Libertarians

Is libertarianism really as bad as the left when it comes to supporting degenerate behaviour? Do libertarians really support Islam drugs and faggotry?

Other urls found in this thread:

lewrockwell.com/2014/10/hans-hermann-hoppe/open-borders/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Degenerate is a buzzword, it's Sup Forums's version of a leftist control term. Libertarians don't want the state to interfere in people's lives, whether its left or rightist interference is irrelevant, they aren't necessarily left or right, and don't necessarily support liberal or conservative values.

Johnson happens to be socially liberal as well as not a puritan libertarian.

No one is being paid to shill for Hillary by the way. It's a Republican-funded lie and a pathetic attempt to smear her campaign.

Leaf, I dont think you have to say about preventing degenerate behavior

Libertarians are just wealthy degenerates while liberals are poor degenerates.

Wealthy degenerates = good hardworking job creators
fucking commie

No one is being shilled to shill for Shillary by the way. It's a JIDF-funded shill and a pathetic at shilling to shill her campaign.

I'm from the west. We aren't all pro fag cucks like Trudeau

Libertarians just dont believe that the government should have the right to criminalize behavior that is not hurting anyone. However, a libertarian could still very much write conservative articles condemning liberal and degenerate lifestyles, as well as participate in conservative church/community groups that aim to make a more virtuous society.
>Should racemixers be sent to prison by armed men?
No
>Should they be laughed at, socially ostracized and looked down upon
Yes

Fuck off open border shill

I don't really care what you do just mind your business.

fuck off with this guy

> Do libertarians really support Islam drugs and faggotry?
generally yes, although not all do

johnson supports all 3, but only islam minus the shari`a

govt should not be involved in social issues at all

>>Should they be laughed at, socially ostracized and looked down upon
>Yes

That's just your opinion, the correct statement should be

>Should we deny people the freedom to laugh at, ostracize, or look down upon any given group?
No.

As always racist scum are always trying to inject their narrative and opinions while describing libertarianism. Libertarianism allows for ideologically opposite groups to form, including those who aren't against racemixing.

they are better than leftists.

the left likes to put laws in place about everything, including actively protecting and promoting degeneracy.

It's up to lazy neckbeards like you to convince others what is 'degenerate', not the state

Libertarianism isn't about being "fiscally conservative and socially liberal." Its about private property, the Non-Agression Principle, and the abolition of the state. It was never intended by Murray Rothbard to become a 4/20 open borders fag-fest.

Degenerate behaviour is self purging. If it wasn't for socialized medicine, and insistent Goverment intervention... The Fag movement would have died out from AIDS and drug abuse years ago.

You can be a libertarian and still be for closed borders. In order to have a free society you need to protect it from foreign threats.

As an outsider If you allow me to chime in.

420-open borders and fag fest cannot be prevented without a strong state. American libertarians are not libertarians. They are social conservatives who call themselves libertarians because
1-Dubya's fuck ups
2-08 crisis.
Hence between 08-13 libertarianism was the hip and trendy word to say. If you remember Sup Forums back then it had far more libertarians than today, statist was used as a serious insult.

Now the popularity is faded and social conservatives are going back to their own original ideologies, social conservativism, right wing populism (like Trump) and they shit on libertarians. Because the shame factor of calling yourself a conservative is gone and suicidal libertarian policies like open borders are now being discussed and discarded.

And then there are people like you who still try to portray libertarian as something which its not. You can't be libertarian and want big daddy guburmunt to regulate the free flow of labor and movement. If a mexican worker and an american farmer come up to an agreement then its their agreement only. Same with the mexican worker and american food seller or american lodge giver. you wan't to stop this and have big daddy guburmunt to prevent mexicans from entering i..e you want it to interfiere into the labor market.

Thats not libertarianism, If you want capitalism but with border protection, tariffs etc just call yourself a right wing populist or plain old conservative. Plenty of people discarded the libertarian term for this very reason. You want to have it your cake and eat it too, "free market policies when I want it but socialist-protectionist policies when I don't" is not libertarianism is conservatism

again, a lot of you have made the transition but few of you are still left behind, trying to shape-label libertarianism something it is not.

>420-open borders and fag fest cannot be prevented without a strong state
Without the state subsidizing it, they would die off.
>American libertarians are not libertarians. They are social conservatives who call themselves libertarians
If you have even been in a libertarian circle, you will know that this is bullshit.
>The entire two paragraphs on immigration and trade.
I never argued for protectionism. I only said something against open borders because it is a tool of the left to expand the size of government.

In a libertarian society, nations would voluntarily exist and in most nations, they would see fit to use voluntary means to restrict immigration.

>trying to shape-label libertarianism something it is not
Read Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Lew Rockwell and the latter works of Murray Rothbard. Neither one of them supported open borders. Open borders was injected by the Koch Brothers to push libertarianism to the left.
lewrockwell.com/2014/10/hans-hermann-hoppe/open-borders/

Hi Sup Forums,

I am an insider working with Roger Stone. Stone has informed his staff that Hillary and her campaign strategists plan to split the Republican vote by promoting Gary Johnson. This is why you are seeing a greater coverage of the Libertarian candidate on MSM news.

Please ignore these Johnson threads. Copy pasta this text and share with other Sup Forums members in any Shill Johnson threads that appear.

Sincerely,
user

I just applied alt-right ideaology into the equation to make it easier to understand for Sup Forumsacks.
What you are getting at is exactly what Im getting at, I just chose race mixing becauss its relatable, and is along the lines of what I believe.
>Racemixing leads to the death of cultural and religious heritage and identity as well as the destruction of diversity.

What's a libertarian who doesn't support open borders or any of that tranny nonsense?

Well, it's not about support, it's about lack of suppression.

Who is to say you are not the degenerate, leaf? Besides, degenerate is essentially Sup Forums's retarded catch all for anything it doesn't like.

But you're making it seem like those ideas against racemixing originate from libertarianism, which could not be farther from the truth.

Some 'alt-right' memester idiot is going to automatically assume that libertarianism is against racemixing without prohibiting it at a state level.

And we're back to square one having people ask stupid questions like the OP. You're unequivocally posting a pants on head retarded example which no doubt originates from your unhealthy obsessions about race.

No libertarians hope natural selection weeds out degeneracy

Many conceptions of Libertarianism are degenerate at their philosophical core. And I mean "degenerate" here as in "degenerates society, civilization, and morality in the name of individualist hedonism". It's cultural marxism with a suit and a fancy car.

Pic related is what the founder of the libertarian movement said about open borders.

Let people do whatever they want (to an extent) master race

Pic related is his most brilliant student. Also quote from him:
>In a covenant concluded among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one's own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very purpose of the covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They – the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism – will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.

Everyone who is claiming shit like such as

>degenerates society, civilization, and morality in the name of individualist hedonism". It's cultural marxism with a suit and a fancy car.

Ha deepthroated the propaganda of the Koch-brothers who are pushing a so called left-libertarian agenda through the Cato institute and Reason magazine, which is a cancer on the libertarian movement.

Just Libertarian or Right-Libertarian. Left-Libertarians are the ones who support open borders/trannies.

Paleolibertarian.

Why would we ever care about making Libertarianism politically correct?

If you're trying to court Berniefags, you might as well start banging your head against the wall. Gary Johnson doesn't need their ilk. The disillusioned republicans voting for GJ + Berniefags not voting should suffice.

Libertarians support freedom of religion. Many of them are going to be naive about Islam and what happens when your population hits some minimum percentage of Muslims. A Muslim population of 1% is not at odds with Libertarianism. A Muslim population of 10% is going to be at odds with Libertarianism. They'll start asking for/demanding concessions that Libertarians find repulsive. This is because Islam is as much a political system as it is a religion.

In the end, Islam is quite the conundrum for people who want equal treatment under the law and religious freedom. I generally consider those to be good things, except for when you are talking about a religion that also seeks to replace existing political systems with some bad acid trip of a religion from a psychotic pedophile caravan raider in the 7th century.

>JIDF
If anyone, they'd be shilling for Trump, considering how hard he panders to Israel.

Libertarianism IS part of the alt-right...

I stated that a libertarian "could still" believe in conservatism to demonstrate that conservatism and libertarianism aren't mutually exclusive. I also don't have an obsession over race, and am myself mixed-race, as well as a friend of many other mixed-race and other raced people. Worlwide, I would say that most people do not believe in race-mixing or even marriage across religious boundaries for that matter.
>Just because you are a mongrel, doesn't mean you should advocate it.

No. Thats the entire point ya goofus. Libertarianism doesnt "support" any of that shit, they let people do what they want and if its bad they will thin themselves out. The left jams funding into it for them to survive and spread their bullshit.

2 completely abd totally different things.

I consider myself libertarian

I also consider islam to be the greatest threat to libertarian views

Islam is a cancer and needs radiation to cure

Some people consider it far left or alt-left.

Libertarians dont have to support open boarders. Its not Anarchism. There is still a state. The state is just used for basic infrastructure and protecting the nation from foreign threats. Secured Boarders is not just about labor. Its about protecting the country from foreign threats. Once your in you can get abortions, grow pot, shoot guns, get married to a faggot, or do whatever the fuck you want as long as you aren't infringing on the rights of others.

>do these strawman images posted from my iPhone validate my retarded shitposting?

I don't know OP, why don't you take the cock our of your mouth and tell us?

Some people are retarded then. How could anyone even think that the most free market movement is on the same side as socialism and communism?

The same way that you could post a picture with fascism on the left of an "economic" scale when fascism is on the same axis of libertarianism and not the left/right paradigm.

This. At the true core of libertarian beliefs is the removal of gov from all non gov sectors.

It's not about making it politically correct, it's about demonstrating a pillar of libertarianism, which is freedom of association and speech.

Giving a one sided stormfag tier example will undoubtedly result in:

1. Leftists or any politically correct person thinking it is an ideology that inherently is bigoted

2. stormfag memers and any strain of racists assuming libertarianism is inherently aligned with their views

3. libertarianism gaining a bad and incorrect reputation

4. people won't actually learn what libertarianism is about

This is why it's always important to mention the whole picture instead of the one sided examples you're giving.

This. I hate the 'fascism is left wing' fags.

DUDE FAGS LMAO
DUDE WEED LMAO
DUDE GUNS LMAO

>Libertarians support freedom of religion.
Not really. Locke for example was mostly against it. And in a purely libertarian society,segregation is not outlawed,so banning muslims would be acceptable.

In a libertatian world, the land and businesses would be privately owned.

Muslims couldn't move to a libertarian country unless a private land owner was willing to allow them to live on their property and employ them.

They're not against Islam, they would just say 'go be a Muslim somewhere else'.

>Degenerate is a buzzword, it's Sup Forums's version of a leftist control term.
This. It basically means "ethics derived from Catholic and 50s-era American thought are the only applicable guidelines for life on earth".

So you don't think that faggotry for example is degenerating to not only the nation and human condition but to the individual getting caught up in it? It's like drugs you get into it either to be cool or a way of coping with other problems but later on you can't stop and it fucks up your life

It's not the government's job to make you a better person, nor is it to force everyone to act in a way that doesn't make you feel offended.

>John Locke
>Modern Libertarians
>One of these things is not like the other
>One of these things does not belong

That flag. Cheers, and drink a VB for me.

I've yet to see HOW it is, but I'm far more ready to accept that (it IS unnatural, but that needn't mean bad) than, say, people who claim that having the AoC at 18 or not legalising drugs somehow makes a society more functional when there's plenty examples to the opposite.

Nevermind the whole abortion issue which just isn't tenable from an atheist perspective.

Libertarianism is not libertarian.

The founders of modern libertarianis may politically been ancaps they were cultural traditionalist.

Gary Johnson is a faux libertarian beltway cuck.

Beltway? Beltway? You fucking cuck.

Does Hans Hermann Hoppe support degenerate behavior?
Is he considered a Libertarian?

As a philosophy, Libertarianism is entirely about when application of force is acceptable, and the extent of the role of government.

It's irrelevant how they feel about degeneracy, more so whether it is acceptable to use the force of government to stop it.

I think the Alt-Right is generally correct when they say many libertarians tend towards supporting libertine/degenerate actions, or will only ever defend them - not recognizing the erosion of culture and community around them.
Or they'll see an issue like WEED LMAO, then get caught up in arguments about the health consequences, basically spouting nonsense.