Why can"t you use your brains and become a libertarian

???

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

6/8 of the mises founders were kikes. The endgame was always Jewish communism. Lolberts convinced the right that this garbage is okay.

The closed hand smitten by the closed heart is opened by the mind of needle shrinkage to the cranium penis.

>captcha SImpson Kings

I already have

1) libertarians are for open borders and therefore for the destruction of culture and family
2) libertarians are socially permissive and therefore for the destruction of culture and family
3) libertarians are just anarchists that lack the courage of their convictions and therefore for the destruction of culture and family

this
/thread

Da but I prefer minarchism over ancap

Only stupid people need protection from the state
If you can't rise your family and protect it you don't deserve to exist.
Don't expect the government take the role of your daddy.

Now gtfo bootlicker

Most of us have been through 10+ years of indoctrination by government "schools".

A lot of us have family members who work in the public sector.

The state is so pervasive in our lives that it becomes the default answer to any question.

To suggest retracting government becomes tantamount to suggesting to threaten everything their very lives.

It's not their fault. You've just got to have patience. Ask the right questions.

...

>I know nothing about Libertarians the post

You cant be a libertarian withouth belief in personal responsibility. The founders of American Libertarian party had a deep love for Western Civilization and Christianity. The "Libertarian" party is literally run by usurpers that kicked out its founding members and is a disgrace to the liberty movement.

OP is a non-white shill. Sup Forums is proud of its dual ethnic libertarian and National Socialist heritage. That said, I think we all know that cultural marxism and white genocide wont be stopped by defending your front yard with a shotgun until you die. National Socialism is our only solution, and no, chances are it wont be instituted by a vote given how small our populations are at this point. Youve had your chance to push for less intervention, now we need MORE intervention. Just remember, National Socialism is not a collectivist ideology, its a mix of collectivism and individualism, and it puts great weight on the importance of that individualism. Any regulations are done by non-materialistic people, with your own benefit in mind (If you are white). Its not a bad thing, its not jackbooted thugs kicking your door down (if you arent a commie, which you arent)

Libertarian minarchists, as typified by the Libertarian Party, are all of those things.

Libertarian anarchists, in the Rothbardian and Hoppean tradition, are not. Open borders are an act of aggression and expropriation on anyone living within them. Destruction of culture and family through state action is one of the worst of the state's violations of liberty. This is why the state must be dismantled and sold for scrap, so that meritocratic and discriminatory societies can thrive once again.

I want reddit to leave

Oh boy, someone didn't do his homework before posting. Read this book, it is a good read.

How the fuck is a libertarian for open borders if they absolutely respect private property and are against the expansion of the state, including individuals under its power ?

The expansion of state influence over the life and decisions of individuals are much to blame for the degeneracy and the destruction of traditional values (responsibility, family, self-ownership).

>Any regulations are done by non-materialistic people, with your own benefit in mind
Have fun with that lasting more than 5 seconds before being abused, as with quite literally every socialist system in human history. But this time it'll be different, right?

Shoo shoo socialist scum
The authoritarian cancer needs to die

Ive since disassociated myself from minarchists and constitutional libertarians. They are dishonest statists who are worse then natsocs.

B-but Ron Paul? Isn't he a minarchist / constitutional libertarian? He's done a fantastic job at spreading libertarian arguments.

Is libertarianism really popular on reddit or anywhere for for that matter?

nigga fuk yo shi ima mo fukn pirate

>TFW ancaps are literal children fuckers.

>ancaps
That's a funny way of spelling 'social services'.

A central government is necessary for the right function of a country
Organization and protection of constitution, that's all I care.

It's feasible and has worked, I'm Ok with it.

Not to mention that there is actual historical precedent, in the form of the United States of America, demonstrating that their system is easily corruptible by the inherently expansionary nature of government.

Certain libertarian arguments, not others. He was familiar with Rothbard's works, and he is old enough to be socially conservative, so I'd say he is categorically distinct from mainstream libertarianism as it stands today.

Try to ask an ancap what age of consent should be and watch them dance around defending child fucking.

>A central government is necessary for the right function of a country
At least make an attempt to come up with an alternative to "necessary" government.
Otherwise you're just giving up. It's laziness and nothing more.

You have no argument if you say you are against the initiation of force, but still praise democracy. You have no argument if you claim government is a "necessary" evil because people are evil. If people are bad then why do we have a government which is made up of people? Minarchists fail to acknowledge the fact that any government is inherently coercive, solely to appear less "extreme" than a full ancap. They are to ancaps what the magapede redditors are to natsocs, in the way that they dont acknowledge the JQ, minarchists dont acknowledge the GQ.

I consider myself a libertarian and all of your qualms about libertarianism being in favor of degeneracy are unfounded.
True libertarians are not advocating for open borders as it would pose a serious threat to the proliferation of a libertarian society. Borders, like the police and the army, are somewhat exempt from the libertarian ideology and only cryptoleftists would argue that the NAP extends to noncitizens.
Furthermore, as a libertarian I would privatize all education and create a market for ideas and enlightenment, not only goods and services. This would inevitably undermine the state-funded Marxists colleges, where the professors are indoctrinating without impunity and any real inspection.
And I think we can all agree that the freest market possible is the most prosperous one, with all of the baseline regulations protecting the citizens from health hazards and monopolies.

In short, libertarianism would inevitably result in a much better society than national socialism or whatever you're advocating, even though national socialism is by far more preferable to international socialism and any other kind of society for that matter, other than the libertarian one.

National Socialism is not an economic socialist ideology. You should really do some reading before making a judgement like that. The second guy is a beaner, but first guy Ill give you the benefit of the doubt. National Socialism never hurt any German person, and it was a thriving success. Everyone loved it, even the people who doubted Hitler at first became ardent supporters after he was elected.

He also achieved full employment, and brought Germany out of a worse depression than the US and the rest of Europe was facing to be the most powerful country economically in Europe at the time. Its just ignorance, and I say that in a non-antagonistic way - that prevents people like you from realizing these things. Ill say it again, its not economic socialism, its not "from the rich to the poor". Its socialism in a sense that everyone is united, the collectivism part. That people have a sense of togetherness, and care about eachother. Its not taking money. The only things that end up being taken from anyone would be for example - land bought at unfair prices during a currency crisis, bought with foreign money, by foreign people, who shouldnt be citizens at all.

Its things like how only members of the race can be a citizen. Obviously only Germans should be German citizens, with full rights, and the ability to protest, and own land and profit from the country etc. Theres no reason to allow China to buy up your oil sands, like Canada for example. None of this is radical. You own private property, until you use it in abusive ways, like running a crackhouse. They even allowed brothels in Germany etc, its not some authoritarian hellhole, it was a paradise, with degeneracy minimalized. Goebbels both wrote about these people who try to take fun away from everyone needing to be reprimanded, and about the brothels thing I just brought up.. I cant recall the exact context, I think Italian soliders or something, to keep their ruckus under control IIRC

Try to ask governments around the world and they'll all have different answers.

Also the whole ideology is based on higher values and people are chosen for their loyalty and dedication. Of course not all corruption can be weeded out, Goring was a fucking cunt for example, but thats one man, and he ended up marginalized for being the supposed #2. Goebbels had far more power than him as the #3.

Yes for most counties that is based on local morality which is should be.

If you dont have some line in the sand you have child fucking.

Source/quote of Ron Paul saying that government is necessary?

>Its socialism in a sense that everyone is united, the collectivism part. That people have a sense of togetherness, and care about eachother

Yeah, I get you.
It's called "Communism", everything you posted was tried in the USSR.

I see nothing wrong with it

Because I want to use state power to legislate morality.

>local morality
>being an actual moral relativist

Because I'm not a naive teenager any more. Good luck with high school user

Nigga I'm bigger than your definitions and labels

>Being a literal child fucker.

>I'm not a naive teenager
>posts nazi stuff

You're not fooling anyone m8

Of course the dumbshit beaner thinks that National Socialists are communists. If it happened in Germany lets just say for example, not one dollar or inch of land would be taken away from any German person, no matter how rich they were. There was no wealth redistribution. There was reclamation of what is supposed to be theirs, based on land. They maintained private businesses however (this makes you dumb) and they had private property (now youre dumber) and they had personal reward for personal productivity (see, you really shouldnt say stupid uniformed things, bean) and also, another key factor - they believe races aren't equal, and that even man isnt equal. No man is equal, obviously. Even whites. Some whites are duds. Fact of life. Some animals are born retarded, and some are prize runners.

Communism is the total opposite of National Socialism, and youre the total opposite of politically educated.

I'm against it because I assert that my morality is correct.
You believe that morality can differ by location, meaning that this action could be morally permissable in some place.
You then can't condemn any action, or use it as an insult, without asserting that your values are the correct ones.

In fact, in a National Socialist perspective, any native blooded person who maintained wealth in a hostile climate where they had to compete with Jews who had an unfair advantage - is highly commendable and worthy of congratulations and respect. Good on them for being industrious and hard working, as long as they didnt maintain their success through morally questionable ways.

We already have regulated markets and a mixed economy. What I described isnt far off, the biggest problem is for non-whites, who suddenly find themselves unable to protest the system legally, or buy up all your land (like China) etc.

I think 16 is a fine age to set consent, but if some britbong country that is high on the jesus wants it set at 18 whatever I have no stake in the race of higher consent in another country.

If some sand nigger wants to set consent at 13 I think its fucked up and say they are a bunch of child fuckers, but unless I wanna move there and started effecting the politics I cant do much in another country.

>implying that he's a moral relativist

In the context of nationhood, morals are literally relative.

But you knew that lots of houses, business and land were taken from germans by the german government, no?
They could be jewish, political dissidents or whatever, they were germans and the state fucked with them, not only with their property, but with their life.

You're no more than a cuck my man, stop trying to make others control your life.

Besides, a libertarian society is compatible with national socialism. Communism is not compatible with either. NatSocs are fighting against a current violence against them, their society and their race - libertarians support that right to fight and win. Commies seek to actively destroy those things without provocation. Their very existence undermines individual sovereignty and the peaceable, voluntary interaction of people.

If non-whites want their own society, they can make it elsewhere, but they have no right to the property natsocs own.

Libertarianism has never been successful at the national level. And in 2016 it sank deeper into irrelevance. I'm not advocating joining the nazi party. But libertarianism didn't even get far enough to fail, it's a non-starter

>being over the age of 16 and unironically identifying as a libertarian

Mike Pence's website hacked; get a chuckle out of this

Libertarianism is for the gay.
My proof: OP

Selling out your culture, nation, or people for profit is a mistake the boomers made, and the younger generations are still paying for their mistake today. So will future generations. The most precious resource you have is your own people. Furthermore, "economics" is just a label applied to any human behavior which creates value. Value can be determined, manipulated, or manufactured by any nation, even one as poor as uganda. Do you think all these jewish hollywood movies featuring drug-inhaling coalburners riding a dick train with no other message would've sold well in the 1950's? No. Selling out your race for a few slips of paper or lump of silver is the worst investment you can make. If you want to become wealthier, nationalize the banks, and get rid of the jewish bankers.

As I said, Jews bought up all sorts of land at unfair rates with foreign currency when Germany was in the dumps, and were the slumlords over the native population etc, profiting from their misery. You argue that a foreign people should be able to unfairly buy up what is rightfully white peoples, and profit from their misery and suffering etc. Why should Jews be allowed to own property if they arent even citizens, and arent allowed in the country? Tough shit bucko. Those werent Germans as much as Akmed isnt Swedish.

Im all for giving Libertarians a large parcel of land to play out their freedom fantasies on, after we secure our race together. I just think we both know that the "stay off my property" types arent what is going to go out in numbers, in a semi-collective way (wink wink national socialism) and put an end to this in organized fashion.

This Britbong country isn't high on Jesus. The state is our main religion now, sadly.

>but unless I wanna move there and started effecting the politics I cant do much in another country.
mfw literally every war ever waged to attempt regime change was started by a government

McKillyourself

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

because the movement was recently co-opted by fucking maniacs.

A right-wing authority that protects the individual is always preferable to a left-wing authority that destroys a society.

(((Libertarian Party))) =/= libertarians. I am permissive of degeneracy but my love for myself and drive for perfection keeps me on the right track. Not forced. The people who want to find success and happiness can find it.

you have shit culture and your family doesn't love you.

>Ask the right questions.
such as?

As long as the individual happens to also be right wing. Do you really not see how this breaks down?

McNotAnArgument

THE WEST MUST BE SAVED!

RESTORE YOUR PRIDE, RESTORE YOUR CULTURE!!

STATES RIGHTS!! youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4 [Open]

CUT EPA!!


CUT DEP OF ED!!


MAGA

This and in other countryes besides the US people dont even know what it is and most of the few that do consider it rightfully retarded.
We have seen what a weak state does in eastern europe after the communim collapsed.People literally starved corporations and corruption ran rampant,civil wars and capitalist lords rising up.
In Russia this facilitated a new dictatorship,libertarianism and anarcho capitalism are a fast way to a totalitarian state.Most people will always need a state to controll them an if its not there someone will fill that power vaccuum up.
I am not even going to talk how such a state would fare in a war against another one....kek if you have neibbghouring countries you would get anexxed in no time.
White country or not white libertarianism and anarcho capitalism are reciepies for disasters.

>implying implications

Because I realized that libertarians are more interested in defending an ideology than actually producing positive change in the world.

Political discussion is fun, but we shouldn't forget why we are a having it in the first place.

Also, some things are better being left to the government to do (local police force, libraries) not because the government is better at doing them, but because they are invaluable assets to a functioning society and either can't be adequately replaced by a private org (police) or may fail to materialize (library/self-learning centers).

libertarianism is quite the romantic idea, but I live in the real world. I still hold the same ideals as valuable, I simply no longer find them infallible.

>can't be adequately replaced by a private org (police)
What on earth makes you think this is the case?

...

All collectivists get the helicopter. You motherfuckers are the scourge of mankind.

NAP absolutely 100% applies to all human beings.

That being said, it sounds an awful lot like they are trespassing in this scenario, so you know what that means.

Because he's rational

this kind of bait is the equivalent of a flaccid dick
like why are yall even trying
its not even funny

and as always sagete

But you child fuckers are not?

Child prostitution rings are an example of anarcho-capitalism when implemented. It provides a great form of wealth, is privatized, and is monitored by the invisible hand of the market (not the government and their pesky "laws"). No concern for morality (because that doesn't give you money) and only concerned with the bottom line [$@$].

Without at least some government intervention, capitalism quickly consumes lives without a care for anything other than the blood money it provides. Splicing capitalism (an already volatile political philosophy) with anarchism (an extremely chaotic political philosophy) only yields chaos.

Therefore, in order to be an unironic Anarcho-capitalist requires you to become a cuck to your already way-too-rich Jew overlords, allowing them to get richer, the layman to get poorer, and pretty much all human rights to be thrown out the window.

Anarcho Capitalists: 0
Everyone else: 1
/sage

>private security cannot exist
>only a violent monopoly on security, paid for by compulsory taxation, can adequately protect people from violence and theft
?

We're not Muslims

You think the production of books was something of a problem until government stepped in?

Because when the police force is private, justice costs money.
Further, there is no real reason I couldn't just take the law into my own hands, after all, some other asshole started a whole corporation around taking the law into their own hands.

It would basically devolve into a wild-west scenario with rival "legal" gangs, which is not conducive to a budding society.

This shit is REALLY obvious, you are like I used to be though: blinded by ideology.
At the end of the day, that makes you no better than a commie.

Results > Ideology

This, it's why I'm a libertarian

Explain this to me: how does your government not just turn into feudalism?

Wow...that's all wrong.

>capitalism quickly consumes lives without a care for anything other than the blood money it provides.

slow down there maduro, jesus

Libertarian are only concerned with private property and not with money. There is nothing in libertarianism that would prevent one from taking all of his savings in order to burn them up on his front yard, nothing to prevent him from not working for any reason what so ever, nothing to prevent him from going on an ascetic retreat.

Since ancap are against aggression and the initiation of force, they must also be against rape, and thus are against child rape.

Do you really think like that? There wasn't a free market in Russia. Government regulations was bigger than now (progressive taxes for example). There wasn't lustrations for soviet nomenclature.

No, I think access to information is of paramount performance and we shouldn't just cross our fingers and hope some church supplies such a powerful accommodation free of censorship.

Before you respond, make sure your response isn't "the perfection of my ideology is more important to me morally than access to information is functionally to society."

There are services which could be provided fairly cheap which reap great rewards for society. Just because we have some retarded abomination of a a State right now doesn't mean that states are inherently a net negative.

Retardation the post

>True libertarians
No true scotsman?

>justice costs money
It doesn't right now? Police work for free? Judges? You should remind them of this and we can all save some money.

> there is no real reason I couldn't just take the law into my own hands
Aside from the people around you, the terms of the covenant community you live in, and the protection agencies they subsribe to?

>It would basically devolve into a wild-west scenario with rival "legal" gangs, which is not conducive to a budding society.
You realize this is the status quo on the international scale? As we speak, anarchy is at work. Where is the chaos? Where is the destruction of global societies?

Because you are so blinded by ideology you care more about memes than the progression of mankind?

It's bizarre that for some reason people are able (contractually?) to create an entity such as the state in order to take care of their security need but somehow would be absolutely unable to do the same thing at a smaller scale with private entities.

There is nothing preventing you NOW from taking justice in your own hand save for the ever present threat of force on the part of government. Likewise, in a system of private ownership and private supply of security, there would be the ever present threat of private reprisal.

I'm not too big of an ancap but some argument against it are just facile.

What should be the age of consent?

So if a 3 year old consents its ok?

strawman the thread

Children in such age can't understand the meaning of sex so it would be a violating of NAP

What should the age of consent be then?

Right now if you violate NAP and assault a homeless man someone can call the cops and they will attempt to arrive and break up the fight.
In your society, the NAP can be violated against the poor without consequence. More than that, actually, you can oppress anyone poorer than you without fear, just buy the local police force.

At least in my society police have to take bribes privately, in yours bribes are equatable to justice.

If the NAP is important to you, you need a way to enforce it.

This

In the rest of the eastern bloc after the 89 we got ravaged by corporations and corruption.Foreign corrporations came in and bought everything from infrastructure to land even most of the original stat property was sold of for bribes.
Industry was shut down and our economy produces nothing we are basically dependant nations of consumerists,if the west would cut us off we would colapse economically.
Back in the 90s people lost alot of jobs,some were literally starving,it was worse than the worst times of communism.You couldnt walk ouside without carrying a knife to defend yourself since mafia,crime and drugs ran rampant.
To me this was clearly the product of open market and the closest thing to anarcho capitalism,never again.

Depends on how you define feudalism. Each legitimate landowner would be sovereign. He would naturally have the ability to collect rents from any tenants on his land. However, he could not own serfs, nor press anyone into perpetual servitude. Tenants must be free to leave in order for an ancap society to remain as such.

On a related note, you should spend some time reading about how feudal societies functioned. Every class had a particular social and economic role, and obligations to fulfill within that role. It wasn't just Monty Python and the Holy Grail, peasants globbing mud, and kings riding around living a life of luxury.

>Libertarian are only concerned with private property and not with money.
>Anarcho-capitalism
>Anarchy: a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
>Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
>Anarcho-Capitalism: a political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.
>"its about land, not money. Trust me!"
ftfy

>There is nothing in libertarianism that would prevent one from taking all of his savings in order to burn them up on his front yard, nothing to prevent him from not working for any reason what so ever, nothing to prevent him from going on an ascetic retreat.
And nothing that would prevent a Hebe from adopting and selling children for money.

Anarcho-Capitalists: 0
Everyone else: 2