This thread is for discussion of property rights, self-determination, natural order, right-libertarianism and the PHYSICAL REMOVAL of COMMUNIST FAGS from our board of peace. Reminder that this is the Libertarian RIGHT General. Left-Libertarians, Cosmopolitan freaks, Open borders cucks and other assorted libertine degenerates need to fuck off.
Questions are welcome, however many are repeated often. We advise you research the basics before asking.
THREAD RESOURCES:
>Pastebin: pastebin.com
>Discord & Book Club: Kd2WD2X
RECOMMENDED MATERIAL:
>The Machinery Of Freedom: Illustrated Summary ((((David Friedman)))) - youtube.com
>Anatomy of the State ((((Murray Rothbard))))
mises.org
>For a New Liberty ((((Murray Rothbard))))
mises.org
>Democracy: The God that Failed (Hans Hermann-Hoppe) - riosmauricio.com
FURTHER READING:
>Reference - See i.imgur.com
>Torrent - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:8d8ec6ef882dee291f119eb69994797574e5d616&dn=Anarcho-Capitalism%20Books
THREAD TUNES:
>hoppewave | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | physical removal - youtube.com/watch?v=LP41IK91_qA
>Against the State - (Hoppewave Hans Hermann Hoppe) - youtube.com/watch?v=HLaqr3QorCw
>I need a Pinochet! - youtube.com/watch?v=zhrYY3ocQ5o
>Drop it like it's Hoppe - youtube.com/watch?v=HPKGgo4kGQM
>Bump for Life, Liberty, and Private Death Squads
/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL
Other urls found in this thread:
bumparoono
Daily reminder that Libertarianism is not Egoism.
We believe in rules, we believe in society/community and we don't need a criminal to consent to being arrested.
bump bump bump
Easy reading for those new to Liberty: The Law - Frederic Bastiat
He's a charismatic french economist that wote some brilliant short works over 150 years ago that are easy reads and surprisingly thought provoking. He ends the book with a flourish too.
freedom is tailor made to the people, and as such the freedom of americans is not freedom to a brit, or vice versa. as ancaps we need to realise this and move onwards
Real An-Caps use the pirate flag tbqh senpai
pirates aren't big on the whole 'morality' thing
Libertarianism is the most autistic, beta ideology there is
autistic? yes
beta? no
You will NEVER have a libertarian society without hardline right wingers first shaking things up. Leftists promotes societal freedom (you can be gay, a different race, a pedophile, an attack helicopter) but not true individual freedom like being able to say what you want, carve out your own land, a protect it from invaders. If you ever want to see a libertarian society, support a right wing party that has libertarian ideals
we are right wing friend, read the op
>Liberating the markets and treating everyone with a base level of rights that they can't even guarantee for themselves
>Right wing
GFY
pls define right and left wing pls
Thasit mayne.
Theoretical vague scenarios are pointless when the actions come down to the people and culture involved during/after a transition to a free society.
exactly, ancap by itself is flawed becuase of its lefitst nature, solution? don't be a leftist
> ancap
> leftist nature
> dont be a leftist
Aye?
leftists think all men are created equal and explain difference with socio-economic explainations
right winger don't, think about what that implies, and...
don't be leftwing
The blurry line we have to be careful with on that is that Liberty & self ownership necessitate looking at people as individuals who can through their actions deviate from statistical trends and bell curves.
So while we understand natural inequality there is a socio-economic impact and ultimately people should still be judged as individuals based on their actual acitons, not some minority report collectivist bullshit.
That's what seperates us from both the liberal left and neocon right, the SJW left and the alt-right.
Libertarians are mass immigration nigger enablers.
If you're going to violate your precious NAP because of "thought crimes" by commies or whoever the fuck, you might as well just be a commie for all your (((principles))) are worth. Relativist drivel at that point.
...
No we're not.
Truth be told, you know Hoppe's physical removal thing is actually pretty misunderstood yeah?
He actually talks about how subjectively, property owners should decline to rent/sell to Communists and if they deny property right to squat etc then physically remove them. He doesn't talk about lynching in the streets of suspected "wrong-thinkers" and anyone mememing that is either just having a joke or doesn't understand or has never actually read/absorbed what Hoppe is saying.
Just thought I'd throw that out there. I hate this thought crime bullshit as well. Right-wing collectivism is a fucking cancer on par with the left in its ridiculousness but still underpowered in comparison.
I know it's a meme but it's a meme some (((ancaps))) unironically think is not a meme.
Fascists have been trying to hide within the Libertarian movement for a decade now. I suspect this is one of them.
>uses cucks
>rages against degeneracy
>no respect for migrant movement across private property
oh hai Clintonian "alt-right"
low-contributing members of society rely upon the state to maintain their lifestyle. without state, they would not be able to mooch off society and do nothing
Libertarians are just cucks that come cries to the government when it suits them. Either you go full alt-right or nothing.
Sup Forumsentooman reporting in
>The blurry line we have to be careful with on that is that Liberty & self ownership necessitate looking at people as individuals who can through their actions deviate from statistical trends and bell curves.
very true but a problem those of us that listen to hoppe don't fall into
>So while we understand natural inequality there is a socio-economic impact and ultimately people should still be judged as individuals based on their actual actions, not some minority report collectivist bullshit.
wrong, you can't import niggers, set them free, while holding them to the same standard, it doesn't work plain and simple, and hasn't for the HUNDREDS of years we had them here. plus the idea for freedom differs from people to people, as a group of people determine culture, thus you cannot have niggers, asians, latinos, etc. in a white majority area without them lagging and the same problems happening over and over
>t.america
now quit wrongthinking
useful idiots
Hey some people vote greens because they actually think they're pro-environment rather than pro-marxism.
It's just one of those things all movements have to deal with. We live in a time of fast-food consumption of information, people can't even be fucked reading an article beyond the headline or a meme posted about the article so it's no wonder people have misunderstood someone like Hoppe.
You can think of me however you like. If you support violence against people for thinking - but not doing - things you don't like but which hurt no person or property, you're really not morally separable from commies.
No way, initiating force/violence/coercion on someone who hasn't actually done anything is not only immoral but the justification is too vague, too imprecise, too subjective to ever be implemented in reality and too collectivist to ever be correct.
When you start mixing real science with pseudo-science and dividing society along collectivist categories you lose everything, you lose the soul of the society you lose the lot. The classical liberal values, the western values, the individualism, the appeal of liberty, it all gets lost in an endless us vs them collectivist tirade which is by design meant to create and inflame conflict, liberty has always been an idea of social harmony while carrying a big stick.
The 3rd way of Liberty is only seperated from the two fighting wings of collectivism precisely because of the incredible insights of an individualist social/economic outlook.
i was saying those men are useful idiots, not you
but for the sake of the bumps, let me play debilz advocado
>You can think of me however you like. If you support violence against people for thinking - but not doing - things you don't like but which hurt no person or property, you're really not morally separable from commies.
in some cases you can justify removing people based upon ideology, for example the marxist. the marxist believe ideologically that he cannot rest until the world undergoes full communist revolution. knowing that you can be suspicious of him, and much like the inner city nigger, you could frisk him and know that you'll find something to arrest him for. the marxist is the same, as the WILL want to destroy you. some kinds just don't get along, and like snakes and mongooses they must fight. ergo as ancaps, it is our ideological duty to persecute them and remove them on sight, even if they are not around covenant land and in their own communes
>in some cases you can justify removing people based upon ideology
No - you can't.
The Marxist can say and think whatever he likes. He hasn't done anything wrong until he's ACTUALLY done something wrong. Words and thoughts don't warrant reprisal - if you think they do the NAP philosophy collapses immediately into blurry-lined relativistic nonsense.
Don't betray everything The Last Knight of true Liberalism fought for.
He survived the rise of collectivism when socialists were causing revolution around the world and the brown shirts were marching down the street, keep the flame of liberty alive lads, like Mises & Leonard Read did in the darkest of times.
Let me play devil's cashew to your advocado.
> you can justify removing people based upon ideology
By doing so you contradict all principles of Liberty; NAP, self-ownership, natural rights/god given rights/property rights etc. It is not defensive violence to initiate force based on subjectivity.
> as the WILL want to destroy you
No one knows the mind of another, you can't read minds, thought crimes are solely the domain of collectivism pseudo-logic.
> it is our ideological duty to persecute them
Even if it were okay to persecute people who haven't taken any actions to wrong you (punch a nazi), you have no way of determining a criteria of what constitutes wrong-think. Whether based on a colour scale, genetic/blood test, things they say, things you think they think, how they've acted previously in shitty environment etc.
You can't claim to have the right to aggress against someone if you have no true criteria to distinguish who deserves to be aggressed against and why.
Ayn Rand was a woman you retard.
Mises*
I just like her quote, suck my dick.
pls highlight my points in green text to counter point, it very annoying picking out what you are talking about, and can lead to communication problems, so for give me if i seem like a collectivist from my answers
>No way, initiating force/violence/coercion on someone who hasn't actually done anything is not only immoral but the justification is too vague, too imprecise, too subjective to ever be implemented in reality and too collectivist to ever be correct.
why is it collective to assume such a thing? if anything is it not exoteric to see that as beings that share similar dna,making us each other, we are more compatible socially among our ethnic brethren, would share the same ideas of freedom, and that freedom would mean different things to the african, asian, the paki, the iranian, the texan, the lithuanian?
>When you start mixing real science with pseudo-science
what is the science and pseudoscience? in reference to what i speak of
> dividing society along collectivist categories you lose everything, you lose the soul of the society you lose the lot. The classical liberal values, the western values, the individualism, the appeal of liberty
where does society stem from? and what does society consist of?
it stems from a people of similar genetic background that share heritage and common activities
whites and blacks in the US alone live in different worlds and share different culture despite living here for HUNDREDS of years, people self segregate and that is normal, for example the city and the innercity.
> it all gets lost in an endless us vs them collectivist tirade which is by design meant to create and inflame conflict
nobody designed that,, we SHOULD however think of community as well, but that sense of community is lost when you can't even connect any level, unless the other submits to your culture completely .
>liberty has always been an idea of social harmony while carrying a big stick.
no disagreement there, but what is society?
if the robber mulls outside your house, and you KNOW that he is a robber by reputation, do you wait till he invade at your weakest moment, or when you are out? no you take care of the threat. that is what property ownership is about, i am not talking of neighbors
I'd probably put booby traps in my house and put a sign outside saying "Private property - do not enter uninvited or risk death or serious injury".
I'm really not morally responsible for people being explicitly warned about static dangers on someone else's property who then take it upon themselves to trespass on the property they're explicitly warned about.
I would NOT do anything AT ALL to the man who hasn't done anything to me or anyone else I know in aggression.
Reminder that Rothbard was not a red-baiting retard like the people in these threads. The anti-communist conservatives were the ones who drove Rothbard and libertarians out of the post-war Right.
Reminder that liberty doesn't care what cultural values you assault it in the name of.
:^)
Did you all have a good Thanksgiving?
i.imgur.com
>it has made gain not growth its aim
???
Gain IS the aim. You don't grow for growth's sake, you grow to meet an end that your growth is instrumental toward.
That looks like a level in dark souls 2.
...
Sub nibsta nobbsters I'm here from discord
> It is not defensive violence to initiate force based on subjectivity.
it is not base in subjectivity, i know what marxism is, i know they will destroy us like a festering wound. where is the subjectivity?
>No one knows the mind of another, you can't read minds, thought crimes are solely the domain of collectivism pseudo-logic.
truly no one knows indeed, but if you follow an ideology, you know where their thoughts are going, a nazi you know his thoughts fore he is a nazi, a christian you know his thoughts fore his is a christian. see where i'm going?
>Even if it were okay to persecute people who haven't taken any actions to wrong you (punch a nazi), you have no way of determining a criteria of what constitutes wrong-think
the antifa is not wrong, the nazi will indeed make their idea of a hellscape, and vice versa, such it is the best interest of a marxist to remove those toxic to its mission, that is universal and within the rights of all to remove cancer from the body, as society is the body, body is nature, and nature is to fight each other based on collectivist/individualist ideas, such as these aforementioned ideas of race, politics, and liberty. what is not natural is a force to stop it(government), mob rule is the opposite of natural witch is autocratic in nature. what constitutes wrong think is think that is not yours, after the only reason you think you cannot calculate wrong think is only, because you were told, read so, or were raised in an environment that taught such.
>You can't claim to have the right to aggress against...
the criteria is what they fill their heads with, marxists are bad because of their beliefs which are universals to all marxists, as thats how philosophy works. the same can be said of the readers of plato, aristotle, aurelius, the followers of wahhabism, the beliefs of non atheistic satanists(think pedogate tier stuff). are all bads and will force you to submit and only destroy your rights
Remember when David Friedman visited one of these threads and BTFO Hoppean fake libertarians?
What does /lrg/ think about the new tax reform plan?
what if the man has robbed your neighbors just the other day, you've seen his face on the pictures from your neighbors cameras, for example
>taking name fags seriously
i realise the irony
less governmental power is always nice
If I mistook you for a collectivist and you're not then I apologize and if your ultimate point boils down to different cultures/backround being incompatible within a society then while I disagre I get where you're coming from. If you're talking about simply that interpretations and meaning of freedom differs between these groups then that's fair enough.
> it's important to be not just to have
While that's true men have wants and needs and they need not exclude personal growth. Pic related.
> it has debarred one part of the community from being individual by starving them
Oh what the fuck. Oscar Wilde sounds like a bit of twat, he doesn't seem to mention that humans need to be able to own and control the fruits of their labour in order to survive, create a society and grow.
His form of individualism seems quite narrow in what he's talking about, he talks about an individuals ability to go down a creative path without having to rely or supplicate to others, while ignoring what makes the division of labour and property so important to allow people to go from a subsistence poverty living to one of personal growth.
We talk of individualism in the form of ethics and economics, treated people as individuals, looking at individual rights and concept as they apply to individuals, this guy just don't like that people work for a living.
> society should be constructed on a basis
It's not really constructed, they call it spontaneous order for a reason
> forced
Solving the problems that come with being alive and nature isn't force, it sucks that people have to work but ivory tower people like this guy need to stop filling peoples heads that they can't live a fulfilling life while participating in lower skill jobs to survive and satisfy their other wants.
One of the biggest issues in modern society right now is kids being filled with expectations that lead them to resent rather than to enjoy work-relationships and everything else.
If I mistook you for a collectivist and you're not then I apologize and if your ultimate point boils down to different cultures/backround being incompatible within a society then while I disagre I get where you're coming from. If you're talking about simply that interpretations and meaning of freedom differs between these groups then that's fair enough.
it does, and you right on both, as both were my points.
thanks for bringing me entertainment and bumping the thread
It's David Friedman's writing style precisely.
you don't know about the larps? autism is a strong force.
unless he posted timestamps, i wouldn't believe it at all, but i've been here to long maybe
> here is the subjectivity?
In declaring to know what someone is, what their intentions are and what they will do before they do it.
> if you follow an ideology, you know where their thoughts are going
I don't think that's necessarily the case, we live in a time where vast majorities of people subscribe to parties and ideas without even truly understanding or following those parties of ideas in practice. You don't know a Nazi's thoughts or a Christian's in fact people barely know their own thoughts because they confuse emotions & chemicals with rational thought, that's why sales is so fascinating because people can be manipulated by how you make them feel and the visions you create in their mind, sort of like politics. You don't know what someone pictures in their minds eye when thinking of a Nazi society. For example; one mind picture shaving the heads of jews and kicking them down the street in revenge, another may picture people in uniform marching in unison as some form of discipline that appeals to them, these two nazi's can hold completely different views on many subjects.
Christians themselves can have millions of different views on how to live a pious life and how society should be ordered to fit their views and interpretation. Again none of this is knowable or predictable and the criteria is just too subjective to just people that haven't acted, wrong-think and thought crimes just aren't logical. We see this with the lefts version against the "alt-right", that saying it's okay to be white means you are a white supremacist and belive XYZ and should therefore have no rights and deserve to be attacked. It just doesn't work, I don't know how anyone can think it does except to scratch a subjective emotional itch to hate & hurt people.
...
I believe every ancap should start with the glory that is readings on the Age of Enlightenment, ja? After reading the Rights of Man, Wealth of Nations, writings by some American founding fathers, it's impossible to sympathize with the mental illness of modern liberalism
I agree people should definitely dive into the enlightenment and not skip it or ignore it for purely ancap writing but surely there's some easier works most normies or newfags should take a look at if you're looking at it from an intro/persuasion standpoint rather than just a purely intellectual one. (I know that sounds weird)
>In declaring to know what someone is, what their intentions are and what they will do before they do it.
but you can contain about 200 people in your brain that you would know on a deep personal level. you need to make stereotypes eventually, unless you've found a way to know everyone.
more on this, you do NOT need to read minds to take action. real world example:at 3am i walked outside to see a brown fellow(taco type) standing in my driveway, smoking, and scoping out my place. if i had a gun on my i would have shot him, lacking that as i did, i would've fought him. but fortunately for him and me, he dispersed into an ally and i've never seen him since(filthy outta towners amiright?). point is, i didn't need to read his mind to know that he intended to rob the place, i just knew.
>minds eye when thinking of a Nazi society. For example; one mind picture shaving the heads of jews and kicking them down the street in revenge, another may picture people in uniform marching in unison as some form of discipline that appeals to them, these two nazi's can hold completely different views on many subjects.
i see what you are thinking here, but i might counter point that if they indeed have even read mein kampf(launching them outta larp tier)
then their idea of nazi germany will be similar, as both the man dreaming of marches, and the man with the hatred of jews, would both want the same as hitler(that is the point of strongman ideologies anyways) and wouldn't disagree on key points, like, the JQ, the belief of race and how it interacts(i've read some of mein kampf, and understand their thoughts a bit). and i can tell you that they want the same thing even if they disagree on superficial things like anime, or what is exactly degeneracy
>Christians themselves can have millions of different views on how to live a pious life
this is where denominations come into play, baptists, mormons, catholics, believe very different but very specific things
i would like to point out that you can't a purly profit motivated society, it certainly helps the ball to keep rolling, but you need a system of common morality to base this off or you'll see a short lived, but beautiful existance
I used to identify as libertarian but came to realize that won't fix problems in the US. When you realize how the banking cartels control everything and the Constitution is just an old piece of paper libertarianism is too take for what is needed
We need a nationalist fascist solution to bring down the banks, the Intel agencies and their deep state cohorts
fascism should only be interval at best