Any good books to learn about Libertarianism? (please none from the American point of view, just neutral ones)
>>8096971
same fucking thread as yesterday.
The declaration of independence
Anything by Ron Paul
Any economics by milton friedman
Fountainhead by ayn rand
Might is right by Ragnar redbeard
>>8096971
Peter Vallentyne: "The origins of left-libertarianism: an anthology of historical writings"
>>8096971
Do you want to read about right-libertarianism or left-? If it's the second, I can give some recommendations, but can't really help with the first, other then Ayn Rand I guess.
>>8096971
jesus was a commie
>>8096971
Just skip reading about it and wait it out. It's just a phase. Libertarianism is complete bullshit of the highest order.
>>8097156
>Left-libertarian
This is literally complete bullshit because libertarianism is inherently anti-left.
>>8097298
So-called "right-libertarianism" is a contradiction in terms. At best, it's a euphemism for feudalism.
Jesus was a welfare NEET.
>25“Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?g 28And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, 29yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. 33But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
>34“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.
>>8097298
What do you think 'left' implies?
>>8097294
Why? Libertarianism is just believing that you should be able to do whatever you want as long as it does not affect others.
>>8097408
Thing is, everything you do "affects others" since everyone is drawing from the same finite pool of natural resources.
>>8097092
>Might is Right
>having anything to with Lolbergtarianism
???
>>8097417
what is
>negative liberty
It's almost as if you haven't even looked into the topic and yet you're talking authoritatively about it.
>>8097092
Thank you.
>>8096971
Start with Rothbard as economic literacy is a requirement in order to understand rationality and libertarian ideology.
>>8097662
Go back to /pol/ with that idiocy. The adults are talking.
>>8096971
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
>>8097156
They stole the term from anarchists. Rothbard even admits this.
>>8097840
I will be sure to check that out!
>>8097840
That chart is retarded and so are you. Rothbard is just a rightwinger, and there's no such thing as "rightwing libertarianism". It's an oxymoron.
>>8097856
It is not an oxymoron, in what way is it an oxymoron?
>>8097859
Capitalism is inherently incompatible with libertarianism.
>>8097859
Libertarianism is a synonym for Anarchism. Anarchism is about getting rid of all formalized hierarchy. "Ancaps" love hierarchy.
>>8096971
Anarcho-Pinochet market feudalism surveillance state
>>8097866
Isn't libertarianism just letting people do what they want as long as it does not negatively effect others? As in you still have a police, army and state.
>>8097873
Everything you do "negatively affects others" since everyone is drawing from the same finite pool of natural resources.
>>8097886
I am aware of that, I mean things like stealing and assault.
>>8097298
Libertarianism is a leftist concept you dumb shit
>>8097896
It is actually more right wing.
>left-libertarianism
Right-libertarianism is the only kind of libertarianism.
>>8097890
"Stealing" doesn't negatively affect others anymore than enforcing the so-called "property right" in the first place.
>>8097900
Stupidest thing I read all day.
>>8097899
Whoever wrote that is an utter moron with deep conceptual confusions.
>>8097901
It's true. You can't even define "stealing" without first defining "property rights".
>>8097873
Maybe in Europe, but in 'merrica it's just classical liberalism. Maybe some an-caps, but they're just as dumb.
Like here says >>8097308
>>8097908
Just anything that you have bought or something that you have received as a gift. Stealing is taking without consent from the property owner.
>>8097925
There is no such thing as a "property owner" without the granting and enforcement of property rights.
>>8097930
The government enforces those.
both left and right libertarianism are idealistic nonsense
>>8097092
So libertarianism is just *tips*: the ideology?
Makes sense.
>>8096971
Why would you want to? The >>8097092 you replied to is the American POV
>>8097937
Everything is, anon.
>>8097918
>classical liberalism
There is no "classical liberalism", "classical liberalism" is a bullshit term made up by Hayek to suggest "these men are the REAL intellectuals, not these OTHER men!"
Anyone I've ever met who uses that term is unironically a right winger and also very stupid.
>>8097934
Yes, that's the point: you need a state to enforce property rights. That's why so-called "right-libertarianism" is incoherent. State enforcement of property rights in an infringement of liberty.
>>8097899
Right libertarian concept of 'freedom' is limited to property. the non-aggression principle and negative freedom become meaningless when you can starve people by controling access to resources you arbitrarily claim as your own. Libertarianism is similar to Marxism in its ambitions, though instead of relying in a model of social analysis, it relies on a system of deontological ethics. According to this system, Propietarianism is always moral even when it leads to the most undesirable and absurd conclusions, ie. Totalitarian pseudo-feudal oligarchy. The market is only one of many forms of social organization, and a relatively recent innovation at that. I
>>8097937
actually I'll amend this
right libertarianism is the step before fully embracing various strains of right wing authoritarian thought
left libertarianism is "whoa dude what if the government paid for my weed? have you heard of this dude gnome chompsky? we just need to get along my dudes"
>>8097899
>>8097945
okay let's pretend that libertarianism means anarchism (which it doesn't, left or right) but left anarchism still requires rights
>>8097958
Free weed and freedom>getting cucked by authoritarians
>>8097942
It's a real distinction for some. They both believe in market capitalism but the new, or progressive to some, accepts certain amounts of socialism, while the "classical" still hate socialism.
I'm an anarchist, so I don't like either.
>>8097972
(((the point is it's a stupid and barely thought out system endorsed by people who want to do whatever they want with little to no responsibility towards themselves or their community)))
>>8097968
The only libertarian right is the right to self-ownership.
>>8097986
so who's going to protect that right without a state?
>b-but it's different
no it's literally just property rights in its basest form
unless you're suggesting that those with strong bodies should be free to control those with weak bodies (this is the reality of anarchism)
>>8097976
Except, that's all bullshit. You've never actually read von Humboldt or any work of libertarian philosophy.
>>8097995
Read a book, son. You are way too confused to sort out on a message board.
>>8098005
refute the argument in your own words
A little off topic but,
Is pic related worth going for?
and is this a decent translation ???
>>8097844
>negative liberty
>isaiah berlin
>/pol/
is every other opinion from your's /pol/?
>>8098019
Yes,if you don't agree with this then you are more than welcome to go back to /pol/
>>8097899
This, left libertarians are authoritarian fascist collectivists who don't know economics
>>8096971
The Constitution of Liberty
Anarchy, State, and Utopia
>>8097975
There's no distinction, what you just said is entirely bullshit. Adam Smith is hailed as the prime capitalist thinker and he demonizes the entire progression in his book as horrible, dehumanizing and we should resist it. The idea of "classical liberals" being in favor of neoliberal ideal is a fabrication.
>>8098064
I'm not sure what you're saying.
>Adam Smith ... demonizes the entire progression
Of Laissez-faire economics?
>The idea of "classical liberals" being in favor of neoliberal ideal is a fabrication.
So you're telling me you're a libertarian (US) who believes in a "free market", yes?
You can claim neo-libs aren't like you, fine with me. It's all dirty money and the life's blood of states.
>>8098135
You have me confused entirely. I'm somewhat of an anarcho-socialist. I'm saying that Adam Smith is closer to Karl Marx than to von Mises, and that ideological hacks like Hayek invent ideas like "classical liberal" that attempt to say 19th century thinkers would justify preneoliberal values.
I'm more saying libertarianism, a radical offshoot of neoliberalism, has no legitimate basis in history, the narrative they give is mostly fabricated. I think most of the historical people libertarians hail would despise them.
>>8098174
Ah, I see now. Well I have a shallow education on the nuances. But that the 19th century brand has changed with it's acceptance of some kinds of socialism does legitimize the term for me.
>I think most of the historical people libertarians hail would despise them.
No doubt.
left-wingers are the real fascists
>>8099079
Collectivism always leads to mass murder and genocide.
The individual is the only thing that matters.
>>8096971
Just forget about it.
Any form of libertarianism is just fedora tier ideology that ends up contradicting itself.
t. A former activist and an-cap.
>>8099079
>Hitler
>Socialist
>>8099083
Nice spooks, kiddo.
>>8099183
>The religious wars of Europe never happened.
You don't know how spooks work.
>>8099187
I thought you were a lefty?
>>8099152
>Activist
>Ancap
nice contradiction friendo
>>8099207
Just 2 mentally retarded phases I went through (first activist then an-cap).
>>8099213
thought they had to be separate, can't be an ancap and an activist, ancaps only exist on the internet :^)
>>8099214
Ancaps don't exist
>>8099226
I fucking hope so friendo
>>8099227
Any form of libertarianism shouldn't exist tbqfhwf desu
>>8097899
Well, friendo, you got close. But no cigar. See, the infographic sets up a false dichotomy wherein the choices are either "people become Anarcho-Individualist" or "The collective violently removes property". In fact, the third option not listed- The most logical of the three- Is simply to ignore the person claiming property ownership and live and use the land as you would continue to anyway. The only legitimacy one would have at that point is if they try to defend their 'property' at gunpoint, in which the collective has every right towards self-defense.
>>8097940
>So libertarianism is just *tips*: the ideology?
Did you assume it was anything else?
>>8099386
Don't you mean the individual has the right for self defense, not the collective?
>>8098012
If you are interested in authoritarian governing, then I would highly recommend but I don't know much about the copy.
>i subscribe to political labels
Legitimate plebeians.
>>8099386
>steal or appropriate property
>person either goes along out of fear of reprisal or
>defends his property and loses to the collective, who use violence in defense of the collective
How is that different than option 2?
>>8099669
I think that he meant the individual
>>8098012
Translated from English to.... English?
>>8097896
This. Libertarianism rejects traditional institutions and values because they get in the way of corporate greed. Libertarians are just leftist who want low taxes.
Um, lmao.
If you're a right winger or an individualist, you should just kill your dumb, toxic self.
Toodles.
>>8099152
fucking how
its such a simple ideology
>>8099187
>religious wars
There's no such thing
>>8097156
I am personally interested in left-libertarian writings apart from left-anarchism. Where to start?
>>8101880
>>8100292
This. Individualism =racist. We as hardworking white folk have a duty to subsidize the lazy dindu. Hail Communism!
>>8098012
Leviathan is a masterpiece. Hobbes is possibly the greatest political thinker of the modern era.
>>8101880
Peter Vallentyne: "The origins of left-libertarianism: an anthology of historical writings"
>muh property
>muh NAP
>muh natural law
>>8102017
What if I told you arguing against property and the NAP is a performative contradiction. As argumentation itself presupposes norms such as non-aggression, rationality and self-ownership.
>>8099618
I believe he means the collective would encroach on the individual's property. The individual would open gunfire to ward them off and the collective would fire back in self-defence.
>>8102047
what if I told you you're a freaking gay nerd
Watch the latest libertarian presidential debate.
>>8102047
As usual, a libertarian must write like an ivory tower intellectual to conceal the ridiculousness of his argument. What if I told you that self-ownership is not the same thing as private property?
>>8102047
The problem is that the very idea of property contradicts NAP.
>>8102054
And how does 'the individual' get exclusive rights to his property?
> Inb4 'mixing it with its labor'
what makes some kinds of labor more worthy of reward than others? Merely claiming a plot of land allows the landowner and his descendants to hold it for posterity. While, the proles can slave away their lives in their Lord's mine or farm without ever getting a fair share of anything. Property is ultimately based on force and conquest ie. Blatant violations of the so-called NAP. Where do you set the line? When does property become legitimate?
>>8099677
>>8099669
The collective group, as individual operators (X) have no reason to respect the authority of the individual operator claiming rights to a certain piece of property (Y). The legitimacy of Y is only in his/her ability to protect this property by violence, as there is no state to protect it. In the offered scenario, X simply goes about living and using the land as they had before, not even bothering with Y's claim because it has no objective value in a post-state society. Y is then forced into an option- He/She either relinquishes his/her claim and the property stays public, or he/she uses violence and coercion to force his/her claim over the property. Once this act of violence is initiated, the individual operators of X are perfectly in the right to self-defend.
Private property can only be defended through coercion, usually by a state. Since the state is abolished, the only one who can apply that force is an individual who claims property. Since this presents an opportunity to return to statism by self-interested parties creating small kingdoms through this claim of property, the claim would be seen as hostile to the values of a post-state society. Rather than allowing this claim to be accepted as legitimate, or by becoming an aggressive force, the collective would simply continue using the area as before until the claimant was forced into reaction.
>>8102129
tl;dr
Right Liberaterianism is autism, Left Liberaterianism is cancer.
>>8102085
>As usual, a libertarian must write like an ivory tower intellectual to conceal the ridiculousness of his argument
the ironing is reaching terminal levels
>>8102129
But what if I actually worked hard for that property?
>>8102489
tl;dr
right libertarianism is feudalism, left libertarianism is feudalism
>>8102695
>right libertarianism is feudalism, left libertarianism is georgism
Fixed.
>>8102710
Nah nigga it's shit
>>8102710
I meant what it realistically leads to, not silly meme ideology.
Libertarianism is a phase the redpilled must pass through to break the conditioning and find themselves.
Eventually libertarians come to understand that men are social predators who's evolved psychology naturally compells them to construct hierarchical tribal societies.
All men who make it through without becoming cucked or betraying their race to extinction for personal profit will eventually turn to white nationalism and evolian traditionalism.
Libertarians do not understand that within the context of a powerful traditional society there is still room for a man to be violently free and bold, and that such characteristics are actually praised and respected. Fascism is humanistic, respects and preserves nature, and prizes beauty above almost all else.
>>8102873
libertarianism is what every decent right-wing extremist despises
>>8102873
Fascism and traditionalism are phases the redpilled must pass through to break the conditioning.
Eventually, they come to understand Islam is Absolute Truth and the Culmination of 6000 years of eternal tradition. Allahu Akbar!
>>8102873
A cripple chan poster said a similar thing yesterday
>>8102873
>redpill
Fuck off
>>8102923
Only reasonable, non-cuck solution is a combination of Fascism and hyper-derregulated free-market capitalism. Pinochet on Steroids.
>>8102931
Only reasonable, non-cuck solution is the euthanizing of all land mammals, starting with homo sapiens.
>>8102965
Hilary please....
>>8102884
Islam is a phase the redpilled must pass through to break the conditioning and find themselves.
Eventually they will come to understand that there is no God but The Meme God of Necessity (peace be upon him) and that there is no purpose but to follow his every word. When he says something needs to be done, it needs to be done, and you are the one who must do it. For his gracious and necessary necessities are at the heart of the universe itself, and to question them would be to walk away from the glorious power of the Meme, his greatest gift to mankind.
>>8102873
>implying libertarianism doesn't naturally create hierarchy
>implying that all rational thought will eventually converge on your exact beliefs
>implying you won't be literally cucked by your right-wing master
>implying you won't someday be ground under the foot of your master while you shout "I am so free and bold! I freely choose to agree with everything my masters say!"
Even if you want people who disagree with you to be put in death camps, you should choose personal liberty over authoritarianism to minimize the risk of ending up in a death camp yourself. Of course it is impossible to see this risk if you believe that your authoritarian government will always share your values, which is a trap you fall into if you believe that, eventually, all men will naturally agree with you.
>>8102965
Antinatalism isn't realistic either.
>>8102873
>>8102085
>What if I told you that self-ownership is not the same thing as private property?
why not?
your body doesn't have some weird metaphysical property that protects it no matter what
>>8097092
>Declaration of Independence
has nothing to do with libertarianism. Just read it, it's extremely short.
>>8103072
I'd rather get cucked by a true aristocrat than by some random ass dindu
