I'm Sorry NatSocs But You Are Terrible On Economics

Why would you purposefully misallocate resources away from the White race? Ethnonationalist libertarianism is the answer.
>The Reich Food Estate, the state-controlled corporation responsible for agricultural production, regularly failed to feed its people. Agricultural output rarely surpassed 1913 levels, in spite of 20 years of technological advancement. Demand outstripped supply by 30 percent in basic foodstuffs like pork, fruit, and fats. That meant that for every ten German workers who stood in line to buy meat from the state-owned supply depots, three went home hungry

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide
geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/07/claims-that-us-is-a-genetic-melting-pot-appear-overblown-if-youre-white/
dictionary.com/browse/misallocation
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Libertarianism gives too much power to corporations who don't care about anything other than profit. Also enforcing ethnonationalist policies seems like it'd go against libertarianism's whole "small government" philosophy because you'd need the state to enforce that.

>Libertarianism gives too much power to corporations who don't care about anything other than profit. Also enforcing ethnonationalist policies seems like it'd go against libertarianism's whole "small government" philosophy because you'd need the state to enforce that.
Corporations are subject to competition and consumer rejection absent government favoritism. You mistake Crony Capitalism for a normal market interaction. Government is much more of a danger to the people. Sarin Gas anyone? Enforcing the ethnostate is not a problem for any libertarian that isn't an anarchist, which is to say, most of them.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide

Hence "ethnonational." I'd just go with national. Honestly this has always been my natural inclination. I think it's just real conservatism, as in conserving things, but with an attention to culture. The autistic inability to address culture is a fatal flaw for libertarianism. Economically it's not nearly as corporate friendly as people think. We would need regulations to safeguard against truly reckless practices but the interventionist system is far more corporate-friendly. Just take one example, Amazon in IL gets a full refund of their local taxes, so the employees are paying Amazon a fucking tax to work there. It just adds up like this everywhere, and then libshits throw up their hands in disgust about corporate greed and wonder why there are no competitors.

you are wrong in that its not capitalism, its just crony capitalism, and free market capitalism are different

You make some good points. However, culture is something that takes care of itself absent government interference and manipulation from (((certain people))). Superior values always rise to the top because they make more successful people. I swear, people see gays in the streets and then think its spreading to the rest of the population when they are only like 4% of the population and always will be...

they think that because its successful
in democracy only the worst rise to the top
at least in a monarchy, or fascism, do the most worthy rise to the top
but even in fascism, it tends to be democratic(looking at mussolini)

Free market capitalism IS crony capitalism just with less public sector support. There's no way to encroach on markets occupied by the major players because they simply have the power of capital and no regard for public interest. Corporations exist for the sole purpose of profit and so they need a balance in the form of true public will to keep them in reign. Finding the balance is the hard part

Whats to stop cheap labor flooding our country in a free market? Libertarianism is for the bluepilled who have not yet ascended

Read Hoppe

explain, don't be a leaf
in a free market
the only type of people that could possibly come in would be those invited, thus if someone wanted to house immigrants in ancapistan, they would have to support them themselves, or house them on their land at least.
if they were to be criminal, than they would be taken care of my concerned neighbors

Closed borders obviously. Read carefully...ETHNOSTATE.

How does a business make money?

inb4 that "70%" figure is the public sector supply and the other 30% was private food

>libertarianism
>closed borders
Choose one and only one

>libertarianism
Literal cryptokikery. Do you really think that Jews will suddenly stop abusing the free market? Do you really think you are so much better than other whites that your success is threatened by sharing capital with them? You sound like a Jew yourself.

There is no such thing as "misallocating resources" dipshit. Libertarians just assume that the purpose of the economy is to meet the demand of consumers, which is false. Desires of consumers are irrelevant. The purpose of the economy is to strengthen the nation.

you’re gonna lose this one porky heehee

Are you fucking retarded?

>culture is something that takes care of itself absent government interference
and yet we stand today in the midst of the firmest affirmation that obscenity laws do the opposite of harm artistic pursuits
civility being a necessary precondition of civilization, a ruling body must ensure a refined populace

>Free market capitalism IS crony capitalism
stopped reading there
how the hell is free market capitalism(no gov subsidies and interference at all) crony capitalism( government subsidies, tax incentives, 'too big to fail', etc
don't be blatantly retarded

>the only type of people that could possibly come in would be those invited, thus if someone wanted to house immigrants in ancapistan, they would have to support them themselves, or house them on their land at least.
Or just rent to them and give them a job. Exactly like spics in the USA today.

Stop formatting your posts like an autist

What part of ethnostate do you not understand you fucking moron? And libertarianism is an offshoot of classical liberalism which was founded by White Europeans and remains one of their crowing achievements.
>Do you really think that Jews will suddenly stop abusing the free market?
You sound like a fucking Commie, Jew.

wrong, spics today are gov subsidised
they get gov housing, health care, and everything else. if it were not for the gov funding them, they would not come

>There is no such thing as "misallocating resources" dipshit.
Hahahhha, that is the stupidest thing I've heard all day. Tell that to the U.S.S.R. who had people starving in bread lines with grain rotting in the silos.

sorry

is this more your pace?

>remains one of their crowing achievements.

Our cultural rot is the byproduct of big government, Cronyism, Jewish subversion, Anti-discrimination laws, diversity, multiculturalism, etc. Even then, magnificent works of art are being created but people just choose to focus on the negative to suit their agendas.

>What part of ethnostate do you not understand you fucking moron?
You want to compete against other whites, so you say. Very Jewish of you.

>And libertarianism is an offshoot of classical liberalism which was founded by White Europeans and remains one of their crowing achievements.

And it was developed and exploited by Jews. A new system is needed. It's not like bartering is exclusive to free markets.

>You sound like a fucking Commie, Jew.
There's a reason you lolbertarian faggots are laughed all the way back to plebbit when you shill your kike Kool-Aid here. Everyone knows why you want a free market Goldstein. It's so you can smuggle in some tangible v
C
capital being held by other Jews and set up a lending scheme so that Gentiles have to use your (((service))) to compete in the free market. Fucking gas yourself, memeflag brainlet redditor

Less than 50% take welfare

"Misallocation" presumes there is a "correct allocation" of those resources in the first place. That is not the case.

>Tell that to the U.S.S.R. who had people starving in bread lines with grain rotting in the silos.
Nothing wrong with that. They had more important business than feeding illiterate peasants.

America's failure is the Constitution's failure. Suffice to say it was not written well enough to prevent the growth of the federal government nor was it written well enough to ensure a country for Whites. Not to mention that small mistake of bringing Blacks to America...
>geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/07/claims-that-us-is-a-genetic-melting-pot-appear-overblown-if-youre-white/

>Less than 50% take welfare
do you really believe this?
in texas alone, one of the hardest hit areas, they use half of their 80+ billion budget on illegal health care alone, do you want me to link you to the comptrollers office?

>You want to compete against other whites, so you say. Very Jewish of you.
So you prefer monopoly, how ignorant of you.
>And it was developed and exploited by Jews. A new system is needed. It's not like bartering is exclusive to free markets.
Developed by some Jews, others were not Jews. Saying Jews can do no right is like saying Whites can do no wrong. You wouldn't be that infantile would you?
>There's a reason you lolbertarian faggots are laughed all the way back to plebbit when you shill your kike Kool-Aid here. Everyone knows why you want a free market Goldstein. It's so you can smuggle in some tangible vCcapital being held by other Jews and set up a lending scheme so that Gentiles have to use your (((service))) to compete in the free market. Fucking gas yourself, memeflag brainlet redditor

What a magnificent non-argument you've made. Except you forgot the part about the White ethnostate. Jesus fucking Christ, you're embarrassing...

dictionary.com/browse/misallocation

>do you really believe this?
Yes because it is a fact. Even if it weren't, it is irrelevant, since the spics would still come here and be given jobs and rented housing even if all government spending ended. This is simply the case because whites can maintain a higher standard.of living, which will always draw shitskins because it's better than the third world hell holes they create.

Hence the closed borders. This is not a problem for libertarians that aren't anarchists.

they can't immagrate when the there is no government saying the landlords HAVE to house them
honestly your claim is like what the lefties claim, that dreamer types and the lo AREN'T criminals AT ALL and they ALL have jobs and contribute more than give back. a complete fucking lie
i live less than an hour away from the border and tell you how full of shit you are

Again, this implies that there is a "correct allocation." An implicit assumption of liberal economics is that the "correct" allocation of resources is to meet the consumption demands of individuals. This is just a dumb liberal belief that has no justification except for "muh feels."

>Saying Jews can do no right is like saying Whites can do no wrong
No it isn't.

No but someone who thinks a libertarian society sans free trade and immigration would be a good idea is

You know that ethnos is nation in greek.
You said nationnationalism.
Silly if you don't mind me saying.

Who could know?

When natsoc are confronted with actual arguments they respond like 15 year olds.

>they can't immagrate when the there is no government saying the landlords HAVE to house them
But the landlords will rent to then willingly. Why wouldn't they? Money is money no matter who is spending it, and there will always be someone willing to rent to anyone.

>honestly your claim is like what the lefties claim, that dreamer types and the lo AREN'T criminals AT ALL and they ALL have jobs and contribute more than give back
No, my claim is not like that at all. But some are not criminals and have jobs. A vast majority have jobs.

"Ethno" is used as "ethnic" in the English language

>Corporations are subject to competition and consumer rejection absent government favoritism.
The imperative of capitalism will force people to go with the cheapest bidder. Unless you install some kind of welfare system that takes care of everyone, people simply don't have the monetary means to be all too picky.

How do you prevent capital flight? How do you prevent what happened in the USA, the rich using their power to get open borders?

>government is the only way to secure borders
wrong friend in a private property society the only people that can come in, would be those expressly invited, in the case where a man would want to house them, they would have to take care of them themselves, or at least house them. if they are criminal. then the neighbors would take 'care' of them. or the sheriff if need be

>But the landlords will rent to then willingly. Why wouldn't they? Money is money no matter who is spending it, and there will always be someone willing to rent to anyone.
because money isn't just money, you deeply underestimate the racism of people.
even if one scummy landlord would house them, then the community(assuming this in ancapistan) would exclude the landlord from society by not selling to him and being aggressive in the sense of not treating him like community, not selling and not buying from him.
for more>No, my claim is not like that at all. But some are not criminals and have jobs. A vast majority have jobs.

drug dealing is not a job

>No it isn't.
Yes it is.
>Again, this implies that there is a "correct allocation." An implicit assumption of liberal economics is that the "correct" allocation of resources is to meet the consumption demands of individuals. This is just a dumb liberal belief that has no justification except for "muh feels."
And for prosperity. But keep up with your belief that central planning can do better than the profit/loss system.

For the first generation this might work but the second generation might decide they'd like to invite gipsies on their territory.

Does the rest of the community have the right to prevent this? If not, then your system is set up for failure because a system that relies on everyone doing the "right" thing doesn't work: just look at Communism.

A government is composed of multiple people who can be held responsible for their decisions by the community. Individuals in your laissez-faire system are only responsible for themselves.

>Yes it is.
No, it actually is not the same thing at all.

>And for prosperity.
Prosperity for whom? Again, you have the implicit assumption that meeting consumer demand is good and is the purpose of the economy. I do not agree.

>But keep up with your belief that central planning can do better than the profit/loss system.
It can do better. It does much better for meeting the needs of the centrally planned state.

>Does the rest of the community have the right to prevent this?
yes they do, we are not lefties, pic related

1. You sound like a cultural marxist. "There is no correct interpretation, as all facts can be interpreted in an infinite number of ways".
2. You seem to believe that human beings' only purpose in life is to serve an abstract construct of a nation, which is pure bullshit. People can exist without a nation. Nations can't exist without people. It's obvious which is more important.
3. Objectively speaking, nothing but individual humans and their physical environment exists. A nation can't have any demands, because it's a non-entity. When you're saying that a nation has some demands, it's actually a metaphor for "I think a lot of people will benefit from doing X greatly". People don't benefit from starvation. You're literally crazy. You're the philosophical equivalent of a dude who genuinely thinks real life is a video game.

I'm glad you posted this, because your posts are actually quite redpilling. They show that nazis are progressives and that OP is right. Hitler was a vegetarian animal rights activist with a shitty moustache and a giant fucking loser. He was a quintessential 1930 soyboy.

You, on the other hand, are a faggot.
Get fucked.

pic

>No but someone who thinks a libertarian society sans free trade and immigration would be a good idea is
I disagree, some things are more important than the price of Widgets.
Welfare is inferior to private charity.
Matching tariffs against countries that use them against us, and no corporate income tax provides a nice incentive. That and little regulation besides safety and environmental. Also without Cronyism, small businesses would thrive, lessening the power of the corporations. Constitution and lobbying rules prevent the other scenario.

>you deeply underestimate the racism of people.
No I don't. You're nuts if you think most people would choose to be racist and poor over being richer and selling to everyone. We have evidence against that everywhere. All of our politicians are people who chose to sell out their race for money. All major corporations do that same. And businesses that sell to everyone will naturally be more profitable and out compete those who exclude on race.

>A government is composed of multiple people who can be held responsible for their decisions by the community.
Hahahaha tell that to North Koreans. As for your second point, we essentially had laissez-faire in America for a long time. And you know what? The family unit and community was never stronger.

If you want to organise this kind of removal you have no choice but create a state with a government if you don't want to remain at the level of tribal villages.

>we essentially had laissez-faire in America for a long time
And we all know the result of that.

Pic related.

>No, it actually is not the same thing at all.
Yes it is.
>Prosperity for whom?
The people.
>Again, you have the implicit assumption that meeting consumer demand is good and is the purpose of the economy. I do not agree.
Well then, I say you are an evil person.
>It can do better. It does much better for meeting the needs of the centrally planned state.
Yes, clearly...

>People can exist without a nation. Nations can't exist without people.
False. Humans are social animals. The tribe precedes the individual. In fact, the concept of "the individual" was almost unknown to ancients and did not fully emerge until modern time.

>Objectively speaking, nothing but individual humans and their physical environment exists.
False.

>A nation can't have any demands, because it's a non-entity
False.

>nazis are progressives
False. You don't know what either of these words mean.

1923. Are u fucking kidding me?
Take a look at 1933 u fuckign maggot

> You're nuts if you think most people would choose to be racist and poor over being richer and selling to everyone.
you hasn't been to the south have you? those people are confined to cities that are mass brainwashed by (((marxists)))
>We have evidence against that everywhere. All of our politicians are people who chose to sell out their race for money. All major corporations do that same.
you mean jews
>And businesses that sell to everyone will naturally be more profitable and out compete those who exclude on race.
you are right so far as money, but when did that start happening historically? when jews took over in the mid century of the 1900s.
if we continued the course of white america without the gov having to FORCE most companies to sell/hire to other races
it wouldn't have happened

What is that? I have never seen that meme before. But would you care to address the point? Are you blaming slavery on capitalism? Also, like I addressed before, the Constitution was not written well enough (probably on purpose) to ensure that the federal government wouldn't balloon in size and the country was preserved for Whites only.

>tribal villages
we acknowledge municipality as the basis of all society
and acknowledge the peace can only be kept properly with the city state/jeffersonian method.

also you don't need the state, militias and private death squads will do the job much better

>also you don't need the state, militias and private death squads will do the job much better
Up to the point where an outside nation filled with people who are men enough to submit to order rather than act like uppity children decides to take what is yours, murder your men and enslave your women and children.

>What is that? I have never seen that meme before.
Maybe you need to lurk more then.

>implying that can happen when everyone is armed
there is a reason america wasn't invaded prior the turn of the century circa 1900's
because unlike those 'good' statists, our people were all armed
it the unfortunate nature of democracy that lead us to this degenerated state

>Welfare is inferior to private charity.
Private charity works on a tribal level where people know each other. It doesn't work at a nation-wide level where people don't know those to whom they're donating, forcing those in need to advertise their need. That way the money doesn't necessarily reach those in need but more likely those who can advertise their need the best (i.e. the organisations behind).

>we essentially had laissez-faire in America for a long time
This is false. Laissez faire did not become widespread in the USA until the early 20th century

>Yes it is.
No, it is not. It is possible for "Jews do nothing right" to be true and "whites do nothing wrong" to be false at the same time.

>The people
"The people" is a meaningless term.

>Well then, I say you are an evil person
Evil is not real. Stop believing in fairy tales and thinking like a child.

Luckily things called towns, cities, and states exist.

It can.

Cleetus and Billy Bob are a part-time deathsquad and they also have to worry about paying their bills, what's going to happen to their families, etc.. Oskar Dirlewanger and his merry band of town rapists are full-time professional deathsquad and they're fully committed to their craft.

Wealth is not evenly distributed among those.

>you hasn't been to the south have you?
The south is mostly anti-racist cucks. I live there, and i am not seeing your point.

>when jews took over in the mid century of the 1900s.
Jews took over earlier than that. How did they create the Federal reserve in 1913 if they only took over in the mid 20th century? How did they get America involved in the great war? They obviously had enough power to get those things accomplished

> False. Humans are social animals. The tribe precedes the individual. In fact, the concept of "the individual" was almost unknown to ancients and did not fully emerge until modern time.

Patently false. The individual ego appears before the process of socialization even starts. Children are little sociopaths until they learn that other people are just like them and start developing empathy. There are people that never go through this process.

You're basically throwing your feels and delusions against our biology and it's hilarious. You're like a feminist. A rabid bitch that should be thrown out of a helicopter.

> False.
> False.
Okay. What are the physical/biological properties of a "state"? It has none. It's a concept, not an entity.

> False. You don't know what either of these words mean.

Progressives are people who believe in advancing the human condition via social engineering. They believe in linear, human-controlled progress, as opposed to traditional conservatives, who believe that the human condition can't be altered and had a more contemplative approach towards living.

Both nazis and cultural marxists believe in the same ridiculous notion of progress. Aside from your sense of aesthetics, you're no different from a commie.

Like most naziboo simpletons caught with their pants down you're probably going to deny that you're a progressive. Which is hilarious, because Hitler embraced it. He was proud of making the Reich the most progressive country on Earth and he was proud that Germany can "make socialism work" by transforming into a socialist gradually instead of killing all the members of the elite like the reds.

>implying oskar dirlewanger would not get killed by disgruntled fathers and the townsfolk
there are plenty of stories of bad apples just 'disappearing' in small towns they terrorize
mob justice can't be held back by some invading faggots, especially when all men are armed
you underestimate angry men

>This is false. Laissez faire did not become widespread in the USA until the early 20th century
That's true, before the early 20th century the USA had a vast regulatory bureaucracy.

>No, it is not. It is possible for "Jews do nothing right" to be true and "whites do nothing wrong" to be false at the same time.
Possible but empirically verifiable to not be the case. You would be a fool to say that Jews can't do right.

>"The people" is a meaningless term.
Nay, anyone with half a brain knows exactly what I mean when I refer to "the people."

>Evil is not real. Stop believing in fairy tales and thinking like a child.
I don't want to get into a debate about the nature of morality.

We are talking about an invading army that means business. A full-blown genocide.

Yeah, that's unfortunate.

What are you talking about?

>Patently false.
No, it's true. Primitives have no concept of the individual at all. Ancients only had a slight understanding. The individual as a concept did not even exist until the modern period, and grew into it's full form only a few hundred years ago with Hobbes. The tribe precedes the individual is an undeniable fact.

>What are the physical/biological properties of a "state"?
You are asserting that for something to be real, it must have physical or biological properties. This is not the case.

>Progressives are people who believe in advancing the human condition via social engineering
National socialists did not believe this.

>Both nazis and cultural marxists believe in the same ridiculous notion of progress
No, you're an idiot. And you conflate progressives, "cultural Marxists," Nazis, and commies, which is retarded. Liberals, such as yourself, have much more in common with progressives that Nazis do, since progressivism is simply a branch of liberalism.

>You would be a fool to say that Jews can't do right.
They can't.

>The south is mostly anti-racist cucks. I live there, and i am not seeing your point.
you live in the cities or something? i remember walking into a rest stop in maybe, tennessee at the time(2013/4)
as a basque man, i can tell you how hard those anglos gave me looks. every single man and women in that bar had eyes on me and my senpai like the wanted us gutted, me, my ma, and my cousins and aunt, got the fuck out of there as fast as we could
you are completely fucking wrong
>Jews took over earlier than that. How did they create the Federal reserve in 1913 if they only took over in the mid 20th century? How did they get America involved in the great war? They obviously had enough power to get those things accomplished
take over, like what we have now, with jew being EVERYWHERE in business, media, politics, etc. was not the case from the turn of the 20th centurary
they only got some key men in places, like the advisors(non-elected positions), and the easy places, like hollywood. business as a whole did not become infected, as the white creators did not like jews. it wasn't until a little thing called business law, specifically the law saying that if you make over x that you HAVE to become a public company and open up a board of (((stockholders))) and an (((hr))). that this became a thing
the had only very miniscule power back in the day, but they knew how to get it, hell they were fighting the founding fathers before this, but they won the first battles, and it wasn't till they all died that they 'won'

>as a basque man, i can tell you how hard those anglos gave me looks. every single man and women in that bar had eyes on me and my senpai like the wanted us gutted, me, my ma, and my cousins and aunt, got the fuck out of there as fast as we could
Probably because they thought you look Arab. They love niggers though.

>you are completely fucking wrong
Tell me I'm wrong about the place I have lived all of my life because you drove through one time and someone gave you a bad look.

Your political experiment was imagined and brought to you by kikes. That's all you needed to know to walk away and not be a faggot. Nice pipedream though.

like world war one. when something like that happens EVERYONE will get involved, like if walmart were to become a state in ancapistan, and then costco, walgreens, ford, monsanto. would band together to fight walmart, even any crackhead would start to fight and loot them as it is now socially,and morally justifiable to attack them, there is a reason kings did not do what you just predicted, because nobody likes a warmonger
in this case of non business aggression, like you said, then the local communities, any big cities nearby, would join in defense. as well as the corporations that sell to the local people, as those genociders would be attacking their customer base
and this is excluding the idea of mercenaries and private security, for more on that, pic related

> No, it's true. Primitives have no concept of the individual at all. Ancients only had a slight understanding. The individual as a concept did not even exist until the modern period, and grew into it's full form only a few hundred years ago with Hobbes. The tribe precedes the individual is an undeniable fact.

Motherfucker, don't give me your mystical bullshit. Children are aware of self before they're aware that the people around them are conscious beings too. It's how human biology works. Read up on feral children. Those kids had a sense of self even though they didn't even know a single language.

You're literally as retarded as a modern SJW denying the existence of gender.

> You are asserting that for something to be real, it must have physical or biological properties. This is not the case.

More mystical bullshit.

> National socialists did not believe this.

Of course they did. Their entire ideology was based on the idea of linear progress, down to the most basic concepts.

> No, you're an idiot. And you conflate progressives, "cultural Marxists," Nazis, and commies, which is retarded. Liberals, such as yourself, have much more in common with progressives that Nazis do, since progressivism is simply a branch of liberalism.

Like most Hitler-worshipping faggots, you think that "progressive" is a synonym of "socialist". But that's wrong, you collosal faggot.

It's a philosophical stance, which is older than both nazism and communism and which spawned both of these movements, along with your "liberals" (it's funny how you mistake liberals for libertarians and can't recognize a conservative).

>Probably because they thought you look Arab. They love niggers though.
lol what? i like the bantz, but they most certainly wouldn't like niggers if they didn't like other races of white man
>Tell me I'm wrong about the place I have lived all of my life because you drove through one time and someone gave you a bad look.
well where the fuck do you live? the cities were fine and lot of white trash/niggers were there. making us not stand out, but when i went to racially homogenous committees, it was a different story
the only exception being small texas towns, as most of the people share my homeland

>What is classical liberalism

way to be completely retarded, most of the kikes you speak of were statist with good economic ideas, and do not comprise the majority of the movements philosophers

Yep, you're right. No Jew has ever done a good thing in the history of the world. Hope you aren't Christian.

>Motherfucker, don't give me your mystical bullshit. Children are aware of self before they're aware that the people around them are conscious beings too. It's how human biology works. Read up on feral children. Those kids had a sense of self even though they didn't even know a single language
Nobody is talking about children. And it is not mysticism, it's history.

>Their entire ideology was based on the idea of linear progress, down to the most basic concepts.
No it wasn't. It was actually built on cyclical history.

>Like most Hitler-worshipping faggots, you think that "progressive" is a synonym of "socialist".
No I don't. I actually corrected you for conflating them with communists.

>it's funny how you mistake liberals for libertarians and can't recognize a conservative
Libertarians are liberals. So are conservatives.

>No Jew has ever done a good thing in the history of the world.
Correct.

>Hope you aren't Christian.
I'm not. As I said, stop believing in Jewish fairy tales.

>Nobody is talking about children. And it is not mysticism, it's history.
Can't into logic, huh? If children have a sense of self before gaining the ability to empathize with others, how could human beings ever have an ability to empathize with others without having a sense of self?

Like I said, you're literally feminist-tier retarded. Kicking your ass is so easy it's not even funny.

> No it wasn't. It was actually built on cyclical history.

Oh, right. That explains all the massive social programs, which ranged from eliminating entire races to introducing government-based child care programs and creating Hitlerjugend to spawn a new generation of better, stronger men, all in the name of improving the spiritual and material condition of the Reich.

Literally every policy of the Reich was supposed to achieve linear progress and you're saying that it was based on cyclical history, like medieval societies which remained fairly stable in terms of social structures for decades.

> No I don't. I actually corrected you for conflating them with communists.

And you were wrong. Every commie is a progressive, but not every progressive is a commie. Geddit?

> Libertarians are liberals. So are conservatives.

Neck yourself. At the very least, don't have children. You're polluting the gene pool.

>we essentially had laissez-faire in America for a long time.
And where is it now, retard? It led to you becoming the most degenerate society on earth. Libertarianism naturally leads to bigger states and degeneracy.

Man, duck Nazis. Nazism sucks. I'm a capitalist and support freedom. Nazis are against natural selection and survival of the fittest.

Here's an example of why National Socialism is also anti survival of the fittest and natural selection.

I'm a black male, and I currently have 3 girlfriends. 2 white women, and a Japanese woman. Now, in a natural world, I aquire all three of them, and can even seek more.

Meanwhile, National Socialism and other collectivist retards want to take 2 of them away from me since i'm ''only supposed to have 1 gf''. In fact, no, they want to take all 3 of my girls away from me ''because I'm black''. They want the state to come in and remove my girls from me just so they can partner them up with some of Richard Spencer's tiki torch virgin boys.

Collectivism is for losers, and doesn't value survival of the fittest/natural selection.

yummy pasta

>Collectivism is for losers, and doesn't value survival of the fittest/natural selection.
Neither does libertarianism or any post-tribal society that relies on advanced technology, you fucking idiot. Libertarnians need to be gassed.
There is nothing about survival of the fittest in a society where everything is established for you prior to your existence. You are coddled from birth by technology and advanced social relations. Stop appealing to evolutionary theory to support your retarded meme ideology, you obese neckbeard.

Only if the government isn't constructed properly. Yet for some reason I can still own a gun...