Convince me that Libertarianism is wrong

Convince me that Libertarianism is wrong

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=qw3S35wGgT8
youtu.be/5AWI_ECKrBc
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>privatized roads

Every private road I've been on has been immaculate. 1000x better than public roads, easily

>adding more bills every month because every road is owned by some kike charging for its use

wage slave mentality

what is aleppo?

"You, my five sons, were born from my one womb. If you become separate like those single arrows, you will be easily broken in half by anybody who passes. If you become one union like that bundle of arrows, how will anybody be able to break you easily?"

use a saw

pol think libertarianism is the same as anarchy, which is why the people where that hate libertarianism hates libertarianism.

It's a metaphor you fucking autist. The principal is that the divided are easily conquered; an argument against Libertarianism.

Then no one would go shopping at their stores leaf.

the saw is also a metaphor for innovation
alternatively, arm your sons

>adding more taxes every month because every road is owned by some kike bureaucrat charging for its use

actual slave mentality

You don't have to choose between innovation and unity desu.

where does it say you cannot join up in libertarianism?

It isn't going to be that much harder to break if, ironically, 4 of the 5 arrows are complete faggots.

THE ROADS! REEEEEEE!

You have to sacrifice some liberties. 'Joining up' is kind of weak compared to mass discipline.

How are they going to be faggots?

I can't detract from the use of the non-aggression principle as the sole moral foundation for law. No crimes aside from physical or financial violence inflicted on another individual.

I tend to think that planned economies can be more efficient these days, so I'm not into the invisible hand trumps all shit.

Or are we actually talking about minarchism here?

"libertarian" is an even worse political descriptor than conservative/liberal desu

Sonthen what is it?

No where. The metaphor really isn't a good metaphor. It doesn't account for:
>Humans being able to recover or become stronger by themselves
>The fact that humans are reactionary organisms and arrows are inanimate objects
>The effectiveness of the arrow when unified do to the weight the other arrows carry
>That humans can adapt to situations, eventually evolving to the point of not needing dependence
>And what you said with the ideal libertarian society allowing you to join forces

One of the fundamental assumptions of Libertarianism is the fungible nature of human beings

The idea that humans, through education, can become anything. The son of a poor farmer can become a high power executive if he works hard enough. Unfortunately, this isn't true. Unless the farmer's son is born with the right IQ level, he will never be an executive, or a doctor, or a scientist....etc.

But it's not just IQ, that's just a singular example I'm using. Here is my evidence:

youtube.com/watch?v=qw3S35wGgT8

As you can see from this video, things like your career choice, your hobbies, your proclivities....etc. all have a strong genetic component. Therefore something such as being a welder could be genetically passed on. This means that if a welder's son is forced into another career, because his job was eliminated by a machine, he will never be quite as happy, satisfied, or fulfilled as he could have been if he was doing what he was born to do.

For example, 90% of the white population used to be involved in farming. It's how we literally evolved. However, when those farming jobs are gone, replaced by a machine, we are forced into other lines of work that we are not necessarily adapted to, or happy doing.

Furthermore, I would like to make this point: The end product of capitalism is transhumanism.
Following the trend of global capitalism, humans will soon be able to augment their bodies, their minds, their very essence.

In the near future, we will be able to:
>Alter our bodies at will. You want a 3rd arm, you've got it
>Change our sex or race at the DNA level
>Have designer babies
>Have cranial implants that gift us with perfect memory, telepathic communication, 2000 IQ's
>Design a self-evolving AI intellect that utterly dwarfs any human, or superhuman.

In such a world, how can human beings exist? The answer is: they can't.
Do you really want to live in this world?

>I can't detract from the use of the non-aggression principle as the sole moral foundation for law.
The NAP is a meme that only a minority of libertarians use as the sole moral foundation for law

OK so individual warriors are stronger than a disciplined army of equals? Think Gauls vs Rome.

It doesn't account for negative externalities like pollution or over harvesting a resource.

youtu.be/5AWI_ECKrBc

Hmmm.

sure, no true lolbertarian in existence after all

sorta the same thing with scotsmen

Libertarianism is a spectrum, the founding fathers would have been called libertarians if liberal meant the same thing it means today.