Man i have no fucking idea how to feel about this guy. I've read some Rothbard so I've seen some serious shit but idk where to place this guy, is he the absolute craziest Libertarian or is he the most sane Libertarian?
He's the last step before you're ready to digest Moldbug.
>>8264684
lol pretty much this.
His Democracy: The God That Failed is how you separate the principled libertarians from the posers.
If he sounds crazy, it's because society is.
Tangent: he called Keynes a faggot.
If you want to dip your toes, here's Hoppe writing how the theses of Marxism about class are basically correct, but then he gives it a Mises-Rothbard analysis.
https://mises.org/library/marxist-and-austrian-class-analysis-1
>>8264674
>a homosexual degenerate comes into my office and tries to justify his right to express his sexual identity without fear on the basis of his individual liberties
>gently remind him that non-kin based lifestyles are fundamentally incompatible with a private property based libertarian society and such individuals must either be forcibly removed from such a society or become property within it
>turn him into my means of production
Hoppe was too dumb or maybe just too dishonest to understand what democracy is about.
It was never meant to be perfect or a "god", but the least bad system, what pretty much is.
He also didn't understand (or didn't read at all) Mises, since he hated anarchism as much as Socialism.
Just like commies he has a romantic view of the human nature and thinks a perfect system is possible.
Try reading Walter Block, he's the last not-so-bad anacap.
>>8266731
>since he hated anarchism as much as Socialism
But he he is an anarchist
>>8266759
I was talking about Mises, who loathed anarchism and would see Hoppe as a retarded.
>>8266731
The inexorability of democracy as the one true form of governance - even though democracy can mean anything - is exactly what makes it a "god". It's not the fact that it's supposed to be perfect, but the fact that it's treated as a metaphysical necessity.
>>8266779
Mises rejected the forms of anarchy existent at the time of Human Action's publishing (1949), so not the type that Rothbard and Hoppe argue for. The best he had as reference were american individualist anarchists who were neither really structure-building thinkers or properly capitalists.
>>8264674
He's a great thinker. Most of his stuff is superb, but argumentation ethics is overly praised, it's not really apoditic but can have a better justification within analytic philosophy.
>>8266898
> as the one true form of governance - even though democracy can mean anything - is exactly what makes it a "god"
You (just as Hoppe) don't know a shit about Democracy. Democracy is the only form of government that allows questions to its existence.
>ises rejected the forms of anarchy existent at the time of Human Action's publishing (1949)
Even if it was true (Gustave de Molinari was the real father of Anarcho-capitalism, as Rothbard acknowledged) does not change the fact that Mises hated Anarchism as much as possible and would laugh at Rothbard's conclusion at the possibility of a private Justice and Army.
>>8266922
>Democracy is the only form of government that allows questions to its existence
You can't vote out of it, can you?
You should read some criticism of democracy, specially ancap's criticism of it. It's sad that classical liberals and minarchists think they can get their minimal government through democracy.
>>8266779
Mises also thought john stuart mill was a dirty socialist
>>8264684
>dark enlightenment
Ishygddt
>>8266946
>You can't vote out of it, can you?
You can. The problem , and I do not deny it's one of its flaws, it'ds the fact that healthy Democracy is majority or consensual, and in neither you can apply an anarchy system , because most of people likes democracy. It's still the best way to change the system, even if gradually. The other options will result in bloodshed and power concentration.
>You should read some criticism of democracy, specially ancap's criticism of it.
I've already did. It sucks. It has some good points, but most of it is pretty obvious stuff and their alternatives are retarded. Mises also defended Democracy and Hoppe thinks he preferes Monarchy IIRC. That's one of the reasons I think this man is ill-disposed.
>It's sad that classical liberals and minarchists think they can get their minimal government through democracy.
I agree a small government tends to get bigger as the time passes, but fuck, we're humans, every system has its flaws. A small, limited government with representative/direct democracy is the most eficiente system we know and the most compatible with the human condition.
>>8266961
WHat is the point of this post?
>>8264674
Mises et al are a bunch of fucktards.
Milton Friedman is the only good libertarian - a pragmatic one.
>>8267282
Commie pls go
>>8267355
1 I'm no freedomfag.
2 Even the best in their areas aren't pefect and make mistakes. Newton, Plato and many others were wrong in their own field, of course Mises would make his mistakes. That does not change the fact he's one of the greatest social scientists ever.
3 He wasn't totally wrong. Mill was almost a socialist in the end of his life. Just compare his later work with the older ones.
