/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL

"Libertarianism will win eventually because it and only it is compatible with the nature of man and of the world. Only liberty can achieve man’s prosperity, fulfillment, and happiness. In short, libertarianism will win because it is true, because it is the correct policy for mankind, and truth will eventually win out"

This is a thread for the discussion of all ideologies that promote self-ownership, individual liberty and the natural order.

THREAD RESOURCES:
>Pastebin: pastebin.com/iT0Rw8PT
>Discord & Book Club: AbGmGWH

RECOMMENDED READING:
>The Law (Frederic Bastiat) - mises.org/library/law
>Anatomy of the State (Murray Rothbard) - mises.org/library/anatomy-state
>For a New Liberty (Murray Rothbard) - mises.org/library/new-liberty-libertarian-manifesto
>Democracy: The God that Failed (Hans Hermann-Hoppe) - riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

FURTHER READING:
>Reference - See i.imgur.com/wCIpgNA.jpg
>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

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/jr-P8snKXcc
youtube.com/watch?v=n67hcWV6a9A
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Thoughts on sexy lolis /lrg/?

Go fuck yourself sicko.

Get out. You are no longer welcome in /lrg/ or its Discord server

Do you have the three page version?

...

libertarian and right used to be the opposite sides
i miss those days

t. reactionary

Libertarian dogs, get out of the way of TRUE freedom.

No, but I have the third page.

How can the ends of perpendicular axes be "opposite sides" to one another?

...

faggotgay

You swallowed the hook pal. I'm not the last guy

Wasn't Cycle.

>being totally enslaved by the state is true freedom

Why do you people even exist?

NEETSOCS get the bullet too

Bumped for truth
I'm enjoying the libertarian threads

>libertarian
>right

>commies
>right

lmao

What are /lrg/ honest thoughts on fascism?

Better than socialism but still shitty.

Libertarianism is inevitable as our societies evolve more individuals will become intellectual rather than emotional.

It is an undeniable natural destination of society.

>share goals
they are polar opposites. fascism has nothing to do with utopian materialism

Did Pinochet do anything wrong?

christian values
nuclear family
and active local communities
no commies

cannot be reached AND SUSTAINED trought coercion, theft, kidnapping and murdering trought the state (aka politics), without civil warmonguering, international warmonguering
>inmoral
>violent
>arrogant
>unexpected negative consequences (high taxation,fraudulent pensions system, expropiation of property and bussinesses, print money for the gov.)
>can't be sustained
>no limits to state growth

ancaps can share some goals, but the means to get there are radical opposites, one is retarded, the other perspective matchs how reality works; creative actions; entrepeneurial creativity, ie decentralizing problem solving = markets = private rules = private property = voluntary associations = cooperation

fascist goverments still have done massive fraud/theft/looting to their population to get whatever nonsense done

That's the basic foundations of any goverment, the means to do stupid shit are evil and dumb as fuck

any arguments besides unsourced claims

Once he had his little chat with Friedman, he was pretty good. I'm to understand he was an illiterate protectionist before then, however.

his only problem he wasn't free market enough

what year did the chicago boys go there and make his liberalize the market?

His wiki page says he decided on liberalization around 1975. Funny enough, that ends up being the lowest trough on the graph.

most of the policies didn't get inplemented until the mid 80s though

either way he didn't liberalize that much because their copper industry was still nationalized

yay /lrg/ time

While this is true, the reason for it was that liberalism fundamentally wants to dissociate from the whatever the current reigning order is. If it's natural hierarchy and tradition liberals want the freedom to be secular and individualist, if its absolute degeneracy and nihilism liberals want the freedom to live without it polluting their lives.
And yes liberal and libertarian can be used interchangeably in this sense.

>he doesnt understand the japanese and their reverence for the emperor and their hate of capitalism goes against everything libertarian
this board makes me feel like a fukcing genuis from time to time. but i know im and idiot, you guys are just on another level

>implying libertarians wouldn't submit to the emperor

wtf

im implying that yes

>hatred for capitalism
even back then they embraced markets

well, we will see, but as it is now Right libertarians are the best allies, or would you prefer those cryptosocialists of the new right?

I'm spanish

FREE MARKET DESU

people in Europe doesn't think about capitalism as an absent of a system, they think it is an economical system with blueprints how to install and run it.
so most of them just equals the term with degeneracy.

>882288
>but i know im and idiot
>and idiot
how?

Please find the sources to the following claim:
"2+2=4"
Odd that you'd call us materialists when your shitty empiricism depends on material in the first place.

>reverence for the emperor and their hate of capitalism
Alright, I'll bite.

Can you show me proof that the japanese political majority, at any point in recent history, both revered the emperor and hated free markets?

>they
otoya was not your average jap, japanese society of the last decades is a disgrace
youtu.be/jr-P8snKXcc
libertarians are not "right"
so?

>libertarians are not "right"
yes we are

>libertarians are not "right"
they are more right than every "right" wing movement in europe and not only on the economical part
they are on the right way, just come more often to those threads, /lrg/ is good
but I agree that your common libertarian needs to be deported.

Fascism has described itself as "third position".
Since our ideology is the only one to take the laws of the universe, not the constructs of man, into consideration, we are the ones on the Right and have little concern for your socialist den of degeneracy.

Any libertarian who supports democracy is living in a contradiction.
Since 99% of the population is just highly intelligent cattle, though, they'll bend to any system that is offered to them with force.
Since we have an ethical justification for our expansionist policy, which is in line with the natural order, I see no problem in crushing those who would seek to undermine our efforts.

>Since we have an ethical justification for our expansionist policy, which is in line with the natural order, I see no problem in crushing those who would seek to undermine our efforts.
that's the spirit

define recent please
insisting that a revolutionary materialistic ideology is somehow reactionary is a bit absurd
>laws of the universe
individualism is the law of the universe, damn never knew that

>Since our ideology is the only one to take the laws of the universe, not the constructs of man, into consideration
*tips fedora*

>materialistic
>muh materialism
you sound like a commie

there's nothing wrong with materialism

1900 and later.

>individualism
That's the vaguest term in the history of mankind. Anything that is not strictly defined should not be used in serious debate, and anyone relying on shifting their definitions is doomed to fail.

Not an argument
Hah

Someone explain to me how age of consent works in a Libertarian society? Who has the right to tell you not to have sex with a child?

Not to burst your bubble, but if materialism was our goal, living like cattle under someone who could satisfy our wants would fit that definition.
Utilitarianism must be exposed for the joke it is.

you are the one thinking in a materialistic way, nobody of those guys is materialistic and if you weren't a materialist yourself you would see it.
and to live your life to the fullest you have a natural desire for materialistic and spiritual needs to be fullfilled.
alone the fact that you want to build a house and accumulate some capital for your future generation is on a way higher spiritual level than, screaming about muh materialism, muh capitalism, why should I care when I can always use the welfare state to pay for my degenerate offspring

>Someone explain to me how age of consent works in a Libertarian society?
like in europe before there were laws about it.

If you need to have a gun held to your head to prevent you from diddling kids, your low personal quality would see you wiped off the face of the Earth through your own poor decisions.

>materialistic ideology
A free society generates low-time preferences, and thus people become less materialistic (less consumerism.)

>Libertarianism is the right choice because I believe it is the right choice.

1) Organized collectives > collection of individuals
2) More cohesive collectives > less cohesive collectives
3) Ethnically homogeneous collectives are more cohesive than non-ethnically homogeneous ones, and a foundation of ethnicity is the ONLY foundation that is guaranteed to be passed to the next generation. You can't guarantee that your children will share your philosophy, politics, interests, or anything else except your genes.
4) That said, a meritocracy within a homogeneous, cohesive collective that allows the most competent individuals to assume positions of leadership is obviously desirable.

Before there were laws about it people did it and got away with it, especially if they were wealthy. Child prostitution was a bigger industry in London than in Thailand or Brazil.

Why would that be a good thing?

You can also say, like in america
before the jew funded feminists

fuck this server, they kick you for having opposing opinions

your entire thing isn't an argument

how is your ideology in line with the laws of the universe?

You sound like a batshit insane cultist

also there's nothing inherently wrong with materialism

kids cannot consent

I don't, but obviously a lot of people do, and I'm asking how Libertarian ideology deals with it.

>living like cattle under someone who could satisfy our wants would fit that definition.
No.

Also materialism isn't the goal.

people still do it and get away with it
especially if your wealth
america is CURRENTLY know as the human trafficking hub
now take into consideration what would happen upon aoc being abolished. children that go though that will have more visibility, thus more awareness, thus more help will come to them

>Before there were laws about it people did it and got away with it, especially if they were wealthy.
>especially if they were wealthy.
You know... like today?

I agree, because of age of consent laws.

What prevents children being exploited sexually in a Libertarian society?

Hey fashbro!

Here is the three page in one image

The NAP. Violation of said NAP may be met with swift force. Texas already does this. A man who killed his childs rapist was only given a couple of years. You are also allowed to freely kill a rapist in the middle of a rape to defend a person. Those who would diddle little kids would find themselves staring down the barrel of a gun. That

the problem with materialism is that you don't see anything spiritual with life, it sucks the color out of life, and is a short path to destruction.
ancap is very spiritual when you consider its origins of greek philosophy, the idea that you should good for your city because you are a part of your city, and helping it is helping you.
ergo, ancap is inherently esoteric

> people still do it and get away with it

Yeah but that's not an argument to decriminalise it, right?

> now take into consideration what would happen upon aoc being abolished. children that go though that will have more visibility, thus more awareness, thus more help will come to them

What "help"? If it's not a crime, how do you stop it? Vigilantism?

Abolishing age of consent just leads to child prostitution.

Thanks, love this one

>posts pictures of naked cartoon children
>gets kicked
yUo KiCkD mE fOr DifFerEnt OpiNiON

OP even stated degeneracy isn't allowed.

Not everywhere, but it is a problem that should be addressed. That's still not an answer.

there would still be laws

age of consent would still exist

What's your discord tag?

yes vigilantism
freedom to good is also freedom to bad
if the moral fiber of you city is so bunk that child prosittution gets you anything but lynched, you are already doomed
>pic related

communism is also materialistic.
league of blood incident maybe
a spiritual purpose has nothing to do with the material world, its sulflesness in its most pure form.

>if the moral fiber of you city is so bunk that child prosittution gets you anything but lynched, you are already doomed
soddom and ghomorra
and we all know how it ended for them

are children people or property?

something a normal human can never archieve, peope who can, are born leaders or chosen by the stars
your definition sounds like some new age commie garbage

By scaring off the spooks away from their children, and generally not raising their kids to be fucked in the head. Shame that's hate speech in Bongistan.

Also this: youtube.com/watch?v=n67hcWV6a9A

>tfw no free market white ethnostate

But if you go into someone's home to kill someone for raping their child, that person can just kill YOU, right?

I mean, you are just talking about defending someone from assault, which already exists.

What if the parent is the abuser, or permits the abuse?

It sounds like the answer to my question is, "people will kill paedophiles still"... which isn't an answer. The problem would get immeasurably worse.

Why isn't it the goal? Is there anything wrong with it according to yourself?

If there are still laws, you need lawmakers which requires taxation. I mean you might not be against all taxation so fair enough.

Libs have argued for legalization of child abuse.

>Is there anything wrong with it according to yourself?
That's like saying chocolate is the goal because chocolate is something that exists in a libertarian society.

You don't have to be a materialist consumer if you don't want to.

depending on their age, behaviour and their mental capabilities
the modern western woman would not be considered a person in a free society

>you need lawmakers which requires taxation
no, look up what polycentric law is

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law


Libs have argued for legalization of child abuse.
Then they are sick fucks.

So your answer is there would be zero protections for children in a Lib society. Just the freedom for people to kill one another if the suspect wrongdoing?

Do you have the right to enter someone's property to kill that person for having relations with a, say, 13 yo?

Why do you autists think libertarianism is any different from liberalism?