Redpill a NatSoc on libertarianism

Redpill a NatSoc on libertarianism.

Is that true they are favorable to gay rights, legalization of drugs, against religions?

Is that true they want remove nations and races?

Seems a jew plot for me.

>Is that true they are favorable to gay rights, legalization of drugs, against religions?

>Is that true they want remove nations and races?

Libertarianism has suffered an invasion of kikery and subversion. Leftist libertarianism is trash, but austro-libertarianism and based conservative values go hand in hand.

I'll post a few image macros.

gay "rights" or any other civil rights is bullshit, for legalizing drugs but don't advocate using them. I'm not against religion but some reddit libertarians might be against religion. Also the Nation does not equal the state. Again cucked Redditor libertarians will be open borders fags.

Read late Rothbard and based good Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Hoppe unkiked libertarianism.

Any more questions?

...

...

...

...

I think the libertarian movement was coopted by people who support multinational corporations and open borders. Many libertarians just want government to be limited to the constitution and for people to be left alone.

>favorable to gay rights, legalization of drugs

yes

>against religions

no

>they want remove nations

yes

>and races?

no

>Seems a jew plot for me.

yes but the jews are right on this one so its cool.

...

Nah son, fags don't get extra rights. And I love my nation, the Nation =\= the state m8

>Is that true they are favorable to gay rights, legalization of drugs, against religions?

It's important to realize that libertarians are not, as it were, in favor of anything in particular, in the sense that what one person does with its own property is not the business of the libertarian. The libertarian may be the worst homophobe or racist ever conceived, but whatever his personal tastes may be, in order to be a libertarian, he must recognize that his own likes and dislikes are not the norm according to which what is and is not allowed to take place will be determined.

Rather, the libertarian believes that all are free to do with their own property as they like as long as they do not interfere with the property of others without their consent. In this sense, gays are allowed to be gay and act gay even though an individual libertarian might hate them an their lifestyle.

>Is that true they want remove nations and races?

Presumably, some libertarians, or people who call themselves libertarians, like libertarianism because of its perceived "egalitarianism". That is, they believe that the libertarian framework can be extended to all human beings on earth, and that as a consequence of a system of voluntary exchanges, racism would be eliminated somehow. This will depend on the libertarian.

>Seems a jew plot for me.

It's also important to realize that libertarianism allows racism. A person who refuses to associate with an individual of another race is not outside the bounds of liibertarianism, in so far as he only uses his own property as he see fit. Furthermore, another advantage of libertarianism is that the schools are not government controlled. A parent wanting to give his children a "right wing education" would be perfectly free to do so. He would not have to compete against the state system of ideological propagation.

Furthermore, the libertarian system is such that one cannot be compelled to financially support behavior that is not desirable or productive.

>favorable to gay rights
If you're referring to gay marriage, the libertarian stance is that marriage should be made a contractual arrangement outside of government purview.

>legalization of drugs

Yes, externalities are indeed a problem with drugs, but the current "drug war" approach has failed, and drug liberalization would allow such externalities to be better controlled.

>remove nations and races?

No. We support freedom of association for your businesses and communities.

...

That makes some sense to me, but I have never seen a libertarian society.

Is it a utopia?

Is it just a inside moral values that can be added to society?

How to conciliate a good society with individuality?

>Nah son, fags don't get extra rights.


So am I but I understand gay rights as the lack of gay oppression. Not being able for two humans to make up a contract is state discrimination.

> And I love my nation, the Nation =\= the state m8

the nation is a anti invidualistic. in an ulitmate libertarian utopia it would also make litttle sense you would rather be thinking more locally than nationally. but then again we are speaking here about the end game. disolving nationalism would be probably one of the last few steps.

I don't think a fully anarcho-capitalist society has been tried, at least not any time in the past few centuries.

It's not a utopia inherently, rather it's a system of governance (or lack of) which removes a state and the inherent downsides of it: egalitarianism, moral decay, welfare. It's a society based off respect for other's private property and liberty, ruled by contractual polycentric law.

Most, if not all, anarcho-capitalists believe in a powerful natural elite and the natural order. As such, traditional and conservative values ('good' values) will see rise again (e.g. with no welfare state, the family and community will be needed again to help the good people in need) - this is insofar as those values are actually helpful, I suppose. There's a sort of social darwinism here, since there's no subsidies for destructive behaviour anymore.

>gay rights
No. Gays won't have any more rights than other individuals.
>legalization of drugs
Yes. More people doing them == less people doing them(they die).
>against religions
Neither pro nor against. You are free to do anything as long as you don't violate NAP.
>Is that true they want remove nations and races?
No.

While a "true Libertarian social order" has never existed all the parts have been tried and work well when applied

As for individualism NatSoc seems to have the idea that individualism means dyeing your hair pink and being "unique" this couldn't be a worse stawman.

Individualism is an understanding that individuals are the only actors in society. Collectives do not act, families do not act, governments do not act. Only individuals take actions, only individuals own property and and individuals own themselves.

Fair enough, I was thinking anti discrimination laws and such.

As for collectives, they are fine if based in consent. I know our current idea of Nations are certainly not consensual. There's some essay by Rothbard where he evaluates the Nation as anything but a state monopoly.

Thanks for post this, I will take some read.

I think libertarianism can be the key to oppose liberal ''values'' - Like NatSoc is the best to fight against communism.

>disolving nationalism would be probably one of the last few steps.

That's not a step I'm super comfortable making. I strongly believe the nation might be the proper space within which a good approximation of a regime of liberty may be allowed to exist. In this sense, the dissolution of nation is not necessarily advisable.

All forms of government can have varied laws.
Nat soc doesn't require the banning of everything that makes you an individual much like libertarians don't require total freedom.
You set the laws to fit the people. More freedom can be given when the population is generally together on the same page.