How old were you when you grew out of libertarianism?

How old were you when you grew out of libertarianism?

I agree with pic but yesterday I did.

I never grew into it because I'm not a retard

>having a lolbertarian phase

I think it's an American thing. Aspie-types tend to come across Ayn Rand or some shit sometime in their mid to late teens, then have a 5 to 10 year sperg period where they think FUCKIGN STATISM is the root of all evil. Or, at least I did.

What's wrong with hunting puppies you paid for in a forest you own?

Note that after a few months I knew Ayn Rand was retarded, but for some time I maintained ideas centered around small government as a virtue.

Why use the state to solve social and cultural problems? At the end of the day, you end up leaving someone dissatified when you could have (as in OP's pic) prevented the issue in the first place with better parenting and environment.

Because then in order to have a functioning society you're depending on everyone else to voluntarily be better parents or produce better environments. Never going to happen.

It must be. I've never personally known any Australian who has described themselves as a libertarian

Yeah libertarianism is just a party for rich fucks here

Same but it only took me 6 months and I still agree with most of ayn rand

i was never libertarian
but i'm against being obligatory having to use the seat belt on cars in cities, if i don't want to use it i don't , the life is mine, and no one even runs inside cities wtf, our streets are awful its not even possible to run here

Well "libertarian" is an American word because "liberal" was corrupted to mean the opposite of small government. Doesn't "liberal" mean "the smaller government the better to you"? Or do you have a word for that? Do kids go through such a phase?

What's retarted about her?

Given that liberty is a major part of the American national identity it makes sense that it would be more of a local phenomenon.

In Australia we call our conservatives liberals

What would be the point in hunting puppies? It would be one step above shooting fish in a barrel.

If you get in an accident, is there a chance that other people are paying for your bills? Either through private insurance or state medicine?

If so, that's the reason why seatbelt laws exist. Allowing you not to where one increases the chance that you're a burden to everyone else.

She honestly believes that there's such a thing as objectively good art and music, for starters.

makes sense

>What would be the point in hunting puppies?
Freedom, you fucking statist.

That's ancap not libertardianism.

I disagree with that but I think there is some standard for what should be good art even if all don't follow it.

...

I still agree with a lot of parts of it but realize the pragmatism in tariffs when we're getting jewed so hard by the chinks. We gotta deregulate and cut taxes and shrink certain corrupt messes like the EPA by 90%.

What's wrong with hunting prey you own on property you own?

Hell yea!!!!!!! Im randlet now

Your scenario isn't even libertarianism. The guy is violating NAP by shooting puppies, within the framework of libertarianism its acceptable to arrest him.

Not if the accident is a good one... if he wants to die in a car crash, that is his fucking business. We shouldn't be paying other people fucking bills or being forced to have insurance. Laws only serve to remove freedoms. If you want to be free, you have to own up to responsibility for your actions.

What? The NAP applies to animals? All libertarians are vegan? This is honestly news to me.

You honestly expect a society filled with blacks, Mexicans, rednecks, children, drunks, and old people to own up to responsibility for their actions? Or what, they would just die on the side of the (muh) roads?

Who would pay for the towing of the reckage and disposal of the body in your lolbertarian scenario?

You'd be relying on other people regardless of what type of government your society employs. The difference is whether you convince them to help you with reason or threaten them with violence. At the end of the day, voluntary interactions will always yield the best results.

Problem is, most societies today seem to be getting dumber thanks to degenics/welfare. Obviously, a libertarian society would never succeed without intelligent people. Just like how any government above tribalism never succeeds in sub-70 IQ Africa, no matter how many resources and how much education the left throws at them.

>At the end of the day, voluntary interactions will always yield the best results.
This is insane. You have no proof whatsoever of this. It's true to you only because you want it to be true. It is communism-tier pipe dreaming.

/thread

But that doesn't mean it won't work

What are you talking about? How about instead of running off on an ad hominem rant, why don't you try applying it to a real life scenario?

Someone has resources/food that you need. You can choose to trade something with them, or you can choose to hold them up at gunpoint and steal from them. The act of trading is a far less risky scenario for both parties involved, as there is no violence, and is more sustainable in the long run because you are more likely to trade again in the future. If you steal, what exactly would stop the other person from leaving, short of human slavery?

The result of the second option is no different from when the government causes corporations and businesses to relocate overseas because of 70% taxes on revenue. You look at something like charity, which accumulates billions of dollars every year based on voluntary donations alone, and say that it is a worse alternative to driving away the only people who produce wealth?

I have nothing against nationalism, just to be clear. In fact, I see it as a neccessary step to remove unfit people from an evolving society. The problem is that government programs don't fix cultural problems, only intelligent people do.

b-but is there really anything wrong with buying puppies just to hunt them on your private property?

Is this really the kind of thing that the gubment should have oversight of? Where do you draw the line between what you can and can't kill on your own land?

I'm not.

Why shouldn't I be allowed to hunt puppies? Are they human?

I bet you support abortion.

well, if you're a libertarian, you should support abortion, it's not up to anyone else to tell you what you can and can't do to your body.

And before you go bitching about my last sentence about government programs, you can look at welfare as an example. How poverty had been decreasing rapidly before it was implemented, only to begin a steady incline again when it was introduced.

>someone else's body is your body

10/10

>If you steal, what exactly would stop the other person from leaving, short of human slavery?
>implying slavery is not on the table when the right to contract is absolute
top kek

so if you were to remove that other body from the mothers, would it be able to survive on its own? The same argument could be made for a parasite living inside of you, but killing a tape worm isn't considered murder - you can't be a libertarian and have ridiculous backwards double standards about abortion.

> mfw stormweenies still think lolbertarianism is the same as anarchy

libertarians and fascists (the "right" philosophy according to Sup Forums) are both fucking retards. for some reason you people seem to think you can only be one extreme or the other

A tape worm isn't human, you fucking idiot. If you were to kick an infant out of your home and let it die on the street, you'd be guilty of murder.

>voluntary interactions will always yield the best results.
Source?

>Problem is, most societies today seem to be getting dumber thanks to degenics/welfare.
source?

>Obviously, a libertarian society would never succeed without intelligent people.

Source?

>strawmanning libertarianism as ancap
Maybe puppies should also benefit from the NAP? Government exists to keep Stirner the grand douchebag under foot, spooks exist to haunt him and not well meaning, potentially successful "oppressive privileged" demographics as being currently promoted by government.

We want different government, perhaps less government, not no government.

>photoshop red hats on anime girls all day
>thinks their mature

Trumpfags everybody.

XD sooo retarded hehe


Fucking faggot

>trading is a far less risky scenario

That implies you have something the guy with food wants.

There is a saying : "In the desert, water is more valuable then gold"

>when the government causes corporations and businesses to relocate overseas
>causes

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, muh poor little coorporations. Oh poor victims.

>I have nothing against nationalism
> I see it as a neccessary step to remove unfit people from an evolving society.

Do you even know what nationalism is?

When I reached age of 0.

>comparing a human baby with a tapeworm.

Libertarianism 101.

Daily reminder that by refusing to pay rent to AmeriGov(TM), you are thereby squatting on their land and thus violating the NAP.

>my idea is not working just because people are dumb
Communism rhetorics, never changing.

>How poverty had been decreasing rapidly before it was implemented, only to begin a steady incline again when it was introduced.

And why is that?

What an argument! Guess I'm #pancakeforkasich now

>A tape worm isn't human, you fucking idiot
so at what point does a fetus become human?
Is a small clump of unformed cells with no heart, brain or limbs human?

If a pack of niggers raped your mother/sister, would you encourage them not to have an abortion because it's a human life and that'd be unfair to the child? wouldn't that be even more unrfair to the raped mother/sister?

I liked it for a moment but never got into it. Right when I was about to register as a lolbertarian the Alt-Right gained traction.

It's Liberal in the sense of economic liberalism.

>"Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that libertarians can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question. We condemn state-funded abortions. It is particularly harsh to force someone who believes that abortion is murder to pay for another’s abortion. It is the right of the woman, not the state, to decide the desirability of prenatal testing, Caesarean births, fetal surgery, and/or home births." -
Source: National Platform of the Libertarian Party , Jul 2, 2000

>libertarians see the natural taking of nutrients from the mother by the baby (and infact all symbiotic or providing systems within nature) as parasitic

not surprised you guys tend to be major autists.

Stop being a fucking retard.

A human is a human. A fetus is a human. Not a tapeworm or anything else. Dependency on the mother - the same mother that created that fetus in the first place and placed it in a position of needing to be cared for - does not excuse abortion. Otherwise, we may as well give parents the right to kill their underage children because they can't provide for themselves.

...

>le libertarianism is ancap meme
When will this stupid meme end?

Who arrests him if there's no govt?

What are your thoughts on the Austrian school of Economics?

Common sense. I already gave an example to the other guy.

Poorer people have more children and poverty has increased since the introduction of welfare. This is a pretty well-known fact. Do I need to explain that you can't feed babies without food as well?

"Intelligent" is a subjective term. Requesting a source on that was pretty idiotic.

Healthy kek

>libertarian
>no govt
Fuck off. Libertarianism is not anarchy, libertarian just means a smaller government

Draw the line, then

All i see is you guys escaping criticism by always saying this shit,

Poverty in the US.

prove to me that this isn't objectively true though :^)

nice strawman tbqh

Volunteer militias of selfless people who would not succumb to power trips.

>Common sense.

lol.

> I already gave an example to the other guy.

A stupid example that holds no ground outside of your mind. You can't fathom it.

>Poorer people have more children and poverty has increased since the introduction of welfare.

What are you trying to argue?

>This is a pretty well-known fact.

It's not, but ok.

> Do I need to explain that you can't feed babies without food as well?

So?

Yeah pretty much this.

Got over it pretty quick though when I realized that progressive social policies were pretty much rending society in two.

The last spike is due to your '08 bank crash caused by deregulation.

And makes you think that welfare is directly causing poverty?

Both Libertarianism and Sup Forums teir facists/Nat Socs, want the same thing, hence their abundance on Sup Forums... A better type of people.

But while facists want a better type of person by the direction of men, Libertarianism wants natural law, and ultimately mankinds own decisions, to be the eugenics that shape future humanity.

Am I wrong?

What if that someone you wanted to trade with managed to unite all the surrounding territories and basically they hold you and your settlement to gunpoint

...

>That implies you have something the guy with food wants
Yeah, but the point of stealing is that you can have both sets of resources. Looks like you'll have to save your proverbs book for a relevant situation.

>>causes
If taxes aren't the driving force for countless businesses moving overseas, specifically to low-tax havens in Europe, then what is? This ought to be good.

>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, muh poor little coorporations. Oh poor victims
Yawn. Take your cringe-inducing non-arguments back to the Youtube comments section.

>Do you even know what nationalism is?
A very simple way to decrease third world immigration. You seem to be lacking some critical thinking skills, champ.

libertarians just want a smaller government

Having already conceded that it's more efficient not having an invasive 3rd party involved with every exchange a person makes in their lives, statists like the OP know they can't say shit about libertarianism on economic grounds. So common memes usually revolve around painting humanity as a collection of feril shaved apes looking for the first chance to cut one another's throat as soon as the iron fist of daddy government is no longer in play. The warped psychology of statists is so transparent it's pathetic.

To Statists/collectivists there's such a violent refusal to learn from history or even ponder looking down the road at all. "Bernie/Hilary are only raising taxes 5%!" Right, then 4-8 years later it's another 5% until eventually we're the new Venezuela. So individual people aren't to be trusted with sovereignty over themselves but small groups of people should have the authority to tell the masses how to live? What fucking planet are you living on? Marking on a piece of paper every 4 years & hoping that daddy government takes care of you is the ultimate childishness.

I don't think so, I just don't understand why some of the differences (if any) between Libertarianism and Anarcho-capitalism.

I enjoy the fruits of Capitalism, but if An-cap and/or Libertarians advocate for zero regulation, wouldn't that be a Jew's wet dream, to install complete domination over "x" industry?

Is the government completely inefficient in all scopes of its power? There isn no doubt that that is true, but it is true for things like healthcare or the military?

I think NatSoc are menwho have faith that a government of men who are truly great can prosper, while An-cap (and/or Libertarians) have faith that little-to-no government is what makes great nations.

Why the open borders and freedom to be complete degenerates (i.e. degeneracy seeps into modern culture without being challenged)?

That has more to do with their liberal view towards the free market than it does their principles though.

What the fuck, they were crossing the Delaware to fucking run away

Who is going to build the cemeteries, he would not pay taxes anymore either, the state would have to give money to his children because they are orphans now, just because he didn't use a fucking seatbelt

>Yeah, but the point of stealing is that you can have both sets of resources. Looks like you'll have to save your proverbs book for a relevant situation.

Sure. But to trade you need to have something the other person wants.

>If taxes aren't the driving force for countless businesses moving overseas, specifically to low-tax havens in Europe, then what is? This ought to be good.

Simply don't alllow them to move to tax heavens ffs.

>A very simple way to decrease third world immigration. You seem to be lacking some critical thinking skills, champ.

So you actually don't know what nationalism is.

hint:

nationalism != white pride

>Argentina
>white

>Who is going to build the cemeteries

The Church will you fucking heretic

To what deggre? I want a smaller government. Does that make me a lolbertarian?

> that it's more efficient not having an invasive 3rd party

source?

>then have a 5 to 10 year sperg period where they think FUCKIGN STATISM is the root of all evil.

But it is, though. What are you supposed to 'evolve' to? Fascism? National Socialism? Conservativisim?

>my snarky meme talk and willful ignorance of logicstics ought to dismantle this guy's facts
Wow, you sure out-witted me.

He didn't gave up on lolbertarianism at age -0.9

That assumes people are capable of such.

At least with the state there's something preventing that.

>Is the government completely inefficient in all scopes of its power?
No. Healthcare is way more efficient when handled by gov

Libertarians think people are capable of governing themselves.

This is simply not true.

Kek
Isn't that called a graveyard?

I thought cemeteries are the ones owned by the state or private companies