox News and stop letting kikes inform your worldview.

Fucking newfag

...

Absolutely based. I fucking love this old man

Why hasn't the MSM been gassed yet? (In pure self defense, so to speak).

Yes your friend is correct. Other than a few likely commonalities among the territories (or covenants, if you will), such as respect for natural law and private property rights, each would have further restrictions or requirements for conduct and admittance in order to protect whichever lifestyle was normal there. There'd be a free market in ideologies and ways of life, and people would gravitate towards the better one (which incidentally happens to be the non degenerate nuclear family lifestyle).

>Left-Libertarians

How is this even a thing? It's fundamentally an oxymoron.

this seems ideal to me, being that I'm newer to this specific spectrum, in this type of society is there any way to prevent a bourgeoisie-like class to form?

maybe before you answer that, would such a society even contain a class structure that's similar to the ones we've come to know? (e.g. plebs, working class, bourgeoisie, rulers) and if class structure is a thing, how would it be used to not exploit it's people as the likes of capitalism does?

it actually is you retard. It's not difficult to understand that the right is for smaller government while the left is for larger government. Read a book.

I'm an anarchist but I utterly despise the left and I'm way more sympathetic to right ideals except for the fact that I do not believe in any laws whatsoever
I just want total chaos

I hate EVERYTHING about the left, and I actually like some things about the right.
so in a way I'm right wing. But deep down I hate all government
I think there should be no laws so that only the strong will survive

Really makes you think. Are you a political science professor or something?

>i just want total chaos
The first honest anarchist I've ever met

>he thinks conservative liberals are right wing

A fucking leaf

That's a tough question. Back when we almost had an AnCapistan (during the aristocratic ages preceding feudalism), we had a natural elite of aristocrats who rose to power by being recognized as the most competent members of society, fit to judge as arbitrators on disputes between parties. A few hundred years later, I'd say it all depends on the place you'd live. If you lived in a small town without being insured or covered by a large law firm, most likely disputes would be left to the best achieving person in that town (the one everybody knows for his achievements). He and his family would then become the admired and much coveted family/authority in that place.

But why is the bourgeoisie so bad?

Also capitalism doesn't exploit the people, stop using Marxist terms.

Please leave. You're making us look bad.

Feel free to spam pic related.

>conservative liberals


That's an oxymoron. Explain to me what you think a "conservative liberal" is

I'm not here to claim to be ''one of you''

Governments don't produce. They earn all of their revenue by theft, and must be punished for it.

I've got news for you, the plutocratic globalist governments are the strongest and are ensuring the survival of their families. They make the laws and we follow them.

This guy knows what's up. Nuremberg trials for the State when? Barbra Streisand will get the helicopter too.

>tells others to read a book
>doesn't know that conservative is short for conservative liberal

Lurk more newfag

If you want to talk about preventing exploitation by direct intervention, you are an authoritarian. The solution to being exploited by the "bourgeoisie" is to simply leave the community for one with a less exploitative bourgeoisie, ruler, etc. For this reason, it is against the upper class' best interest to exploit the lower and middle classes of the covenant, because you will drive them out and lose sources of revenue to other, more benevolently ruled communities.

To quote Hoppe:
"The king does not have an attitude 'I must loot the country as fast as possible, because if I don't . . . I will not be able to do it in the future'. As a matter of fact, if he doesn't loot it as much, the value of his country will be higher and his heirs will get something better."

You can replace king with bourgeouisie, ruler, governor, mayor, or whatever term you prefer, the point is that a smart, non-democratic ruler will not screw over his own people.

You should read Hoppe's review of Death of the West. He lauds Buchanan for being right on the diagnosis, but he misses the mark on the cure.

>describing lolbertarians
Progressivism is a disease. The lie of equality has killed millions.
Your point is?

Gnosticism + Ancap = Truth

He's right you stupid fuck. The origin of right and left comes from the positions taken by members of the tennis court assembly immediately following the French Revolution. The most pressing issue at that time was whether egalitarianism or hierarchy would be the order of the day. (((Libertarianism))) comes much later, and the notion of "fiscal small government conservatives" doesn't even enter the picture until William F. Buckley helped subvert the true American right in the 60s.

Open a book, go back to Plebbit, and FUCK OFF. Stop shitting up this board with your MSM normie horseshit. Lurk and read, and don't come back until you're less of a stupid faggot.

>Hoppe and Rothbard
>normie
You go back to wherever you came from.
Freedom shall reign victorious over your dead body.

Christ you could really read some Hoppe. He even points out Buckley was a proto neoconservative piece of shit. Monarchy and the ancient regime are philosophically closer to libertarianism than present democratic age.

Blue-pilled population. Modern Americans don't care about things beyond themselves. We are consumerist first and foremost. As long as we have money in our pockets to shop at the shopping mall, there is food stocked on the shelves, and we can get a loan to afford a house, who gives a fuck about what our government is doing in the Middle East? Who cares about the $20 trillion dollar national debt? I'm much more concerned with what's going to happen in the next episode of my favorite TV show. As long as it doesn't threaten my standard of living, why should I care. This is the sort of mentality based on selfish and pleasureful indulgence which leads modern Americans to not care about truth in history, politics, government, and world affairs. This is not even mentioning the sort of cultural brainwashing that is instilled in us from young age.

>the notion of "fiscal small government conservatives" doesn't even enter the picture until William F. Buckley helped subvert the true American right in the 60s.

This is important. The National Review started pushing Libertarianism after it went kosher to subvert Catholic social teaching which teaches against both capitalism and socialism. They made it so people think the only way to defend against Marxism during the cold war was absolute free markets where Jews can practice usury and exploit countries in international trade. It's sad to see so many gullible goyim still buying into this subversion.

THIS MAN ABSOLUTELY NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF LIBERTARIAN PEPES

RALPH RAICO: HISTORIAN OF THE LIBERTARIANS

>RAICO LECTURES (AUDIO): STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM

>The European Miracle
mises.org/library/1-european-miracle

>Classical Liberalism
mises.org/library/2-classical-liberalism

>John Stuart Mill
mises.org/library/3-john-stuart-mill

>Class and Conflict
mises.org/library/4-class-and-conflict

>War, Peace, and the Industrial Revolution
mises.org/library/5-war-peace-and-industrial-revolution

>The New World of Capitalism
mises.org/library/6-new-world-capitalism

>The anti capitalists
mises.org/library/7-anti-capitalists

>The planned society
mises.org/library/8-planned-society

>The first world war
mises.org/library/9-first-world-war

>Classical liberalism and the welfare-warfare state
mises.org/library/10-classical-liberalism-and-welfare-warfare-state

Quote:

>Liberalism did not emerge full blown nor did it undergo a metamorphosis into a caricature of itself. But it did evolve. I'm not offering any argument that liberalism sprang up at a certain point complete, fully matured. Neither can liberalism can be approached -- as some people do -- as a conversation conducted among philosophers over the centuries. Instead, liberalism must be understood, I think, as a political and social doctrine and a movement grounded in the distinctive culture and traceable to specific historical condition. That culture is the west. A Europe that rose in communion with the bishop of Rome. The historical conditions were those of the middle ages. The history of liberalism is rooted in what economic historians call the European miracle.

Historicist libertarians master race.

>libertarian right
>not anarchists
>not austrian economics
>not retards

you are not a libertarian

real libertarians call themselves liberals

>he doesn't know about the European liberal tradition

"Le journal des économistes" was just all bullshit and Herbert Spencer, John Stuart Mills and Lord Acton were just didn't exist.

This bitch probably doesn't understand that libertarian do not draw a necessary connection between democracy and freedom rooted in respect for property right.

Hong Kong didn't have democracy but was free from the point of view of property rights.

>all my stuff comes from a economically illiterate think tank funded by wall st

Liberals focus intensely on equality, but equality cannot be guaranteed without rigorous intervention on the part of the state. This is why we have the Civil Rights Act of 1965, Affirmative Action, and other ruinous policies that tread upon the freedom of prosperous individuals.

God, whether you believe in Him or not, did not create all men equal, so it is retarded to treat all men equal.

>I saw the word "mises" and my feelings got hurt

> Monarchy and the ancient regime are philosophically closer to libertarianism than present democratic age.
not really a libertarian, but this is true and one of the largest mischaracterizations committed by academia. We are always presented the idea that the average peasant's life was essentially divvied up between compelled Church obligations, compelled Feudal obligations, and compelled Monarchal obligations. In practice, however, the actual pressure exerted on these peoples lives was really only felt strongly when they rebelled or went heretical. Otherwise tradesmen, farmers, and the rest were more or less left to their own devices, minor crimes and governing were left to local authorities or village leaders, and most people had an astounding amount of free time, especially during the winter season. Compelled military service was also only expiernced by a small minority of the population as well.

In my lifetime I have encountered two kinds of men. Those who feel fulfilled by creating things and those who feel fulfilled by status. The former don't actually care about anything other than pragmatism. I would say they represent 10% of the population and are responsible for 90% of actual production.
The second are 90% of the population and they were not born with the means to feed themselves. It's not about class or even race. Some will produce a lot with whatever they have and the rest will come along half way through, make a bunch of rules or some other trumped convention to create status for themselves and take credit, but really they are nothing but a burden. Take NZ. Fucking superb purely libertarian country till it became comfortable. All down hill from there.

It is unreasonable to expect us who can work and produce and cooperate without instructions to be burdened with all this useless bureaucratic rotting meat. Let the inevitable failure of free paper money happen and hopefully the cunts will all starve.