/lrg/ - Libertarian Right General - Fuck Utilitarians Edition

Motto of the day: We believe in the formal, not in the material. Thus, ethics trumps utilitarianism every time.
This thread is dedicated to the discussion of all things libertarian - private system of government, natural law, laissez-faire economy, and sovereignity, as well as organisation, tactics, and long-term strategy.
We encourage debate, so long as all parties recognise that property norms are inherent in each civil exchange between multiple consenting individuals.
Communists explicitly reject property norms and as such will not be respected.
Discord server: /sXwfD5K
Pastebin link: pastebin.com/0rkTentN

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Om7rUCY3f_U
youtube.com/watch?v=oHv9NyeS3s0
youtube.com/watch?v=FcQBJPZKR28
youtube.com/watch?v=do5eQ5tEoRk
youtube.com/watch?v=MtvmgfI2zyM
youtube.com/watch?v=0uiJGDShHJg
gab.ai/Founding_Father
gab.ai/militantliberty
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

bump

bump

...

Frequent misconceptions:
>What is the libertarian stance on open borders?
A full privatisation of all property implies the owners' full right of exlusion or inclusion to their property only, being responsible for the accomodation, as well as legally for the good behaviour of their invitees, which automatically rules out inviting jihadis and other savages with no concepts of property norms into civilised lands in large numbers. As long as a state exists, however, closed borders (forced exclusion) are preferrable to open borders (forced integration), if for no other reason than there being fewer people within the reach of a State to be expropriated by it.
>Is capitalism Jewish/degenerate?
Capitalism is the natural order of things, most commonly used in regard to the economy. It is the lack of restrictions on grounds other than natural law, which must be equally appliable to everyone. Deviation from this model ultimately means higher time preference rates among people, meaning immediate satisfaction is preferred over long-term investment, which in turn leads to less interest in production and more interest in leisure activities, meaning general poverty. This goes to show that socialism, not capitalism, works best for the Jewish interest of turning the gentiles into hedonistic cattle.
>Who would build the roads?
Scarcity of space implies the need for people and goods to move from point A to point B. Generally, this means that roads must be established, as land transport remains one of the most heavily used modes of transportation. There is a market for roads in any society, the state just holds a monopoly over it.
>What is the libertarian position on usury?
The main problem with interest loan provision is the historical monopoly the highly tribalistic Jewish communities have held over it, often due to state intervention (which was comparatively extremely rare in those times).

...

...

Recommended reading:
BOOKS
>The Law by Fréderic Bastiat
>Democracy - The God that Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
>Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard
>Theory of Socialism and Capitalism by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
>Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant
ARTICLES
>Open Borders Are an Assault on Private Property by Llewellyn Rockwell - mises.org/library/open-borders-are-assault-private-property
>A Realistic Libertarianism by Hans-Hermann Hoppe - lewrockwell.com/2014/09/hans-hermann-hoppe/smack-down/
>For A New Libertarian by Jeff Deist - mises.org/blog/new-libertarian
>Nations by Consent by Murray Rothbard - mises.org/sites/default/files/11_1_1_0.pdf
>Race! That Murray Book by Murray Rothbard - archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch75.html
>Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature by Murray Rothbard - mises.org/library/egalitarianism-revolt-against-nature-0

ump this sit

Media:
PODCASTS/VIDEOS
>tomwoods.com - Tom Woods Show
>radicalagenda.com - Radical Agenda / Letters from a Charlottesville Jail / Cantwell & Kessler / LIVE from Seg! (Christopher Cantwell)
>youtube.com/stefbot - Steben Bolynu :DD
>youtube.com/channel/UCR7pD2JAMKUx4LH93YWjaXw - morrakiu.com - Morrakiu
>youtube.com/channel/UCRr7mGBwURyRGM2BRPV3hNQ - Augustus Sol Invictus
ARTICLES
>mises.org - Mises Institute
>lewrockwell.com - Lew Rockwell
>propertyandfreedom.org - Property and Freedom Society

...

Videos/podcasts:
>What Must Be Done by Hans-Hermann Hoppe - youtube.com/watch?v=d_ybi1MeC3c
>For a New Libertarian by Jeff Deist - youtube.com/watch?v=tsUmV0wNXlc
>Radical Agenda by Christopher Cantwell with Morrakiu - radicalagenda.com/2017/06/07/radical-agenda-ep313-morrakiu/
>The War on Terror by Augustus Sol Invictus - youtube.com/watch?v=wy2O7CPNmqI
>Libertarianism's Ultimate Logical Conclusion by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=Om7rUCY3f_U
>The Leftist Invasion of Libertarianism by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=oHv9NyeS3s0
>Attempts To Reach The Left: An Unmitigated Disaster by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=FcQBJPZKR28
>Individualism and Group Interests by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=do5eQ5tEoRk
>The Truth About Libertarianism | Immigration and Borders by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=MtvmgfI2zyM
>In Defence of Capitalism by Christopher Cantwell - youtube.com/watch?v=0uiJGDShHJg

Smash cultural Marxism, smash degeneracy, and smash the state.

lets scrap MLK JR day. FUck this degenerate nigger!

>tfw you'll never see a Jew speak favourably about David Duke ever again
>"Well, they finally got David Duke. But he sure scared the bejesus out of them. It took a massive campaign of hysteria, of fear and hate, orchestrated by all wings of the Ruling Elite, from Official right to left, from President Bush and the official Republican Party through the New York-Washington-run national media through the local elites and down to local left-wing activists. It took a massive scare campaign, not only invoking the old bogey images of the Klan and Hitler, but also, more concretely, a virtual threat to boycott Louisiana, to pull out tourists and conventions, to lose jobs by businesses leaving the state."
- Murray Rothbard, Essays of Murray N. Rothbard, Right-Wing Populism

>>What is the libertarian stance on open borders?
>A full privatisation of all property implies the owners' full right of exlusion or inclusion to their property only, being responsible for the accomodation, as well as legally for the good behaviour of their invitees, which automatically rules out inviting jihadis and other savages with no concepts of property norms into civilised lands in large numbers. As long as a state exists, however, closed borders (forced exclusion) are preferrable to open borders (forced integration), if for no other reason than there being fewer people within the reach of a State to be expropriated by it.
This makes no sense. First, since when does allowing a bad person onto your property imply legal responsibility for the actions of said bad person? That's the same leftist logic that says gun owners should be charged with murder when a nigger steals their gun to kill someone. Second, how are open borders forced integration? If Jose can find work, great, if he can't, he'll leave on his own. Third, that last point is insane. You're saying the state should make laws should to reduce the number of people, in order to reduce the number of people that can potentially have their rights trampled by the state in the future? That's the insanity of an edgelord that wants to kill people to end suffering.

You've really schadened my property here

>tfw I was ready to smash communist "revolutionaries" but instead I just got more faggy protests

You can't end the welfare state if thousands of Pacos are flooding in to your country and will inevitably vote for Democrats that will raise taxes and raise spending. If the border is not secured first, the state cannot possibly be dissolved, because third-world leftists will never stop flooding in.

Open borders is government-sponsored immigration, alongside pro-immigrant programs, welfare for immigrants, and anti-discrimination laws that protect immigrants. All public property rightfully belongs to the taxpayers, and it is the duty of the state to act in a way that is most similar to a private property owner so long as it actually exists. It is perfectly reasonable to thus prevent immigrants from flooding in to the country and using public property that they did not pay for.

...

A person whose weapon gets stolen by a nigger did not consent to their weapon being taken from them, in contrast to people who willingly invite others onto their property.
In a fully private society, open borders do not exist. Only unclaimed land has open borders, and rules of homesteading apply further. This example of closed borders implies that a State still exists, and if that cannot be helped, it should be made to act like a market agent and exclude undesirables from its premises.
I do not wish to kill people, it's just that if the state is not abolished yet, it should still be made to act like a property owner and turn away Squatemalans and other low quality people at the border, with force if necessary.

I was really disappointed when garry johnson blew up at that guy for saying "illegal immigrants" it made the decision to vote for trump very easy.

is the actual libertarian party just the people who dont take it seriously and then sjws in suits?

There are no more arguments to be made

The Libertarian Party is completely lost. It is a left-libertarian cesspool of degeneracy and cultural Marxism. We must find alternatives.

Are you a libertarian or a fascist or what!??

You'll have to find out Commie

I am whatever is necessary.

I can be a fascist if you're into that kind of shit.

If you can end the welfare state at all, the details don't matter. You're talking about practical ways of slowing leftist decay, I thought he was talking about ideals. Sure, some forms of statism can be used to prevent other worse forms, ok.

Open borders don't mean all of those things. To me, it means free trade, specifically the free trade of labor. If Microsoft in Washington consents to Pajeet working for him, and Pajeet consents to working for Microsoft in Washington, whose right is it to forbid them from making an economic decision?
Yeah no. I'm entirely anti-welfare, and that includes protectionist statist policies which only serve to help hypocritical white welfare leeches.
A private person did not consent to the nigger on their property later infringing on another's property either. A private individual cannot ever be held responsible for the actions of another person, unless that other person *is* the property of another.

The only reason people think they need a state to turn away niggers is because the state has so deeply entrenched the idea that the state owns a monopoly on force. The only thing preventing me from shooting undesirables that infringe on my property is the government. Shitskins wouldn't come here to rob if they knew they'd receive no welfare and if property owners would shoot them.

im hoping trump reinvents the gop with the midterms, but what if it doesnt happen or doesnt happen quickly?

The republican's brand of statism is just as repulsive to me. And well really trump isnt that much of a libertarian either. He's just a positive delta in that direction.

>getting baited by a fellow from the child soldier army
Wait a minute, is anybody a real goy around here?

Libertarianism is a coward’s ideology. It’s an attempt by white males to argue in their own interest by ideological means instead of arguing plainly for what’s in the interest of their own blood and culture like every other ethnic group does. Every libertarian ideal has been turned against them by their ideological opponents. To be a libertarian you have to believe in open borders and free trade (or make some Rube Goldberg argument about why it’s more libertarian to believe otherwise) despite the fact that this is dispossessing and impoverishing white males who make up 99.9999% of all the libertarians that ever were or ever will be. To be a libertarian means to choose liberty over survival because how can you be a libertarian if you let sanity trump laissez-faire? In the future, when the last libertarian is bludgeoned to death with the last copy of Atlas Shrugged by some black panther militia man, he’ll be bitching with his dying breath about violations of his property rights and voluntary agreements.

>liberty over survival
benfranklin.jpg

Fuck off statist. In a libertarian society, no one is preventing you from exercising your culture or from making a lot of white babies. No one is preventing you from creating a white enclave with your fellow whites.

If you are anti-welfare, then you must oppose the flow of unskilled labor into the United States, because not all of those people are going to be able to get jobs. Skilled immigrants are fine.

>like every other ethnic group does.
why would we want to be like every other ethnic group?

You misunderstood me, I don't think both the nigger and the property owner of the nigger's lodging should be punished in the same way, I think that after the nigger was punished for his crime, the property owner should foot the bill of his removal from society.

if there were no welfare they would just leave after not getting work.

The problems with welfare and the problems with immigration are intrinsically linked.

>To be a libertarian you have to believe in open borders and free trade (or make some Rube Goldberg argument about why it’s more libertarian to believe otherwise) despite the fact that this is dispossessing and impoverishing white males who make up 99.9999% of all the libertarians that ever were or ever will be.

Read even one post in this fucking thread and you'll see that we do not support open borders, and most of us aren't fans of Ayn Rand.

Why can't retarded NEETsocs argue?

>this wall of text
I know your type, cuck. You obviously prefer utility to ethics, which makes you a lost cause. You're just mad because all you're fit for is being a human animal of sorts.

Based on what? Mexicans self-deported during the 2008 recession. Even sub-80 IQ shitskins understand basic economics; if they can do better elsewhere, they'll leave. Every successful ancap society, e.g. Kowloon Walled City or some of the Brazilian favelas, shows that economic productivity and employment skyrocket when all trade barriers are extinguished.
>I think that after the nigger was punished for his crime, the property owner should foot the bill of his removal from society.
A minor difference. You are not any kind of libertarian, you believe that people aren't responsible for their own actions, you may as well be Ralph Nader pissing on the grave of caveat emptor.

>liberals believing that they are right wing

>neo-FDR statists believing they are right-wing

But we can't abolish welfare until we can make sure no more are coming. If we don't, they'll keep coming in. Every day the border is not secured, it becomes that much more difficult to abolish welfare.

Do you actually believe you can open up the borders AND also vote libertarians into office?

>Do you actually believe you can open up the borders AND also vote libertarians into office?
>libertarianism
>democracy
Pick one. The entire concept of democracy is a statist-populist spook. I support a constitutional state enforced by the citizens themselves, one unified behind the message of self-responsibility.

That's fucking great for you. Now, how are you actually going to accomplish that?

The state exists right now. Democracy exists RIGHT NOW. It is the only strategy that exists RIGHT NOW.

You idealists need to stop burying your heads into the sand.

yes I agree. Given we are in the society we are in the most expedient thing to do is to secure the borders, and probably also put a moratorium on immigration. Depending on what happens.

Then we can clean our house in peace.

HOL UP
*smacks lips*
SO YOU BE SAYING
*declines welfare check*
WE
*eats black market watermelon*
WUZ
*steals bitcoin wallet*
HELICOPTER PILOTS N' SHEIT?!

also i hate to say this but immigrants vote for bigger government. Rampant immigration is dissolving the political will to shrink the government, even in bipartisan ways.

There's no fixing America or whatever country you come from via the democratic process. Great social change only comes when the institutions of power are dismantled and replaced, and democracy, especially a flawed two-party system like the USA's, are not capable of doing that.

The property owner was however responsible for his invitation into the covenant community, for which he must atone by paying for his expulsion.

Could ancap only ever exist in a vacuum? Wouldn't neighboring countries try to invade ancapistan?

We must use the state to crush the criminals, the degenerates, and the leftists, in order to pave the way for the arrival of a libertarian social order.

Why do you hate to say that? It's 100% true. Don't be ashamed of saying the truth.

No, but it can help pave the way for a libertarian social order by voting in a right-wing populist who will actually pursue libertarian policies.

Ancapistan would be protected. Not only would it be the ultimate tax haven, meaning that companies will try their best to protect it from being destroyed, but everyone would be armed.

Nope, it has no bearing. If I'm a gun smithy and John buys one of my guns to shoot Sue, according to you and Hillary Clinton, I am now on the hook for Sue's death.
The people would need to be well-armed and possess a desire to live independently of the state. To the extent that most humans are biologically designed to be collectivist, I suppose it would only work in a vacuum.

...

>companies will try their best to protect it from being destroyed

How so?

technology is the way to dismantle and replace the institutions of power, and the market is the river that carries it.

Big tech companies are frothing at the mouths to infect their veins with state power and join the beast. But if the actual technology makes it cheaper and easier for new people to make competing services then we can simply use our wallets to ensure that when the state, as we know it, finally collapses it isnt replaced with all the same people but sitting in the board rooms of facebook and google.

>No, but it can help pave the way for a libertarian social order by voting in a right-wing populist who will actually pursue libertarian policies.
For Trump's response to Charlottesville alone, I'm going to vote for him in 2020 (unless he totally fucks up later). I do what I can to slow the rate at which things become bad, but there's only so much that can be done.
I think you're talking about decentralized currency here, and while I don't exactly disagree, the government is still far too powerful. Technologies that are too dangerous to them can easily either be shut down or relegated to state-approved corporate monopolies.

The idea that there are right-wing liberals and left-wing liberals is absurd. The labels "right" and "left" are meaningless if liberalism fits into both categories. As if all political theory is just dialectical liberalism. It's the world we live in, but I can't believe you bought it.

Because it's the ultimate tax haven. Companies would have a vested interest in protecting their earnings by protecting Ancapistan.

When will LRG make an official gab?

>monarchist sympathizer
Disgusting

>We must use the state to crush the criminals, the degenerates, and the leftists, in order to pave the way for the arrival of a libertarian social order.

Well I dont agree with that. Enabling the state with that much power just makes it that much harder to take it away afterwards. It may be more complicated and have deferred results, but we have to ensure the free market can do its thing and social ills which give credibility to state power will naturally dissipate till they reach a point where individuals can take of them.

The state has been using the same excuses to grow and grow forever, and we keep falling for it because the flavor of the excuse is tailored to our tastes. We have to eschew the easy solution for the hard one or else it will never end.

Don't tell me you're one of those anti-Hoppe faggots.

Ancap doesn't mean absolutely no society or community. You have to have borders to enforce private property.

I, The Founding Father of /lrg/ have a gab.
gab.ai/Founding_Father

>Companies would have a vested interest in protecting their earnings by protecting Ancapistan.

I'm asking how companies would go about protecting their shit in ancapistan. I already know why, but how would they do it?

>You can't have anarcho-capitalism without government borders

Are Hoppeans really this retarded?

Armed soldiers (or drones or whatever), how else?

I also have a Gab.
gab.ai/militantliberty

If you don't suppress the violent criminals that want to tread on you, then they will tread on you. Tread first.

I don't know exactly what would be the best kind of defense system. I'm not a company in Ancapistan.

What do we do with the commies that came out for November 4th?

Private borders, retard.

...

>borders can only exist if the gubberment makes them
what's it like being a brainlet?

Look at the post he responded to. He was implying government borders.

>private property
>caring at all about boarders when there is no welfare niggers, both corporate and African
>allowed to discriminate who you associate and do business with

Its got to be the most efficient system of culling all the retards from the genepool.

Ultimately who's responsible in this case is determined by whatever contracts were signed.

If the property owner is a member of a covenant then there must be rules he agreed to. If one of the rules is that he's responsible for the crimes committed by his guests then that's exactly how things are.

The rules could have been written in anyway the interested parties wanted it to be, and that IS the rule within their community.


If it wasnt between some kind of community members then the victims would have to sue and prove their case to an arbitrator they both agree to meet, and abide by. In this way we could treat every instance on a case by case basis. Maybe he invited the criminal in specifically so he could commit that crime! Sounds like he's responsible then. Maybe he let the criminal in under false pretenses? Sounds like he was a victim too.

This is not a morally strait forward question with a simple universal answer.

You can't have a libertarian social order without FIRST having government borders.

We had private citizens, the minutemen, enforcing the USA-Mexico border in the early 2000s. GWB the cuck forbade them from doing it.

Right and left are economic, faggot. Have you never seen a political compass?

its quite simple you see, we must CRUSH THE ANTI-FASCIST MOB

That's exactly what we need to bring back, then.

>I think you're talking about decentralized currency here, and while I don't exactly disagree, the government is still far too powerful. Technologies that are too dangerous to them can easily either be shut down or relegated to state-approved corporate monopolies.
im talking about all technology. Any technology that encroaches on a government institution. Like e-mail to the USPS, for an admittedly lame example.

A speculative example would be some kind of security system that made a lot of police functions obsolete. Or what if there was a machine that could resurface roads with no expertise and was rentable from A-Toolshed?

Not any one thing but everything in aggregate. If you just didnt HAVE to turn to the government to do the practical things in your life you need. Things you can't give up, and force you to vote for bigger government lest your favorite thing be the first thing taken away.

The Right values ORDER, and the left values EQUALITY. We are Right-Libertarians because we understand the true laissez-faire results in the natural hierarchical order of man.

>We must use the state to crush the criminals, the degenerates, and the leftists, in order to pave the way for the arrival of a libertarian social order.

This is the same retarded shit communists say. You might get yourself a 4th Reich, but it isn't going to dismantle itself once all the leftists are dead.

>If you don't suppress the violent criminals that want to tread on you, then they will tread on you. Tread first.
yes
just dont have the state do it.

You first need to establish that ethics are objective

There's nothing wrong with a little free market fascism.

>natural law
Spook. Establish an objective natural law kiddo.

Im aware, but I figured we might have one just for LRG and a personal one for our founding father

In general I agree that technology improves our ability to be free. However, it's not the solution on its own. A security system will never make police obsolete because private citizens can be sued out the ass by kikes, whereas the police are more or less immune. You can't resurface the roads without buying them first from the government, and good luck with that.
>the state is the free-market
wew

ok this guy's just trolling.

>implying borders arent implied by the right of an individual to decide who exists on or moves through their property

Ehh, I don't think my knowledge reaches that far, in that case. Take it up with Hoppe, he was my original inspiration for that sentiment, I'm fairly certain he'd mentioned it in Democrussy somewhere in the second half.

>Right and left are economic, faggot. Have you never seen a political compass?
>a political compass
>the power of libertarian thought

you're just describing the barriers to change. It's going to be difficult and take a long time. Having the police be immune to litigation isn't something to brag about.

You think I am?

The best way for us to pave the way for a libertarian social order is to establish a radically free market right-wing government that will protect liberty from leftist aggressors.

You don't have the right to dictate who is allowed on my property.

Maybe i'll get an offical account rolling soon..

Right is capitalism, Left is communism. Libertarian is south where we like to say "fuck off", North is Authoritarianism where they kill gays or kill the people that kill the gays, or Jews or whatever people want to kill that day.

>The best way for us to pave the way for a libertarian social order is to establish a radically free market right-wing government that will protect liberty from leftist aggressors.
It's maybe the least bad way; it kinda worked in Singapore though they're still extremely authoritarian socially. It still doesn't yield a true libertarian society though.

Natural law is objective in that it can be arrived at through pure reason. Kant is an Ancap.