This thread is for Discussion of Capitalism, Libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism, Minarchism, 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.
Absolutely required material. How moral a society is, and how free it is are forever tied. They are the dancers of fate.
Jordan Martin
...
Xavier Johnson
...
Jason Russell
Explain the libertarian party's support for open borders
Nicholas Clark
I would unironically support anarcho capitalism without giving a shit how it works if it ever got its feet off the ground
Dylan Nelson
Yeah I watched this, libertarian Bros should watch too.
Ethan Morales
*blocks your path*
Brandon Ortiz
Homosexuality.
Christopher Harris
>Acting like any other party besides democrats and republicans isn't Hegelian dialectic tier controlled opposition
Angel Reyes
...
Kayden White
...
Jayden Martin
Who's the best right libertarian youtuber? Is it unironically Molyneux?
Joseph Adams
Christopher Cantwell is pretty good too.
Ian Harris
What path? Yeah Cantwell.
John Cooper
Roads?
Levi Jones
>open borders >gun control
Weld is a massive faggot, glad the Libertarian party got embarrassed by not getting their 5% again.
Noah Ortiz
No /lrg/ is staunchly anti-road.
Tyler Scott
>Countless children are raped, sacrificed, and eaten by current political elites. Unfettered human and drug trafficking. >Muh roads.
O-okay..
Literally who?
Cameron Clark
Pay to use them.
Carson Miller
>Indeed, in cooperation with one another, >insurers would want to expel known >criminals not just from their immediat >neighborhood, but from any civilization >altogether, into the wilderness or open >frontier of the Amazon jungle, the Sahara >or the polar regions
Luis Nelson
A moral society is based on Christianity and God's word.
Sebastian Walker
made some shitty OC
Sebastian Sanchez
>not knowing the man you put up as VP
You are more of an embarrassment then fat naked dance man at the libertarian convention
David Hernandez
>countless because there is no evidence other then a handful of strange emails
Schools?
Jackson Morales
And they will deport me in the polar regions too if I mess up green text again
Angel Price
How does libertarianism solve pic related
>inb4 don't let them in the first place
pic is from bongland, they're already here you have to deal with them
Thomas Adams
FUCKING PAY FOR THEM. THE ANSWER IS GOING TO BE THE FUCKING SAME.
Julian Jenkins
There is also eyewitness testimony and many books on the matter
Christian Anderson
Need a violent purge/civil war first
Blake King
...
Hudson Brooks
Legal tender?
Jacob Hughes
no white guilt bux to breed and removal if they get all governmenty
Jace Hall
Gold, cryptocurrencies, and private banknotes issued by respected banks.
Angel Murphy
Also almost everyone will be carrying so no more mass rampages with impunity
Levi Peterson
This, also barter if you want. Trade goods and what not
Ryan Robinson
Military?
Jackson Cook
Private. Again pay.
Nathan Kelly
What exactly is the difference between ancap and feudalism?
Ethan Russell
>What exactly is the difference between ancap and feudalism? What are the similarities?
Levi Williams
What's the difference between feudalism and now?
Austin Collins
...
Jeremiah Watson
Everything really, land owners essentially controlling everything. People who own a lot of land being kings, delegating sections to their lords.. etc
A lot, the draft for starters
Adam Kelly
Oh yeah!!!!
Isaiah Wood
so you'd still let them walk around like that? You wouldn't just deport them?
cucked as fuck
Dominic Phillips
Deport them? They wouldn't be allowed to enter.
Jordan Smith
but they're already in many western countries
Lucas Robinson
You start a commune (or suburb) where you only sell to white Christians.
Isaiah Turner
so you give up, basically
Charles Hill
...
Colton Russell
Are you retarded?
Jason Williams
>reeeeee stop wearing stuff I don't like >reeeeee that offends me!!
In all seriousness, I could see that some insurance agencies, in specific localities, would require a ban on veils covering the face for anti-crime reasons. If not, then so what? Let these women wear what they want; no one would be forced to employ, sell to or otherwise have any interaction with them. Stores could (and most likely would) have signs saying "no veils" just as today they have "no dogs, no smokers, no beggars, etc." -- except, of course, these restrictions would be private and therefore voluntary, unlike a state that tells us what we can and cannot do with our bodies and our establishments.
Evan White
b-but road networks and the like are about the scale, not complexity
Sebastian Butler
in the name of 'freedom' you cede territory to some mudslime invaders, that's what you're saying effectively.
Austin Sullivan
So you want to forcibly deport them? Go ahead. Pay for it.
Leo Morales
cut their welfare see how far they go
David Morales
everyone must contribute to the deportation, it's for the good of the nation
Mason James
You don't need to cede territories to anyone. Just cut the gibs and they fuck off back to where they came from. If not, they stay in the host country but must live a disgusting life on the streets.... Oh wait, they can't do that either because streets are also privately owned and the property owners have every reason to expel those who bring down its value.
Portugal took in some "refugees" and most of them fled to Germany and Denmark after a few weeks. These people come to our countries to flee from war, but also to leech off of our welfare states. Remove the welfare state and the states in their countries, and they'll stay there and we can simply trade from a distance if people don't like them.
Aiden White
Islam conflicts with libertarianism and therefore cannot be tolerated
Adrian Mitchell
Libertarianism is meh, Rhine capitalism aka Soziale Marktwirtschaft is the way to go.
Robert Cooper
...
Camden Morris
You missed the point, leaf.
Evan Wilson
The central muslim organisation would buy some land and establish an islamic state where s high amount of muslims, so you don't see them in your area. As soon as they attack someone and as they violate the NAP, they get fucked by privat anti-islam security.
Colton Young
Even the organization itself, if it were private, would keep the radicals off. Radical Islamic terrorists raise premium costs of insurance and make a hassle for everyone's life, not just for us, so I think that if the current Islamic states were to crumble radical Islam would also crumble.
Isaiah Roberts
Are you people literally retarded? The reason they are here is because of welfare,end that and they will go back,private death squads will clean up those who stay.
I understand in Brazil they have a private law system. Can you tell me how it is, do you have any experience with it?
Cooper Watson
We do not have such a system, sorry to disappoint. Unless you were making a satirical commentary on our corrupt upper courts, in which case you are on point.
Angel Richardson
you mean the conciliations sessions? yes, they are very helpful, I never used it but most lesser disputes are solved throught it.
Lincoln King
Maybe it's your lacking English skills but I am not being sarcastic. It's just what I have heard from another Brazillian. Is there a big libertarian movement, a lot of libertarian stuff is translated into Portugese.
Brody Evans
Pardon me, but I didn't make that association since I don't think it's that similar to a "private" system as far as I recall. It's basically the ability to settle small lawsuits outside of court using a private intermediary. It's usually used because most small cases take more than 5 years to be judged, so it's a way to "unclog" the system. Also yes, there's a growing movement for libertarianism here, quickly disseminated by facebook and other social medias, but still not as prevalent as traditional conservatism and commies (freaking everywhere, I shit you not).
Colton Watson
Bump
Connor Parker
Geolibertarianism is the belief that each individual has an exclusive right to the fruits of his or her labor, and thus an exclusive right to the value of those fruits; and that all individuals have an equal rightto land, and thus an equal right to the value of land. By embracing this belief, geolibertarians are simply taking the core libertarian principle of self-ownership to its logical conclusion: Just as the right to oneself implies the right to the fruit of one's labor (i.e., the right to property), the right to the fruit of one's labor implies the right to labor, and the right to labor implies the right to labor -- somewhere. Hence John Locke's proviso that one has "property" in land only to the extent that there is "enough, and as good left in common for others." When there is not, land begins to have rental value. Thus, the rental value of land reflects the extent to which Locke's proviso has been violated, thereby making community-collection of rent (CCR) a just and necessary means of upholding the Lockean principle of private property. In the late 19th century, CCR became known as the "Single Tax" -- a term often used to denote Henry George's proposal to abolish all taxation save for a single tax on the value of land (irrespective of the value of improvements in or on it). Throughout the rest of this FAQ I will often refer to the Single Tax as the LVT (land value tax).
Oliver Morgan
...
Logan Peterson
>Left-Libertarians, and other Shit-Libs need to fuck off.
Asher Reyes
Royal libertarians are ideologically inconsistent
Cameron Robinson
Yes goys open the borders for the free market
Henry Collins
No, fuck open borders fag.
Landon Price
The problem of open-borders is complicated. There could be no immigration restriction in Ancapistan that would violate the right of freedom of travel. The libertarian stance on open-borders should be therefore exactly that and like for any other government program that extends government power it should be opposed. However, the immigration of further nonintegrable "citizens" threatens to bloat the welfare state and extend government power anyway so in the long run it's a non-issue. A re-arrengement of priorities needs to happen, otherwise the state makes it impossible for you to consistently stick by your ideals. The reason why those people are flocking to the West is benefits in the first place so the welfare state needs go to first. Being anti or for immigration doesn't matter after that. Either way, one thing you can be sure is that no ancap would hold the liberal position of accepting even more refugees. As a moral conundrum only blocking access is the issue, not encouraging more for to travel over. Hope that makes sense. You wouldn't have to live with either muzzies or nigger in ancap society if you didn't have to
Ryder Scott
Open borders is an inseparable key opponent of (((libertarianism)))
Cooper Stewart
Opening borders without destroying the welfare-state is nonsensical. They are the one and the same issue.
Benjamin Long
State does not have private property. That's the whole fucking point. It has illegitimate property claims all over "its land" and all the private properties on it
Gavin Hughes
Is the decline of the west a good book to read?
Angel Ross
That sounds 'private' and is a far better solution than government courts. Many companies also prefer private arbitration to the public courts.
Luis Barnes
private property is illegitimate because it's all enforced by the state
you pay taxes so the state will pay the pigs to enforce private property laws
Caleb Smith
>it's all enforced by the state How many times do I have to explain this here? Some else do it for me
To stimulate some discussion here is a question I've been thinking about: How would the problem of privacy solved? Say stalking or spying? What's to stop someone 2 miles away from your property on watching you through a telescope?
Robert Hall
land is a state enforced monopoly; property rights are central to any libertarian philosophy including the so called left/geoist side of the party
The right/royal wing of the is just confused and somehow thinks that land becomes private property when one mixes one's labor with it. And mixing what is yours with what is not yours in order to own the whole thing is considered great sport. But the notion is filled with problems. How much labor does it take to claim land, and how much land can one claim for that labor? And for how long can one make that claim?
According to classical liberals, land belonged to the user for as long as the land was being used, and no longer. But according to royal libertarians, land belongs to the first user, forever. So, do the oceans belong to the heirs of the first person to take a fish out or put a boat in? Does someone who plows the same field each year own only one field, while someone who plows a different field each year owns dozens of fields? Should the builder of the first transcontinental railroad own the continent? Shouldn't we at least have to pay a toll to cross the tracks? Are there no common rights to the earth at all? To royal libertarians there are not, but classical liberals recognized that unlimited ownership of land never flowed from use, but from the state:
