Please give me a reason as to why you oppose the clearly supreme form of governing, libertarianism

Please give me a reason as to why you oppose the clearly supreme form of governing, libertarianism

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/leeNmVHphFs
alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda
dissidentvoice.org/2014/12/chiles-plantation-economy/
alternet.org/news-amp-politics/honduras-sold-libertarian-paradise-i-went-and-discovered-capitalist-nightmare
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending
madmonarchist.blogspot.nl/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

...

...

...

people mix up Libertarians and Anarchists all the time. The difference is too hard to understand for the average Sup Forums-tard.

>open borders
>supreme form of governing

KEK

I really don't

But obviously 100% libertarianism is a little tricky because roads

No see Murray Rothbard changed his stance on open borders later in life after he realized what a fucked up cuckery it creates, so that means libertarianism is totally compatible with closed borders!!

MUH ROADS XDDDDD

think of a better argument you brainlet

i know fucking nothing about how a libertarian government would run, so riddle me this:

An oil spill has just happened off the coast, the company whose fault it is is slow to manage the disaster, is blaming everyone else, and wont pay a cent in cleanup, disaster relief, or damages if someone doesnt make them.
What does the libertarian government do?

Because I like to drive on roads, have my food inspected for fecal matter, fire departments, and I am old enough to grow a beard and fuck women right in the pussy.

>Libertarianism is synonymous with anarchism
>Libertarians exclusively support open borders
>Libertarianism can't handle roads or other shared facilities
>Stupid hypothetical scenarios
3... 2... 1...

>libertarianism is totally compatible with closed borders

-So it's not libertarianism then

Ancap in favour of open borders here. All of you are fucking socialists.

>Anarcho-capitalism
>Libertarianism

you do realise they're not the same thing right?

The government does nothing. You want to know what will happen? Not a single god damn soul will buy from that company again if the spill worsens over time.

Yes it is. You can have libertarianism within a single country whilst still maintaining closed borders.

ITT: dumb people who think that private enterprises cannot get shit done even though they have been getting unthinkable shit done for hundreds of years a hundred times more efficient than an immoral band of mobster thieves called: the government.

>hurr durr I like roads it's impossible for a private company to build roads

This obviously pisses many people off and the company goes out of business. They clearly showed they are incompetent fucks. Good that there are no dirty monopolies and cartels around that bribed all these powerful government officials. That means this company is on their own ... Nobody there to save their asses.

The world is watching them fail. No puppet Government official on TV telling them that they do everything they can to solve the problem! This lie has been told a million times.

Competitors who are more capable of doing it will take over .. make the sea great again .. take over the companies business. Everyone is happy!

>Recreational nukes
MFW

>It's ok to close borders to migrants in order to protect the local culture, but setting up tariffs and regulations to protect the local economy is a no-no
>this is what closed-borders libertarians believe
Yeah, you might as well go vote for Corbyn, m8

A libertarian society can coexist with social programs, just as a federal republic (Like the US) can coexist with social programs. All I'm saying is that some of the programs are cancerous and are a waste of tax dollars. Extremism with anything is bad, stop trying to look for some sort of altruistic ideology.

And border, more importantly

>Not a single god damn soul will buy from that company again if the spill worsens over time.
What if they don't?
What if they are on the other side of the country and have no reason to give a fuck at all. What if they still buy their gas without a second thought because it's the most affordable?

>Not a single god damn soul will buy from that company again if the spill worsens over time.
pic related

>what is Game Theory

>the average consumer
>rational

>billions of dollars on the line
>nobody is interested in it

mmh

Since there are different shades of libertarianism I won't pretend to answer for all of them, but with regards to this issue the "common solution" happens to be private property. This means that oil spills will happen, but since the coastline and natural reserves are private the company responsible for the accident will be sued to hell and back by every individual landowner affected by it.

And this doesn't include the PR hit and possible boycotts.

Make Sea Great Again!

Building codes

Because the first action upon gaining our independence was securing that independence through strong foreign offensive measures.

This thread has beem stumped. Goodnight shitlords.

because a libertarian government would treat niggers equally, and they don't deserve that

Libertarianism: A system of "govern-ment" (govern: to control. ment, mental: mind) that believes the best form of mind control is one that controls least. The belief that anarchism (a lack of control mind control heirarchies) is better than any other degree of mind controlling within a given geological area.

Remind me why libertarians aren't anarchists again? It is superior in every way libertarians even agree

no but ancaps like libertarians and libertarians like ancaps
youtu.be/leeNmVHphFs

>tfw you country was utterly destroyed by incompetent government
>tfw you are watching europe get drowned by sandniggers and political correctness enforced at a gunpoint
>tfw when you say you don't want even more government you get called an edgy anarchist

a lot of ppl think it's sociopathic

alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda

dissidentvoice.org/2014/12/chiles-plantation-economy/

dissidentvoice.org/2014/12/chiles-plantation-economy/

alternet.org/news-amp-politics/honduras-sold-libertarian-paradise-i-went-and-discovered-capitalist-nightmare

Unlike any other option, it gives you a choice.
You can help anyone, anyhow and anyone is free to seek help anyhow.
The current system is worse morally as it forces you at gunpoint into "helping", which oftentimes doesn't help much anyway.

> Libertarians

Aren't they those sovereign faggots who get up in everyone's business like some retarded child and yells about their legal rights, even though they break laws all the time?

No thanks. Throw all sovereigns in solitary confinement.

>MUH MUH MUH ROADSSSSSSSSSSS
>WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADSSSSSSSSS

Because I'm a Nationalist. Libertarianism is in direct opposition to the existence of a state, and thus the nation.

Libertarianism in my view is the same 'land-of-do-as-you-please' mentality that neo-liberals practice with a fancy new name and logo, so yeah. Nope.

I think a lot of people blow of libertarian ideals as just being 'angsty anarchistic children'

but i cant see how less oppressive laws and a smaller government is bad.
To me in any case, the early United States was a fairly good representation of what they want to achieve. the government wasn't interfering in your daily lives, each state still had plenty of its own sovereign power, but we still came together as a nation. I mean hell, we went over to Libya and kicked the shit out of pirate for bothering us.

I think that just because you like Libertarian ideals, doesnt preclude you from being Nationalistic. You can be proud of your country and want your country to be stronger on a global scale, without submitting yourself to the federal government every night, and sometimes before lunch.

You have to find a way to privatize roads while still maintaining competition. That way the money isn't wasted on the government that isn't doing jack shit to maintain the roads and you won't have high prices bc of competition.
Trucks damage the road thousands times more than normal cars, so the trucks should pay the majority of road prices.
I think toll roads would be amazing if you could somehow introduce competition.

libertarianism is a meme, nice one OP

Because if systems weren't corruptible and people were ready to abide the law we wouldn't need a system to begin with.

Same failings as communism, enables too much power to fall onto the hands of a few who then can break the system and shit on everything.

The communist party won't stay altruistic and selfless, let alone be founded in such a way.
The market won't stay in balance, let alone enter such state.
Same utopian bullshit.

These cancer ideologies that disregard reality are a product of autists who project themselves onto others and think they'd all be touched in the same way.

Systems are corruptible because the vast majority of people aren't autistic enough to follow or love a system. They're just out for themselves, no matter what's put in place by others.

what is buying land next to a bad road and making a new road on it?

There's no such thing as ''less'' government.
''less government'' just means giving your country away to corporate & Jewish & international interest.

The only way is to change the way of government, either by monarchy, natsoc, or rightwing authoritarianism

But we don't...

at all..

"libertarianism" isn't a form of government, just as conservatism isn't a form of government, nor is liberalism.

Now, if you're thinking of anarcho-capitalism, that's another matter. And the problem with ancap is that it doesn't take the human trait of tribalism into account. Just as communism fails because human nature doesn't allow for it, so does anarcho-capitalism.

If there were magically an ancap society, what would happen is natural hierarchy would ensue. Certain people would end up more powerful than others. This isn't a problem in and of itself, but in an ancap society, their land means their rules. That's just another way of saying that this person's property is their own nation with its own government. So you'd end up with a bunch of smallish governments with people living on the land, not unlike the feudal system. And then of course each of them would end up going to war at some point or another, and smaller governments would get knocked out and bigger ones would rise up and coalesce. Suddenly you have a new govenment.

>the problem with no government is that eventually government would come back

JUST

Anarch capitalism is going 6000 years back into history

not an argument

A government would come back that is worse than what you have now. It'd be a monarchy with absolute authority over the people in its land.

And then you'd have to have a french revolution 2.0 to replace it with democracy again and blah blah blah. And you'd just get back to where we are now.

Point being that anarcho-capitalism is inherently unstable.

By Ancap logic, libertarians are hypocrites. Both ideologies recognise the immorality of use of force to coerce and therefore the evil of a state, but Libertarianism arbitrarily says that it becomes moral in small doses.More of a minarchist myself but I do enjoy a bit of Lysander Spooner

>swap Jewish government for a Jewish SJW Corporatocracy
No thanks lol.

We've already had the perfect form of governing and it's gone. It's all downhill from here.

>implying passage through national borders isn't a product to be sold in the free market

I built a Stellaris Empire as Xenophile, Individualist, Materialist and it went well

Libertarianism isn't removal of government absolutely. Its removal of government from the people's personal lives and the market. The government still exists for public service, military, etc but tax is kept to a bare minimum.

>something is bad because I declare without proof that it wouldn't last long

so are orgasms bad because they only last a couple seconds?

you're literally saying like:
Lack of poison is bad because if you have a lack of poison in your body poison will come back in higher concentration then you have now

literally not an argument.

Everything in this can be refuted.

Try again.

And that vacuum left over will be filled by megacorporations. It's actually quite possible that a Libertarian society would eventually morph into some kind of corporate feudalism whereby individuals sign a document of fealty to a corporation in exchange for employment and the opportunity to live in suburbs owned entirely by that particular corporation. The cost to the worker would be excessively long work hours and few rights.

Because corporations need to be regulated and public funds are favorable to privatized services when it comes to essential aspects of our society like healthcare, education and infrastructure.

But that's just a theory...

It will also cause comets from space to explode the earth.

Seriously though, you're just making up scenarios in your head, come back when you have literally any evidence.

If you don't see how what he's saying is completely reasonable, you're an idiot.

There are plenty of nations that have very little government and they're all neo-feudal corporate shitholes.

having less government makes a country better than it would be if it had more

That's not saying it will make a population of shitty unintelligent people perfect, but they are still better off then they were under the mind control

If that's the case, why is almost every single nation with the smallest government a total shithole?

What government will enforce the suits? And how much in this scenario do we assume that government is actively policing corporations in this manner?

but you apparently can't name one.

come back when you have literally any evidence, by which I mean never come back, because there isn't any.

...

only oppose it as long as it includes open borders.

...

Africa and south America are packed with examples of governments that interfere minimally in the market, they're all shitholes. Other nations know that in order to have a prosperous and livable nation, public money needs to be pooled for the public good. This is basic shit.

>Systems are corruptible
>Therefore let's give all power to control the lives and resources of the whole country to Cristina to keep things from getting corrupted
As expected of a South American.

I assume you're referring to some 3rd world african shithole.

They have as much government as anywhere else. They are just referred to as 'warlords' or some such term because the savagery is obvious when it isn't your own government doing it.

Also they have a shortage of white people, which are necessary for a society to ever get beyond chucking spears.

Name me ONE (1) geological area in the world in which the vast vast majority of people (99%) have committed for at least a year to refraining from using violence against each other except as a last resort in self defense. Then show me how much of a shit hole it is. Hard mode: Not Antarctica

Funnily enough, south america is actually packed with countries which are hardcore socialist, and they are the biggest shitholes among all

> venezuela

>Name me ONE (1) geological area in the world in which the vast vast majority of people (99%) have committed for at least a year to refraining from using violence against each other except as a last resort in self defense.

That doesn't happen. People are literally wild animals and a particularly aggressive species. What autistic fantasy land are you living in?

>Africa and south America are packed with examples of governments that interfere minimally in the market
>Literally the countries with least economic freedom

All the best nations on Earth are liberal democracies with extensive public services.

Why do you think your system isn't implemented? I'll tell you. People are smarter than you and know that our type of system is the best. They know that getting rid of the state or minimizing it to a rudimentary level will have bad results.

Fuckin name one then.

from how many metres high were you dropped on your head as a baby?

The governments with the smallest state expenditure percent of GDP are all shitholes. The lowest spenders reads like a list of the worst nations on earth. Don't believe me, look at the list for yourselves.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending

Congratulations, user, you just learned of the fact that the more wealth a country produces thanks to more freedom, the more their governments grow, just as any other parasite would.

they'll starve without welfare, and get shot whenever they chimp out.

I have become a monarchist, it is the ultimate red pill, you'll go down all paths but eventually you'll become a monarchist. All roads lead to Rome.

Libertarians don't seem to care about morals (lol just let me do whatever they want no big deal) or securing the borders, two ingredients which I think are vital for a country to survive.

>This kills the libertarian

Projection.

It's percentage of GDP, you're retarded.

REEEEEEEEEE
delete this

>governments that interfere minimally in the market
>South America

Nope. In fact, the shitholes are the ones that interfere the most.

>It's percentage of GDP
No shit.

madmonarchist.blogspot.nl/

There is no free market and it can't be one when govern must regulate with basic food and services.

I don't want to be ruled over by a king and neither do most people.

All the richest and best nations are liberal democracies with extensive public programs. It's like you aren't even living in reality.

>oh look, it's a bunch of dictatorships, recently collapsed dictatorships and islamic states.

The only reason their state expenditure is low is because the state lacks the means to extract the money, because they were recently rekt by a big 'ol government.

The autism is extra strong with statists today

I think you're looking at the current picture. Are they rich now because of dem programs, or was it due to an extensive process of wealth accumulation done through (crony) capitalism?

You need to produce wealth first in order to redistribute it later.