Stefan Backstabs Libertarians for Alt Right Shekels

youtube.com/watch?v=HZzeC06hVvA

Stefan actually thinks Libertarians
>don't care about spanking
>don't care about circumcisions
>wanted to invade Iraq

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=3BDyFuDxA-I
youtube.com/watch?v=8-ZjtXXZ2co
youtube.com/watch?v=hUHAyiMnb88
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

what a fag.

I'd like to nominate Stefan as Sup Forums's first offical "Honorary Aryan". Hitler had his, why not us?

>calls out the jewish influence within the libertarian movement

The Truth about the Jews when?

Libertarians are cucks.

t. Right-wing Libertarian

Stephan is being wooed by the Alt Right, there's book deals down the line for him from Vox et al.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being Jewish.

Libertarians literally don't care about those things, though. So what's your point?

Libertarianism is dead. Less immorality is still immorality.

Faggot got Plato wrong. I'm piss.

...

Aleppoman has already ruined libertarianism's reputation for the next few decades.

Join the winning team.

how so?

because there are bigger issues, this fag just has mommy issues

On its own, yeah.

...

youtube.com/watch?v=3BDyFuDxA-I

soon (tm)

He's right though. Libertarians tend to be idealistic thin skinned spergs. They support policies such as open borders in climates where that means millions of big government 3rd worlders will come and make libertarianism a memory. They are retarded short term clowns.

ONE OF US
ONE OF US

DESPITE ALL MY RAGE

He's already covered all of the big issues, at length. The fact that he shows, with irrefutable evidence, why spanking/breastfeeding/circumcision are issues is not any sort of argument against his credibility.

You're an idiot.

>how so?
By framing it as some nonsense about how ideas, principles, philosophies, etc., shouldn't be "tainted" by reality. That's a complete bastardization of Plato's metaphysics.

I'm not really angry, though. Moly is always shit at philosophy.

Libtertarianism is weak.
Dictatorship of the Stars when?

where did he say that or what about? I'm not shitting on you, this dude is not a philosopher at all, but i'm just curious

how come it takes this guy 50 minutes to make a point

It's part of this video's preamble. Starts at 1:05.

He's a cult leader who realised he was going to lose his cult to the alt-right if he didn't start claiming those talking points himself.

He's an anarchist who promotes closed borders? Sure. Anyone who follows him is a moron.

He like putting forth arguments to back up his points. Personally I can't blame him. I'd rather someone over explain a statement/opinion than under explain.

ah i see, sorry I watched it yesterday and must've missed that.

I stopped watching this video half-way through when he started using personal anecdotes to ascribe a set of values to an ideology.

At one point he describes getting into an argument with some libertarian(s) who happened to be (a) feminist, and they got offended when he said he was against feminism. So now apparently libertarians are all feminists now.

What the fuck does libertarianism have to do with feminism? Fuck off with this non-argument molymeme.

It's part of the manipulation strategy. He needs to throw so many tiny logical jumps at you that you lose track and miss the contradictions. He never says something that was too far away from the last 5 minutes, but over an hour he gets *really* far away from the original premise. Thing is, you don't remember any specific contradictions because the videos are so long.

Dianetics videos do the same thing. Watch a few, you get the same slightly weird and creepy vibe. It's just more obviously bullshit so you don't buy it as easily.

I also remember in the vid he said Libertarians were for the War in Iraq, which is such a blatant lie it's absurd

He's already explained why he's calling for closed borders, and even expanded on that in this video. When war is declared and the enemy is at your gates, you don't destroy the walls you have to build better ones, you use the walls you have, those walls being the state. Also, as a taxpayer he has economic investment in his country and by extension western civilization.

>cuckbertarians

>He's an anarchist who promotes closed borders? Sure. Anyone who follows him is a moron.

why would you support open borders BEFORE the welfare state is dismantled?

hes an anarchist, not a retard

DISLCAIMER: Vote Trump 2016, Hillary is an evil, lying cunt, I am not a divide-and-conquer shill whatsoever, etc...

>Stefan disguises an anti-spanking video targeted toward libertarians as a video about why he was wrong about libertarians.

What the heck is this guy's actual hang-up on spanking? Spanking is highly successful on children whom are smart enough to comprehend what the rule of law is, understand when they've done wrong, and not allow the fact that they have to be punished for breaking the rules to damage their relationship with their parents. My father only ever spanked me a very small amount, and never excessively hard, and I think I turned out much better for it. Yet, Stefan seems completely content to ignore the evidence that sometimes spanking does do good, and instead tries to shove everything into this non-existent box of the "non-aggression principal." It's honestly as cringe-worthy as watching a libertarian try to build every one of their arguments around the non-existence of tacit consent and the social contract. I just wish SOMEBODY would call in to this guy's show and debate him on this, but there are so many other more important issues to talk to him about that it's just not worth it to bring it up, even if I were to do it.

so call him, faggot

He claims his belief comes from a first principle: that enforcement of your will upon others via the government is wrong.

I didn't say open borders was not right or wrong (nice hallucination), I was pointing out the contradiction. It's just an obvious example of his lying.

>I'd rather someone over explain a statement/opinion than under explain.
Yeah, I agree, but some of his points are pretty straightforward and overexplaining them just comes off as an attempt to overstate their relevance, while other times he just outright babbles on along a flimsy argumentative line without ever adding any substance.

I don't hate the guy, but I do find it hard to sit through some of his videos.

The whole video is basically: the people that call themselves libertarian piss me off with their hypocrisy and fear of political incorrectness so I'm going to make this video to try and disassociate myself from them. His ideas are still ancap, he i just clarifying that there are more fundamental evils to be removed than cops working in inner cities.

>nice hallucination
Reading a Scott Adams blog one day and immediately adopting his idea into your arguments. Wonder what you would be arguing if you had missed that blogpost.

>cult leader gets himself brainwashed by the cult of kek

>Spanking is highly successful on children whom are smart enough to comprehend what the rule of law is, understand when they've done wrong, and not allow the fact that they have to be punished for breaking the rules to damage their relationship with their parents.

Literally all scientific research points to the opposite.

LOLBERTARIANS BTFO

>spanking violates the NAP, so you must get rid of spanking
Why not just get rid of the NAP? Why is aggression always bad?

>Why is aggression always bad?
>t.nigger

That's literally the point...

Maybe if you'd learn that you could take Constantinople

>neutering yourself is progress
I'd rather be a nigger than a cuck.

>I'd rather be a nigger
>checks flag
Enjoy living in a shithole filled with niggers

>not initiating violence makes you a cuck
Defending yourself and punishing violence are encouraged under the NAP.

(((Libertarianism)))

Based Stefan exposing this (((movement))) for what it actually is, just another kike-subverted neo-marxist hippy shitfest.

Burn it all down and start over from scratch.

Man I'm surprised you can even afford internet

hey we're not romania man, things aren't that bad

I can't tolerate this guy for more than 30 seconds. Any video he makes just makes me cringe. He's so full of himself. pls die

No, it really doesn't. Most research points to spanking as being a by-in-large counterproductive venture, yes... for MOST children. That being said, whereas MOST children will not benefit from it, it's not such a bad to do if you think your child is, say, in the top 5% as far as intelligence goes, and can actually make those distinctions and learn a lesson from a correctly-applied method of punishment. In that case, the child can actually learn the lesson as intended, and this is precisely the kind of shit Stefan is ignoring in his obsessive vendetta against spanking.

I'm not saying it's a great form of child education, but applied to the right children, applied correctly, and not applied overly often, it is no worse a tool to correct childrens' behavior than a screwdriver is for turning screws.

No, I'm talking about the initiation of force. Why would a society deprive themselves of such a useful tool? The libertarian fetish for self-defense is incomprehensible if you look at history, where aggressive violence has been used to regulate society and acquire resources since before humans were humans. It seems like the ideal libertarian society is a big game of "i'm not touching you."

Maybe, is he an 1/8 or less kike?

>That being said, whereas MOST children will not benefit from it, it's not such a bad to do if you think your child is, say, in the top 5% as far as intelligence goes, and can actually make those distinctions and learn a lesson from a correctly-applied method of punishment.

There is no scientific evidence to support your hypothesis.

Regardless of intelligence, you're teaching your children that 1, violence is an acceptable response to noncompliance; and 2, people that love you are allowed to physically hurt you.

I think it's generally a very solid, rational principle, though there are issues with "aggression" being a fuzzy term, and specific dilemmas like whether you should be allowed to "enact aggression" upon someone who cannot possibly give informed consent (due to being a child, intoxicated or handicapped, etc.) for their own future benefit.

Moly has been shifting hard right since around May~, even before then he had gradually been admitting faults with his meme ideology.
Hes going 100% Fash.

The principles of liberty that Libertarians and Ancaps espouse can only work in a homogeneous high trust society. Such a society can only exist when made and kept so. The state must exist, and it must protect the ethnic identity of the nation as a whole.

>Regardless of intelligence, you're teaching your children that 1, violence is an acceptable response to noncompliance

This is the foundation of law.

Not an argument.

It's not a justification, and furthermore, Molyneux/voluntarists believe law is inherently immoral, which is just the icing on the cake, as far as anti-spanking arguments go.

If you think it's okay to initiate violence against a nonviolent person, there can be no reconciliation between your ideology and voluntarism.

Not at all. Say you and your friends are hosting a party and some people there are being dicks. Not necessarily harming anyone, but being dicks. It would make sense to initiate force and kick them out, right? And if they resist, to use violence to subdue them before kicking them out?

Now just swap "party" with "society", and libertarians flip their shit. It's nonsense. People are society, and through representation they are the government as well. Therefore, they should be able to initiate the use of force against any undesirable individual or population.

>It's not a justification
It works, so I'd say that's enough of a justification for me.

The basis of this meme Anarcho-Capitalism is that everyone should volunteer for everything. They believe that statehood needn't exist, that for example America as a country shouldn't exist. Only groups of people voluntarily forming small groups here and there.
It is the most infantile, unrealistic, and backwards nonsense that exists in the entire realm of political dogma. Even shitlib commie fetishists recognize that a central power is necessary in their fantasy communist government.

What it boils down to is cowardice. By adopting such a belief system they shelter themselves from ever having to make the moral decision on where to draw the line, on what is acceptable for a society, on when a state can use violence.
They want to live with their heads up their asses and say
>lol the state doesn't exist man, you can only use persuasion to convince people to behave in a way that you find agreeable dude!

100% of them are pussified cowards. Moly is finally growing out of this ridiculous phase.

>It would make sense to initiate force and kick them out, right?

Or just ignore them, or if you're own your own private property THEN you have the right to initiate force and push them out.

It doesn't change the fact that Stefan is AnCap, what did change is libertarians became moderate democrats (see Gary fucking Johnson, who Ron Paul doesn't even support)

Kicking someone off of property you own is not initiating force. If they violently refused to leave, using violence to subdue them would not be initiating force.

So you have no logical consistency in your views, then. "The law is right because it's the law" is not an acceptable standpoint.

>if you're own your own private property THEN you have the right to initiate force and push them out.
Right, and a nation is the property its citizens.

an argument

I think he is no longer fully an-cap, more a realpolitik.
Saying that middle east is better left as authoritarian rather than forcing them to modernize, or even mentioning the phrase "human biodiversity" is a massive dogwhistle

Spanking does not qualify as violence, performed correctly, and would not reinforce this idea. Any dumbass with 70 IQ points can properly distinguish between a well-reasoned, well-executed butt-smacking and a fucking backhand at full power across the face that was delivered for a stupid reason, followed by a violent raping. Just how stupid do you think a child is? They are like sponges for knowledge.

The hypothesis is supported by studies claiming that 'gifted' children are more emotionally-sensitive than 'non-gifted' children. As a result, they are better equipped to discern the reason why they are being spanked.

...

>Kicking someone off of property you own is not initiating force.
Is this one of those things where ideologues change the definition of a word? Like how racism turned into power + prejudice? Because as far as I know, shoving someone out the door is initiating force. And who says they have to resist violently? Why can't you use violence if they just sit on your couch and say "fuck you I ain't leavin"?

>So you have no logical consistency in your views, then.
Sure I do. My views are "whatever works".

the real red pill is that sometimes initiating force is necessary

only autistic children think pure libertarianism is good

>may

No, it has been for a few years.

He started the "gene wars" series in Jun 2015.

Molyneux is just going to jump ship when the next popular movement come a long, he's been caught lying several times, now he makes a video lumping all libertarians into one group so the alt-right cheer. I'm not sure about this guy, I think he's opportunistic.

>"To give them the "Redpill" as it is called, hopefully orally."

Oy vey

what else has he lied on? jw

I think it's more of a case of ideology vs practicality. He's ancap, but he realizes we'll never reach that state, so he's just working with what he's got.

He lied about his wife being disciplined for advising her patients to defoo their family, he lied about being Jewish, he lied about the false DMCAs he did.

Lied about being not Jewish

Well, also what he added was that ancap demands an extremely high-IQ society. So because of that, he believes its not the perfect system for all, only to the brightest possible people.

Thats a more realist than an ancap look at the world. Sure, the ideal is there, but practice makes him more of a "what fits, works" guy.

No, but something terribly wrong with being a practicing Jew.

Hes definitely not an opportunist, hes a narcissist. With total cult like devotion to his ideas he remained unwavering when questioned, and took the position of preaching to others on how to live, going as far to say that people were being immoral for not ridding themselves of family and friends with differing political views.

He started getting more into racial issues around the time of the Zim-Zam trials where he caught a lot of flack from other Lolbertarians for mentioning the uncomfortable facts. Going deeper and deeper into it Moly here probably finally realized that one set of rules cannot work for all people because all people simply are not equal.

False flag. If you actually watch the video he's shitting on libertarians for not completely following the NAP. He's not shitting on libertarianism itself.

I think he is an opportunist and a narcissist, he a cannot handle criticism of his """"""philosophy""""", I remember one time a caller said he googled counter arguments to his UPB shit, and he spazed out, he is often very condescending and rude to his guests on his show

Newfag

could you find that clip? sounds good

I'm trying to find it, I watched it some time ago

youtube.com/watch?v=8-ZjtXXZ2co

this?

Hes just going through a phase.

No it was a different one

>youtube.com/watch?v=hUHAyiMnb88
>it's a Stefan opens the video singing episode

...

Check digits.

Trump wins.