Cringe/rage thread?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Cringe/rage thread?
>libertardians
You won't even be able to buy anymore guns anyway, because there won't be any more roads leading to gun shops.
>>30105750
How much sway does a VP really have anyway? Dude seems to be pretty live and let live.
>>30105750
I'm wondering what kind of drugs these fucks are on. Calling themselves "libertarians" and then going around saying "we need to restrict your rights!!!!" They aren't libertarians. What in the hell has happened to the party of freedom?
>>30105975
git with your shit meme.
>>30105750
The LP exists solely because the Koch brothers are wealthy, fulfilled, and need to find some way to spend their money and spread their cuck propaganda. Reason, the LP, Gary Johnson, etc. are all a fucking shame compared to things like the Free State Project that decided they were tired of the fucking political appeasement shit and are actually doing something.
>>30105975
kek
>>30106246
when bill mahr started calling himself a libertarian I went national capitalist
>>30106246
>I'm wondering what kind of drugs these fucks are on. Calling themselves "libertarians" and then going around saying "we need to restrict your rights!!!
Welcome to the LP. David Nolan died considering it a waste of his time for a reason. Rothbard etc. put so much time and work into it only for it to be ruined by the Kock bros. Same with Cato. Move to New Hampshire friend, where we will build a promised land of weed, machine guns, and AM I BEING DETAINED?!?
>>30106286
How are NH gun laws? I can have suppressors and any non-NFA firearm with a bore 15 mm or smaller. Employment opportunities for engineers? Also how much is the price of land? I'd like a rural home with my own 500 yd range.
>>30106264
Well fuck. Time to start my own party then.
>>30106320
>How are NH gun laws?
Real good. They are in the process of getting suppressor hunting through the state legislature.The one downside is the cunt of a governor keeps vetoing constitutional carry.
>Employment opportunities for engineers?
Pretty good in the Manchester area fro what I know.
>Also how much is the price of land?
Varies greatly. http://www.landwatch.com/ is your friend.
When I'm done with school I want to head up there. Check out https://freestateproject.org/ , there is already a fair amount of infrastructure in place in terms of getting us liberty minded folk moved in.
>>30106380
Hell I might join you then. Been trying to decide where to go after college.
Open bordered free trade cucks, not surprised by this
>>30105750
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?
GUN CONTROL INFILTRATED THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY?
WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER VOTE LIBERTARIAN NOW??
>>30106495
Uh...you're a whiny "liberal" who is an "independent" but don't want to vote for hilldog? bernie has already lost this thing, I wouldn't be surprised if his supporters went lib.
>>30106495
>WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER VOTE LIBERTARIAN NOW??
Why vote for them before? They have a shit track record at doing the one thing that they were supposed to do, which was spread the message, and actually field candidates that could do that effectively. But they wouldn't touch Ron Paul because he is "icky" and they won't take any firm stand on where they draw the line on compromise. They're the "vote for us for weed and hookers" party. The only way for them to get votes is to sacrifice all they believe in.
AnCap is the way to go. Join the Free State Project and get shit done.
>>30106566
Oh good, draws voters from Hillary who has been selling out American interests to foreign nations for Clinton foundation donations for years.
>>30106587
>ancap
Political equivalent of juggalos
>>30106595
You realize these people weren't going to vote for hillary anyway right? They aren't going to draw a significant number of voters away. They'll just get the ones who liked bernie.
>>30106606
Remind me of anarcho-communists. Two ideas that are complete opposite yet it's supposed to work in reality? I agree that ancap is morally superior but it isn't an effective form of governance.
>somebody saved my cap
AYYYYYYYYY
McAfee was pretty based, Augustus Sol Invictus is cool, fuck the rest of 'em though.
>>30106246
butthurt over people calling out his naive ideology
>>30106606
You got something against juggalos, pal?
>woop woop
>I believe personal rights and individual freedoms are more important than anything
>here in the United States of America, a place known for 'freedom' I am likely considered an extremist
>>30106649
That or fags like this guy >>30106641 will call you an idiot.
>>30106417
It's a great state. I signed the FSP pledge back in 2013 and am currently preparing to move there. I have an interview on Tuesday. Hopefully I can make the move in time to vote in November.
>>30105750
I don't understand.
Why even run as a libertarian?
>>30105975
>existence of private roads =/= no public roads senpai
>>30106606
Hence why both Porcfest and The Gathering are so fucking awesome.
>woop woop
>>30106816
Gary ran as a Republican in 2012 and it didn't work and it sure wouldn't work for him to run as a Democrat now
>>30106720
Libertarianism would only work if literally everyone was some sort of ubermench, so it that sense he is right that it is naive.
>>30106928
Mate, if you think it wouldn't work then you need to review your US history. Majority of the original platform was just pushing to return to actually following the US Constitution. You know, recognize states rights, stop all the bullshit restrictions of civil liberties, and so on.
You sound like the people who don't vote because "your vote doesn't matter!".
>>30106644
People who are "down with the clown" should be shot .
>>30106928
>Libertarianism would only work if literally everyone was some sort of ubermench
Not an argument.
Literally can be copy-pasted to any ideology.
>Gary Johnson
>Libertarians
Say hello to Hillary Clinton
>>30106146
None.
Until the Vice President retreats from his public tour with the President claiming illness and something bad happens.
Im not sure if you guys have seen this before, but i found this on some antigun blog.
Read further if you want more cringe, its like a list of every shitty gun control argument possible.
https://historymaniacmegan.com/2015/09/18/worst-arguments-for-not-enacting-gun-control/
>>30106980
No, can only be applied to ideologies on far ends of traditionaly defined Left/Right political spectrum or i
>>30106972
On the one hand, yes.
On the other hand, is it possible to return to the status quo ante 1913 or so w/r/t income tax, gun laws, regulations in general--but not w/r/t women voting and segregation? I'm not sure, could go either way, but it at least seems like a live possibility.
>>30106979
You're welcome to try.
>>30106972
correct me if I'm wrong, libertarians are in general for free migration
>>30107077
If people actually held their damn gov't accountable, yes. Things would be fucking great. This is the main issue however. Too many people don't bother to vote, even in the "big" elections. Shit, I see it in my town all the fucking time. We got a small group of east coast trust fund babies who run damn near everything while the rest of the town bitches. The difference between the babies and everyone else? The babies go out to vote. Town of about 12,000. Elections for mayor last year? About 2,000 voted and the sitting mayor (one of the babies) won by less than 500 votes.
Our sewers are fucked, we had 10 years to fix them. Last year they voted to change the extra sales tax they charged us for "fixing" the sewers to go towards lowering property tax. Why? All the babies own massive amounts of property and their
sewers aren't bad. Just the sewers everywhere else in town.
>>30107129
Yes, though there is a bit more to it.
>>30105975
>because there won't be any more roads leading to gun shops.
The things they believe....
>>30106637
Was based? I thought McAfee was still running
>>30107129
>free migration
That's a debated subject, but many believe that there's no problem with such a thing if there are no government benefits- as it doesn't lead to leeching immigrants.
>>30107129
There is no problem with free migration so long as you don't get government benefits just for living someplace.
>>30107058
>muh 2nd amendment muskets
>actually gets that gun=car is pro control argument
>>30107171
>>30107191
>>30107203
Asuming that there are no benefits from gov. could imigrants get a citizenship?
>>30107264
If they go through the legal process.
Remember, Libertarianism is no anarchism.
>>30107264
Yes and no. Kinda depends on who you are talking to.
I firmly believe that this is America and in America you speak English. So I believe we should have restrictions on immigration.
On the other hand you will get people who think we should let anyone who wants in, in.
As noted by multiple anons however, both sides believe you shouldn't get benefits just for being alive (welfare).
>>30105975
>MUH ROADS
It's like clockwork
>>30107377
So what are your requirements?
>>30106928
>Libertarianism would only work if literally everyone was some sort of ubermench
I don't see how that is even remotely true. It's a society that breeds the best because it doesn't facilitate the stupid and weak.
>>30107464
Do you think that without welfare stupid people would stop reproducing? Look at any 3rd. world county for an answer.
>>30107457
>Pass proficiency test in english, spoken and written, minors exempt
>have trade/useful degree/etc, minors exempt
>no criminal history, any exemptions would be on a case by case basis (ie, you got a speeding ticket for doing 35 in a 25)
To my understanding this is mostly done already. The big issue is we need to streamline the process and get better border security.
>>30107457
Speak English
Must know the laws
Must not be a serious criminal offender
Must be able to find a job within 3 months of entering the country, government immigration services will help with this
Must be either skilled or willing and able to seek higher education/trade school
>>30105975
10/10
>>30107575
They only survive because if hand outs though.
>>30106606
Kek
>>30107575
>Not realizing that billions of dollars go to giving aid to sub-humans in 3rd world shit holes
>>30106264
like any of that means anything lol
>>30107593
>minors exempt
Nope, look to the 12 year olds with mustaches and baritones for why that is a terrible idea. Minors should not be exempt from knowledge tests because they are the ones that need screening the most in regards to their affect on the school systems they will enter into.
>cringe fred
Better leave this here, then.
>>30107593
fair enough
>>30107603
>must be able to find a job within 3 months of entering the country, government immigration services will help with this
>must be either skilled or willing and able to seek higher education/trade school
if there is no welfare why does it matter
also aren't we getting a little bit too statist?
>>30107617
People will commit crimes in order to stay alive.
>>30107650
>not realizing that most of that aid is wasted on warlord Unga-bunga's pet projects
>>30107684
roll senpai
>>30107710
You could have made an argument for some, but you kinda discredited yourself when you said "most"
>>30107695
And then we shoot them.
>>30107171
This doesn't strike me as an example in support of the thesis that libertarianism can be ours if we just get out the vote. More like "we can get more gibsmedats if we just get out the vote"--which is not necessarily a bad thing! libertarianism may not be correct and sewers are important, but I don't see how that gets us from the way things are now to no income taxes, no gun laws, no Wickard v. Filburn, no Department of Education, no new half-assed wars to bring democracy to the Arabs (remember, invading Iraq was incredibly popular at the time), no surveillance state (remember, normies think that the TSA is some variant of "annoying but effective"), etc. etc. etc.
"Liberty" is not merely "anything I happen to like", you dig?
>>30107684
rillin
>>30107719
Most as in more then 50%
>>30107692
Not really no.
You should only let people into the country if they can be a boon to the society. If you can come here and start pursuing higher education to get a good job and start giving back, great come on in.
If you're gonna come here and be unemployed or just end up working a minimum wage burger joint you're not coming in sorry.
>>30107603
You're not me.
>>30107683
I considered age and education level (of the minors) being a factor in what they are exempt from but since I think we need to change the basic way our schools work, I just adjusted the education system to be able to handle them. Plus since the parents would already know english, they can help their children learn.
Before someone asks about changes to schools, it's simple. Remove grades. As in, first grade, second grade, etc. Kids should be able to associate with other students both significantly older and significantly younger than them. They should also be learning with people who are at an equivalent level. This is basically how the old one room school houses worked and I can tell you those kids actually learned shit rather than memorizing it.
>>30107737
Do you want income taxes? No? Vote accordingly. What about no gun laws? Same as taxes. You dig?
>>30107751
Yeah i'm not just going to take your word for it with a number like that
>>30107778
>Lmao just vote
Democracy is not an inherently good or fair thing. The founding fathers knew this, that is why we were supposed to be a constitutional republic, not a democracy. Some things should not be up for debate.
>>30107795
>russian national anthem plays in background
>>30107809
>Guaranteeing citizens certain freedoms is equivalent to holding people at gun point for their things
>>30107809
No I agree with him.
Certain people were not given the right to vote for a reason.
Some if those reasons were racist and sexist, others were logical and intelligent.
>>30107684
Roll
>>30107754
Why tho? Is this some sort of "productive member of society" argument. Are you affraid of beaners stealing your job?
>>30107795
What I was saying is that people are bitching about how the country is run. So, how do we get it to run the way we like? We vote for people who will represent us the way we want them to. So yes, we should exercise our voting privileges to ensure our country is run properly. We don't sit around, bitch about how horrible things are, and then decide not to vote to change things because "uh...my vote doesn't even matter man...".
>>30107809
Voting was never a right in the US until womens suffrage granted women the right to vote. If you do not sign up for the selective service (draft), then you have committed a felony with a maximum punishment of 5 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. Now that you are a felon, in most states at least, you cannot vote.
>>30107684
thick get
>>30107778
>Do you want to be drafted? Do you want mandatory cavity searches before flying? Do you want to be carved up so your organs can be donated to your fellow man? No? Vote accordingly. You dig?
Voting doesn't legitimize anything.
Voting may accomplish some ends, especially at the local level. But quietly breaking the law, flying under the radar, and doing what you want is a far superior tactic by this criterion. Get enough people doing this and secede.
Voting is not a useful feedback mechanism--it encourages not putting one's money where one's mouth is, resulting in escalating spirals of holiness signalling. Markets are a superior mechanism. Exit, not voice.
>>30107872
so women should be drafted then?
>>30107863
Not at all. I see no reason to import more people who would be a net drain on society when we already have enough net drains that are born here every day.
Living in a country you were not born in is not a right. It's a privilege. You don't get in free you earn your way in, you prove that we can benefit from your inclusion or we replace you with someone else who can benefit us.
If you really want to ask me is be in favor of deporting the drains of society. Not the people born with crippling defects or anything out if their control like that, but I don't know why we tolerate people who have never worked a day in their life who sit there and collect a check each month because they're breathing.
>>30107938
>drain
assuption was that there is no welfare so what drain are you talking about? Or do you believe that hobos are drain of society?
> me is be in favor of deporting the drains of society
where?
>>30107884
Or rather than risking violence and the destruction of the US we can attempt to fix it by the system in place. Which means we take some damn responsibility for our country and actually try to fix it rather than wishing things were better and bitching about the results of elections we didn't bother to vote in. Seriously, you realize how slim the victories in our elections are at the national level? Is it really because so many Americans are split so evenly or is it that the silent majority simply don't bother to vote because "it won't change anything man".
>>30107912
yep, equality time bitches.
>>30108011
it is not a good idea, if the Great War 2.0 (prolonged conflict with high military casualties) or something similar happened, depending on scale having equal women representation in the "trenches" could result in serious depopulation.
>>30108007
Just as it's silly to think we could actually deport drains on society, it's also silly to think we could get rid of welfare at this point without a revolution occurring.
At any rate even without welfare these people would still be a drain on society. Best case scenario they go to food banks and people give them money and donations and homeless shelters. Worst case they just become criminals and thieves and burglars and muggers and even murderers.
Why import a foreign person who's not going to be able to support himself? I can't think of any logical reason to do so. Even in the interest of "humanitarian" reasons I still don't think that's a good excuse. Life sucks, it's shitty, and it's not my job to take care of you. I owe you nothing.
And y'know, that sounds assholeish, like I'm an uncaring dick or some kind of robot. Maybe in a lot of ways I am, but the sad fact of life is you can't save everyone, and if you try you're just going to hurt yourself.
Look at Germany, they're providing tons of humanitarian aid and what's that getting them?
Sweeden? An aid worker just got MURDERED by a 15 year old, and the news story is being outright BLOCKED!
Society is a fragile thing. Efforts must be taken to strengthen it at every turn, and emotional decisions do everything but strengthen society. If there is no logical backing behind a decision it does not belong in large scale considerations. And immigration is one of the largest scale considerations a nation can make.
>>30107684
Rollalongadingdong
>>30108103
>implying drafted personnel would exclusively become infantry
Why do people think this kind of stupidity? There are hundreds of jobs a woman could do that would put them in little to no physical danger.
>>30107684
https://youtu.be/2KPplYp7K7M
>>30107684
go tomboy waifu
>>30108011
> rather than risking violence and the destruction of the US
What do you think has been happening since 1913? (under the leadership of democratically elected governments, may I add) (or 1860, or 1787, depending on exactly when you think the rot set in)
>we can attempt to fix it by the system in place.
That's exactly what I'm proposing. (I was being a touch facetious about seceding.). The system I propose to use is common law and property rights, not electoral politics. So: buy land, do what you want on it insofar as you can get away with it, migrate to communities with lots of people who feel the way you do. Notice, under this system, how you choose your own institutions and deal with the consequences thereof, instead of being at the mercy of whatever a 1% majority of your countrymen decide. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner, my man.
>>30107684
Rawl
*sigh* Why can't more presidential candidates shoot Barretts from the hip? I'm still voting for this businessman who was more successful than Trump even if the cuckterians feel they must vote for a euphemism.
>>30105750
>anarcho-capitalists
Top kek. Don't worry, market forces will solve everything.
>>30108147
>great war 2.0 implies that
he caught you my friend
>>30108182
lucky bastard
also rolling>>30107684
>>30108192
Ah, your previous post came off as more "fuck laws, anarchy is the way".
I do have to disagree, I think having proper representation is the key. The issue I see is that people don't do a damn thing to ensure they are properly represented. The biggest part is they don't vote. And even a lot of the people who do vote in "big" elections (like the presidential ones), often ignore their local and state elects (which are arguably more important to quality of life and rights). Then I don't see any strings attached to voting. It has become a right which it never should have been. It should remain the privilege it was always supposed to be. After that the biggest issue is we don't follow the Constitution anymore. States should have much greater leeway in their choices than they currently have.
>>30108275
Let me spell it out for you then. A woman can go be a clerk while the man who held that job previously can go and fight. So when you draft women, instead of drafting them as infantry, draft them as anything else and the men will go fight as they will be better at it as a whole than women.
>>30108307
If I'm reading that right he wanted tomboy and got dumpy. Unless you like dumpy girls anon....
>>30108330
>sarcasm
>>30108273
>Anarcho-capitalists
>Libertarians
>The same
Cute.
>>30106644
Yeah they are scum, and not like biker scum, like trailer trash scum thats unwilling to put in the work to cook meth
>>30108330
>Ah, your previous post came off as more "fuck laws, anarchy is the way".
You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to. An intelligent future-oriented approach to "fuck laws, anarchy is the way" looks like buying land, doing what you want (insofar as you can get away with it), and trying to live near people who feel the way you do. Become worthy, accept power, rule.
>often ignore their local and state elects (which are arguably more important to quality of life and rights).
True.
>After that the biggest issue is we don't follow the Constitution anymore.
Okay, but we arrived where we are now, Constitution in tatters, via democracy. Look at FDR. (Though I agree it probably would have been better if the franchise had remained limited to property-owners, say.).
David Friedman has some very good work on this, as do his public choice compadres James Buchanan (not that James Buchanan) and Gordon Tullock.
>>30108374
Maybe they don't like you either.
>>30106623
>ancap isn't an effective form of government
It's a utopian ideal to work toward, same as any other boutique political system. The whole world would have to be AnCap for it to be functional, ya dingus.
>>30107684
Rolling like Roland
>>30106928
you're thinking of objectivism.
>>30106623
>FUCK ancoms
Funny how you ancaps defer the attention to ancoms rather than make a real comeback
>>30106742
Where you planning to move to? I already live in NH and there's no state I'd rather live in. Absolutely my favorite place on earth.
>>30106649
>...more important than anything
>for the next two hundred years before Earth is turned into Waterworld
>>30107077
>On the other hand, is it possible to return to the status quo ante 1913 or so w/r/t income tax, gun laws, regulations in general--but not w/r/t women voting and segregation? I'm not sure, could go either way, but it at least seems like a live possibility.
segregation and women's suffrage has been amended into the Constitution. Bullshit like the NFA, and the appropriations for various alphabet agencies are not.
>>30106260
>Based Lysander Spooner.
Reason.com editors are closet progressives who want western civilization to lose.
>>30108358
It is when the Facebook page is rocking an ancap flag.
>>30107058
>. I mean look what happened to Trayvon Martin. He was just a teenager minding his own business but gets shot anyway.
I want to find the author of this article and "mind my own business" until his brains leak out.
>>30106928
>>30105975
>Libertarians are anacho-capitalists
>>30109056
Libertarians who are complete ideologues are, sure. Any (well, the vast majority) ideology taken to its extreme becomes retarded. Sadly, on the internet, libertarians seem to have have moved further and further towards anarchy as each step seems to be a logical conclusion as seen through their ideological lens. Therefore, totally retarded ideas like completely open borders become acceptable to otherwise reasonable people.
>>30108528
Even then I don't think it would be effective. No way to maintain a balance of power.
>>30108579
Not an ancap.
>>30109294
And the tripfag explains why I don't call myself a libertarian anymore.
>>30107684
Will I get the nerd again? I would be okay with the fatty or dumpy, but I need one to marry me
I don't like Weld, but he's a purse and extra media for Johnson who does have a good record on guns andost other LP issues. The people acting like he's not a 'real' libertarian are mostly AnCaps who are butt hurt the party is leaving them behind and possibly becoming relevant.
Besides, a VP has no real power.
>>30108528
>The whole world would have to be AnCap for it to be functional
Not true at all. What would preclude small ancap societies from existing?
>>30109294
>totally retarded ideas like completely open borders
What is wrong with open borders? You realize that borders in a libertarian minarchist country (just as in anarchist societies) would simply be a collection of adjacent privately-owned properties? Any invasion of this land would be dealt with the same as any other trespassing. Not to mention that there would be nowhere for those scary migrants to go; public land would be virtually nonexistent, same with government handouts. People would only migrate if they had somewhere to go.
>>30107684
Why?
>>30109666
>blah blah words
Well in your utopia you essentially have no State, so those "scary migrants" would just be an invading force from whatever outside state (or large enough group of individuals, wouldn't have to be a state) decides your shit is worth taking.
>>30105750
The Lolbertarian Party is a joke anyway.
They are:
-pro open borders
-pro amnesty
-pro unlimited immigration, which these days is almost entirely 3rd world and non-White
-against any form of minimum wage and pretty much against any laws designed to protect workers
-pro degeneracy
They are a joke.
>>30109738
That says everything about the party leadership, and not necessary anything about those who consider themselves libertarians.
Also, OP's pic is half made up.
>>30109441
YouTube libertarians are also pushing me away from using the term to describe myself, where I have to juggle classic liberal/federalist/Jefferson conservative/constitutional or small government conservative (guys like Cruz ruin that though) - where before it was easier to just say center or slightly right libertarian
wew
>>30109720
Why do Liechtenstein and Costa Rica exist? They have no way to defend against outside states or large enough groups of individuals from taking their shit.
>>30109738
Why do you support a minimum wage? A minimum wage does nothing but drive demand for labor down. That means a few burger flippers will get paid WAY beyond their actual worth to a company (technically their worth will change, because the job is still necessary, but it's artificial worth that has nothing to do with an easily replaced individual) and the other burger flippers will lose their jobs. Or they will all keep their burger flipping jobs, but they all get their hours slashed to 6 hours a week.
>>30107684
rolling
>>30108108
aaaaand that's a /thread, folks
>>30109842
For one, those are states, not ancap wet dreams. They have controlled borders. For most of history they WERE ruled by whatever power rolled over them, and achieved/maintained their independence by being in the back pocket of a more powerful state or groups of states.
You are advocating for the state being next to non-existent, so if you live in one of a collective of small privately owned properties in say, former Arkansas, who stops Canada from annexing properties in former Washington State? Do you pick up a rifle and go there? How do you get there? Does everyone drive their cars up there through a disjointed system of private, non-interstate roads? Do you spend even five minutes thinking about how an ancap or minarchist society is supposed to maintain its existence?
Okay, let's assume the U.N. supports your autonomy as a nation and will protect your sovereignty because some percentage of your private communities pay them to. What then, if its just groups of armed Canadians who come over to rape/loot/burn and then go back? Or they just take over some of the private communties, but want to be citizens? Again, do you journey up there out of kindness in the hope that other people will too? Do all the *border* communities get together and enforce strict TRESSPASSING rules at the *BORDER* communities? Do you just expect Canada's government to deal with it - and what do you do about it if they're just like "Hey guy, we don't give a shit"?
Do you have an answer for any of this that doesn't rely on the collective whole to voluntarily either pay for a state force or volunteer their bodies (theoretically without pay) out of sheer goodness and rational foresight?
It's just a childish fantasy, imo.
>>30107684
Tomboy or dumpy
>>30105750
>LIBERTARIAN party
>wants gun control
>>30107684
rolling
>>30107684
NERD GET
>>30107684
rollin
>>30110355
I am most definitely ok with this outcome.
>>30107684
Roll
>>30107684
is rolling allowed on /k/?
>czech em
>>30110388
>>30107684
lets finish that roll
>>30107684
Come on, slut.
>>30110424
Not bad, and I got two bonus points, so I can make her loosen up or convert her to uppity slut if I want.
>>30108659
>waterworld
>believing this shit
>not knowing that several different times in geologic history all ice on earth has melted, outside of some seriously minute amounts on the peaks of very high mountains
I fucking hate this meme, and wish anyone who believes it would be sterilized
>>30107684
why the hell not
>>30107684
rooooooooooool
>>30110488
well alrighty then, who do I get now?
>>30107684
Ojou get
They dont like it when you dont push their narrative apparently.
>ban reason: karma
>>30107684
>roll
>everyone I can vote for sucks
>even the ones that were expected to suck
So at this point can I just write in "Palmetto State Armory" as president?
>>30110647
Fuck you
>>30110940
nice one buddy
>>30107684
Roll
>>30110947
>>30107058
>>30109033
>25, female, and fat
aka diversity is the only way she's getting some dick
>25 year old COLLEGE STUDENT
aka failing at life
>25 year old college student
aka overgrown child who hasn't yet learned to support herself
>college student and "aspiring writer"
aka muh ivory tower, safe place to express muh ideas
>argues against "guns don't kill people, people kill people"
>in the MIDDLE OF THIS ARGUMENT, says "most criminals will use other weapons when they can't get a gun"
>worried about living in "walking on eggshells society", would be happier if noguns
>because she's surrounded by people who think like her; wait until she's in a dark alley with 3 dissenting dindus
>Trayvon was just minding his own bidness, he dindu nuffin, and lawdy dat Cracka cut im down.
>wants to cede society to the bullies to prevent conflict
>doesn't realize that bullies take their power from being bigger or more numerous, and guns take away that advantage and level the playing field
>>30108910
OK, but:
1) at least some of that consists of Supreme Court decisions about interpretation rather than anything explicit in the Constitution
2) in any case, it's fair to say that repealing the NFA and so on is legally possible, repealing suffrage (etc.) isn't. But my worry is that, even if the NFA (etc.) somehow get repealed, we'll end up with them back again pretty soon thanks to pandering to women voters after NAM violence spills over into white communities.
>>30107684
IMMA GIT DAT TOMBOY ASS
>>30109294
>Therefore, totally retarded ideas like completely open borders become acceptable to otherwise reasonable people.
This is the one thing keeping me from voting for my country's libertarian party. Which is sad since they are the only really progun party.
What POSSIBLE meaning of the word "liberty" do these motherfuckers think they're upholding? Fuck that.
>>30107684
Roll
Austin Peterson was the only LP candidate worth a damn, but they have no chance of being elected ever anyway.
>>30110155
If you're interested in hearing some answers to these questions, David Friedman has some interesting ideas in the latest edition of The Machinery of Freedom--which I recommend to everyone in this conversation, incidentally.
>>30106587
I'm ancap and I'm absolutely disgusted by the cultural Marxism infesting the LP and libertarians generally.
Only white people take our ideas seriously. Immigration is an existential threat to us all, and anybody for open borders is an idiot who has no idea what they're talking about.
>>30107058
>https://historymaniacmegan.com/2015/09/18/worst-arguments-for-not-enacting-gun-control/
This article gave me cancer.
>>30107684
welp
>>30108631
Sorry, responding a bit late. If this interview goes well, in the Conway area. I'll be poking around there today & tomorrow. I've visited NH before and spent a few days down in Nashua & Milford. One thing I meant to do but haven't done is connect with local FSP supporters or try my RP2012 contacts from the area.
>>30107684
Roale
>>30107912
Yes
>>30109738
>Complaining about degeneracy
>On 4chan
>>30107684
C'mon lads.
>>30111990
I might look into it as a matter or intellectual rigor, but frankly I'm not really interested in your special snowflake system of government (or anti-government). It is merely the endpoint of a total ideologue who equivocates any form of tax or social policy as unjust force, which is a childish way to look at the world. Everyone owes society some degree of debt, everyone puts in to society in order to receive the benefits of civilization, you cannot be a citizen without this. Doing things you don't want to do for the greater benefit of both yourself and the people around you are what separate adults from children. You cannot opt out of this because with no governing body to enforce even basic social constructs like ownership of property would fall apart. There are ZERO successful ancap societies in the world and there never have been outside of short-lived tiny societies and third world hell holes.
>>30112255
Just because a group agrees with a group of cultural marxists on one or two issues doesn't mean they are both cultural marxists. They both support open borders for different (and equally stupid) reasons.
>>30107684
rolling for the pure one
>>30107684
gimme dat slut
R-roll
>>30112373
I'm from Milford. Conway is nice, Amherst is nice for people who can afford it. The lakes region and the white mountains up north are ridiculously beautiful.
>>30107058
I know what this picture is going for, but without reading the text it looks like the man on the right is defending him self from a mutant with a creepily tall upper body and no face who's assaulting him with oranges.
>>30107684
rollin
>>30107684
sure
>>30110155
>achieved/maintained their independence by being in the back pocket of a more powerful state or groups of states
If this is the case, then they are no more sovereign than the anarchist society you're decrying. If it is not the case, you must explain how it is they currently maintain their sovereignty without a military force, where there neighbors can come in and take what they want with impunity.
>It's just a childish fantasy, imo.
All the scenarios you've described are exactly this. Armed Canadians looting and pillaging private property? Disjointed and chaotic system of private roads?
Statists come up with the most ridiculous scenarios to attack anarchism, and expect a given anarchist to provide a turnkey solution to whatever stupid shit they think of. Are any other ideologies held to this standard of rigor? Would you like me to come up with some extremely implausible scenarios and have you detail how the state would successfully resolve them? I can do just as many as you.
Now, to answer. Anarchist societies living in favorable geopolitical locations are less likely to need any form of collective "national" defense, be it PMCs or people's militias (depending on the flavor of anarchism). In the case of an anarchist Liechtenstein, this is demonstrably so, since it is a completely toothless state and yet remains unmolested. Why? Because it is surrounded by peaceful, progressive, and Western nations.
An anarchist society in an unfavorable geopolitical location, like on the border of the Sudan or Russia, would definitely need some form of collective defense if it is to survive for any appreciable amount of time. However, it is unlikely that anarchists would want to live there, any more than you would want to have your bedroom in the tiger enclosure at the zoo.
>>30111815
Weed and gays, bro
>Wait, economic liberty and the free market? Pfft not important!
>Property rights? Pfft mot important!
>Gun control? You don't need ar15s!
"Vote for us! Because weed and muh gays!"
I feel ashamed I consider myself a libertarian, thank fuck I voted trump
>>30107684
Rolling, seems like fun.
>>30107058
>>30113321
I was bored enough to make an edit.
>>30107058
Anyone who sees anything wrong with that pic is shameful and should be deported to Europe
>>30114277
Get a load of this guy
9.9/10
>>30107684
roll up
>>30110783
they have shitty rules, but if you play it right you can shitpost all day long and they won't ban you
good way is to pretend to be "resonable gun control advocat", you want to make "gun control great again" but by accident you reffute all their bullshit
>>30113564
Liechtenstien remains unharrased because there isn't anything of value there
>>30113564
>you must explain how it is they currently maintain their sovereignty without a military force,
They have treaties with nations that will protect them.
>All the scenarios you've described are exactly this. Armed Canadians looting and pillaging private property? Disjointed and chaotic system of private roads?
But we do already have Mexican cartels doing a lot of trafficking, theft, rape, etc. so don't pretend like they wouldn't escalate when you have an open border and no authority protecting private property. How exactly do you expect to have an effective interstate system without any central planning?
>Statists come up with the most ridiculous scenarios to attack anarchism, and expect a given anarchist to provide a turnkey solution to whatever stupid shit they think of. Are any other ideologies held to this standard of rigor?
You know how I know you are a blind ideologue? You call me a statist even though I would prefer the existing state be faaaaar smaller than it currently is. You're like a feminist calling any criticism misogyny, even with reality staring you in the fucking face. And to answer your dumb question, yes, EVERY ideology is held up to this much rigor. Rigor is how you separate good ideas from shit ideas.
Thank you for explaining that ancap could maybe work (even though it never has) if it was small and had super nice guy neighbor states. That's a compelling argument.
>>30107684
>Mfw this post has the most replies.
>>30114808
>overcrowded Europe, where any land comes at an insane premium
>nothing of value there
>>30114932
>They have treaties with nations that will protect them
In exchange for what? Why would those nations protect them when the balance of power is so hideously skewed that they could take whatever they wanted with zero resistance?
>already have Mexican cartels doing a lot of trafficking, theft, rape, etc
They exist solely due to government action. You think it costs less to run a drug cartel than a legitimate drug production business? The reason they incur these costs, and the reason they resort to this kind of violence, is precisely because of regulation. Those wouldn't escalate because there would be no need to use violence in order to sell their product. There is a case to make for their continued use of violence against each other, since they've grown accustomed to competing in this fashion. But to think that they will start spreading out in a wave of chaos, like some sort of Mongol horde, is idiotic.
>effective interstate system without any central planning?
Why is it that you think private businesses are unable to organize and interact with each other effectively, and only government is magically endowed with this special quality? Do you think Wal Mart and its thousands of suppliers needed government help to coordinate the logistics of running a global operation? Do you think hospitals and insurance companies needed government help to form networks and lay out a framework for their interactions?
>you call me a statist
If you support a state, small or large, you are a statist by definition. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but that's how it is.
>every ideology is held up to this much rigor
Ok, your turn, how would you propose a state (minarchist, let's say) respond effectiely to the same crisis as you posed to me; an enemy with superior numbers and firepower attacking you with the intent of seizing your property?
>>30114932
>ancap could maybe work (even though it never has) if it was small and had super nice guy neighbor states. That's a compelling argument.
So now anarchism has to work globally in all possible circumstances in order to be a "legitimate" ideology? Care to move the goalposts any further while you're at it?
>>30107684
droll
>>30115072
>overcrowded Europe
you amerifarts really believe that Europe has India/Japan level of population density
>>30109771
This is why I've started saying that I follow Milton Friedman/Von Mises.
>>30107684
Rollin
>>30107684
nerd get
>>30115111
Relative to North American densities, you guys are crowded. And it'll only continue to rise, which means the price of land will rise as well. Since Liechtenstein's neighbors are already paying their militaries to exist, there would be marginal added cost to invade them, for significant return (since property in Liechtenstein is very expensive). Why does this not happen?
>>30107684
Roll for slut
>>30107684
I'm rollin' it
>>30115466
Oh ok, rerolling for lez
>>30107684
fuck me, I'm rolling
>>30115072
Switzerland and Austria don't need Lichtenstein's land, that's dumb. If anything they would want to incorporate it's GDP, but there are governing bodies such as the EU and the UN. Not to mention these are very altruistic western societies.
>The reason they incur these costs, and the reason they resort to this kind of violence, is precisely because of regulation. Those wouldn't escalate because there would be no need to use violence in order to sell their product.
Why would they even sell a product when taking wealth would become so easy?
>Why is it that you think private businesses are unable to organize and interact with each other effectively, and only government is magically endowed with this special quality?
Interstates have to pass through private land.
>If you support a state, small or large, you are a statist by definition. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but that's how it is.
Technically true. We both know you're using it as a pejorative though, because your ideology is absolute and anything else is bad.
>Ok, your turn, how would you propose a state (minarchist, let's say) respond effectiely to the same crisis as you posed to me; an enemy with superior numbers and firepower attacking you with the intent of seizing your property?
I would never argue this from a minarchist perspective because that isn't my position. For any state, the response is the same, war. You know, like has happened over and over and over throughout history??? I'm not sure why you even ask this question.
>So now anarchism has to work globally in all possible circumstances in order to be a "legitimate" ideology? Care to move the goalposts any further while you're at it?
Is it a good ideology for governance if it falls apart if conditions aren't perfect?
>>30107684
rol
>>30115081
I've never even argued that libertarianism is a bad ideology, I think it's a good ideology - it has many good ideas and fits well when applied to many current issues. I said that becoming an ideologue and viewing everything through your ideological lens takes it too far, the same way that feminism sees sexism in literally everything. It's like literary analysis, where you can interpret all kinds of different, often conflicting meanings out of the same text. Ancap or Anarcho-communism are just two extremes you can end up at if you chase libertarian ideology all the way to its end.
>>30115659
>Switzerland and Austria don't need Lichtenstein's land, that's dumb.
Why not? After all, any poorly-defended area is ripe for inevitable invasion, as you are outright stating in your anarchist hypotheticals. Do you not see the double standard you hold?
>Not to mention these are very altruistic western societies
If anything, that supports the argument that an anarchist society can succeed there.
>Why would they even sell a product when taking wealth would become so easy?
Because you would see an immediate response. Anarchists aren't all rugged individualist ubermensch men-turned-islands. People of any ideology have the ability to recognize existential threats. If you have Enemy Group X threatening to steam roll your neighbor and end your freedom, it is in your best interest to act in concert with others to stop this threat quickly and decisively in order to keep yourself safe.
You only need look at the amount of charitable contributions that happen every year. Those contributions go toward relatively less critical things like saving animals, helping the homeless, etc. Why don't they go toward stopping the Islamic State, which is burning people alive and committing mass rape? Because helping others to protect themselves has been delgated to (or more accurately, appropriated by) the government, and we can see just how ineffective those governments are. Without government, it would fall on individuals to assume that responsibility. I daresay if Los Zetas were on the "border" of anarchist territory and threatened to rape and pillage, anarchists wouldn't just let it slide because >not muh problem.
>Interstates have to pass through private land
Interstates would be private land. If there is sufficient demand, there would be sufficient money to purchase nice, straight stretches of land for long-distance highways.
cont.
>>30115659
>>30115825
>your ideology is absolute and anything else is bad
Within the moral and philosophical framework of the ideology, yes. So is yours. Or are your ethics so malleable that on one day you consider murder (viz. unjust homicide) unacceptable, but the next day it's a-ok? I imagine not. You seem to take issue with holding a consistent ideology, and yet in your everyday life you invariably support consistent positions.
>For any state, the response is the same, war.
And so you have my answer to your original question. People would either join together to personally repel the invaders, or they would hire those who specialize in the handling of this kind of crisis. Whether the war is successful or not is irrelevant since states lose wars all the time, and so anarchist societies are no worse off in this regard.
>Is it a good ideology for governance if it falls apart if conditions aren't perfect?
The conditions do not have to be perfect. They just have to be such that your neighbors are not expansionist, or at least deterred by the amount of effort required to invade. You know, like has happened over and over and over throughout history.
>viewing everything through your ideological lens takes it too far
Refer to my point about consistency. You cannot present a valid argument for any ideology by arguing for inconsistency, because logic without consistency is not logic. The argument is self-defeating.
>>30115930
So you're openly admitting that you are an ideologue - and not understanding why that is bad? You are only seeing issues in black and white, even though issues in reality are on a sliding scale. That is not principle, that is not consistency, that is dogmatic thinking. You are a willing to look past reason and even evidence in adherence to your belief set. That is how cults are formed - start with very acceptable, good, reasonable ideological tenants, and then push them all the way to radicalization. This is how under feminism, even when women are doing bad, it's still men's fault. Being an ideologue means being a shit human being.
>>30105750
>>30107684
roll for nerd lesbo
>>30105975
>muh roads
>>30107684
>>30117144
shit... makes me a bit of a bitch, but at least I'm lez, roll for waifu.
>>30107684
Fatty get
>>30117163
Using my influence points to loosen myself up and convert slut to tomboy.
>>30108358
An caps are one of the two types of libertarians.
>>30105750
Libertarians have lost their god damn minds.
>>30105750
This is not a libertarian group supporting Weld, they (we) are ANGRY about it.
Most of the libertarian pages and youtube channels feel betrayed.
>>30105975
>B-but muh Roads
>>30107684
Let's have a go, then.
>>30116259
Address everything else I said, please.
>that is not consistency
That is the very essence of consistency. "I believe involuntary human interaction is wrong" is not some crazy, cultist view. It is, as you put it, acceptable, good, and reasonable. What I take issue with is your ridiculous assertion that these acceptable, good, and reasonable tenets somehow become unacceptable, evil, and unreasonable when applied to certain circumstances. If murder is wrong, it is never right to murder. If theft is wrong, it is never right to steal. If slavery is wrong, it is never right to enslave. That you consider these views "radical" is laughable.
Being an ideologue means being consistent. If the ideology is wrong, then the results will be wrong. If the ideology is right, then the results must necessarily be right every time. An argument to moderation, which is precisely what you're doing, is a fallacious approach to assessing the validity of a given ideology.
>>30107684
Roll
>>30105750
>Cringe thread
>222 replies
>33 images
Every fucking time
>>30112921
Shockingly, some people who disagree with you have considered these exact points, Friedman among them. That's why I recommended him. I wouldn't have recommended him if I didn't think he would tell you something you didn't know.
>>30112921
Guy you've been arguing with here, pic related is an excellent defense of anarchism (ancapism in particular).
Libertarians are mostly cucks.
>>30107684
Rolling OuO
>>30107684
Rolling
>>30107684
Rolling
>>30107684
Rolling for wizard
>>30107684
Eh, why not. Rollin'.
>>30107684
roll
>>30107684
Rollin
>>30107684
Roll
>>30107684
roll
>>30107684
tomboy get
>>30107684
roll
I voted libertarian last election, got registered as such and everything. Oh well, we all make mistakes. #Trump2016 and all that.
>>30107684
Wasn't someone working on one of these with Operator-chan and things like that.
>>30107684
Roll
>>30107058
>"history maniac" megan
>anti-gun
looks like she conveniently ignores all the history where guns corresponded with less murder. i.e. wild west.
>>30107684
Yee
>>30107684
rawlin'
>>30107684
rolla rolla
>>30107684
Roll
>>30107684
rool
>>30107684
dawud
>>30107684
Let me join in.
>>30107684
rollins
>>30122039
rollin'
>>30122039
rollin
>>30107684
reroll
>>30122039
rolla
>>30122039
rerolla
>>30122039
rawliet
