/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL - HAIL HOPPE

This thread is for Discussion of Capitalism, Libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism, Minarchism, Anti-Communism, Right-Wing Populism, 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

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/sites/default/files/Anatomy of the State_3.pdf
riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf
mises.org/library/egalitarianism-revolt-against-nature-0
archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch75.html
youtube.com/watch?v=nuVqwe3qTUM
youtube.com/watch?v=a4pPLwAL_Qo
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>ANATOMY OF THE STATE - MURRAY ROTHBARD
mises.org/sites/default/files/Anatomy of the State_3.pdf

>DEMOCRACY-THE GOD THAT FAILED - HANS-HERMANN HOPPE
riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

This should be considered required reading for posting in this thread. If you havent read these please do.

/////ANTI-EGALITARIANISM/////
>We began by considering the common view that the egalitarians, despite a modicum of impracticality, have ethics and moral idealism on their side. We end with the conclusion that egalitarians, however intelligent as individuals, deny the very basis of human intelligence and of human reason: the identification of the ontological structure of reality, of the laws of human nature, and the universe. In so doing, the egalitarians are acting as terribly spoiled children, denying the structure of reality on behalf of the rapid materialization of their own absurd fantasies. Not only spoiled but also highly dangerous; for the power of ideas is such that the egalitarians have a fair chance of destroying the very universe that they wish to deny and transcend, and to bring that universe crashing around all of our ears. Since their methodology and their goals deny the very structure of humanity and of the universe, the egalitarians are profoundly antihuman; and, therefore, their ideology and their activities may be set down as profoundly evil as well. Egalitarians do not have ethics on their side unless one can maintain that the destruction of civilization, and even of the human race itself, may be crowned with the laurel wreath of a high and laudable morality.

>EGALITARIANISM AS A REVOLT AGAINST NATURE
mises.org/library/egalitarianism-revolt-against-nature-0

>RACE! - MURRAY ROTHBARD
archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch75.html

...

Support right-wing populist movements!
Support Nationalist and secessionist movements!

Send Left-"Libertarians" back on their way to reddit!

...

>It's not real capitalism!!

That's Jews exploiting nogs in a liberal egalitarian society. What do you expect? Liberalism is trash.

But we don't live in an egalitarian society. The trend of the last 200 years is consolidation of power in financial institutions. Jews hold the financial power. Liberalism is a buzzword that only Americans care about.

>Jews are forcing muslim integration into your country through the state apparatus
>Obviously this is the result of laissez-faire.

The rapid degeneration of your country is not the result of laissez-faire, its quite clearly the state that prevents you from discriminating against jews, homosexuals, muslims. You don't have free speech, you don't have a right to bear arms, you don't have laissez-faire. Jews in the state are manipulating your market.

...

feels good having a four day weekend
how's going freedom lovers ?

...

goin' good my dude, hows shit in frogland? lotta commies still fucking shit up?

Yo why does everyone put Pinochet and Sneks together, surely Pinochet is the bane of a libertarians existence because the government doing extrajudicial killings is like the opposite of limited government?

daily thread fellating your jewish idols?

Pinochet is the symbol of Libertarian Fascism, Kill commies, open up the markets. very memeable. btw trying to abolish property is a nap violation, they should be thrown from helicopters.

All bolshevism/socialism is disgenic even if on a national level only.

Change your thinking.

The free market tends towards efficient production and consumption. If the state is a useful tool for the control and management of the people under these 2 principles then it must necessarily form in laissez-faire conditions. If it is NOT an effective control system, then why complain about it?

The rapid destruction of ethnic homogeneity in previously homogenous european countries has to do with the destruction of the middle class and cultural cohesion. A stupid, atomized and deracinated labor force is preferable for efficient control of production and consumption.

>libertarian
>right

Uh pizza gate wuz okay cos the age of consent if for dirty statists

>Libertarian Fascism
How is that possible?
Fascism is like pure collectivism with no individual elements as everyone follows the leader and state where as Liberalism is pure individualism.

Oy vey

out filthy lefty.

>hows shit in frogland? lotta commies still fucking shit up?

right now we just discovered one of Macron's ministers was a crook
nobody expected that !!! kek

Seemingly an intelligent stance.

Why are libertarians so retarded?

frog poster

>If it is NOT an effective control system, then why complain about it?
The state is effective at destroying the family unit and preserving it totalitarianism.

> A stupid, atomized and deracinated labor force is preferable for efficient control of production and consumption.
Yeah, when your running an authoritarian monopoly. Again, sweden, isn't what we'd call a "free market" economic system.

I'm a libertarian but I think the idea that the free market solves all problems meme is too simplistic.

Some things require voluntary association and compacts, still others require some form of tax(?) for the maintenance of the commons.

I'm open to ideas on this though.

You are dodging the argument. Like incorporation is a market mechanism, so is the state.

How does your libertarian society even compete?

by surviving more than 12 years

The solution is to not have "commons" funded by the state but rather contractual "covenant property" that would be considered private property funded by the owner (s)

The primary argument of the libertarian is that free markets are better because they create wealth

But when you point out that wealth doesn't really seem to corellate to free markets, it corellates more strongly with genetics, the free market ideology falls apart. Suddenly you see how much more important it is to pursue policies that shore up the genome. Maintaining a common community, culture, heritage becomes so much more important than just "muh freedom"

Most people don't even want freedom, nor do they do better when given freedom. They want to be part of something, a social order. They want someone to give them goals and values and villains to overcome. We didn't evolve to be individuals, we evolved to be part of a tribal social unit. Tribal networks will outcompete a society of individuals every single time, and be happier too

Pic related, "freedom"

What about monopolies? It seems to me they are one of the bad edge-cases of a free market. A predatory monopoly is almost as bad as government in some cases.

I agree that the state acts as a property owner and is involved in the market, but that has nothing to do with Libertarian Capitalism. The state is a violent Monopoly that prevents free entry into that market.

A monopoly is what the states is. A monopoly prevents free entry to a market. If there is a monopoly there is no free market. We must fight them the same as the state.

>But when you point out that wealth doesn't really seem to corellate to free markets, it corellates more strongly with genetics

Chili has the freest market in south America
Venezuela is the least free
both are mainly mestizos
and Chili is superior to Venezuela in any terms of economics
since they are hispanics they will never reach white/asian levels of livings
but still a free market is superior to central planning

>Tribal networks will outcompete a society of individuals every single time, and be happier too

Wrong,African niggers are the most tribal,collectivist social order ever existing and their greatest invention was mudhuts

Some industries like electricity should have multiple providers, however the infrastructure shouldn't be duplicated since its a waste of effort.

How then can this system be resolved, especially if one of the providers is trying to play dirty?

Jewish enslavement to degeneracy is not freedom. Do you really think the natural state of man is to dress like a dog, dye your hair blue and suck dicks?

>youtube.com/watch?v=nuVqwe3qTUM

KEYNES DINDU NUFFIN

kys.

Needless duplication is probably a legitimate concern, i doubt there will be 10 roads built next to each other if the first road serves it's purpose well tho.

You have to look at economics as a total war. A cost-benefit analysis is applicable to anything, not just moves that we deem 'permissible'. Look at the way that corporations operate. There is a precedent for everything from assassination to paramilitary funding. Even common marketing practices initially come from military sources.

You shouldn't understand the state as a misguided attempt to protect individual rights that backfires and creates monopolies. The state is imposed on people by financial power because it is an effective way of consolidating power.

tiny peanut brain. I don't care about keynes.

I think you guys should definitely team up with the natsocs.

You can argue and shit yourself over "bootlicking" and shit but in the end, you share a ton of philosophy and goals

I agree.

Why? Snekbois are useful idiots for jewish interests. They believe they must fight the ghosts of dead commies and the chubby unemployed dyke feminist next door, or die trying.

But at first you need to solve society. Solve the degeneracy and all that.
As much as you'd argue about raw, unregulated capitalism, you need to solve society first, otherwise every system will collapse back into what we've got .... or worse.

Degeneracy isn't a bottom-up problem. The reason young girls idolize whores that sing about having threesomes and eating cum, is jewish capitalist lizard-men and the system that protects them. Deregulation only serves to make it worse. Besides, it makes no sense to fight symptoms while ignoring the source.

Nationalize the economy, remove foreign economic interests, ensure self-sufficiency and try to move the culture to a healthy and happy place. Then we can talk about the best way to manage the local economy.

I guess the cringey fuck who made that image didn't realise that the man who coined the word libertarian was a literal communist.

Lol, yeah let the swedish government nationalize the economy, I'm sure they'll work towards your interests and not be corrupt.
>Inb4 we'll kill the Jews in the state.
You'll do no such thing, the state owns you and wouldn't allow any "anti-Semitism"

If you believe in statism you might as well just kill yourself, slave.

It's so dumb that you keep talking about the 'state' and how it's such a problem while simultaneously admitting that the state is zionist occupied. So you're saying give the economy directly to the jews without intermediary? To reduce paperwork?

As long as the state is controlled by foreign interests, then the nationalizing of the economy has nothing to do with giving power to the state. The nation is an ethnic concept and the ethnic population should seize control over natural resources and capital.

Anarchy is a fact, adding -capitalism just tells me you're to much of a pawn to act in your own self-interest.

autarchism would be the proper terms than anarchism

Tom woods and molymeme: Western Civilization
youtube.com/watch?v=a4pPLwAL_Qo

Bump

Open question to fellow libertarians.
What do you think of our racially integrated society? Do you think society should revert to segration like the natsoc advocate?
Once the government gains certain powers it is almost impossible to take them back.

Top Kek.

Voluntary racial segregation would be preferable. No doubt that people in homogenous societies work well together.

Thanks for your answer
Most people do voluntary segragate themselves anyhow. I do believe that integrated societies can work just fine though.

Eh, I'm kinda a disbeliever of integration. Unless everyone is a cosmopolite hipster some group is gonna have beef with another group.

...

We believe in the subjectivity of value to its logical conclusion, this means that if someone values racial integrity within his community over other, perhaps positive values of racial integration, then the market should be allowed to attend their demands.

It's hard to have absolute truths about what would be the most successful form of society, perhaps one where everyone is white, perhaps one with vetted high-skill immigration, perhaps one without borders at all, but if we don't allow the market to show us, then we will never know.

Threads been quite lately, I think we alienated all the r_libertarians, and /liberty/arians.

Great success!

*Quiet

>Support nationalist and secessionist movements!
What do you mean by that? Even if it's something like Nordfront or the American Nazi Party which goes against everything the concept of liberty goes against? A lot of you seem to have been integrated by Sup Forums and just become pseudo-nazis instead of libertarians.

>goes against everything the concept of liberty goes against
One too many "goes against", I should really reread my posts.

no government > many governments > few government

The Frenchman gets it, in a globalized world Nationalism is a step towards decentralization.

I'm not going to support nationalists if they want to take away basic human rights from anyone they deem as degenerates and control every part of my life.

You should oppose those things, I'm just saying you should support things like brexit and the like. That doesn't mean you should support fascism.

...

Oh hey it's this thread again. Didn't learn when your last /general/ died a bit ago, huh? Go back.

we're here since a long time kid

Go back where? Sup Forums is my native board.

Look at the current developments in Europe. Do you think the right wing populists like the AfD here in Germany, Geert in Netherlands and all the others are the statists? No, they oppose the EU, the biggest danger to freedom in our current times. EVen if they support protectionism like Front National, it is still better to support a populist party that favors protectionism than to support parties like our "libertarian" party, that might advocate for some market liberal reforms but jerks off to the idea of a strong EU. Before we tackle the economy we need to slay the behemoth that is the elite in Brussels. Without straight priorities we will all die in Gulags within the next ten years.

What do ancaps think the basis for property is?

...

Self ownership. It's self evident that you own your body and therefore the results of your actions. If you build a house you are responsible for it's creation and so it belongs to you.

This seems to be a good thread so far. Lots of propaganda and macros, less leftism and trolling.

In mixing his labour with the land, a man extends his self ownership to unowned territory.

>Natural law theory rests on the insight that we live in a world
of more than one—in fact, a vast number—of entities, and that
each entity has distinct and specific properties, a distinct
“nature,” which can be investigated by man’s reason, by his
sense perception and mental faculties. Copper has a distinct
nature and behaves in a certain way, and so do iron, salt, etc.
The species man, therefore, has a specifiable nature, as does the
world around him and the ways of interaction between them.
To put it with undue brevity, the activity of each inorganic and
organic entity is determined by its own nature and by the
nature of the other entities with which it comes in contact.
Specifically, while the behavior of plants and at least the lower
animals is determined by their biological nature or perhaps by
their “instincts,” the nature of man is such that each individual
person must, in order to act, choose his own ends and
employ his own means in order to attain them. Possessing no
automatic instincts, each man must learn about himself and
the world, use his mind to select values, learn about cause and
effect, and act purposively to maintain himself and advance
his life. Since men can think, feel, evaluate, and act only as
individuals, it becomes vitally necessary for each man’s survival
and prosperity that he be free to learn, choose, develop
his faculties, and act upon his knowledge and values. This is
the necessary path of human nature; to interfere with and
cripple this process by using violence goes profoundly against
what is necessary by man’s nature for his life and prosperity.
Violent interference with a man’s learning and choices is
therefore profoundly “antihuman”; it violates the natural law
of man’s needs.

One problem with that is that it cannot account for the ownership of the land and natural resources from which everything else is derived.

I would suggest that property is that which you can succesfully defend using all means available to you, including negotiation and bartering. This is a definition that is much more true to reality. The problem with ancap is that it claims to be fair and meritocratic basing itself in rhetoric like 'self-ownership' and 'natural rights'. In reality it arbitrarily restricts physical force and permits everything else. In truth ancap memes should always end with the capitalist beaten to death, because in reality, the holding of property is only tolerated if the amount of value is returned to the public is enough to dissuade violent takeover (or if the fact of the exploitation is sufficiently hidden).

I wish more people could into natural law, is it really too redpilled for most Libertarians?

Put it in practical terms. 'Natural law' is just a spook unless you can argue for it's necessity or utility. That's what it seems like to me. You should read my post above. If you think Hoppes argument still holds, present it as your own and we can discuss, I'm not gonna read excerpts of Hoppe preaching and just leave it at that.

beautiful

How does the working class compete with mechanical labor?

You expect all these farmers and welders to move to the city to become lawyers?

Mechanization opens up new fields of work. Machines need to be built themselves and maintained.

But the number of machine repair jobs is a tiny insignificant % of the number of jobs the machines are replacing

There is a supply land demand for human genes. And once these working class people are no longer useful to the economy, they'll find themselves phased out like some old product nobody uses anymore. Prices and wages will conspire to shove them out of the gene pool.

This is why the wealth gap continues to rise despite our increasing societal splendor

Quick question, how would you
theoretically privatize libraries? I can't see a way that you could retain a library as they are currently, and yet still make a profit. How could you change them so that you aren't running them at a loss, but still provide reasonable services akin to what they do today? I'm one of those few nerds that actually foes to libraries for more than free wifi and a place to use the restroom, and I'd hate to see them go

Membership fees?

but user don't you get it? that will be automated too

everything will be magically automated all at once instead of gradual technological progress and slow shifts in the job market. You just don't understand AI! and these workers, you expect them to get new jobs?! they're only good for one job and one job only, the idea of people changing jobs or improving themselves to get jobs is just untrue. i mean I've always been jobless, but everyone else will somehow be jobless too! Inequality is real and is a big problem! That guy is richer than me, and thus he is bad and evil! I hate capitalism!

vote bernie.

You forget that the service sector is a huge part of the economy. Mechanization won't be able to spread in that sector as fast (if at all) and either give enough time to resettle or don't affect people at all. We have been seeing a rise in this sector for the last decades now and it would just grow with more mechanization.

Membership fees would presumably be pretty expensive, since you've only got a few people willing to pay them. I'm not gonna pay 200 dollars a year to use a library for example, I might as well take that money and use it towards books I can keep. I'm not quite sure how you could improve a library to the point where 200 dollars a year is reasonable, either.
I'm not raising whimsical objections for the sake of being devil's advocate, I'm trying to figure this out to a point that reasonably satisfies me.

But not everyone
A) wants to
B) is suited to
work in the service industry

You're going to take some greasy mechanic with calloused hands and put him in front of a cash register?

And with so much competition for service jobs, their wages will be completely shit tier compared to the wages of someone working in an actual productive field, like business or something.

Realistically what's going to happen is what I already explained. Prices and wages will arrange themselves to push these genes out of the gene pool. That means the working class gets starved out until they stop reproducing.

Then maybe get Netflix for books instead.

let's ignore the fact that a clandestine guild of dark occult, child raping, baby eating, blood drinking, satanic, psychopathic, elite group of men run the world and its politics through blackmail, murder, gematria, bribery, and drugs.

we need to discuss automation and roads.

So an online library? I hadn't considered that. It'd be pretty cheap cause you just have to host the servers, and you wouldnt even need a lot of storage because books are tiny.
Well fuck I feel like a retard now, thanks for answering my questions

Not sure how you guys get so confused as to what natural rights actually are and how you've all forgotten Locke's Proviso

Nor was this appropriation of any parcel of land, by improving it, any prejudice to any other man, since there was still enough and as good left, and more than the yet unprovided could use. So that, in effect, there was never the less left for others because of his enclosure for himself. For he that leaves as much as another can make use of, does as good as take nothing at all. Nobody could think himself injured by the drinking of another man, though he took a good draught, who had a whole river of the same water left him to quench his thirst. And the case of land and water, where there is enough of both, is perfectly the same.

—Second Treatise of Government, Chapter V, paragraph 33


Ownership in land is not natural; its a state granted privilege, a legal fiction. You guys are practically socialists looking for big poppa government to choose winners and losers

retarded, retarded for freedom user ;)