I've been on Sup Forums since 2009 and I find myself regressing further and further to the Libertarian Left...

I've been on Sup Forums since 2009 and I find myself regressing further and further to the Libertarian Left, both on economic and social issues.

I'm okay with gays, trans, drugs, prostitutes, abortion, euthanasia, healthcare. I HATE GUN RESTRICTIONS AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS! Freedom of speech, needless to say, is of utmost importance to me.

So I get sad when I see so many people here who respond to the authoritarianism of the mainstream Left by becoming the legit fascists who legitimize the existence of their enemies.

I have a huge amount of respect for the sharpness and the vigor of many proper right-wing thinkers (George L. Rockwell and Francis Parker Yockey are undervalued intellectual giants) but I can't stand the authoritarianism, the moralism and the lack of empathy coming from the Right-wingers themselves. I reject this self-imposed martyrdom, this ideal of ascetic perfection that the Right-wing jacks off to.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
w3.salemstate.edu/~cmauriello/pdfEuropean/Paxton_Five Stages of Fascism.pdf
c4ss.org/content/39598
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

le pee pee poo poo

REEEEEEEEEEEE

Dude weed lmao

We tried that. Left-ist governments will just take more and more power. We had the exact society you describe, it destroyed itself.

Listen to this man. Speaking as someone who lives in what arguably WAS (40 years ago) the most successful implementation of socialist democracy in the world that's successively turned worse and worse over the decades due to marxist subversion, a strong nationalist/isolationist component is VITAL in order to safeguard the nation against the type of foreign influence that has eroded the state to the multicultural dystopia my country has currently devolved into.

Without pride over one's nation and - race by extension - stamped into every citizen's head, you can bet that kikes will find a way to worm their way into society and destroy it from within under the guise of libertarianism and tolerance.

>We had the exact society you describe, it destroyed itself.

Where?

There was no /pol in 2009. GTFO Ronaldo you lying gypsy

>been on Sup Forums since 2009
>2009

Sure you have faggot.

You guys are /new/ here.

Pol didn't exist in 2009.
THis is trivial however, as Left Libertarianism does not and has not ever existed. It is an oxymoron.

I'm not a Left Libertarian, I'm a libertarian leftist.

And saying Libertarianism is incompatible with leftism is being ignorant of history.

You probably think Libertarianism started in America in the 1970s.

Nice blog post. And? Why do we give a shit about your gay crisis? If you don't like traditionalists then go to Reddit or something? Sup Forums has something of everything. Either put up or shut up and fuck off back to Tumblr, faggot.

>libertarian
>left

No such thing, faggot

Left means state
Libertarian means less state

>Left means state

So the far-right is anarchist.

And the fascists are left-wingers.

Is that it?

I wanna see how much of a retard you are.

I will eat you alive leftist

Far right is anarchist, yes; just before that is libertarian, and before that is classic liberal

Fascists are left yes; the reason why people are confused over fascists is that they're economically middle/right.

You define left - right based on the amount of state control; it doesn't matter how they go about controlling

Of course you will.

And the day of the rope is just around the corner.

Bloquista? Achas mesmo que a economia portuguesa aguentaria com o bloco no poder?

Além disso, em Portugal pelo menos, quem tem um discurso político mais moralista até é a esquerda.

Fascist can't be defined as left or right because ideologies from Strasser to Franco are considered Fascist. Most of the Fascists didn't have economics in common.

Left means state.
Right means state
Center means state.
Make your choice.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment

Libertarianism is always on the right by definition. Whether you like drugs and faggots is irrelevant.

>Far right is anarchist

Are you saying the far-right strives for no government?

>Fascists are left yes

Then why did the fascists persecute and kill leftists? Were they confused?

>You define left - right based on the amount of state control

This is no better than defining racism as a "system of oppression blah blah done by whites". It's a dishonest redefinition of the terms and proper right-wingers will laugh at your stupidity.

>"The leftists are the real statists!!! The leftists are the real meanies!!! Not us!!! We freedom and shit!!! ;_____;"

Does it look like libertarian benchmark for you?

The thing is, fascists are no different to socialists.

They have their pet likes and dislikes, but they use the state to enforce their views.

By definition, they can't be right socially.

It all comes back to how socialists didn't want to the lumped in with say, Nazism. Nazism was socialism with a national bent (nationalism isn't right or left by design). So, they saw how the Nazis were socially left, but fiscally middle, so they changed their little definitions in Europe.

Which is sad, as the left and right in Europe with their definition is state and state.

Whereas the left and right in English speaking countries is state and less state.

>Left means state
What the fuck is this
have you actually read anything about anarchism? it's mostly influenced by leftists thinkers not right one
you probably think left = big goverment and welfare state because that's what left is in USA lol
democratic party =/= left

Leftists kill leftists; nothing new

Nazi Germany and the USSR were both socialist parties with massive state control

The definition I'm using is what they use in English speaking countries.

Europe has a different one where both sides are state controlled.

Yes

Anarchy means no state

So, it's extreme right

You're using the shitty .EU definition that has made it so the state is always strong; it's why you have shit freedom

Fascism simply uses violence to suppress dissent. It doesn't have a left-right placement unless you are discussing specific Fascist groups from past or present.

It's a very misunderstood word.

It uses state controlled violence

hol up hol up
so is communism far right in your book? the ultimate goal of communism is to be stateless

>It uses state controlled violence
That's one definition yes. The other is that it's any political group that uses those tactics.

You could have a fascist political party that goes around as an independent entity to enact fascist control over an area without being attached to the state itself. Say for instance the KKK as a political entity was a fascist group that used violence to quell political rivals.

>Left means state
no, it really doesn't.

>You define left - right based on the amount of state control;
no one does this except retarded american libertarians

>Francis Parker Yockey
was a fucking authoritarian you mong, yet you supposedly hate them so much.
Fuck off, shit rectangle.

The "ideal" communism is anarchy where people magically all have the same ideology

It's unrealistic

It's far right in the extreme, yes

It's never been right when it's been tried by governments, however. Because of obvious reasons.

>the ultimate goal of communism is to be stateless
But then comes dialectic materialism aka double-think and way to that goal leads through omnipresent state.

lolno
fascism doesn't mean being mean to people.

Left and right are defined by how much freedom the individual has

Left = less
Right = more

That's the basic definition, and it always has been this way

>Anarchy means no state
>So, it's extreme right
There's more than one political axis. "Anarchy" spans a great deal of space along the left-right axis but little to no space along the up-down axis.

It's a matter of how little authority is provided to anyone, and what role the individual has versus the collective has in maintaining a society.

I haven't voted Left in forever. I am a member of Bloco since 18 years old but only went to a meeting once and never gave a cent to them. I'm 29 now.

I actually voted PNR the last 3 or 4 elections because I was so mad at Bloco and the Left in general for their stance on Feminism and Identity Politics and the whole refugee crisis.

Now I regret voting for Marcelo and not Sampaio da Nóvoa. Not that my vote would make a difference but I was admittedly uninformed.

But now I'm over it all. I will forever speak my mind but I prefer to fight authoritarianism by staying true to my libertarian values and not by feigning concern about the white race, because I am a portuguese and I won't let german/american/french philosophies dictate how I .

Portugal is about freedom and progress. One of the very first to abolish slavery, the very first to abolish death penalty. If you're an authoritarian Portuguese nationalist, you stand for an ideal that is contradictory to our national spirit.

I love being portuguese. And the only reason I'm writing in English is so others understand. I want when Swedes start talking their language.

im not talking about whether or not its a good system, i just find it hilarious you are calling Karl Marx extreme right wing

>fascism doesn't mean being mean to people.
Thanks for the strong man.

Fascism is beating your political rivals to death so that their voice in the political sphere is suppressed and kept in submission to yours.

The only thing Fascists had in common was extreme nationalism. Many of them had very little in common beyond that.

w3.salemstate.edu/~cmauriello/pdfEuropean/Paxton_Five Stages of Fascism.pdf

The four axis chart is based on social and economics

When in reality, you can use social to define it all just fine, simply because:

more individual freedom = capitalism
less = socialism

>Sup Forums
>2009

>I find myself regressing further and further to the Libertarian Left

Congratulations, you are smart! The reason why your opinion diverges so strongly from Sup Forums is because they are incredibly stupid!

I only come here to advocate race-mixing and cuckold-fetishism and to get my laughs from their impotent rage.

You won't find intelligent discussion here. If you want to further educate yourself, always start with economics, Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Friedrich Hayek, then get into micro- and macroeconomics for college. If you get bored with economics, pick up the Greek philosophers, Plato (Socrates), Epicurus, Aurelius, or historians, Xenohpon, Herodotus, Thucydides, or Arrian.

Engaging in politics is only sensible if you have a real interest, but for a 21st century employee that is never the case.

you are completely wrong and retarded. do you even know how the terms left wing and right wing came into being?

For everyone ITT I always thought it was left = no classes and right = definite attention to social class. Isn't it that easy?

>more individual freedom = capitalism
nope. what about a society where everyone was totally free to do whatever they wanted, with no state, but there was no such thing as money. is that capitalism?

It was both

Extreme left which morphs into extreme right

It just never got past the extreme left stage when put into practice.

It doesn't work like this. You can't just pick a single dimension and say "this is what left-right politics is REALLY all about". In truth, every single issue has it's own spectrum, and a political opinion can be any combination of these.

Yes, I do. Look up your local definition of both. Get back to me.

Yes, it's capitalism

If Og is fully free, then he can sell his clubs wherever he wants to whomever he wants, for whatever price he wants

wrong, that's just the meme definition. why is Sup Forums so ignorant now?

fucking beat me to it. why do reddit-to-pol posters give off such a detectable stench?

nice bait, poland

underrated post
danke schön hanz

Those issues being based simply on the opinions of the culture

Less freedom to more freedom, on whatever issue, is nice and simple, and it works across pretty much all beliefs and opinions.

>The four axis chart is based on social and economics
No, most of the ones I've seen are

Collectivist (Left) versus Individualist (Right)
and
Authoritarian (Up) versus Anti-Authoritarian (Down)

"Freedom" versus "Non-Freedom" is an authority versus none orientation. Not a Left-Right orientation.

The Left-Right portion of the spectrum is more about what society should be structured to value. The Left values the collective whole, while the Right values the individual.

You could be Socially in part of the spectrum and Economically within another.

What do you call a libertarian society?

Fantasyland

So the Communists, Red Front and reactionaries who fought police and politicians in the street were Fascists then according to this definition?

>>I'm okay with gays, trans, drugs, prostitutes, abortion, euthanasia, healthcare. I HATE GUN RESTRICTIONS AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS! Freedom of speech, needless to say, is of utmost importance to me.
>We tried that.

Yes, in 19th century America and it worked out great.

>Healthcare

Had me until there bro. You realize that socialized care like Obamacare results in higher taxes and higher premiums for working class families? It won't be little Paco or Jamal that shoulder the price hike in aids drugs or epipen drugs. It'll be me. Why do you think so many conservatives fight against this and other regulations?

>fascists who legitimize the existence of their enemies

How Trudeau.

Exactly; because like everything else, we'll be the ones footing the bill for little Paco and Jamal.

give me one non-libertarian defining the left-right spectrum purely on how large the state is. the "right wing" were originally the people who supported the king during the french revolution, the people who supported the old order, hierarchy and church, they weren't libertarians.

Doesn't make sense when like that

Authoritarian can't be individualism

>A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.

[Robert O. Paxton, "The Anatomy of Fascism," 2004]

Eh, I'm the same as that second line, but they take it too far.

I'm okay with somebody BEING trans, and I'll even "respect their pronouns" as far as calling them the name and as the gender they ask for (he/her, no xer bullshit), but there's a real problem with championing it, and encouraging it. Encouraging people who are clearly mentally ill (and that's what they are, if they have an XY chromosome but legitimately have the brain of a woman, something has clearly gone wrong) to chop their genitals up as anything but a last resort is just sick.The fact that something so clearly a mental illness got declared not one to protect peoples feelings shows how far they go to deny reality for pandering. I don't hate gays, hookers, trannies, etc, but the left fosters a culture that is insanely shitty for those people.

I've always felt that people who identify themselves on one trait are scum, and it's the culture that liberals encourage. By which I mean, you have a GAY MAN, and a man who is gay. The gay man is a complete faggot who votes, acts and lives solely around that fact. Every decision is made through a gay lens. A man who is gay, is just a normal guy who sucks the dingus.

It's not even limited to things like that. Bronies and Otaku, they're a prime example of what I'm talking about. Nothing wrong with liking a show, or a medium, but when they base their whole identity on it, when it becomes who they are rather than a factor of themselves, then they become scum.

The right, the direction the right takes can be improved, we're never going to go back to gay bashing, we won't lose abortion. Once things settle, people will loosen up a bit. But the left is irredeemable. Things only get worse down that road, you can look to the collapse of almost any civilisation of the past to see the validity of that fact.

As well as that, the next generation of righties are not nearly as religious as the last, which is where the shit comes from.

You fail to realize that your perfect, tolerant leftist society is nothing more than a piper's dream. Scandinavia was supposed to be a shining example of a leftist utopia, and is now collapsing under political correctness and mass immigration. No society is perfect, and no society ever will be.

The right wing is defined by individualism as opposed to the socialism of the left, and therefore free speech is one of our core ideals. Of course Monarchist and Fascist governments don't apply, but that may be the Horseshoe theory in effect.

Not everyone on Sup Forums is hardcore natsoc, you know.

according to this libertard any kind of use of violence by authority is "fascism".

>worked with elites
Hitler had the chance to put the King back in power and failed to. Strasser and Rohm were Fascist and opposed to the upper class and all forms of elite. Mussolini was also inspired by the Socialists and opposed the elites.

>we won't lose abortion
we haven't got it in the first place lad

>Authoritarian can't be individualism
Why not?

You're confusing individual liberty and limited government with the underlying concepts that create those conditions.

For individual liberty to be maintained, the authority of government to restrict the individual needs to be kept at a minimum. But you're going to get into hiccups or conflicts on topics where even rugged individualist might feel the need to assert that their opinion on policy topic A is the best way to approach said thing and will want authority to be provided to government to enforce policy topic A in a way that they agree with.

If a society values the individual, but develops and overly idealized concept of what every individual within it should strive to become and enforces that ideal then you have created a Right-Wing Authoritarian country.

Islamic countries are very much withing this mold because their "Individualist" ideal is Muhammed and everyone should strive to be Muhammed. And damn anyone that says otherwise to a violent death at the hands of the Theocratic or Despotic government.

>Hitler had the chance to put the King back in power and failed to.

The King wasn't the elite.

All the big German companies of today got big during 1933-45. Fascism is crony capitalism with nationalist PR.

>All the big German companies of today got big during 1933-45.
how awful. truly a failure.

Portugal historically does not stand for freedom and progress. We were explorers, deeply religious and a very centralized, united and nationalistic country.

On social issues, we were not libertarian one bit. We sought to justify our society on a religious grounds. We abolished the death penalty for religious reasons. The same applies to slavery, where we abolished it early in our mainland but not in our colonies. We abolished slavery in Africa and Americas half a century later because the English pressured (and paid) us. Also, we had an inquisition in our mainland and all our colonies and we were not kind to heretics. Lastly, Salazar based his social and economic doctrine on papal bulls!

Economically, our businessmen were always heavily dependent on the state, which is literally the thing I most dislike about my country. Our trade routes were state controlled monopolies and our industrialization in the 19th century (and later in the 1950's) was completely reliant on the mingling between the state and wealthy families, which were granted oligopolies and monopolies.

Portugal was never even close to being libertarian.

It exists, there are libertarian socialists and they have cognitive dissonance. Libertarian right is the best.

We haven't but I speak for America. We're fucked, I hope you know that. Absolutely fucked. Our present isn't so bad, but our future is FUBAR.

That explains Fascists like Hitler and Franco but what about Mussolini, Rohm and Strasser? Those were Fascists with borderline commie views.

>according to this libertard any kind of use of violence by authority is "fascism".

Every facet of society is maintained by threat of violence. But there's a gap between the threat of violence existing and it being used. If your primary tool of coercion is the act of violence and only the act of violence and you use it excessively you become a fascistic group.

It's a complete lack of attempting to persuade your opposition and leaping to simply bashing their skulls in instead.

But maybe I'm spreading the definition too thin and over too much territory. It's a very abused word that's losing its meaning over time.

Nah son, shit's looking up. Just keep the faith and papa Noonan will look after us.

thank you for speaking truth

You're not the Alt right

You're the Alt left

Ancaps and libertarians are the right ones.

>give me one non-libertarian defining the left-right spectrum purely on how large the state is.

That dude is retarded. He has no idea what he's talking about.

c4ss.org/content/39598

Authoritarianism, historically, was always mainly associated with the right: tradition, monarchy, militarism, religion.

Then Communism happened and Americans went full 1984 redefining words.

You made very valid points, specially regarding the nature of those actions being religious or due to political pressure.

Still, when I look at how laid-back we are as a people and our consistent choice in liberal politicians, I think that speaks volumes about our current priorities.

>reading comprehension

I enjoy the way he solidified my beliefs because he was one of the few who managed to really put them into question. The fact that he is an authoritarian is precisely why I found him fascinating. The same way Christian thinkers like G.K. Chesterton rocked my world and my atheistic certainties yet I'm not a Christian.

You only read thinkers you already agree with or what? That's sad.

Woke af desu

It's not that simple.

Leftists will give you personal freedom on abortion but not on guns.

Right wingers will give you personal freedom to have business with whoever you want with no state intervention but will forbid two guys from getting married.

Etc etc etc.

I've been here longer and you're retarded.