Libertarian Goes Full Retard

These people are truly antifa-tier insane.

>fee.org/articles/why-free-immigration-is-a-right/

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/blog/mises-nationalism-right-self-determination-and-problem-immigration
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

lol (((libertarians))) went full-kike

libertarians are just lefties that want lower taxes. theyre an embarassment to the classic liberals they claim to emulate.

A few retarded quotes from the article:

"If you don’t want immigrants in your neighbor’s house, that’s tough for you, bro; you’ll need to keep your prejudices on your own property."

"Of course it is morally wrong for nations to pursue their “self-interest” in anything, and especially in border control policies. People have self-interests that matter, morally; nations do not. Nations are toxic hellholes of false identity and purveyors of monstrous political violence."

t. lolibertarian retard

>libertarians are just lefties that want lower taxes. theyre an embarassment to the classic liberals they claim to emulate.

Troof!

True.

Nonwhite immigrants would never even come to a free market society. There wouldn't be any gibs.

Lolertarianism and Anarcho Kikepitalism are atheistic jewish economic ideologies
No different from communism just the other side of the same coin
Both communism and ancapitalism have the same traits, they're both cold and soulless, its all about numbers, investing, stock, and of course money.

Traditionalism, Monarchism, Fascism, National Socialism are the only true ideologies.

>t. "Libertarian"
You think Ron Paul would've said that?

But the welfare state isn't going to be dismantled any time soon, so we have to close the borders.

Ron Paul was openly for open borders?

>expecting lolbertarians to be reasonable
Libertarianism is just idealism, it's a jewpill

They're literally autistic.

Physically remove leftIstanbul and even centrist libertarians

Yes I know, I'm just talking about hypothetically.
You could have an open borders society in a free market society and the only people who would come to your country would be whites.

Free immigration to Israel is a right

This teebeeh

Lolbertards truly are the worst

Anyone below the line of authoritarianism should be physically removed, anything above the line on the left should be gassed

> not knowing that Communism and Anarchy are identical, i.e. the withering away of the state

> not knowing both are kike plots

> not knowing

lolbertarians guzzling kike splooge by the 5 gallon bucket

Libertarians oppose *government* borders. It's because governments are criminal organizations that have no right to do anything.

Nothing stops private property owners from curtailing immigration in their own ways. Some societies will open immigration, some won't.

I literally said "these people [i.e. libertarians] are antifa-tier insane."

How are you people only seeing this now, they're anarchists at the end of the day and Jewish to the nth degree. They only care about shekels, I never take anybody seriously using the ancap flag because most times they don't even know what the ideology is about or the fact that it was tried in the 1800s and failed like communism did in the 1900s.

Psyop agents from multiple alphabet agencies have infiltrated libertarian groups, such as the Oathkeepers, to create division amongst the right.

What do country boarders matter if every man has a right to own property and decide whose allowed to access said property?

>borders
>criminals
>organizations
>government
>society
>property
>immigration

Just. Listen to yourself.
Deary me.

Paul believes that illegal immigrants should not be given an "unfair advantage" under law.[364] He has advocated for a "coherent immigration policy", and has spoken strongly against amnesty for illegal aliens because he believes it undermines the rule of law, grants pardons to lawbreakers,[365] and subsidizes more illegal immigration.[366] Paul voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, authorizing an additional 700 miles (1100 kilometers) of double-layered fencing between the U.S. and Mexico

No?

Maybe these days, but not when he ran for president.

Wrong libertarians are right wing capitalist, but they don't believe in a state or system of government.
Left anarchists don't believe in a state and believe everybody should get what the need to survive through communal gibs.

Immigration is bad, period.

It's a one way street that benefits third-worlders and is a net loss for western countries.

Fuck off, jidf. Quit conflating government with society.

Yes but what is his proposed system for allowing people to enter the country legally?

>libertarians are your friends!!!! tolerate them or you'll never shift le overton window ever

As soon as a goy with enough shekels comes along you'll open your borders, if immigrants will do the labour you require for less, you'll open your borders. It's about the money Jew.

I'm not lunatic, I'm point out how completely brainwashed you are. Your language is totally robotic.
Everything is just economic to you (((people))). As (((Karl Marx))) said the true god of the Jews is gold. No wonder communism and libertarianism are both almost entirely run by jews.

So do you think national boundaries are arbitrary?

Libertarians have always been tards

It's time to go full fash, white man

I've heard him talk favorably about a system where labors would come when needed and go home when not. But I haven't heard him talk much about legal immigration besides railing against the 14th amendment.

And both identical

A libertarian society can never exist for more than a week because someone will quickly reinvent a central structure and conquer your Somalian no-government "paradise".

Even a kid can see that.

Disagree entirely. Skilled immigration of artisans, craftsman, inventors....etc. is a huge benefit to any nation.
The issue we're dealing with today is mass immigration and population replacement on an industrial scale

Paul also believes children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens should not be granted automatic birthright citizenship.[368] He has called for a new Constitutional amendment to revise Fourteenth Amendment principles and "end automatic birthright citizenship",[369] and believes that welfare issues are directly tied to the illegal immigration problem.[370]

The current system?

That's the issue with anarchy in general, but I think in a libertarian society the most powerful companies would join together and form the new government as opposed to gangs doing on the left hand side of the spectrum.

>It's about the money Jew.

Yeah, I'm not arguing against closed borders. I'm arguing that market anarchy can have closed borders in its society. Governments operate in the same way. They'll let in jews with fat stacks of counterfeit cash and make it rain like they do now.

Cool reductionism, bro. Karl Marx also wanted central banks, just like the Rothschilds. We want the exact opposite.

This is a fucking hackjob. You niggers are trying to shit on libertarianism and promote Nazis in a cointelpro op. Fuck you.

>So do you think national boundaries are arbitrary?

Arbitrary? No, they were made by nation-STATES. It's just that governments don't have the right to make them.

>Skilled immigration of artisans, craftsman, inventors

These are outliers. And we don't need skilled workers from other countries when we already have plenty of them here.

See, you totally cannot comprehend anything other than a cold clinical breakdown of money and numbers

DIAF JIDF.

Make a case for private borders, then.

Convince me that mass immigration from the third world into the West could be effectively mitigated by private organizations.

Because based on the research I've done private borders on a national (let alone continental) scale are a highly implausible proposition due to incentives and coordination problems.

>reinvent a central structure

You have to force compliance with such a structure. When anarchy finally get a strong footing, it will be unstoppable. When nobody buys the government shekel, it will permanently cease to exist.

for one thing, property values are probably the most effective racial segregation mechanism possible. Short of actual segregation policies.

>open borders
>immigrants can vote away libertarian policies

>See, you totally cannot comprehend anything other than a cold clinical breakdown of money and numbers

Well, I'm not one for appeals to emotion if that's what you're trying to say. I'm more privy to logic.

Without a government there is no way of enforcing borders you retard, all it takes is that one Jew to have that "oy vey" moment,
>employ illegals,
>products cheaper,
>undercut competition.
>no question marks
>profit

Nazism is also cancer, but we're here to discuss your fucked ideology.

can and will.

Ok let me start by saying, yes the article is complete and utter bullshit. That being said Libertarianism is not the worst ideology in the world, it stems from the very American idea that all people have a right to live how they se fit. Freedom, self determination, all those nice lovely ideas everyone born in "fly over country" grew up on. That being said libertarianism in the modern day is beginning to be used by the jews to divide rapidly growing alt right. They worry, rightly so, that this new trend in the populous opinion could threaten their move towards a one world government. To fragment this group they introduce ideas that have some of what they want and something that goes mildly against their agenda. Ex the above article, individual freedom but third world immigration. Honestly this is the same thing we have seen for decades as democrats have been pro education and anti gun while republicans have been anti education and pro gun. As a result the jews never have to deal with an intelligent population with fire arms. Same thing with the fragmentation of the alt right, Libertarians believe in free speech (even anti Semitic speech) but for the third world invasion while most alt right fascist are ok with limiting free speech (prevent degeneracy) while stopping third world immigration. As a result the jew once again wins. How do we stop it? Taking the best of both views and moving forward, by uniting against the scourge of organized Jewry and by forming armed militias filled with people who are educated on the facts of the jew world order. That is how we kill the kikes gentlemen, that is how we take back our countries.

>Make a case for private borders, then.

I said that borders would be regulated by property owners. I don't just let anyone into my home, so why would others just let anyone onto their property or into their societies? However, some societies may choose more open borders than others.

I agree, but I asked above the construction and management of private borders between nations, not enforcing racial segregation within a nation. Racial segregation wouldn't even be a problem for the most part if we weren't flooded with third world hordes to begin with (with the exception of African-Americans).

Humanity has existed for millenia and anarchy has never had a strong enough footing to create your lolbertarian paradise.

Face it you go against the natural order and can never exist m8.

Or if you somehow forbid gibs:
>immigrants chimp out
>communist insurrections everywhere
>be forced to go full Pinochet

thats a massive assumption

as soon as you throw anarchy in the picture you cannot predict what will happen, that's why it's anarchy

>Without a government there is no way of enforcing borders you retard

Ermagerd without gangsters there would be no turf!

Fuck you. If you knew anything about market anarchism you would know that we promote more organizations doing law enforcement instead of leaving it to a stupid fucking monopoly like government.

By what means could a nation enact and enforce collective value-judgements such as favoring open or closed borders in the absence of a centralized state?

The whole "private borders" thing is nonsense. This is an issue with centralized cost, distributed benefit. Obviously you need some kind of central government organization managing this

So fucking wrong, everybody is an individual in anarchy, until somebody realises if I get help from a mate we'll be stronger and so on and so forth until it's a huge group of people working together, then they win dominance in society and government is reformed.

>Humanity has existed for millenia and anarchy has never had a strong enough footing to create your lolbertarian paradise.

Well, your argument is analogous to those made by critics when early americans were touting constitutional republicanism and look at what we have now.

When enough people aren't as retarded as you are, we'll be closer to having what we want.

>Ron Paul was openly for open borders?

Yup. Him and Rand both.

im a minarchist, and i want my boarders shut TIGHT!

Libertarians VS LOLbitarians

Go to Somalia with the other niggers, they are the only ones that thrive in chaos.

All civilizations had leaders and a government. There is a reason for that.

Lmao nigga as soon as an entity claims the monopoly of legitimate violence within a determined territory there is government and borders.

Borders don't mean can or cannot enter they mean that within that territory it's X entity that has the monopoly of legitimate violence, literally politics 101

Private companies to do law enforcement, kek.
It's anarchy you fuckwit there are no laws to enforce.

I have to disagree with you here man, without immigration all European people would have to live in the kike run EU were holocaust denial and hate speech are illegal, where millions of third world savages rape white women in the streets, where any kind of armed resistance is impossible thanks to the gun restrictions. At least with immigration Europeans can flee burning Europe and help strengthen the white majority in the US. The problem isn't immigration, its who you're letting in.

>By what means could a nation enact and enforce collective value-judgements such as favoring open or closed borders in the absence of a centralized state?

It's called a market. People will organize to provide these services to customers. If customers want them, they pay to have them. The best part is that we'll have choices instead of getting one or the other.

The current system lets us vote for peanut butter or jelly, but not both. In market anarchism, some will have peanut butter, some will have jelly, and some will have both.

Transitioning from constitutional monarchy to constitutional republicanism is far more feasible than transitioning from big government to no government at all.

What the fuck are you talking about Neger?

Athens was a fucking Direct Democracy before any civilization had reached northern Europe.

The people who said that were hypocrites I present you reality.

The left to right political spectrum is directly parallel with the low to high IQ spectrum.

>everybody is an individual in anarchy

Everybody is an individual anyway. Regardless, you're conflating the notion that it's impossible for people to operate in a collective under voluntary means. Your implying that it's impossible for people to interact with each other by choice and that they must be forced to do so. Good luck with that.

Somalia is in a state of anarchy right fucking now user, and it's not because there isn't a group powerful enough to take the damn place it's because the first world is keeping it in a state of anarchy.

You're a Jew.

What's athens like these days?

"They might use the wall to keep us (citizens) from leaving"

yep - lefties who rationalize away any cognitive dissonance

>legitimate violence

I'm not saying that governments aren't formed by violence. That much is obvious. What's not obvious to you is that this violence is illegitimate since they are the aggressors.

>Transitioning from constitutional monarchy to constitutional republicanism is far more feasible than transitioning from big government to no government at all.

That's likely true, but that doesn't mean we should just stop at constitutional republicanism. The US system was hackish to begin with. The Federalist Papers admit this. We're SUPPOSED to find new and better systems as Americans.

It's fallen and dead. never mention it's name again as it's existence stains humanity.

But you realize that if one group of people living on the border of a former nation-state decide they don't want to pay for private border security, they effectively force open borders onto the other members of their former nation-state, or force them to take on significant costs in paying for more border security.

For example, if the United States government were to be disbanded, and the people of all former borders states except California decided they wanted closed borders, they would have to pay for the creation and maintenance of a border wall along the entire eastern boundary of california, instead of having a central government pay for securing the border with Mexico along California's southern boundary.

>muh Greek Dick

You are clearly missing the point. It was an argument by analogy.

Everything gets Co opted sooner or later.

>The problem isn't immigration, its who you're letting in

You bring up a fairly new scenario, but I agree with you.

Under normal circumstances, Europeans would have to reason to flee the EU. I'm just saying western countries don't need immigration.

>Somalia is in a state of anarchy right fucking now user

That is arguable. The UN is there. That and I'm the first to admit that there are good and bad anarchies in the same way there are bad and less bad governments.

>You're a Jew.

Right back at ya, fgt.

It's a self interest world would have been better than everybody is an individual, granted. And I don't discount the fact people will work together voluntarily, in fact I count on it. The larger and more powerful group will establish government. Anarchy can only work so long as people remain self interested.

National Socialists and Libertarians Arguing, think how much better off this country would be if these were the two major parties.

>they effectively force open borders onto the other members of their former nation-state

No, their neighbors would be the new border.

>For example, if the United States government were to be disbanded, and the people of all former borders states except California decided they wanted closed borders, they would have to pay for the creation and maintenance of a border wall along the entire eastern boundary of california, instead of having a central government pay for securing the border with Mexico along California's southern boundary.

Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Let Commiefornia get walled off with Mexico. IDGAF.

>same coin
>Traditionalism, Monarchism, Fascism, National Socialism
>same coin
>same coin
>same coin
cucks. the only true free ideology is minarchism. everything else is (((coin))) worship for literal cucks.

Syria and Libya were better off when they had functional central governments than they are in this constant state of conflict between rival political and religious factions (something that would surely ensue in any place central governments were disbanded).

Can this entire fucking thread stop arguing with this lolbertarian retard.

Like all lolbertairians he is autistic and his worldview exists and is feasible only in a state of hypothetical rationality. Every argument that you present to him about the imposibility of his philosopjy will be met with some snarky retort as to how "if people behaved how i want them to" we could all be in libertarian paradise

To bad for him, humans are not ruled by rationality and will therefore never fall victim to his fantasy world.

>National Socialists and Libertarians Arguing, think how much better off this country would be if these were the two major parties.

You can help make this happen by joining the Libertarian Party.

So you are, in effect, advocating for the deconstruction of ethno-national identities.

Moron
mises.org/blog/mises-nationalism-right-self-determination-and-problem-immigration