Be nationalist

>be nationalist
>start reading libertarian books and listening to libertarian intellectuals and economists
>quickly realize how right they are
>become libertarian

how didn't realized it before??

You are no longer ignorant of how capitalism works.
That basically boils down to the divide over net neutrality.

...

A libertarian state requires total order, which requires an extremely strong but small government, which means that libertarian prosperity is dependant on extreme authoritarian government like monarchy.

...

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Say it three times and maybe someone will buy that crap

National libertarianism wherein the people want a state which they can use to protect themselves but not dominate the individual is the most redpilled ideology. The early USA was an example of this.

Next post he'll bring up Chile. Canadiens keep letting me down

Property rights and contracts are dependant on near-zero levels of crime, which can only be achieved by a powerful and secure state.

FUcking off kike. only Hoppean libertarianism is acceptable.

>libertarian
>fund both sides of the war

Milton rules

...

What we need is a proper leader, even democracy is too much. Libertarianism will only create degenerate hellholes, especially the open borders and free trade varieties.

This.
Libertarianism requires physical removal of commies and shitskins.

>The state has to be as small as possible in a libertarian utopia

unobjectionable

>has to be strong enough to provide security and maintain monopoly of force

it's not a state otherwise

what are y'all being autistic for?

>be a jew
>read jewish books
>go on Sup Forums to promote jews and jewish lies
>still a jew

Enjoy being richer and getting hotter women.

its leaf public education, it grooms them to be docile little workers.
>which can only be achieved by a powerful and secure state.
It can be achieved much more easily by not delegating crime fighting and law to the state or central authority.

Kek

Do you have any examples of that that don't date from 12th century Feudalism or the American frontier

Libertarian Jews are the white hats of the Jewish world. They knew that they weren't getting invited to the party, so they tried to subvert the globalists.

I got kind of disillusioned with libertarianism when I realized that property rights obviously cannot exist objectively and are legitimized always only through force. Currently govt legitimizes property rights, who will do it in an anarcho-capitalist word? Every single person will secure his own property through being well armed? Ok, that would work fine in principle three hundred years ago, but today with modern weapons its just not possible, especially if your property is more than 10 square feet. And its obviously not a very stable society in that case, because there is no central power that legitimizes all property rights, is essentially a free for all until some strong power DOES arise, and then its back to square one of having a central authority. "Homesteading", and all that are just memes, nobody cares if you built something up all alone, if they have a gang and guns, they will take it from you and it will be legitimately theirs. Now I am a transhumanist, unironically. Only when man surpasses his paltry human self, only then will the individual truly be able to exist independently and no longer require central authorities, and also be able to properly resist them, even on his own. Of course all this is idealistic, I will almost certainly die in the same kind of a world in which I was born, and so will everyone else for the next thousand years.

>how right they are
But they aren't?

>Free Market Capitalism is a meme
>Capitalism in its current form only exists and succeeds due to money from illegal/immoral means (drugs, human trafficking, slavery, usury, etc) being laundered and fed into the economy
>Make Capitalism free and without white collar crime and it crashes instantly

You forgot, 5th stage - Technocrat

I have not yet met anyone who has been thoroughly exposed to the libertarian/anarchocapitalist position that did not agree with it... In other words, most critics of libertarianism don't even understand what they are against. They are judging from a position of ignorance, so be careful to take any criticisms of libertarianism with a grain of salt, because chances are, these people are completely uninformed and have put very little thought into how a free society may function.

Libertarianism is a worldview unlike any other. There's no fear or manipulation required to get people on board, only the undeniable truth. I think we can have a free society if we can figure out how to get people exposed to these ideas. The truth is simply too powerful to ignore, once people see it. The problem is that people are often quick to get emotionally invested against the idea of freedom, and the state keeps everyone economically illiterate.

Too many people lately have been buying into the ethno-nationalist rhetoric, which states that a free society would suffer from unchecked degeneracy, but this simply isn't true and is more evidence of how these ideologues are using fear to manipulate people into following their "movement" rather than honest facts based in reality. In a free society, there is a natural financial disincentive against degeneracy (health insurance - degenerate lifestyle are unhealthy and therefore require greater healthcare expenses on average), and in most systems involving a state, the inevitable outcome is a social welfare system and public healthcare system that subsidizes, rather than disincentivizes, degeneracy. Moreover, you would be able to find a community where you could raise a family, within a free society, which strictly prohibited degeneracy. The degeneracy thing is a total non-issue in a free society but for many "white nationalists" they will act like the alleged degeneracy that would take place in a free society is a deal-breaker.

Things libertarianism can't do anything about:
>subversions
>psychological warfare
If you are going to tolerate those who don't tolerate your NAP, you will lose. If you accept that breaking the NAP is necessary to keep a stable order, why not break it some more and go building some ovens.

This is the true redpill progression. Except that many ofus started out as liberal, not as conservative.

>I got kind of disillusioned with libertarianism when I realized that property rights obviously cannot exist objectively and are legitimized always only through force. Currently govt legitimizes property rights, who will do it in an anarcho-capitalist word?

Anclaps aren't lolbergtarians, they are not synonymous. Libertarians pretty much always insist on having enough government to protect property rights and have a legal system to enforce contracts.

At least criticize it on the ground they stand on, not what you heard from some normie bluepilled cuckservative.

Fuck off, libertarians are perversion of everything real anarchists - futurists, wished to achieve

>I got kind of disillusioned with libertarianism when I realized that property rights obviously cannot exist objectively and are legitimized always only through force.
How much time did you spend familiarizing yourself with libertarian ideas? It sounds like very little based on what you're saying.

Are you familiar with any of Rothbard's work? He addresses all of these concerns. It sounds like you just assumed there were no answers and gave up instead of actually looking and thinking. All of your concerns are pretty obvious and people have raised them before (decades ago) and they've all been addressed, and by more than just Rothbard. Try reading "The Ethics of Liberty" or just search google for some answers, if you're actually interested in getting some answers.

Out of curiosity, how much time have you spent familiarizing yourself with libertarian ideas? How many hours would you estimate?

In the US 90% of blacks vote democrat - at every single election. 70% of Whites vote Republican.
This is the nature of a multicultural democracy, one group vote for their own interest and another vote for theirs, one of the key divisions in this, is race. One racial group will vote to get privilege or ressources from the others, this will never stop..

Should the world ideally be like this? No.
Can we change it, by repeating the mantra of "skin colour doesn't matter", over and over again? No.

mono ethnic, cultural and religious states are the best possible scenario, you have right off the bat eliminated the default groups. It is the only context of which a libertarian free-market society can rise, because this type of system, are not well suited to exploit other groups. Therefor in the multicult they will never vote these people in, and give up the right to extract ressources from alien groups.

Libertarianism is the best political system ever invented, its just that its not compatibile with democracy, since democracy will alaways lead to socialism.

good goy

Why not just address his points? Telling him to go read x isn't an argument.

libertarians are intentionally ignorant.

/thread

To be fair you have to have a really IQ to understand Fascism.

...

Unironically this. You support ideas because of knowledge so why not make it in itself the endgoal of politics.

What if I consider niggers moving onto property next to mine as a violation of the NAP?

the corrupt Jews who are after power want authoritarianism, such as (((national socialism))), (((communism))) and their latest idea (((ethno-nationalism))). the legit high IQ jews want capitalism because they aren't psychotic power hungry reptiles, and understand their high IQ will be rewarded the most in a free society. just because some jews are capitalists, doesn't mean capitalism is the enemy, you fucking mongoloid.

I recommend you read some of Curt Doolittle's work. He corrects for the ghetto ethics that result from Rothbard's rigorous yet exclusive application of the NAP. Instead of aggression, he points out that it is the imposition of born costs that must be forbidden, by force if necessary.

...

Because addressing these points takes books worth of text. That's why libertarian philosophers wrote books. Sup Forums isn't the place to have a debate of this nature.

you wont colonize the stars as a species without respecting someones authority, it sounds to me you foremost care of yourself and your material desires only, you fucking goy

You really have stretch logic to think that jews would support explicitly and implicitly anti semitic ideologies.

A simple thought experiment:

You find yourself along 10.000 others at the space station in the deep space, having everything needed to live but having limited resources and requiring maintenance and proffessional operation.

Which goverment or society form will you preffer?

Yes I am aware, however ancap is the logical conclusion of smaller and smaller govt, i suppose. Its worth addressing in any case. With small govt libertarianism/minarchism, other issues exist, like what kind of govt to have. As you can see, massively inclusive democracy does not work. We would have to ban women from voting.

I've read both rothbard and hoppe, although not everything of course. I've heard the many arguments for how ancap society would work, i merely remain unconvinced. Hoppe still entertains the notion of homesteading for example, as a way to legitimize property rights, which seems ridiculous to me. Property rights cannot objectively exist. Only force exists. This concept of a self-regulating decentralized society seems extremely far fetched and unrealistic, every single power vacuum in existence gets filled with a central power eventually.

Libertarianism under authoritarianism only works with philosopher kings. Philosopher kings don't exist. Until the posthuman man, perhaps.

>Because addressing these points takes books worth of text.
Than it's probably not gonna work well for the masses m8

The one who happens to control the oxygen supply should be the unquestioned king of course. He just happened to be there so he somehow has a moral right to the oxygen.

Anarchocapitalism run by American, Russian and Chinese megacorporations

Why do you think there has been a ancap country?

that's stupid. i am both libertarian and radical right according to your pic.

maybe youre stupid, ever thought about that mehmed?

You left a blank in there and I really can't infer what you meant. I think fascism appeals to people at different levels of intellect.

But my big issue with discussion of fascism is the definition of fascism. What does it mean?

Whenever someone mentions communism or socialism you get the no true scotsman bullshit. Proponents deny the purity of Cuba or Venezuela or the Soviet Union.

But people trot out the word fascism all the time and rarely do you see a discussion about how specifically it's defined.

That said, the examples of fascism which we can draw upon do reveal very specific flaws, particularly around alliances amongst fascist nations. I'm sure there are others, but I haven't really spent much time thinking about it as I'm not very politically motivated.

Monarchy obviously. Even every sci first show uses one, the Captain is rarely ever voted in by the cremated but his word is law and he appoints his own sub-rulers for different areas like engineering and navigation.

Just for future reference: soviet union and cuba are communist, venezuela is left populist.

Lolbertarianism is just pure ideology to justify attacks on collective identities of any sort that have an economic component or interest. The ruling elite appeal to lolbertarianism when they want to attack white interests and ship jobs overseas, attack working conditions, remove regulations, etc. You are both blue-pilled retards.

Exactly, feodalism is the ideal and supreme system ever designed by mankind.

Depends on the demographics of the people on the space station.

Human nature will make people want to work towards a goal which maximizes their evolutionary/genetic success.

Libertarianism is a Jewish perversion of the idea of individual achievement and market economy. It places money as the highest achievement. It is cancerous to the soul. There is nothing wrong with individual achievement and liberty within society as a whole. Libertarians do not believe that society and race is even a thing.

Except when you get a generation of retards as your rulers.

why are you mean to me?

Monarchy and Feudalism are not the same thing. Monarchy is a centralized personal authority, whereas Feudalism describes a small scale economic and military system involving serfs and lords. you can have a monarchy over a bunch of feudal units, but neither implies the other.

you have shit courts, nice trips

Feodalism is just the ideological conclusion of monarchism. Everybody should have their own noble to command them around.

What are you going to do about niggers bloc voting for gibs?

>be a libertarian
>grow up and learn the importance of family and traditon to live a fulfilling and happy life
>become "culturally" nationalist, low-key white suprematist

didn't it how before?? realized

So even if a "maximize the common good" or "everybody gets even chances" approach is taken, demographics will still need to be considered because people will work with their tribe to maximize their tribe's genetic success.

Biology is a fact. Biology is inescapable. Biology dictates much of human behavior, including group strategies to maximize genetic outcomes.

>trying to make ppl fall for the libertarian jewish trick
i see the shills paid by the jewish wretch pig anti-Christian subversive mauricio machir (jewish president of arg*ntina) have stepped up their game, they received an improved training over the first waves. How much does he pay you, subhuman? i know you work for the mossad nigger

Feudalism predated monarchy in Europe, and was eventually phased out for a kind of hybrid merchant-peasant system with a centralized military force instead of individual fiefdoms with their own authority.

This. Libertarian ideas work best when mixed with nationalism

You can still be "nationalist" and Ancap.
Just live in an independent area with only your people.

Libertarianism is another one of those ideologies that can work with a high iq ethnically homogeneous group but not with niggers and beaners and other toilet people.

>Venezuela is not socialist, it's left populist.
You prove my point.

It works great if you live in a white, right wing, nationalist state.

i know man
you have shit tap water. as soon as i drank that shit i got diarrhea.
also centre of Prague is pretty... diverse.

It evolved after the fall of Rome where former nobles and military commanders would offer protection in exchange for taxes.

you know you can be both a libertarian and a nationalist.

Money as the highest achievement Ummm what airline pamphlet did you read?

Meh after even after reading on libertarianism to me its closer to communism,on paper it says that it will do one thing but in reality it will be completly different.
On paper communism said that it will be a classles society where everything will be shared equally etc,yet in reality it had clear classes and culturally it was heavily nationalistic in eastern europe.

Not if you're intellectually honest. Libertarianism does not believe in governments or borders. It is an inherently Globalist ideology.

What is all this talk about "legitimizing property rights"? Rothbard goes over how to determine who owns what and it all sounded pretty reasonable when I read it. Are you saying there is something wrong with his ideas here? I'd be interested to hear your objections to Rothbard's position on property rights, since you're claiming you're familiar with his position.

Assuming you're fine with Rothbard's method for determining who owns what, then we're left with the issue of protecting property rights. As far as protecting property rights, to ensure that people can't steal, or violate your property with violence or whatever or that if someone does violate your property that they are punished... there are many possibilities that have been put forward. Are you aware of any of these? Since the government handles this sort of thing in our society, it seems quite reasonable to assume that if government stopped doing this, the demand for rights enforcement agencies would result in private businesses taking over because of the potential profit of doing so.

It's almost as if you have some fantastical idea of what governments are capable of. Government is just people providing a service and they use the threat of force to give them a monopoly in most cases, which insulates them from competition which results in bad service. Why do you think that opening up an industry in whatever service to competition would result in people being made worse off? This goes against basic economic theory. We need to remove the government monopoly on the enforcement of property rights, and by doing so, rights will be enforced more efficiently and everyone wins.

Venezuela is socialist but different type of socialist than the two other.

Libertarianism is an "adult" disease. It is the syphilis of mankind.

Yea but true monarchy requires feodalism.

You sound like a dumb commie with that post. Did you drink too much soy milk today?

Germans are subhuman authoritarians

Missed one.

Just a few little things by Rothbard and Friedman. Some of Molyneaux's earlier stuff as well. Really like Atlas Shrugged as well, until I got to the end and realized how fucked up of an ideology Ayn Rand actually had.
-t. Former AnCap

I put a division between Rome and Western civilization because the former disappeared around 500 and the latter didn't really appear till 900ad. I know that's not how a lot of people use the term 'western civilization' but there isn't really a word for Western European civilziation after 900ad.
That I could agree with, at least if 'true' means 'ideal' or something like that

>after reading on libertarianism to me its closer to communism
lol... and what exactly did you read? how much time did you spend reading?

Libertarian is the ideal. It's like when James Madison said that if people were angels, there would be no need for government. Libertarians are correct in their estimation that most of government, the vast majority in fact, is useless, wasteful, and even detrimental to the economy and society.

They forget however that there are subversive and sub-human groups within society which undermine its free foundations, either in their advocacy of government intervention or undermining of private social institutions which are necessary for the voluntary regulation of a free society.

Thus, something must be done about these subversive groups, and that is where stage three comes from.

Both systems are contrary to the Natural Law. Communism expects people to work for no reward, and Libertarianism expects people to think about nothing but financial gain and long term benefits when making decisions. Both systems are silly and idealistic.

Curt, stop self-advertising. It's getting ridiculous.

6th stage - Dixiecrat

I should probably stop using meme flags.
Curt lives in Ukraine, btw.

You responded to me but you did not answer either question I asked. Let's try again...

What exactly did you read? How much time did you spend reading?