When did Sup Forums stop being libertarian

When did Sup Forums stop being libertarian

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=COItiKtHWyg
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

When it was created.
SIEG HEIL.

Because libertarians are
>free economy
>free morals

and the left is pushing moral degeneracy so hard that we had to shift to
>free economy
>hard morals

When we realized borders and law were necessary.
Also we quit weed.

We turned 5.

When everyone realized race was a real thing with real consequences.

when it became acceptable for gary johnson to be called "libertarian"

I remember quite a shift at the libertarian national convention. Something about a fat man getting naked on stage?
I voted lib for ten years, and it didn't change anything, but that was before I found Sup Forums. Plus, the lib candidate is pro tpp. This makes him not very libertarian, in my mind.

Even libertarian Sup Forums hated niggers and muzzies.

Most people stop being libertarian when they grow older.

When Gary Johnson became the face of Libertarianism.

Libertarianism was just a stepping stone toward Fascism, like Pepe intended. This is Libertarianism in 2016:

- Gary Johnson — Should a Jewish Baker Be Forced to Bake a Nazi Cake? — youtube.com/watch?v=COItiKtHWyg

I'm still libertarian. Anyone who likes socialism or big government has never actually lived in a socialist shithole

2012-2013

Sup Forums was only really libertarian because it hated leftists and neocons and thought ron paul would name the jew.

sweden pre-invasion seemed pretty nice.

When Ron Paul retired, in the last couple of years mainstream libertarianism has been overrun by cucks and autists like that naked guy from the convention

Hating niggers and muzzies is nothing when you don't follow it up with policy prescriptions. The fact of the matter is, once the extent of the racial question was realized, it became obvious that a libertarian approach to public policy would not work in a country that was being inundated with shitskins. So libertarians stopped trusting in libertarianism as an organizing principle for society.

Racial incompatibility lays bare the empty facade of libertarianism. Libertarianism simply has no answers for these problems.

Hate them is different from willing to act to stop them. Libertarians were spineless when it came to the issue of strong borders and removing kebab invading lands. Because a lot of them appeared more interested in cheap labor than protecting the nation's genetic future.

Only few autist like you and me browse Sup Forums more than 2-3 years. For many its just a period, they come, they post and they move on. Due to every new demographic the ideology also changes.

Mark my words, those who used "statist" as a real insult back in 2012 are now working in white collar jobs, and kids who support trump here will grow up, move on with their lives and make way for the new blood.

The invasion is just a result of socialism. It created a society of entitled women and weak cucks

When everybody saw how ridiculous open border policy is thanks to missus Merkel (ie drives down wages, takes jobs away from citizens). You cannot have a strong economy without strong borders.

State coercion is still wrong. Degeneracy can never be stopped with laws, the culture must be fixed first.

Also trump is more libertarian than limp johnson

You can be both libertarian and control your borders

>Trump
>libertarian

>State coercion is still wrong.

Nope.

>Degeneracy can never be stopped with laws,

It's actually the only way we can stop it.

>the culture must be fixed first.

You've already lost the culture. That fight is over. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you'll realize that force is the only viable option at this point in time if we're going to salvage anything.

>open borders
>Gun control

Libertarians have some good sounding ideas, but in a society filled with niggers and kikes who aim to subvert and fuck shit up, it's not feasable.

No you can't. Now you can be a conservative and have economical freedoms with certain limitations such as border control, but no you can't be a libertarian. The close border libertarians are hypocrites or in other words
>I want big daddy guburmunt to protect me when it suits me, and leave me alone when it does not..

If pablo from a agrees with John from b, he can move to John's home. Provided he agrees with the contract. No pablo cannot move, because he is from a not from b, rhetoric is not libertarian at all.

Stop calling yourself libertarian, you are conservative.

it neverwas fagg

They grew up.

how do you explain america then? the centre of most of these ideologies and majority of births are non-white. and contrast that with ex-commie states which are far more "redpilled". it's western liberalism as a philosophical doctrine that is the problem, and by liberalism i mean "classical liberalism" too, whether or not the economy is free market or democratic socialism is wholly irrelevant. yeah the "right" might play at social conservatism, and the "left" might play at marxist economics; but ultimately they are pretty much the same. immigration itself is largely driven by capitalism, the leftist ideas promoted to justify it are just propaganda.

i'm not even a socialist really, but it's clear that the principles and philosophy of a political system are more important than economy in defining what type of society you get.

Criminals who want drugs will get them
Criminals who want guns will get them
Faggot will always be faggots

Laws will not stop these people

But a cultural shift can make these things look ridiculous and disgusting

Don't underestimate the power of propaganda

One of the actual jobs of a government is to keep the people safe. And in order to do that, there must be border control.

It's a basic thing and wanting border control does not make you "not libertarian".

The ex commie states are so redpilled because they know how utterly shit communism and socialism is.

America is suffering, sure, but European socialist countries I.e. Sweden are going to be far worse off.

when ron paul failed and insane leftism became even mor of a threat today than it was in 2012

Of course, If Pablo is a criminal a Libertarian goverment can and should stop it

But what you are suggesting is border control regardless of whether he is criminal or not. Letting Pablo the Cartel member in is not libertarianism, but Worker Pablo and Farmer John come to an agreement a libertarian goverment cannot say "no pablo cannot enter, he is from A not from B"

By open borders people are advocating the last example. Open border does not mean let all criminals in, open border means that if you are not a criminal-have fucking black death etc you can get in. Protecting the working class-job market-white people etc are not a libertarian goverments job

When Ron Paul lose.
Because of this huge dissapointment...Sup Forums evolved

those nigger cities here are shit because theyre nearly socialist

>Criminals who want drugs will get them

And yet look at how effective Duterte is being in the Philippines, with drug dealers and users turning themselves in by the thousands.

>Faggot will always be faggots
>Laws will not stop these people

And here is where we have the really instructive lesson: homosexuality. Do you wonder why homosexuality does not permeate the culture in the Middle East? Now sure, homosexuals still exist there. But why doesn't it permeate the culture the way that it does in the west?

Because they are executed or imprisoned by the state, that's why. It is unacceptable, and not just in a "shaky" moralistic way according to the personal beliefs of individuals, but directly by the state. The legitimized state/governing entity of these countries has said "this is not what our culture is about" and they exercise zero tolerance. And it is through those policies that the Middle East is largely free of homosexual influence (again, not free of homosexual individuals, but CERTAINLY free of homosexual influence).

>But a cultural shift can make these things look ridiculous and disgusting

You will never make homosexuality look ridiculous or disgusting at this point in our culture. It will never happen. Wake up and realize this. Trying to "change the culture" on this topic is a fool's errand. We've already lost that fight.

>The ex commie states are so redpilled because they know how utterly shit communism and socialism is.
not at all. they are redpilled because they weren't in the american sphere of influence and didn't become indoctrinated by the same ideas. very, very few of the pro-immigration, pro-feminism crowd are hardcore marxists, those exist, but they are not the norm. the vast majority are capitalist liberals, and the hardcore marxists are often of the "anti-identity politics" sort (think /leftypol/).

they're shit because they are filled with niggers

We must realize that a lot of degeneracy is caused by the State

Public education and welfare and Medicare have caused a class of dependent and entitled citizens

That caused shit like single motherhood and unemployment which lead to crime and niggatry as well as mountains of disinformation about history and culture which breeds enabling SJWs

End the state and well minded people will take the lead in the cleansing

Memes come and go

but is the degeneracy caused by the state as an abstract or the state as in how it currently exists?

I miss rand paul guys...

The problem with expanding the government is that the people in charge will exercise their power for personal gain without regard to the consequences

It might be used against you one day

Me too. But if I have to choose between a tyrant who hates Mexicans and a tyrant who hates pensises, I'm pretty sure there aren't any Mexicans in my pants.

Both

Our current state is just an example of how giving people power will use it to benefit themselves at the expense of the culture

>It might be used against you one day

That much is true. It's a problem I don't really have an answer to. I can only hope that we have the ability to cultivate the kind of society that would be vigilant against threats like these, after forcefully expunging some of the more debasing influences. But we have to get rid of these influences first.

Have you read Hoppe? He had an idea for small privately owned communities where you had to sign a contract before entering

Voluntary? Check
Physically remove? Check
Don't like it? Move on to the next community

All the blacks end up together
All the productive people live together
No degeneracy in certain communities

We're both happy

That's just utopian thinking.

Better than mistakenly being shot in the street without trial for being suspected of degeneracy

Voluntary is always better

I'm not agreeing with the other guy as far as shooting people in the streets, but you need coercion to fix societies' current problems.

I'm a libertarian who believes in roads.

What am I?

The muslims use state coercion to advance their ideal society

Not working so well for them

Freer societies are almost always better off

A libertarian

> he thinks only the state can make roads

>We're both happy

Yeah, right. Because the NAP is etched into the brains of every shitskin, right? When the "black" social structure breaks down, as it inevitably will, and it starts spilling over, we'll end up with the great race wars anyway.

So we could either do it my way, where we forcefully deal with this shit now while we can still salvage the vast majority of our society's capital (monetary, cultural/social, etc). Or we could try it your way and have it all go to shit eventually anyway and try to deal with the consequences after we've drastically altered our social structure and are likely far weaker for having done so.

Why do we need the state to kill niggers when we have the power and the will to so it ourselves?

The state fucks up everything it tries anyway

In my view, it's a delicate balance that made the west great. Islam is a cancerous ideology, so no society could be great as long as Islam exists. For the west, our main problems are the lost of social pressures and morality from Christianity and unchecked immigration. It's true that western societies were generally freer (and that's a good thing), but in the past people were socially pressured to raise families and remain faithful to their spouses.

So expand freedom and spread propaganda. It's insanely powerful.

Just two months on Sup Forums undid ten years of my social conditioning in public school.

It's hard to compete with the media giants without coercion. I'm not advocating the government taking them over, but something simply like banning no-fault divorce would go a long way.

I would argue that banning the welfare/entitlement state would force people to clean up their acts or die

I think that's where the biggest cultural impact can be made

Who said the state should kill niggers? We're talking about changing the culture. The state will set boundaries.

Think back to the homosexuality example. There's no way to combat the homosexual influence in society in a non-forceful way right now. We are not going to change the culture on this through propaganda or protests or petitions. That battle has been lost. So that's where the state steps in to define boundaries. These boundaries will be obvious and will feel familiar to most people because they're based on the same values that the nation was founded on and that we have lived by since then.

The alternative to doing this is to simply watch helplessly as our culture is debased and our civilization follows.

When a stronger, proactive ideology took over - just like it'd happen in a libertarian society.

Any boundaries set by the state will be fought tooth and nail by its opponents and maybe lead to popular uprising. Especially if the media is on their side. (See BLM)

People latched on to libertarianism because at the time it was the strongest assault on the deranged, terroristic madmen who make up the status quo.

That assault was blunted, and libertarians had minimal impact. The problem of the status quo remained.

So when Trump attacked from a slightly different angle and got stronger results, people jumped on that team.

I think people increasingly realize the status quo is a suicide cult and are willing to play ball with anyone who can challenge it.

He said he changed his mind on TPP but it was so recent, he'd have to be a retard to say what he said on it.

And yet that's what must be done. I never said it was going to be easy or that it would come without bloodshed. The alternative is the abdication of our culture to foreign and debasing influences and the slow suicide and self-destruction of our society.

I used to be a pacifist and a libertarian too. Those days of mine are long gone. There is no way to make this omelette without cracking some eggs.

This.

Lefties have the Che Guevara phase, right-wingers have the libertarian phase. It's part of the political maturing process.

Good luck getting the state to stay on your side forever

Hope it works out for you

This

Without borders you have no country, you are just a piece of global land. Your "agreement" with pablo is in the end harmful, because John is shipping people over without taking into account the wishes of other people who live near him.

nice posts mate

Libertarianism, at least in its pure form, is an extremely childish, idealistic, and unrealistic worldview. Libertarians can't even agree on what it means to be a libertarian.

The natural evolution of libertarianism is conservatism, and that's the realization that many had here. A liberal social outlook STRONGLY lends itself to governmental liberalism eventually in the form of handouts due to a bleeding heart society, whereas a conservative social outlook strongly lends itself to financial responsibility.

>Live in nanny state
>Just want the government to back off a bit
What does this make me?

>not purging commies and democrats

FPBP

Ever heard of the Wiemar Republic and a guy named Hitler?