Isn't this nigga more of a Libertarian than a Socialist?

Isn't this nigga more of a Libertarian than a Socialist?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=AwQEgOKEEXI
huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/art-2/notorious-russian-protest-artist-arrested-setting-fire-banque-de-france/
insurrectionnewsworldwide.com/
belliresearchinstitute.com/the-savage-peace-ii-management-oikonomia/
youtube.com/watch?v=0fM9oYfkB9Q&t=213s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

he's a jew.

it's all that matters/


Jews don't stick to a single ideology, they always go with what's good for the jews as a whole at that particular moment.

How so? Please elaborate.

He owned a human being, does that count?

Anti-government, pro gun and many of his over observations have become true as capitalism has progressed.

But he was also against private property. That's not libertarian. At least it's not if property is not shared voluntarily.

>But he was also against private property. That's not libertarian. At least it's not if property is not shared voluntarily.
Agreed but most people/business don't own private property in our current capitalist system. Most things are rented out, owned by the banks or owned by shareholders. Workers can actually own the means of production via stocks.

Communist Manifesto denounces "philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind."

Because Marx already saw his failure coming. His prediction of revolution caused reforms that kept it from occurring.

marx was no liberal hippy

Yea but capitalism let's me own shoes. I don't have to schedule an appointment to use the community shoes 6 months in advance.

One of the key differences between Marx's ideals and libertarian ideals is the plan for creating a government-free world
Libertarians suggest for gradual privatization of government sectors until there isn't a government left, or a very small government left
Marx said we should give total control to the government until people get so used to running society that they no longer need a government to tell them how to do it

or am I missing something?

Libertarians won't shoot you in the head for not wanting to share your turnips.

you missed everything

anrchocap is so silly, i dont even want to bother with it

>anrchocap is so silly, i dont even want to bother with it
Do realise this makes you look like you are unable to rebut it.

>anrchocap is silly
But the communism version is OK, right?

one has to understand that capital cannot operate without the state, it will implode immediately. we cant even go to court if buying a judge is legitimized

>court
There wouldn't be courts. Just the NAP

NAP? sorry, im new to this

youtube.com/watch?v=AwQEgOKEEXI

>NAP? sorry, im new to this
Oh man, you sure are. NAP = non aggression principle

Basically that's the only rule in an ancap society. You can do whatever, as long as it's not an act of aggression towards someone else. If someone does violate the nap, you can pretty much do whatever you want to them.

Theres a shit load of Memes about this...

Because people don't have hobbies with capitalism?

hahahahhahahah thats a good one

>ancap

just call it nuclear autism

both, because there is no contradiction between the two

some, and some work 3 jobs

Theres some for you're thing too

>and some work 3 jobs
And? Shit ain't fair.

Personal =! Private property. Only things like factories or labs will be redistributed, your shoes and land will stay

thats why those kids throw them fire bottles

huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/art-2/notorious-russian-protest-artist-arrested-setting-fire-banque-de-france/

Aren't NutSacs supposed to care about the worker? Or are the NutSacs gone and Sup Forums returned to its lolbertarian roots?

No you can't just do whatever the hell you want. You can't trespass on other people's private property. So no open borders crap here.
If you live in a neighbourhood and you turn your house into a bordello or a drug operation the neighbours can stigmatize you or disassociate with you or do other things that until you either leave or adjust your behaviour. Physically removed so to speak.

>anrchocap is so silly, i dont even want to bother with it

>NAP? sorry, im new to this

My friend have you read any AnCap literature? Rothbard, Hoppe etc.?

>NutSacs
Hue. I never quite bought into the Soc part. Capitalism works too well.
NatCap when?

National Capitalism is basically the USSR. Stalin was the CEO, all land was rented by the State instead of landlords, and workers were under lifelong labour contracts

hillarious meme

Also, this infograph tells you about the true nature of National '''''''''''''''''''''''''''Socialism'''''''''''''''''''''''''''

>National Capitalism is basically the USSR.
I don't mean it like state run capitalism, that would get you the same retarded shit that communism does. More like nationally responsible capitalism, a market in which players act both in their own interests and in the interests of the nation.

i listened to stefan molyneux ones, yeah i remember this NAP thing.

this whole thing is just a grotesque caricature of neoliberalism, funny who he can both profess this AND trump, the supposed nationalist. neoliberalism is virtually a synonym for the globalization of capital, the rise of corporate rights above state power

>I don't mean it like state run capitalism, that would get you the same retarded shit that communism does
The USSR itself was state capitalism. Why do you think all the antifags and college red libs scream about the USSR not being 'true socialism?
>More like nationally responsible capitalism, a market in which players act both in their own interests and in the interests of the nation
see

>see #
So yea that's the idea.

Maybe he didn't want Hillary to win. Maybe he wants to live in a society where people who actually accomplish something in the free market are rewarded, i.e Trump.
Hillary would've ensured that the browning of America, turning it to a 3rd world shithole, and the stigmatization, vilifacation against white males and white culture would've continued indefinitely. We are against such things and we value nationalism, nothing wrong with having in-group preference. Which Donald seemed to have as well. Which is why we supported him.
Even though we are AnCaps doesn't necessarily mean that we can't like some people some who like the state, we're not cultists.

Trump assembled an administration that seems split between those who offer a more radical extension of the status quo and those who seem committed to breaking not only with economic orthodoxy but with democratic governance in general. On the one hand: the CEOs of oil companies and fast food empires who would continue in the ruts of the long declension, cutting taxes, deregulating, privatizing, and union-busting. On the other: true counter-revolutionaries like Steve Bannon who would raise tariffs, destroy trade relations, and attempt an economic isolationism of the sort that can only hurt the bottom line of multinational companies like Exxon and Carl’s Jr, not to mention financial firms whose entire trade is in hot money. We might think of the former as hyper-neoliberals; the second are close enough to the project of historical fascism to deserve the name.

But this alliance between billionaire CEOs and the second-rate generals’ junta-in-waiting can hold only for so long without one side dictating terms to the other. Trump probably knows that if the Koch-bred austerians and privatizers are allowed to have their way, we’ll never see growth or jobs; as yet he is unable or unwilling to act without them. The question, then, is whether this will be a brief moment of crony capitalism, the billionaires enriching themselves, stuffing their pockets with loot, and then blowing up the crime scene behind them, as so often happens in the global south — or whether we will really see a reorganization of capitalism along new and newly fascistic lines.

The means with which Trump and his coalition would remake American capitalism are the technocratic tools of his predecessors, Reagan and the Bushes, Obama and the Clintons. His infrastructure project is not a return to the government-funded building projects of the New Deal, but instead imagines that roads, bridges, internet bandwidth, and power plants will magically appear as the result of tax breaks and deregulation, something that challenges reigning macroeconomic orthodoxy not one iota. Why it would succeed now, having failed under more propitious conditions back when it was called “supply side economics,” remains unexplained, necessarily so. Similarly, his plan to bring manufacturing jobs to the US imagines that lowering the tax rate, deregulating industry, and smashing unions is all that it will take to encourage the repatriation of capital and spur investment. This is the very assumption that Bush and Obama made in response to the economic crisis of 2008: if you bail the banks out they will begin lending again and, with lending, capitalists will invest and said investment will create jobs. But builders won’t build and corporations won’t invest if the roads go nowhere and the plants can’t make things people need — in other words, no one will build capacity if there’s already massive overcapacity, which there is. Labor costs have a long way to fall before it’s cheaper to manufacture here, and if firms do invest, it will likely be in totally robotic factories. In other words, Trump’s economic proposals seem, at first pass, as if he plans to make America great by employing the very same methods that have accompanied four decades of decline.

YEAH BASED COMMUNISM AM I RIGHT?!

So fucking based how it fails every time some Autist cries that they have a better communism and implements it only to have it fail again.

WOW isn't starving to death SO tolerant. I love it how we're all equally fucked now.

>I asked if Marx was closer to a modern free market libertarian than a socialist.
I'm not shilling for communism, you dumb nigger.

It doesn't matter what he was, it matters what his cancer gets retards to believe

An Egyptian writer, a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, wrote in the now-distant days of the first Tahrir square: “The people I saw on Tahrir Square were new Egyptians, having nothing in common with the Egyptians I was used to dealing with every day. It was as if the revolution had created Egyptians in a higher form […], as if the revolution had not only rid Egyptians of their fear but also cured them of their social defects. […] Tahrir Square became like the Paris Commune. The authority of the regime collapsed and the authority of the people took its place. Committees were formed everywhere, committees to clean the square and committees to set up lavatories and washrooms. Volunteer doctors set up a field hospital.” In Oakland, the Occupy movement held Oscar Grant Plaza as the “Oakland Commune.” In Istanbul, no better name could be found, already in the first days, than the “Taksim Commune” for what was coming into existence there. A way of saying that revolution was not something that Taksim might lead to one day, but its existence in actuality, its ebullient immanence, here and now. In September, 2012, a poor Nile Delta village, Tahsin, 3,000 inhabitants, declared its independence from the Egyptian state. “We will no longer pay taxes. We will no longer pay for schools. We’ll operate our own schools. We’ll collect our garbage and maintain our roads ourselves. And if an employee of the state sets foot in the village for any other purpose than to help us, we’ll throw him out,” they said. In the high mountains of Oaxaca, at the beginning of the 1980s, Indians trying to formulate what was distinctive about their form of life arrived at the notion of “communality.”

>Should be a jew sat in the cash
>Should be a white man reading

The left can't meme

> and many of his over observations have become true as capitalism has progressed.
Crypto commie detected

go back to leftypol

Tell me meme flag, will you kill the jews in the communist uprising as they are the ones with a disproportionate amount of the wealth of the world?

They have, do you have a counterpoint?

>Tell me meme flag, will you kill the jews in the communist uprising as they are the ones with a disproportionate amount of the wealth of the world?
The Commiecucks killed mor Jews than the NatCucks did.

He was born of rich parents
chose to live in squalider
married a rich bitch that has ties to Roachchild
Raped a maid, got her pregnant, kicked her out
Fathered several kids
Some children died and didn't care
Was tasked to create a divide between the people and the royalty
Had the support of Khazar Jews from the start
Was a true demonic Zionist Jew

I guess "hipster communist trust fund kid" would be the best contemporary label

i'm not talking about the past, i'm talking about the future.

And the Bolsheviks were jews.

This has nothing to do with Anarcho-Capitalism. You're just complaining about state power, i.e THE STATE.
Capitalism is you keep your money, nobody has the right to take it from you without your consent, and you fulfill your contractual obligations.
That's it.

Marx got BTFO by Henry Ford who was NatSoc. The masses were satisfied with two days off a week and a car. The Labour Theory of value has some credibility to it, however, the deterministic nature of Marxism pretty much invalidates the whole ideology.

we dont ask for ID's

On 25 May, on the first day of the 2017 NATO summit taking place in Brussels, Belgium, whilst being driven back to his home at 6:30 in the early evening, the ex-prime minister of Greece, Loukas Papadimos was injured in a successful high-impact letter-bomb attack that remains unsolved and unclaimed. The incident took place in central Athens, a few blocks from the Athens Polytechnic in the central part of that city. The device detonated inside an armoured-car with accompanying police security detail, and humiliated those security services and the authorities who shut down the area containing the vehicles transporting Papadimos, beginning a counter-terror investigation.

Loukas Papadimos is now a senior economist, former governor of the Bank of Greece and former vice-president of the European Central Bank. The letter-bomb arrived at his home after undergoing checks which did not detect the explosive material. Two security officers serving as driver and bodyguard to Papadimos were also injured in the explosion. The explosion of the device inside the customised vehicle added to the pressure of the bomb, leading to injuries to Papadimos’ eyes, chest, abdomen and legs and he was brought to the hospital for surgery for the non-life threatening wounds. The other victims of the bomb also were taken to hospital suffering less severe injuries. The attack was hailed by the authorities as the worst act of violence against a senior figure in the Greek establishment in decades.

insurrectionnewsworldwide.com/

That checks out with OP, libertarians protect the second.

>so close

The commies genuinely think capitalism is the government and not a system of contractual exchange. They have no concept of corporatism and that corpratism isn't capitalism, they are so retarded it beggars belief

mfw

Seems arbitrary.

its true that Socialism is counter revolutionary

The two great social welfare expansions in America occurred in response to the crises of the 1930s and those of the 1960s. In August 1931, over eight million citizens were unemployed. By 1933, that number would be closer to 15 million. The production of a relief system to absorb this growing mass was slow and widely resisted in America. This was the country where one was supposed to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. The New Deal in the 30s and the Great Society programs of the 60s both had “the preservation of capitalism at all times in view” as a Time magazine article about the New Deal put it. But what exactly threatened capitalism at these times? The fear was in the dissolution of civility and good morals among the unemployed. Having no work, men wandered. It became less likely for them to marry and settle down. They may turn to crime or riots to take what they want or need. Even worse, they may meet with other disenfranchised unemployed and simply begin organizing to get what they need. It took the Great Depression and millions to be unemployed together on the street for the sentiment to change from individual shame at being unemployed to recognizing it as an inherent and desired part of a capitalist economy. In Chicago, a group of around five-thousand unemployed organized a march on relief offices demanding free meals, free lodging, tobacco, and the right to hold Council meetings. When the relief funds were cut by 50%, they marched again and the cut was rescinded. There were rent riots in New York and Chicago’s primarily black neighborhoods. Groups would gather to return an evicted tenant’s furniture back into their apartment, even if that meant fighting landlords and police. After one riot in Chicago in 1931 during which three cops were injured, evictions were temporarily suspended and work relief was doled out to the rioters.

there could be courts, they would simply operate independently of a state
Private law

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what property is, and why people adhere to the concepts behind it, and how they can continue to adhere to it without a state, even if they don't admit it

so you WILL kill jews and many jews at that as they are the ones with das kapital right? Just answer yes or no faggot, i don't need some tl;dr faggotry in a slide thread that is basically wasting the time i have left on this planet talking to retarded uni students who have no concept of the difference between capitalism and corpratism

I would subscribe to the concept of a more nationalistic free market society, meaning anti federalism, anti open borders, keeping migration to a minimum, but at the same time allow competition and not protectionism.

But
>More like nationally responsible capitalism, a market in which players act both in their own interests and in the interests of the nation
Sounds really bad, markets operate on individual interests, to say they have to act on nation interests, means you'll involve the state way too much with the market.

>your land will stay
LOL

Why are communists so against renting? Have you never been in a situation where you need a car but not for long enough to buy it? If something exists in the market is because there was a demand for it, no one is making you rent that car...

>no concept of the difference between capitalism and corpratism

there is non

i dont study at a university

im a jew myself

will shot a jew if need be

will shot nazis if they get in our face, necessarily so

>hurr muh state capitalism

that's actually National Syndicalism

>Agreed but most people/business don't own private property in our current capitalist system. Most things are rented out, owned by the banks or owned by shareholders. Workers can actually own the means of production via stocks.
You are so fucking delusional. Must be a nigger. Why don't you kill yourself already?

That sounds more like Socialism
National Capitalism is more like a strange mix of Minarchism and Fascism

>"the preservation of capitalism at all times view"

This is where I can find some common ground with you unwashed Marxists, capitalism is a shitty system, but it's just a stage in human development. But can you not see? Those with this attitude are the same people who used the Bolshevik Revolution to establish state capitalism in Russia? Marxist Socialism is based in the same 'milk the worker dry' Jewish thought as capitalism. You can argue as much as you wish about 'people power' and list all of these protests, but at the end of the day they achieve only mere reform, not revolution.

>Inb4muh the state will wither away.

This will never happen. There will always be a state. People will always be racist, and for good reason. So why not choose the national socialist model of true socialism?

>will shot a jew
shoot a jew
a jew
a
A

no faggot you will have to shoot many fucking jews, so you still didn't answer the question, will you shoot many jews?

>im a jew myself

i know kike, i know.

>there is non

ermmmmm, they are 2 different things you fucking retard.
One is system of voluntary contractual exchange made between citizens, the other is big business (mainly kikes) using the corruptibility of politics/politicians to further increase their wealth and power.

>being this retarded

>That sounds more like Socialism
Socialism is when the workers collectively own the means of production and earn the full product of their labour, while owning the things they use themselves. The USSR paid wages and stole property

>I'm a jew myself

>You are so fucking delusional. Must be a nigger. Why don't you kill yourself already?
404 No Arguments Found

That's really kikey, though. How do you make sure that the Whites who take over society won't slowly become (((them)))?
Capitalism relies on property rights, where a 'capitalist' is entitled to someone else's labour. How else do you enforce that right without a state?
It will though. Read Marx
>hurr muh
Not an argument

You misrepresent nationalism completely.

Much like many libertarians talk about different levels of individualism, meaning you can use the word individualism to a person, or to a family, so to can you imagine individualism in the scale of nations. Nationalism is against nation collectivism where successful nations are taxed to pay the less successful ones like in the EU.

Nationalists are for more national control over their nation's laws instead of having the power of legislation go abroad to Washington, Madrid, or Brussels.

If you're a libertarian, you most likely want the level of individuality the closest to a single person you can. If you believe that nations are a necessity in the present, then you should be for nation individuality, which is nationalism, and oppose globalism, which is nation collectivism.

>doen't understand that the world needs pricing mechanisms in a capitalist structure to understand the market value of goods and the need for the number of goods to be produced... user I...

>Capitalism relies on property rights, where a 'capitalist' is entitled to someone else's labour. How else do you enforce that right without a state?
Capitalism is the free exchange of rights and services, if someone says they're a capitalist, you can't conclude how he wants to defend private property, AnCaps por example are capitalists, and don't believe the best way to protect private property is the state.

>im a jew myself

socialism is still governing people. its like a pitbull that you own, if you wont feed him enough he may go for your throat and reap you to shreds, if you feed him to much he may get ballsy and do the same - discipline is necessary - its a question of balance

however im not in the business of governing, people are not pit bulls for me. im the pitbull and when were dont with our master we will roam like the wild beings that we are

i never said i didn't want a state, i just want a state that is as small as feasibly possible, unlike you commie kikes, who wants the state to rule how much toilet paper every comrade has. Tell me faggot, how will you know how much toilet paper each person needs?

>when we're done [tearing his throat]

fucking english

>as small as feasibly possible
Minarchism?

Socialism is "White culture".
Stop appropriating "White culutre".

No. He's a deconstructed lampshade, and a socialist.

Communist, anarchist, and socialist groups were beginning to look a lot more attractive to the unemployed and with riots becoming more common and unemployment still on the rise, one could speak of a “mass disorder” by the mid-30s. The New Deal (though it made some concessions that more hard-line American ideologues were uncomfortable with) was designed to steal that thunder and return the unemployed to work where they would become stable again. Roosevelt put it in simple terms: “I am fighting Communism, Huey Longism, Coughlinism, Townsendism,” he told an emissary of William Hearst in 1935, “I want to save our system, the capitalistic system; to save it is to give some heed to world thought of today. I want to equalize the distribution of wealth.” Direct relief is never the goal. By 1934, Roosevelt was calling for its dissolution. “Continued dependence upon relief” he said to Congress in 1935, “induces a spiritual and moral disintegration.” Direct relief may even have the opposite of the intended result that workers might begin to realize that there is no need to work if they can extract a living from relief agencies.

>Minarchism

Cheers user i didn't even know this was a thing, yes, close to Minarchism, perhaps slightly above this that amount of government that includes border controls, critical infrastructure and a minimal social security. Everything else should be controlled by the free market.

and here's the source, great book

belliresearchinstitute.com/the-savage-peace-ii-management-oikonomia/

between Minarchism and clasical liberalism

Ok, so people collectively own the means of production?
What exactly is the means of production?
And if I earn the full product of my labor, this essentially means if I make say, a ceramic mug, even though I made it on a collectively owned pottery kiln, I own the mug myself and may do with it what I wish, becuase it is the product of my labor, yes?
Or am I missing something again?

>still hasn't answered whether he will kill many kikes

you do realise that you loose any form of debate if you don't answer the question right?

Well, very nice.
But I think that until there are no violent marxists trying to obliterate our society and tear down every tradition and value we hold dear, a strong fascist state is needed.

yes, there is no individuals in communism. the individual is actually a liberal invention.

you didnt give birth to yourself, didnt you?

it takes a village to raise a child

there is no individual property without individuals, only communal property

i tell you what, if ALL of them were "kikes" and there is what it took then yeah, i would, however the process of communisation dont imply genocide, the american didnt genocided the Germans during the de nazification process

... i don't know the answer to this user, perhaps you are correct... was Pinochet correct?... i don't know, i would like to think that we can meme marxist scum into understanding the reality of the world but if this is not possible and they continue to the point of societal collapse, then we are probably going to need to fire up the hellicopters.... oh well... if they continue with there cancer, i will shed not a single tear.

and congratulations, you are now a Nazi.

nice bait

youtube.com/watch?v=0fM9oYfkB9Q&t=213s

reminds me of the neet copypasta

I love Nazis even more now. Reprivatize industries and remove the jew and communist so that when the time comes to restore a republican government, there are no subversive jews to destroy everything.