Serious question, what the fuck is a socialist libertarian?

serious question, what the fuck is a socialist libertarian?

some communist bullshit

an idiot

an oxymoron. Kind of like a nationalist libertarian.

libertarian =/= ancap

One that thinks you'd agree to be a slave of the state for gibs and yet believe the bullshit they tell you that you have liberty when you're a slave.

A dumbass

>implying a low authority state could act in a socialist way without some sort of socially engineered culture of charity
>implying Christianity hasn't already failed in this regard

fpbp

confused

Long way to spell "faggot".

voluntary socialism

*anarcho-syndicalism

A LITE COMMIE

>serious question, what the fuck is a socialist libertarian?
a commie in denial

Oh, some serious answers.
Community and liberty are not incompatible. In theory, that is.

This

A Jew.

A particular brand of commie.
In terms of optics, it allows pseudo-commies to distinguish themselves from other commies.
Also a corruption of language that usually profits the various sellers of bullshit.
>Community and liberty are not incompatible. In theory, that is.
People spontaneously form communities of all kind, from your chess club to your parish to joint stock companies. It has nothing to do with the various anarcho-bullshit.

You mean a libertarian socialist, voluntary socialism. Classical libertarianism was a originally from Europe and didn't mean what American libertarianism means today. Exact opposite really. The libertarianism you see on this site is a anomaly only found in North America, not including Canada.

People talk about "Jews" here but all of their "selfish" ideologies; oy vey! Where revised by Jewish people. This site trash lol.

Team work, we’re everyone is a team player.
Government is for protection and to provide an environment that cultivates success.
It establishes a base line so that the free market can function on true Darwinian principals.
If you want to be a millionaire, prove you’re worth it. One billionaire isn’t really worth 1,000 millionaires, just fucking retire if you’re sacrificing too much

Social libertarians are socialist policies with no government. Basically those hippie communes people join, but on a much larger scale.
That would be a paleo-conservative.

when it's Chomsky, it's based

Commies invented libertarianism.

Another political branch of the low-trust high-context Jewish culture of lying.

This and it's the right way to live. Socialism by social means only.

the boston tea party was done by anarchists long before communism.

bro....read a book please. I get that this is a fashy board now but nah, that's bullshit

It's almost an oxymoron, but not quite. Anarcho-Communism and Libertarian Communism are definitely oxymorons, but since "Socialism" is extremely vague and poorly defined ( as there are a great many interpretations), it's more of a pipe-dream than an oxymoron.

Realistically, it's just not the right label. Communal Libertarianism is something closer to it's actual meaning, but it would require every single person in the commune to be of identical mind, so it's technically unfeasible.

Just like NeoConservatives and (((Alt-Right))), it's all Communism by the back door.

Anyone that says they are socialist or Communist is trying to subvert other movements to cater to them. I remember seeing Trans Twitter's that have been saying they are Anarcho Communist and the thing is Anarchy and Communism are two opposing ideas.

basically this. anarchy and communist are opposing, but they don't want to label themselves communist because of the stigma. I guess a socialist libertarian would just be someone living in a commune where this is no official coersive government but where everyone basically shares everything. good luck with that.

They were the original libertarians before Rothbard stole that word.

And their ideology made absolutely no sense then either.

a marxist desperately holding on to that brief period of spanish history where socialists didn't immediately run their country into the ground.

>Where revised by Jewish people. This site trash lol.

Time to sleep off that crack high, Jamal. You can try again later.

Socialism based on anarchist or libertarian ideals e.g. grassroots action

Chomsky has spoken about the USSR and its crimes.

probably a social parasite

>socialist libertarian
I leave this board for a couple weeks and you mongoloids start coming up with retarded as shit like this

>Classical libertarianism was a originally from Europe and didn't mean what American libertarianism means today.
Here is a quote from Frederic Basit's book "The Law." Frederic Basit is one of the many men that was influential on American Libertarianism, which at one point you would just call liberalism but you can thank the Dems for shitting that up.

>Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.I do not dispute their right to invent social combinations, to advertise them, to advocate them, and to try them upon themselves, at their own expense and risk. But I do dispute their right to impose these plans upon us by law – by force – and to compel us to pay for them with our taxes.

Get the fuck out you ignorant cunt.

I could perhaps see that term being applied to my self. In the sense that I support certain socalist policies such as universal healthcare. But, I also support freedom of choice and the freedom to call black people niggers.

That's the way Chomsky describes himself

It's a contradiction in terms. People who describe themselves as such are, in fact, totalitarian statists. They are wolves in sheep's clothing.

I assume it’s a commie who doesn’t necessarily want to kill you.

>I also support freedom of choice
But you don't support the freedom to choose not to pay for medicine, so you don't really support freedom of choice at all.

Because he is a hypocrite. If Chomsky were in office, he would be just like Stalin. All reds are alike.

I don't support the freedom not to pay for roads either. My belief is that there are certain things which go towards the collective good of our society that we should pitch in to pay for. So perhaps I'm not a libertarian if we go to the extremes of personal choice in a society.

A retard who doesn't know that words have meaning.

...

Still Libertarian. Just paleolibertarian master class, dude.

>leave me alone, but let me get some of your paycheck

>Socialism
>No government
That's not how that works

>there are certain things which go towards the collective good of our society
I agree, but medicine is NOT a public good. It is a private good. Most diseases requiring medical care are not contagious, and many of them, like diabetes and Alzheimer's, are self-inflicted, the result of bad personal choices. There is no reason why those who take care of their health should subsidize those who do not.

A Jew shyster. It makes sense to them because it's simply Marx + Rand-Rosenbaum. Jew + Jew = good. Goy = Bad.

What happens whem you combine socialism with fascism.

Oh wait...

>A bogan who hates christcucktianity and can name the Jew
Hello you beautiful unicorn, you want a beer?

A Socialist Libertarian is just a Social Librarian. Doesn't exist.

I dunno, what?

A Libertarian is someone who defends private property, a socialist is someone who thinks private property shouldn't exist. A libertarian socialist can only be someone who's a commie that defends that others shouldn't be forced to join their retardation. Which, honestly is fine in my book, as long as they stay away and don't stain the libertarian movement

Oxymoron

Socialism means government control
Libertarianism means little government control

Yeah Jews basically limit the spectrum of goy opinion to their own ideologues. Abrahamic religions, capitalism, socialism, individualism, feminism and egalitarianism. These are the only ideologies allowed to the good goy.

Libertarian is someome that defends private property isn't it?

>x1sy2dqY
Don't make me pay for your roads. That's violent and not a way to organize society if you care about freedom of choice.

whats the answer?

I actually agree with libertarian socialism on this point. If they want to go form their private, barefoot, hippie commune and fuck off then they should not be ridiculed for doing so. They should be praised and sent packing with warm wishes, never to return again.

That's just libertarianism.

Socialist itself means state control

Kys, don't ever call yourself libertarian again, you're just another commie under diferentes colours.

Only correct anwser to any kind of socialism

Socialism is to be against private property (to an extent), I would argue.

Aye, if they're going to their commune out of free will and not forcing anyone in then it would be illogical for anyone to preventiva them from doing so.

Socialism is to be against private property (to an extent), I would argue.

Aye, if they're going to their commune out of free will and not forcing anyone in then it would be illogical for anyone to preventiv them from doing so.

But it is. It already is a thing in the hippie communes. Whether it would actually work or not is irrelevant.

Yeah, the Falangists did a pretty good job of that.

>Community and liberty are not incompatible.
It depends on what one means by "community".

Certainly, small-scale communities, where everyone knows each other can organise themselves on a voluntary basis. As soon as communities grow larger than that it does not work voluntarily any more because the element of personal trust that people have in people they know is not present any more, so the governing body needs force to make the individual move if it refuses.

One might ask: why grow past that point then? The answer is: because power is always with the masses, and if you want to exert geo-political force, which needs to be backed by the potential to overcome with other with violence, then your community has no choice but to grow, because otherwise your competitors will and you will perish.

Essentially this, they believe a need for some forms of government but they need to justify themselves or they have every right to be dismantled. There's more to it than that of course, but yeah most libertarian socialist i've known usually end up settling on defining themselves as Minarchist

It also includes the voluntary organization of workers in the centers of industrial capitalism to take over the means of production. Not just in secluded pieces of land like hippies. Tard

A Libertarian who thinks people are inherently good instead of inherently greedy.

A lying fucking kike shill, or a retard, or both.
SAGE

Ayyy hol up. So you be sayin they can't make their own centers of industrial capitialism but dey finnah take over already established centers?

Might fine movement of strong individuals you got dere, dat sure am good!

Lol, yeah. The point is to take over the areas that workers have already built. You're assuming capitalists and the ruling classes are primarily responsible for them being built. The workers should own what they have built and significantly run already, knowmsayin?

Sounds like niggers taking land from the white farm owners in South Africa, just without mentioning race.

I agree with this. If you want public healthcare, make some form of health exam. Add taxes to poor health choices. (smoking, drinking in excess, laziness, poor eating habits.) The unhealthier you are, the more you have to py in taxes. But the people that would be for this would be in a minority, and the people that would be healthy enough for this to work would be even lower.

You saying that people that run and own businesses are lazy? Say that to a business owner you intolerable faggot. Actually work for something for once in your life.

I should clarify, the workers would run production through consensus, without bosses, currency, markets, etc. when they take over the means of production.

I'm saying their exploiting a system that not only was originated from an imposed ruling system (primitive accumulation of land taken from peasants and fenced off into private property by the gentry) but also forces people to unethically compete with each other and live in a cruel society in a way that's not only economically inefficient, but unethical and dehumanizing.

Bossing is unnecessary. Even if some may actually put in work for their business.

A commie trying to muddy the water.

Fuck off. You agree to terms of employment, find another job, or employ yourself. Commie filth. Why don't you use the free market to create a company where there is bottom ownership? Lack the drive? Initative? Risktaking behavior?

It's an ancap who either believes that if you remove government then people will naturally all be lovely to each other and take part in social welfare programs and other community programs willingly and all get along and cooperate well.

Alternatively it's someone who believes that democratic state government should break down and people should form mini local governments but don't call them governments and don't acknowledge that they would be able to force members in the minority to do what the majority decide on just like a normal state government can.

Yes, I know that. Who had the idea for the company, who got in debt, collected funding, convinced investors, brought in contracts to start the company? The workers? No, otherwise they wouldn't be workers.

I can't start up an organization or something of value because I don't have access to the means of production. Having to work for a boss, to use currency, engage in markets, and having to generally live in an impressive system created through primitive accumulation of ancestral lands turned into private property prevents me from doing so. Capitalism is an economically inefficient and dehumanizing system.

I plan on doing so, btw, but I have to work for a boss to get the currency to do so. Unessessary oppression.

Anarchism is better because it's run by workers in peace for each other and through committees through consensus, and production and enjoyment of human achieve is given based on ability and need, not ruled by those who have the most wealth.

It's a cute idea, cute. But it would probably end like Rousseau's ideas ended with Pol Pot.

libertarianism is minarchism (small government)

most libertarians would say the tasks a government should do are police and court system for internal security and military for external security and that's about it

socialist libertarians just include a welfare system in those vital state roles

You see: in anarchism I will magically have, out of nowhere, the shekels to start a company right now! And all the other things that start ups have to do won't apply to me, because...anarchism!

Most of that activities wouldn't be necessary with anarchism. What you're describing is the inefficiency and oppression of capitalism. Why should people be subservient to a boss if they work with them just because that boss had the original idea? It's nonsense and insane.

People should have access to the means of production and the enjoyments of life without having to generally engage in markets.

>GIBS ME DAT, YOU DINDU NUFFINK

Do you live in your mom's basement?

Not magically you moron, it would be alloted in some practical way by workers and people's committees to an individual, either through their initiative or through the individual request.

The old socialist adage, to each according to their ability, to each according to their need.

Fuck off with your gay shit, there are literally millionaire black business owners in America that descended from slaves.

Socialism in the broader sense, not Marxism.

You
> Daaa capitalism good I like da boss

Humanities potential is being stifled by the ignorance of people like you. Go jump off a cliff.

How ironic. Moes CRINGLE ain't what moes DO.

A kike.

STFU. You're making excuses for your lack of vision and work ethic. People support themselves with computers.
>Unnecessary oppreshun.
Stop viewing yourself as a victim and you'll live a much happier life.
>Through consensus.
until one of them organizes a few people, gets them well armed, and starts to demand tribute (taxes)

It's a contradiction in terms that retards like to use to sound smart.