Remember how a few years ago...

Remember how a few years ago, a lot of left leaning publications were attacking Libertarianism and Rand Paul with full force because they expected him to be where all the buzz was at in the 2016 elections?
Did their tricks work, did they kill Rand momentum? Or did they misread things and Rand never really had a shot to begin with?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ljV6FWStFQU
mises.org/blog/market-borders-not-open-borders
mises.org/blog/brexit-individualism-nationalism-globalism-0
mises.org/blog/self-determination-not-universalism-goal
img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1483/56/1483564195196.png
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_M_Rothschild_&_Sons
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Never had a shot. Libertarianism is dead in America.

He had and still has a shot. His campaign was simply boring in comparison to his father's.

All hail kek

That does it kek is alive and is in the thread my friends! No

>the burger marine le pen

He came in before his own time. 2024 gives him time to develop more as a senator and gain recognition for his deeds.

This.
You look at his congressional voting record, and you'll see his policy is where it should be. Young libertarians just got mad that he wasn't as plain spoken as his father, and while that kind of plainness was nice to hear, it ultimately isn't that important, at least in considering a presidential candidate (it was educational though which was important but Rand isn't trying to be an educator). But the youngsters are more interested in excitement than policy. So that, along with his meaningless endorsement of romney, was enough to allow shills to come in to forums and sow seeds of dissent in libertarian circles. Also, Bill Maher and secular talk attacked him for not being libertarian, which his stupid when you actually break down his policy. But They knew that the filthy inattentive casuals could be swayed, not to vote Hillary (who everyone knew would be the nominee one way or another) but to go vote third party and splinter the vote so Hillary would win.
It's partially Rand's fault because he enabled that by trying to brand himself as a (constitutional) conservative, which I'm not sure is working in influencing neocons as he strategized but maybe it has had some effect behind the scenes that I can't see.

Rand never had a shot.

Pre-Trump I thought the Democratic Party was going to get to big and split into socialists and a middle ground Latin party, and Reagan conservativism would die and be replaced by libertarianism.

Maybe that'll still happen, but Trump getting elected kind of threw everything I thought I knew out the window.

But in a way, the powers that be aren't about to let someone else start eating the pie, it makes more sense that ruthless bipartisanship created by the media would be our divider.

Yeah, CNN sucks and fighting Trump on that is retarded, but that shit doesn't matter, we need to fight climate change and be the leading force in world affairs if we want to be respected.

Their attacks probably hurt him, but honestly, genuine libertarian spirit isn't too strong in the Republican Party. It only seems weaker then 4 years ago because a lot of people who joined the Republican Party solely to vote for Ron Paul left and joined/rejoined the Libertarian Party, as did some long-term Republicans who were converted during the Ron Paul campaign.

Ted Cruz has actually been more of a beneficiary to the pseudo-libertarian spirit that got injected into the GOP from the Tea Party (itself partially inspired by the ron paul movement but got overtaken by big government republicans).

Even if Rand had been like his old man and told it like it was, I don't think a lot of libertarians would have come back to the party after what they did to Ron. I think some of them also recognized the libertarian party was getting stronger and wanted to give it all the support it could get.

I live in Iowa and did vote for Rand though.

Honestly a lot of this is speculation off the top of my head, reddit-tier analysis, and I could be way off.

> we need to fight climate change

We don't.
Assuming it's real, it'll hit coastal areas first. It's the best way to get rid of the coastal elites. A huge hurricane that flushes the toilet of Wall Street, the Silicon Valley, San Francisco and so on. There's no other way. They must be eradicated or they'll kill us.

Does that snake have tits?

Rand is going to be making waves over these next years. Expect "Rand was right again" to become a thing. That being said, Cruz and Ruboto are far from done when it comes to gunning for the presidency. Gowdy probably won't run but he's just about the least bullshit politician alive right now so people will be begging him to do so.

As odd as it sounds given their policy differences, I strongly suspect Donald Trump took a lot of votes that would have otherwise gone to Rand had he not been in the race.

I can see that.

Yes.

Certainly a lot more Sup Forumsacks would have meme'd and voted for Rand if Trump hadn't been in the race (a few of us did anyway).

Libertarianism has no shot until you can get a few senators/reps with an L next to their name in congress. Once that occurs it will be able to make a serious case at an election.

Mind you, that project - in I think it was New Hampshire - to have a lot of Libertarians move to the same state and vote as a bloc is now well under way and as I understand it, has been very disruptive to local Rep and Dem parties.

Libertarianism requires a high IQ population capable of abstract reasoning and systematic logic. The west must stop hemorrhaging first.

DEFEAT THE WASHINGTON MACHINE UNLEASH THE AMERICAN DREAM STAND WITH RAND

I voted for Ron and I voted for Rand. In the general election last year I voted constitution party. I'll keep doing this until we win.

Enough you Russian dog!
Enough of your furry crap!
Go drown in the caspian sea.
Faggot!

This dude understands. We cannot have any type of advanced high-trust society when we're under siege.

I voted Constitution too.
Can't hassle the Castle!

The Free State Project
Yeah, I hope everyone who signed on actually honors their pledge.

>did they kill Rand momentum

Rand killed Rand's momentum. After the first republican debate, Rand stopped campaigning and went to Haiti. Fucking Haiti. What the hell was he thinking? Ron needs to put a boot up his son's ass. Then maybe Rand will be ready for the White House in 2024.

Rand was doing well in the polls until Trump announced and stole his entire base
Sup Forums was on the /randwagon/ before Trump arrived.

Does anyone know of any daily/weekly/monthly publication that examines current economic trends and the stock market through a libertarian perspective?

Yup. But even then, it's too easy to hijac and turn into libertine bullshit. The best we can get right now seems to be japan's variant.

Right here bud.

I thought he was the best shot we had considering the cuck atmosphere of politics at the time. I would have never have dreamed someone like Trump to come along and save the white race. I thought we were going to have to play the get your hands of my money survival of the fittest in post spicified America. Rand was even resisting the donor corporate Jew that had been plaguing American politics.

>inbr Trump mega jew lover crap.

youtube.com/watch?v=ljV6FWStFQU

Rand would never have gotten elected. Same with Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders. They only allow people who will be nice to corporate interests on some level.

Trump was able to get in because he was a billionaire with a massive organization. It was only until later did the establishment try and get him out until he won.

Libertarianism has no response to demographic displacement, that's why Rand Paul failed. Not everyone wants to hear a boring lecture about economics.

Reason

i don't think this is the reality. libertarianism just comes off as a buzz-word political stance. most people don't know what it means.

I've supported Rand from the beginning.
Paul/Amash 2024

Zero-Hedge is very bearish and favors hard money.

Are you kidding me friendo? Read a little Hoppe and see if you still believe that

Zero hedge is right wing macro.

Forexlive has some lefties, but their calander is really useful.

seeking alpha has both lefties and righties.

Head of Mises Institute seems to blame Rand
mises.org/blog/market-borders-not-open-borders

mises.org/blog/brexit-individualism-nationalism-globalism-0

mises.org/blog/self-determination-not-universalism-goal

Those articles should address your concerns, even if they don't convert you.

Keep in mind the Mises Institute ilk much more closely resembles what the original libertarian intellectuals had in mind, not this new age egalitarian Gary Johnson crap.

Libertarianism is not ethno-nationalism and it never will be. When your system of government (or lack of government) is concerned primarily with freedom over all else, the idea of enforcing segregation in any meaningful way goes right out the window.

People aren't rational, people are influenced by propaganda and WHO controls the monetary policy is more important than WHAT the monetary policy is.

The biggest problem that Libertarianism has is that it is founded upon a lie, just like all Liberalism: people are not equal, so why should we pretend that they are?

>federal reserve destablizes economy by means of wealth redistribution largely by means of unlimited power of inflation that serves to benefit a rich, undeserving class and drain value from the dollar
>welfare programs also prop up a parasitic section of the poor, middle class suffers greatly
>single motherhood incentivized
>so, white traditional family grows poorer and suffer, starts to break apart
>federal government has too much control on education, education, being managed and universalized by some beauracracy in DC, starts to suffer and is filled with anti-racist and pro-state propaganda
>through all this kids grow up with no values and no sense of personal responsibilty or sense of family or community, no skills, and depend more and more on state and all that entails, living hedonistic, brainwashed lives, don't reproduce and ones that do have 1-2 kids and kids end up worse than parents
>government owns land that should all be privatized
>lets beaners in that have no market demand

Yes truly libertarianism will be the death of the white race.

Listen faggot, any system that centralizes power will just be taken over by Jews.

img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1483/56/1483564195196.png

Ron Paul was America's last chance at greatness. Hated Israel, wanted us out of foreign wars, actually was going to deregulate instead of crony legislation.
He got attacked heavily on all sides and had the media connecting him eith white supremacists all the time.
That is what true opposition looks like, not what is happening with Donald "Israel is our greatest ally" Trump

Libertarianism in it's founding had nothing to do with egalitarianism and you are showing your ignorance by saying that. You are buying into new age libertarian propaganda. People were only equal originally in that everyone had equal protection under the law but natural hierarchies and segregation would exist. Remember, it's the government that desegregated things.
People are allowed to form communities and control their own local borders, be that on a personal property or community level. The government couldn't own any land in this scenario so no immigrants could get in unless a few fags brought them in, but even then it would just be on their land or the immigrants would be physically removed.
As far as propaganda goes, look how much control the federal government exerts over that. When this is removed and restored to local levels, then it would be all over the place. Several states would be very pro white in this world. And if the country had been libertarian in 1960, truly libertarian, we would not have as many spics today.
Large societies that organize themselves over a capital thousands of miles away that they submit ridiculous amounts of power to are inherently progressive.

Therein lies the difference: the LACK of centralized authority that is completely 100% on board with the Jewish Question is the real issue.

Jews can survive a lack of government by intermingling with the population, slowly ingratiating themselves and then practicing their usury and other such evils.

The real redpill is to acknowledge that even when America was run by hard money people in the late 19th and early 20th century, when the size of government was much lower than it was now, America and Great Britain were dominated financially by Jewry.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_M_Rothschild_&_Sons

A Libertarian's solution to this issue, the largest banks in the world being run by kikes and our central banks being run by kikes, is to shrink the federal government as if that would somehow destroy these institutions. Fair enough for the central bank, but you couldn't kill Goldman Sachs with that method.

No. Fascism is the first step, we have to utilize the institution of the state with overwhelming approval by our constituency to destroy these Jewish-run institutions and return Western countries back on track demographically.

Libertarianism can't forcefully remove non-whites because the only thing you faggots see is profit and MUH FREEDOM.

When we're a 100% white country again maybe we can talk about shrinking the size and scope of government.

See, the fact that his aussie dunderhead actually believes this is proof that libertarianism as a movement has been completely hijacked by leftist infiltrators.

Liberatarianism as envisioned by its original founders was NEVER an egalitarian movement. The end goal was NEVER freedom for the sake of freedom, but rather freedom for the sake of restoring the natural order- which is inherently hierarchical. This sentiment is reflected across all old school Libertarian literature- from Murray Rothbard to Hans Hermann Hoppe and even to Ayn Rand.

We must fight against all leftist revisionist attempts to smear libertarianism as an egalitarian movement.

>he fell for the climate change meme
Yes goy pay the carbon tax goy.

I believe it was b8, m8. punchline was the last sentence. shaggy dog bait, if you will

>People were only equal originally in that everyone had equal protection under the law

Clearly false.

>but natural hierarchies and segregation would exist.

Which is completely at odds with the idea of the marketplace, which really sees labour as labour no matter if it is a nigger, white or gook. For this reason alone unregulated gook labour during the Californian gold rush was legislated against.

>Remember, it's the government that desegregated things.

Remember, it's the government that SEGREGATED things in the first place. If a people can't enact into law their own values to enforce them, then they are permissive and weak.

>People are allowed to form communities and control their own local borders, be that on a personal property or community level. The government couldn't own any land in this scenario so no immigrants could get in unless a few fags brought them in, but even then it would just be on their land or the immigrants would be physically removed.

The situation you're describing here is anarchy, in the absence of government there is no enforcement of any law. Frontier justice is still a demonstration of law.

>As far as propaganda goes, look how much control the federal government exerts over that.

The Federal Government exerts jacks shit over it. The legacy media in America is run by rich Jews in private corporations.

You better listen here you dumb faggot: go look at some newspaper articles from the late 19th and early 20th century. The Free Market faggots were all promoting mass non-white coolie labour for industry. A good example is Herbert Hoover running a labour hire company in South Africa for Chinese coolies.

The scope of the Federal Government according to you is to NOT control borders, but instead to have a fluid open border policy to contribute to the pool of labour.

AGRARIAN NATIONAL SOCIALISM NOW

Liberalism is an egalitarian movement. Thomas Jefferson was an active participant in the French Revolution.