Is libertarianism flawed in any way. How come something retarded like socialism is more mainstream than this

Is libertarianism flawed in any way. How come something retarded like socialism is more mainstream than this.

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/dp/0984203729
youtube.com/watch?v=3eyJIbSgdSE
financialsense.com/contributors/jr-nyquist/fantasy-fraud-and-socialism
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It's flawed because it's just a meme

only bad part about libertarianism is open borders

It goes too far in the other direction.

In practice, Libertarianism just enables Socialism.

Yep.
Extreme individualism is same shit as extreme collectivism. Utopian idiocy.

In practice how? A free market is a cornerstone of libertarian ideology which is basically the anthithesis of socialism.

>libertarianism benefits those who produce value
>socialism benefits those who consume value
>there are more people that consume than produce

The flaw is that most people crave leadership and management.

The government is their parents when they leave home. People need to put faith in something and in the absence of religion, the state becomes their god. They worship it with 'hope and change' mentality.

Libertarianism is for adults. Independent thinkers who want to live independent lives.

Nothing in place to prevent retards from doing something stupid, like turning communist.

>>socialism benefits those who consume value
Only in the short term. In the long term, the fact that the producers get fucked over fucks over the consumers.

Only a problem with a welfare state and restrictions on freedom of association and firearms.

Also, immigration restriction for national security purposes is just fine.

Open border is meaningless if there are no gun laws and no welfare.

You forgot to talk about the feeling of Euphoria inherent to all Libertarians. Grow the fuck up, people are social animals, being autistic is not a sign of maturity.

It just doesn't seem to succeed in a libertarian market

libertarianism is republicanism dumbed down so somebody on their 10th tallboy can kind of wrap their mind around it.

This.

Also open borders and free trade are both retarded.

It ignores nature and the predicaments it puts humans into and molds humans in nature and nurture ways.

You don't need to believe in open borders to be a libertarian.

I say if they ain't American, fuck 'em.

It's overly utopian.
Libertarians expect people to act intelligently, when in reality, niggers, white trash, morons, ect exist.

Good points. But unlike socialist adoctrination, libertarianism doesnt go against human nature so it could still in theory work with a proper change of ethos.
>you have the tools to be productive if you fail fuck off somewhere
Imagine that being the first thing you hear in kindergarten.

>Only in the short term.
The average current year socialist voter has an attention span of a few months and an historical perspective of 70 years (the world was created in the lolocaust, but he will insist on calling you historically illiterate). Have you seen their time preference?

lol this

Retards turning communist can't hurt anybody else if their stupid communist ideology has no political/legal power.

Libertarians have Constitutions too...

The issue is the devotion to an ideology rather than sitting down and figuring out what works best. Libertarians and Socialists are both guilty of it.

That could be said to literally any ideology at any given time in history by any side. The difference is that libertarianism is the only one who doesn't force anybody of anything, which is the whole point.

The larger the group gets, the less retarded it needs someone to be to convince them to join. It starts with retards, it grows to normies. This is basically what we're seeing now.

>muh open borders

Fuck off.

You're literally proving my point. You're begging with an ideology rather than looking for what works. Also, libertarian societies would still have police, so they are still using force.

You obviously understand what you are talking about.

It goes against Christianity. Individualism is a sign of the anti-Christ.

Romans 13 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

amazon.com/dp/0984203729

>having conviction is bad : the post
Following this, no theory of action should be taken seriously. Including pragmatism which is some grade A meme ideology (it just works!). This kind of anti-theory has been purged long ago in most matters. Besides, you are always acting based on your theories.

> figuring out what works best
Working best is literally nonsensical here. People have visions and act on it. Pretending that people have the same interests and denying the conflict nature of every two people isn't going to lead anywhere.

Nice argument.

You're right, I can't argue against lack of understanding.

Libertarianism is just anarchy by another name. If you ask them, half of them say there shouldn't be police, half think there should be. Half think we still need a centralized monetary policy, half don't. The only unifying cry among them is "less government" aka anarchy.

It isn't the conviction, it's the approach. Libertarians argue for libertarianism even when you can demonstrate an issue with libertarianism as it would be applied to the situation being discussed. Socialists do the same, but with socialism. You don't care about success, you care about advancing the ideology.

So explain what I'm not understanding.

it depends on rational people making intelligent decisions

>anarcho teachings of yeshua

absolute garbage

Mt 17:24 When Jesus and the others arrived in Capernaum, the collectors for the temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Does your teacher pay the temple tax?”

25 “Yes, he does,” Peter answered.

After they had returned home, Jesus went up to Peter and asked him, “Simon, what do you think? Do the kings of this earth collect taxes and fees from their own people or from foreigners?”

26 Peter answered, “From foreigners.”

Jesus replied, “Then their own people don’t have to pay. 27 But we don’t want to cause trouble. So go cast a line into the lake and pull out the first fish you hook. Open its mouth, and you will find a coin. Use it to pay your taxes and mine.”

Mark 12:17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

You trade government oppression for corporate oppression. Libertarian fucktards never had to live in a time with monopolies or total lack of environmental protection.

>tfw it won't be long before we walk this soil and prove to everyone that freedom is an inherent part of their existence yet again.

>Libertarians argue for libertarianism even when you can demonstrate an issue with libertarianism as it would be applied to the situation being discussed.
For you.
Perhaps you should consider that people don't have the same visions as you. There is no demonstrating an issue with libertarianism.
Neither with socialism btw. When, say, Böhm Bawerk wrote the system of Marx, or when Mises wrote Economic calculation in the socialist commonwealth, they never said to go against socialism because "it doesn't work guys".

>tfw the greatest American heroes inspire fear into the populace instead of self-determination

>half of them think there should be police
those arent libertarians, those are trendy retards hopping on a bandwagon

You're using a government police, something which wouldn't even be possible to exist, as an example on how libertarianism would fail. There would be police, but not in anyway it exists today, and probably not in the way you think it would.

I could give you several passages in which individualism and self-ownership/property are talked about, but you seem to have your mind set already.

You can boycott a corporation, as opposed to a government. Monopolies can only be sustained by governments, otherwise it doesn't exist because the free competition doesn't allow it.

Open borders doesn't pose a problem with welfare.

youtube.com/watch?v=3eyJIbSgdSE

because saying you have the freedom to try and do anything you please doesn't have the same appeal as let me take stuff from people that have more than you to give it to you

>tfw a free man is always plagued by the things he freely chooses to do with it.

You're confunsing classical liberalism with anarchocapitalism.

Not in a positive way you can't.

>tfw the government has no interest in solving your problems, because if they weren't the shoulder you pay to cry on about them, they wouldn't have jobs.

>anarchocapitalism
No such thing. Without a unified and enforced currency there cannot be capitalism.

It does when over half the recipients are illegals.

>tfw you are all absolutely free, and it's incredibly easy to lose sight of that when you don't like your options.

Matthew 10:5-8Jesus sent his twelve harvest hands out with this charge:

"Don't begin by traveling to some far-off place to convert unbelievers. And don't try to be dramatic by tackling some public enemy. Go to the lost, confused people right here in the neighborhood. Tell them that the kingdom is here. Bring health to the sick. Raise the dead. Touch the untouchables. Kick out the demons. You have been treated generously, so live generously.

9-10"Don't think you have to put on a fund-raising campaign before you start. You don't need a lot of equipment. You are the equipment, and all you need to keep that going is three meals a day. Travel light.

11"When you enter a town or village, don't insist on staying in a luxury inn. Get a modest place with some modest people, and be content there until you leave.

12-15"When you knock on a door, be courteous in your greeting. If they welcome you, be gentle in your conversation. If they don't welcome you, quietly withdraw. Don't make a scene. Shrug your shoulders and be on your way. You can be sure that on Judgment Day they'll be mighty sorry—but it's no concern of yours now.

16"Stay alert. This is hazardous work I'm assigning you. You're going to be like sheep running through a wolf pack, so don't call attention to yourselves. Be as cunning as a snake, inoffensive as a dove.

17-20"Don't be naive. Some people will impugn your motives, others will smear your reputation—just because you believe in me. Don't be upset when they haul you before the civil authorities. Without knowing it, they've done you—and me—a favor, given you a platform for preaching the kingdom news! And don't worry about what you'll say or how you'll say it. The right words will be there; the Spirit of your Father will supply the words.

>You're using a government police, something which wouldn't even be possible to exist, as an example on how libertarianism would fail. There would be police, but not in anyway it exists today, and probably not in the way you think it would.
It sounds like you're advocating for a privately employed police force. Is that correct?

21-23"When people realize it is the living God you are presenting and not some idol that makes them feel good, they are going to turn on you, even people in your own family. There is a great irony here: proclaiming so much love, experiencing so much hate! But don't quit. Don't cave in. It is all well worth it in the end. It is not success you are after in such times but survival. Be survivors! Before you've run out of options, the Son of Man will have arrived.

24-25"A student doesn't get a better desk than her teacher. A laborer doesn't make more money than his boss. Be content—pleased, even—when you, my students, my harvest hands, get the same treatment I get. If they call me, the Master, 'Dungface,' what can the workers expect?

26-27"Don't be intimidated. Eventually everything is going to be out in the open, and everyone will know how things really are. So don't hesitate to go public now.

28"Don't be bluffed into silence by the threats of bullies. There's nothing they can do to your soul, your core being. Save your fear for God, who holds your entire life—body and soul—in his hands.

Currency competition is a thing. Capitalism doesn't depend on a single currency, otherwise there wouldn't be different currencies already.

meant without* welfare.

watch the video, Milton is dead on.

Libertarianism can't work, because it is based upon weak central authority. However, since it believes in weak government, it will be unable to prevent certain groups of individuals from exploiting and overpowering everyone else and installing itself as a government. A system dedicated to weak government will not be able to defend itself from a powerful government. You would need to create a powerful government dedicated to preventing existence of a powerful government.

That means there's an issue with the government, not that the concept itself is flawed. The Social Contract comes from one of the people who inspired the American Revolution.

Yes.
Niggers.

Capitalism does require a large number of people to agree on one currency. If everyone had their own currency, capitalism would fail.

That is an option, sure, but you're completely missing the point of libertarianism if you think it's about solving problems, and not that the state is not immoral.

I retract my statement then

No, there are literally hundreds of currencies right now in the world which you can exchange freely. Also, see block chain and the thousand different currencies.

Because the soviets played the long game better than we did.

You're literally providing the equivalent rationale that if you could just fix human nature then communism would be a viable economic structure.

If government solved your problems, you wouldn't need them, and what you actually need is for them to get out of the way of you solving your own.

>Libertarianism believes in "weak" government
>"weak" because it doesnt prop up a massive, unsustainable welfare state, therefore it must also not support a strong military, anti-trust legislation, and criminal justice system

Ok.

Currency is just a means of exchange or product you exchange not for consumption.
Bitcoin has not destroyed the planet, and there are ma,y many currencies in the world right now, not even mentioning all the things that the courts don't recognize as money but really are (like jewels).

There are people in certain parts of the world that use cows as a mean to exchange goods.

That's Jesus warning his disciples against the Jews. He warns them "But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues." You're using a strange translation but suffice to say the way you're using it is not traditional.

Religion is just a tool used by the wealthy to keep retards like you in line

>da joos

I really, really, really like this picture :3

New problems arise all the time. The government is supposed to be an organization employed by the people to lead them and effectively pool resources for the common good. When that relationship breaks down, it means that the people need to assert themselves as the employers of the government. The government should exist to serve the people, and when it does, people who serve the government essentially serve themselves.

Currency is a purely legal term anyway, introduced by courts and governments.

People exchange their stuff against other people's stuff. They have (or don't have) confidence in receipts from their customers banks, etc...

Exactly. Block chain, for example, not only works as currency, but it also has practical uses like keys, contracts, and other exchange mechanisms, etc.

Libertarianism is simply the idea that you are free to do what you want as long as what you do doesn't cause an unwanted affect upon another person or their property.

Because all the libertarians are fedora-manchildfags who don't know nothing about the real world.

>When that relationship breaks down, it means that the people need to assert themselves as the employers of the government. The government should exist to serve the people, and when it does, people who serve the government essentially serve themselves.
I didn't mean to imply that there should be no government whatsoever. They ought to be kept at eye level. Neither should the populace desire to outweigh the government, nor vice versa.

>common good
No one will ever agree on what is the common good.

>an unwanted affect
At which point nobody will be able to do anything. I'll give libertarians the benefit of the doubt and assume you just haven't thought this through, but what you're advocating for is similar to the people who want safe spaces to be protected from being offended.

There are several warnings against the Jews in the NT that have been understood as such by Catholics and Orthodox for 2,000 years. Not that you understand the Bible besides trying to use it to justify your stupid anarchist nonsense.

>people who serve the government essentially serve themselves.
Even in this miracle immaculate conception of the government (where really all of them are the fruits of war and spoliation) how long would it take for this bizarre covenant to hold up? A week, one month? People will always have diverging interests, and they won't "serve themselves". Besides the people are not a monolithic block. Our current cucks should tell you how much it is different to live in the part of the population for which the government doesn't serve me.

There are several warnings against the government in the NT that have been understood as such by Catholics and Orthodox for 2,000 years. Not that you understand the Bible besides trying to use it to justify your stupid statist nonsense.

one of the critical needs of the government in libertarianism is enforcing contract

That's why you give people the ability to vote and discuss their beliefs in an open market of free ideas.

People can vote with their money and choose freely from whoever agrees to exchange goods with them.

Nothing of the sort. It is self-policing and in those situations where that isn't an option, then it is acceptable for an impartial third party to mediate.

It is the polar opposite of a "safe space" because you are held directly and immediately accountable for your actions.

> what you're advocating for is similar to the people who want safe spaces to be protected from being offended.

>property is the same thing as SJW safe spaces
Well, I won't argue semantics. My home, my land, my other belongings are my "safe space".

Which is why you have a Constitution that limits their political power.

Like voting restrictions, protections against economic and behavioral regulations.

Protect people by making politicians too weak to fuck with them.

Make your retards and normies unable to pass laws that harm you.

who keeps saying libertarians want open borders ?

fuck off

this

The guy was a crazy luddite.

Seeing burgers defending the state is blowing my mind.

Your individualist values are rooted in the French Revolution which went against tradition, the Church, monarchy. And it led to atheism and communism. It is not Christian.

Police cannot operate on a person by person basis. Neither can military forces.

You're missing the point. People have rights, and protecting those rights is vital, but you don't have the right to not be negatively affected by any action from any other person. It's a completely ridiculous notion.

>as long as what you do doesn't cause an unwanted affect upon ANOTHER PERSON or their property.

financialsense.com/contributors/jr-nyquist/fantasy-fraud-and-socialism

Ideological subversion, said Bezmenov, "is a slow process.... Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students without being challenged or counter-balanced by the basic values of American patriotism." Ignorant and confused on basic issues, public opinion cannot help but choose socialism. "Most of the people who graduated in the 60s," noted Bezmenov, "are now occupying positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them." And now, almost anything becomes possible

Civilizations, noted Le Bon, are created and sustained "by a small intellectual aristocracy, never by crowds. Crowds are only powerful for destruction. Their rule is always tantamount to a barbarian phase." And so it happens that in the shift from aristocratic values to democratic values, from high culture to pop culture, we have made the transition - metaphysically and intellectually - to barbarism. What you see around you today is an advanced technological civilization that has been reduced to a state of inward barbarity, where the barbarian has taken ultimate control. "When a civilization is rotten," wrote Le Bon, "it is always the masses that bring about its downfall. "

The crowd craves fantasy, said Le Bon, and hates reality. "Tell them what they want to hear," said Lenin, who died in 1924 and remains unburied by Russian authorities. As Drakulić said, "...communism persists in the way people behave, in the looks on their faces, in the way they think." And also, in who they refuse to bury.

Are you trying to use the bible against the bible?