Does this political philosophy exist? If so what is it called?
Libertarian Nationalism maybe? Just making things up.
Trump did this to you, didn't he?
>>74134726
It's just called Libertarianism. Libertarians disagree with each other about a lot of things. It doesn't need its own label.
>>74134726
It does. It's called incoherent, hypocritical, retarded, autistic bullshit.
>>74135225
When a philosophy becomes a *.ism file, it ceases to be compatible with the libertarian system. This includes Libertarianism, strangely.
>>74134726
Its called being a real american
Non dogmatic libertarianism with a small l
>>74135296
I don't see what's so hypocritical about it. Libertarians want to maximize liberty without sacrificing order. Allowing millions of socialists into your country is the absolute worst way to go about that.
If anything, I challenge the notion that open borders libertarians are libertarian at all.
>>74135296
the only word you needed was "retarded." libertarians think "hypocritical" is a buzzword
>>74134726
it's just nationalism.
The particulars of economic policy don't matter much as long as the basic tenets of nationalism are satisfied.
For some reason burger /pol/acks are still tied to calling themselves libertarians. The fact is, you should be nationalist first, then you can be a socialist, libertarian, conservative, or even socially progressive within that nationalist context.
Point is, nationalism isn't an ideology or philosophy, it's a tested theory.
>>74135693
>Allowing millions of socialists into your country
>I challenge the notion that open borders libertarians are libertarian at all
3/10. Too obvious to me. Someone else may fall for it.
>>74135832
>>74134807
I always called myself a nationalist-libertarian. Basically, all the freedoms for us, and fuck everyone else if they try to fuck with that.
>>74134726
Americanism
Whatever it is, 'true' Libertarians will decry it as not truly Libertarian and won't support it because open borders means cheap labor for them.
>>74135693
>Libertarianism
>le everything fixes itself ideology
how it's possible for non-retards to be over 20 and still believe in these fairy tales of le invisible hand and the rest is beyond me
>>74134726
libertarians are 100% for closed borders
>>74136175
This is the real truth, the freedom libertarians care about are for citizens, not refugees from failed states that are just going to try to reinstitute those policies here
>>74135695
I think the key word is "incoherent"
>>74134726
I don't know but it's what America was supposed to be.
![Hans-Hermann-Hoppe[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/yqC4gqO.jpg "Hans-Hermann-Hoppe[1].jpg")
Read Hans-Herman Hoppe
For example:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/hans-hermann-hoppe/on-free-immigration-and-forced-integration/
Lol this board is fucking retarded.
>>74136521
Hans-Herman Hoppe is a retard.
>"My right not to live near you trumps your right to live anywhere someone will sell to you!"
>>74136175
>>74136288
>libertarians are 100% for closed borders
>Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association, and the primacy of individual judgment.[1][2]
You're fucking idiots.
By disallowing spics and "refugees" into your country, you restrict people's freedom and liberties, so you suddenly decide WHAT'S BEST FOR OTHERS, and this is against libertarianism.
So either you are a centrist or an idiot who doesn't know what he believes in.
>>74136172
You are too fucking stupid, too fucking poor and too fucking Soviet minded to get how the market works.
>>74136854
that's a lot of assumptions there тoвapищ
>>74136851
we don't have responsibility for "people" that are not citizens of our nation
they are from sovereign nations that control their own future, if they would like to afford their citizens the same liberty that we would like to offer ours, they can take responsibility and fight for it
>>74135225
>>74135600
>>74135602
>>74135693
>>74135989
>>74136123
>>74136175
>>74136480
>>74136288
>>74136851
>be american
>don't know what your talking about
>have to learn what right-libertarianism is from a Russian
KEK
![The_Truth_About_Bitcoin_Stefan_Molyneux__FreeDomainRadio__158121[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/rvynsQ8.jpg "The_Truth_About_Bitcoin_Stefan_Molyneux__FreeDomainRadio__158121[1].jpg")
>>74136658
Ad hominem.
Not an argument.
non-suicidal Libertarianism
>>74136906
>history
>learning
>>74136969
>i don't like them so they can't come
that's not individualism mate, you are putting interest of society ahead of interests of individuals ("refugees" and spcis)
congratulations, you're NOT a libertarian
>>74137137
i.e. non-libertarianism
>>74136851
No. This is bullshit. I'm not even a libertarian, but this is complete nonsense. It assumes libertarians must logically or ethically care about the well being of people who are not their own. Which in turns assumes libertarianism is innately egalitarian. Neither is true.
Spics may be human beings and "people" but they are not our people. They are racially distinct and they possess attributes that are utterly incompatible with a libertarian society. Utterly. A rational libertarian MUST reject them.
>>74137254
>It assumes libertarians must logically or ethically care about the well being of people who are not their own
No it assumes libertarians are for the free movement commodities, among them, labor, that is, people.
>be american
>don't know what capitalism is
>>74137187
the rights in the constitution are not granted by the american government to every human on the planet, they are granted to american citizens by god at birth; the constitution only guarantees that the state will not infringe on those rights
>>74137187
Libertarianism is not anarchy, or at least it doesn't have to be, despite some who want it that way.
Freedom and equality for everyone IN the country, everyone else can fuck off.
>>74134726
It's necessary because libertarianism presupposes a very high degree of homogeneity.
Almost every single libertarian idea can be run aground with, "yeah, you're mature enough to handle that. Do you honestly think that Xhilquantraevious or Dawnytello are mature enough to handle that?"
>>74134726
It's called "libertarian". Anyone that thinks they can keep their freedoms when they allow a bunch of foreigners to come in and vote them away is retarded.
>>74135296
If my country was as shit as yours I'd be pro-open borders too anon.
![l-2875[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/e5NRYuI.jpg "l-2875[1].jpg")
>>74137403
>Xhilquantraevious
>>74137351
Again, wrong. This is new age, 20th century "libertarianism" that bears no logical weight, and never did. Spics destroy society. It's what you do. It's your genetic destiny. A libertarian is under no obligation to put at risk his own liberty and that of his people to maintain what you view as a logical consistency based on egalitarian assumptions that are neither correct or necessary for liberty to thrive. Your race poses an inherent risk by merely existing within better societies, to those societies. In this regard, your people are no different than convicted murderers or rapists. And nobody would challenge the idea that libertarians would be right in restricting the movement of murderers, and denying access to them by the market, correct? So why is a race of degenerates any different?
Your only possible response will be a defense of a race of people, not an argument on the nature of liberty.
>>74136969
>>74137082
>>74137254
>>74137395
Name a single libertarian principal that gives you the right to prevent me from selling land to someone from another country for whatever price I want.
Go ahead. The free market doesn't stop working when we draw invisible lines.
>>74137611
>Your race poses an inherent risk by merely existing
I agree. White people are the scum of the Earth. We've done a lot of damage.
BTW, you're not a libertarian m8
>>74137620
>Name a single libertarian principal
restricted property title.
when you bought "your" land, you didn't buy the mineral rights, you didn't buy the infinitely tall column of atmosphere above it, you didn't buy exclusive use of all RF spectrum in that space, etc.
if the property title you bought had a covenant on it that restricted who it could be sold to, then you do not have the right to sell what you don't own.
readditarianism
suburbarianism
cringetarianism
>>74137351
this is only evidence that you're too intellectually bankrupt and lazy to actually read any bastiat or adam smith or formative libertarian / capitalist literature
>>74134726
Paleoconservatism, look it up
>>74137620
you can buy the land, and even make money from it, but you can't come here
>>74134726
Libertarian-Nationalism
>>74136851
>using a short summary from wikipedia for a political ideology
Kill yourself anon.
Libertarianism is limiting government to it's basic functions.
National defense is a basic function
>>74137765
In other words, people from the past can make agreements that people from the future are required to follow.
So we live in a libertarian country right now! After all, the states all unanimously consented to the current government! If you don't like the laws, don't live in a country with these covenants!
You're a moron. What ever happened to "I didn't sign shit"
>>74137731
I already said I wasn't a libertarian. I am a white nationalist. Or pro-"dark enlightenment" to use an even gayer term.
Spics ruin. One need only watch them for a little while to see this. Liberty does not require any thinking white man to embrace the chaos they represent.
BTW, you're not white, m8.
>>74134726
You can be a minimalist libertarian [aka Night-watchman state] and support closed borders.
The same way an individual has the right to decide who comes into his house is the same was a group of individuals gets to decide who steps foot on their land. Expand that group to tax paying citizens and land to country and there you go.
Of course this only works with minimalist who still allow for the existence of a state. If you are an anarchist then borders are meaningless anyway.
>>74137809
people are labor. Labor is a commodity to be bought and sold. Capitalism requires the free circulation of commodities.
If you're against it, fine. But that's an anti-capitalist position. Even if you're Adam Smith.
>>74137950
>be a monkey
>know more about politics and economics than Americans
>feelsgoodman
there's one way to be consistent
you have to be in favor of open borders *ONLY* when a country has free markets and an unrestricted right to bear arms
your opposition to open borders must be specifically because welfare and other social programs and subsidies distort the incentives for immigrants to enter the country, and because the government is restricting citizens' rights to protect themselves.
here's an example of a similar dynamic:
I am against gun control AND stop-and-frisk. but in New York City, the gun laws are fucking retarded. I have no expectation that it will change anytime soon. and only because gun control is there to stay, I believe police should frisk citizens to limit the harm caused by gun control. I would prefer neither, but if we have one evil, we must have the other.
>>74137959
And what about all the individuals who DO consent to letting immigrants in? Fuck their rights, right?
Enjoy your tyranny.
>>74138055
You can use that logic to justify anything.
For instance, you could say you are in favor of free markets, but since the market won't totally become 100% free tomorrow, you are in favor of more regulations to help control certain distortions.
You could say you are against taxes, but became government debt still exists, you're in favor of raising taxes until it gets paid off.
>>74134726
>If so what is it called?
Warsaw Ghetto
>>74138047
>>74138047
Not an argument.
>>74137254
>>74137382
>>74137395
>>74137765
>>74137921
jesus people, you can't understand that by restricting more and more freedoms you are walking farther and farther away from libertarianism towards a more controlled state
>i don't like brown people, they can't come
>i don't like niggers and spics, they can't com
>i don't like socialists and commies, they can't come
>i don't like people who want to let all those subhumans in
>b-but i want freedom and liberty for everyone i swear guise
you're all fucking centrists, simple as that, stop making up fancy special snowflake ideologies
>>74137926
>In other words, people from the past can make agreements that people from the future are required to follow.
who forced you to buy the property that had a restrictive covenant on it?
if the covenant/restriction was put into place AFTER you purchased, then I'd oppose that.
if it was part of the contract you signed upon purchase, again, you didn't buy an unrestricted title - you bought a restricted title.
PS: the states did not unanimously consent to the current government.
Anyway, stop thinking in terms of current government.
let's say that I buy 20 acres. I parcel it out into 20 lots. I place a perpetual covenant on each lot that says it may never be sold to or occupied by a jew, and that I or the designee of my perpetual legal trust is the sole determinant of who is or isn't a jew.
you can choose to buy or not buy one of my lots.
But if you do, you will have signed my agreement. you may not later violate that agreement by selling to a jew.
if you have a problem with this, you don't believe in contracts.
>>74134726
being a dumbass
>>74138309
>>74138352
>be in favor of freedom, except for things you don't like
>call other people names
>think they're making an argument
Amricans...
>>74134726
American nationalism.
Every nation has its own unique brand of nationalism, all of which together are called Pan-European Nationalism or Empiricism.
>>74138067
Did you not read the part about MINIMALIST.
Yes from a moral point of view the existence of the government will always be immoral because the government must initiate force against someone to get things done. That what governments do. If you believe that is wrong that makes you an anarchist libertarian. I was talking about that branch of libertarianism.
I specifically mentioned minimalist who allow for government force to exist as long as it is as small as possible.
>>74138510
>Empiricism
wot
>>74134726
>what is it called?
Fascism.
No seriously. Once you accept the moral necessity of the State limiting one kind of freedom, a chain of analogous logical dominoes falls, and fascism becomes defensible. Once fascism becomes defensible, on the premises of necessity, the same necessity implies other state powers are probably also necessary.
Sorry. Libertarianism isn't a pragmatic ideology. It's actually quite absolutist. You can't mix and match.
>>74138355
The freedoms of whom? Spics? People that want to steal my liberty by bringing spics into our political infrastructure?
No, I am simply not willing to ignore realities in this world. Your entire position is based on a non-realistic fantasy and I won't have it. It holds no logical structure.
Spics are not just "people." They are other people, and when you strip away all of the flourish, there is nothing inherent in liberty that says individuals must be allowed to introduce chaos and destruction into a political infrastructure that free men have devised to maximize their liberty. It is destabilizing and it is anti-liberty inherently. Because of the reality of the people we're discussing.
Why Mexicans and not water buffalos? What about snakes, do they have freedom of movement? Why not, because they're reptiles? And Mexicans are also something else, are they not?
If you want to re-litigate the Enlightenment, we can, but that needs to happen before your asinine premise is accepted.
libertarians support open boarders. they are faggots. they dont understand that drugs are bad and they dont get why you cant just walk into your neighbors yard and claim it as your own. what are these "boundaries" you speak of
>>74138497
Not an argument
>>74138355
why do you have such a hard time understanding that you can be fiscally conservative, socially liberal, and nationalist at the same time? You can still be socially liberal within an enforced border.
>>74136851
Libertarian =! Globalist Utilitarian
Went through half of the thread and NOBODY has suggested paleoconservatism? What is the matter with you people?
>>74138673
Private property has very strict boundaries that I have the right to defend to the death.
>>74138376
>Who forced you to buy the property that had taxes on it?
>If you don't want to pay taxes, live somewhere else!
Fuck off. Google the word "consideration" before you start talking about contracts.
>>74134726
Its called being a Libertarian.
Ron Paul who popularized the libertarian movement wanted to strengthen the border security and crack down on illegal immigration.
Its the new age libertarians who equate libertarianism with ancap globalism. Like the /pol/ meme with people being retarded, except they are genuinely retarded and not just trolling like i assumed they were because i had too much faith in human intelligence or something.
I honestly think its just that the globalists have taken over the libertarian movement after it became the
>>74137882
Good, this anon gets it.
Read up on paleoconservatism and don't come back until you do
>>74138355
>everyone
Citizens you dumb shit.
Libertarianism =/= ancap.
Libertarianism is about thinking ahead and not being autistically idealistic.
f you start importing every nigger socialist and commie you won't have any freedom.
>>74138281
Yes, that's called understanding reality and compromise and not being batshit retarded.
>>74138067
They don't have that right.
>>74138769
Nationalist-libertarian is better, paleoconservative sounds like you want to conserve jurrasic park or someshit to most people.
>>74138822
After it became the popular hipster alternative political ideology i was going to say.
>>74137187
>Confusing anarchism with liberatarianism
i don't understand how libertarianism has to be open border. I thought in a libertarian society such matters are decided democratically, it can go either way. The reason is that people outside this country aren't fucking citizens obviously so it is not their land. Just like a liberatarian isn't forced to let people into his fucking house. I don't get it
>>74138799
>Fuck off. Google the word "consideration" before you start talking about contracts.
Ok.
Literally, this text appears in the WP article for consideration:
Further, if A signs a contract with B such that A will not repaint his own house in any other color than white, and B will pay A $500 per year to keep this deal up, there is also consideration. Although A did not promise to affirmatively do anything, A did promise not to do something that he was allowed to do, and so A did pass consideration. A's consideration to B is the forbearance in painting his own house in a color other than white, and B's consideration to A is $500 per year
Sounds like I can give you a piece of property, so long as you agree to give me some cash, and to NOT ever sell it to people I don't like.
>>74138619
This. People call themselves libertarians but only want libertarianism when everyone acts like upper middle class WASPs.
It's communism-tier tbqh.
>all these "libertarians" itt who are in fact centrists but still think they are libertarian
>>74139075
Liberatarianism can be an ideology reached from different ideals. One being liberalism and the other conservatism.
Those that reach liberatarianism from a conservative stand point want to preserve their society and believe that it's inhabitants have a right to their culture and way of life.
The liberalist standpoint believes in a relativist world where just because a culture is different doesn't mean it's better or worse. Therefore they don't believe that multiculturalism will negatively effect a nation.
>>74139075
You are 100% correct sir. This is classical libertarianism or minimalism.
However, in ancap libertarianism borders technically don't even exist cause there is no government. Everything is privately owned. So you can decide who has access to your property but the neighbor can let in whoever the fuck he wants.
>>74139431
>preserve their society
>"There's no society, only individuals"
You even Libertarian, m8?
>>74139431
That's irrelevant to this issue of whether government or people have the right to close borders to their land. The land is owned by American citizens, and can therefore democratically decide whether to open the borders or not. There is democracy in libertarian society, however the democratic part cannot infringe on the rights of citizens
>>74134726
The right to restrict somebody entering the land belongs to land owner, not state.
I.e. all landowners who agree are free to erect wall around collectively their properties. But they cannot restrict other owners, who want to allow immigrants onto theit own property.
>>74134726
/pol/ libertarians are just try to have their cake and eat it to.
Mainstream libertarianism i.e. Reason, the Pauls, the Cato Institute, the Institute of Public Affairs (in Aus) are all in favour of at least large scale immigration, if not open borders of some form.
Normally when confronted with this, the /pol/ libertarian will cite Hans Herman Hoppe. Yeah he agrees with you (to some extent), but he is just one scholar. A lot of other libertarians think he's full of shit.
The attempt to balance nationalism and cultural preservation with full adherence to the logic of the free market have produced this niche contradictory ideology.
>>74134726
Contradiction
>>74139371
>>74139573
>still pushing the "libertarianism = anarcho capitalism" nonsense
Just stop posting already.
>>74139573
And those individuals created a political infrastructure to maximize their liberties. And spics jeopardize that by their very nature. Not some of them, all of them. They are a distinct race that is empirically incompatible with our race. Oil and water. Liberty cannot be maximized when two or more races are in conflict in the same political infrastructure, particularly when one of those races is intellectually and physically inferior, like spics are to whites. This is a way to kill liberty, not to enhance it. You can Jew-talk around it, but that is always the end result. And that's reality. Liberty, derived through reason, does not require us to dispense of our reason to afford comfort to your weird, illogical, anti-fact presumptions.
>>74139647
So eventually the country be be patches of non-White and patches of hardcore racists who won't join the other owners in hiring them.
>>74139643
>The land is owned by American citizens
Nope. Individual pieces of land are rightfully owned by individual Americans, and they can rent them for anyone the choose and hire anyone they choose and if you want to prevent that you're a fascist.
>>74137620
Anarchy to statism is a spectrum. Libertarianism is a compromise. Pure anarchy means no nation at all to tell you what you can buy/sell.
>>74134726
Libertarians can still ethically have closed borders. If the borders were open to anyone that would be anarchism.
>>74139712
whats wrong with having a contradictory ideology? I think that's called a compromise. There's aspects of nationalism I like, and aspects of libertarianism I like. So my ideal ideology will incorporate aspects of both. It doesn't have to be 100% one way or the other.
The term all of you fine gentlemen are looking for is "Paleoconservative"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism
>>74134726
Right winged libertarianism
>>74139814
>created a political infrastructure to maximize their liberties
And you want to use that political infrastructure to make sure your society is the way you want it to be. You're a socialist.
>>74139954
>whats wrong with having a contradictory ideology?
It gets better and better hahaha...
There are no nations in libertarianism. All land is owned, and therefore entering without permission is trespassing.
It's like having a wall at every property line, instead of just one big porous one along an arbitrary border.
>>74140150
Liberatarianism is not anarchism holy fuck can we all just take a minute and get the terms right.
>>74140013
No, the structure was designed to maximize liberty. YOU want us to continue to introduce elements that destabilize that goal and diminish liberty in order to keep a logical consistency that isn't actually logical in the first place because your argument ignores a threatening fact, and is therefore not tenable. Your arguments presumes, as it must, that liberty can exist when spics are introduced to the ecology of a white society oriented toward liberty.
I reject that out of hand because it isn't true. Your position, and that of new age egalitarian libertarians everywhere, is that you can force square pegs through round holes without every having to discuss the underlying assumptions upon which your theories rely. Namely, race.
This makes you anti-reason, and therefore not libertarian. No matter what some Austrian kike has to say about it.
>>74140114
You could explain what is wrong with OP's premise in a logical manner and identify him instead of peppering the thread with snarky greentexts and one sentence quips.
>>74139954
because nationalism isn't a specific ideology. If you're a nationalist, it precedes all other ideology.
It's not like saying you're a conservative except for x and y socially liberal positions.
>>74139954
>whats wrong with having a contradictory ideology?
Everything, but that's not a contradictory ideology, it's like you said, a compromise.
Contradictory ideology is like
>let's have Islam and LGBT rights.
Believing that freedom is a good value but it should be reserved for citizens has no contradiction.
Only autists actually think ancapistan would have any chance of functioning.
>>74140114
what I'm saying is that a society that is 100% nationalist and 100% libertarian is contradictory. But if it's 50% of each, some might say it's "contradictory", but you could still make it work.
>>74138355
Good job pumping up the greentext faggot. Let me fix it for you.
>I don't like non-citizens, they can't come.
>B-but I want freedom and liberty for my fellow citizens, I swear guise
>>74139814
But that's relevant in the current society. In a libertarian society with a constitution and legal form of government, it wouldn't matter who came in because the government wouldn't be able to infringe of people's rights anyway, no matter how many people want tyranny. In the current system with an unconstitutional form of government it does pose a problem. I think this is really the crux of the issue. rational libertarians are going to have very contradictory yet practical politics just because of environmental factors being what they are.
>>74140421
So you're just a conservative really. Like Ivan has been saying you aren't a libertarian.
>>74139830
Wrong. it's public land owned by american citizens. if it wasn't then why are there borders around america? it wouldn't be a state if that is the case. American citizens own public land
>>74140270
>people are labor
>labor is a commodity
>commodities should circulate freely in a capitalist society
>therefore, people should circulate freely in a capitalist society
Is that simple and logical enough? Do I have to explain your own ideology to you, yankees?
>>74140581
>our own
America is not a libertarian nation at all. And wasn't founded on the tenants of capitalism.
>>74140421
Let's say a nation exists in a bubble filled entirely of a homogenous people. These people may roam wherever they may please and do trade with whomever they may please. Without any knowledge of the anything outside this bubble they would be considered a 100percent free state.
If we introduce a second bubble and restrict movement entering our own but not out of our own do we cease to be a free state? Does the presence of other states change the state of our ideology?
>>74140299
it might be a compromise rather than a contradiction, but why are you so desperate to call it libertarianism?
Sounds pretty much like Trumpism if you ask me
>>74140482
This is the fantasy part of 20th century, new age libertarianism. It is ignoring a reality and pretending it doesn't exist. The reality is that once introduced, subversive races will subvert, and your infrastructure will adapt to the subversion. How do we know this? BECAUSE IT HAPPENED TO US! We're living it.
Your argument is no different than saying, "yeah but if I flap my wings really hard it's not inconceivable that I'll fly!" Yes, it is inconceivable. Just like it is inconceivable that once you group degenerate races with the white race, or really mix any races at all, you will destabilize whatever political and economic infrastructure you have, no matter its nature.
Explain to me why I am supposed to accept your presumption to the contrary.
will the libertarian meme ever die? or will the constant influx of teenagers into /pol/ keep it sustained forever?
>>74140696
In a way you are right. But to combat that, americanism would have to be exalted and kept in the public mind. But yes, I do this it is possible that non-whites may be genetically predisposed to not caring about liberty
>>74140873
It is people's introduction to right wing lines of thought. Probably will always be here.
libertarianism is retarded
you need the state to act in the interest of the people that means closing borders and not outsourcing.
It also means providing certain public goods and services
Libertarians want corporations to either control society or the government which is what leads to globalism, mass immigration, outsourcing, etc.
>>74140674
>why are you so desperate to call it libertarianism
Libertarianism is a title for people who think that the government should only be used when there is no other reasonable way.
Trump is in support of a very large government, and yes, a certain amount of border control. He's by no means libertarian.
Ancap autists trying to hijack the term miffs me. You already have a term "anarcho capitalism", why don't you use that?
>>74136172
>over 20 and still believe
nice ad hom
markets are not perfect but they feed the masses better than edict.
>>74134726
National Libertarian American Workers' Party. Their symbol is 4 L's (standing for Liberty) running clockwise.
>>74134726
I justify it by aknowledging that individuals have a right to travel wherever they like regardless of borders. At the same time I have a right to exclude them if their presence is harming to me.
Would you let a homeless man setup camp on your front yard?
>>74141382
harming you by competing with you?
trespassing is illegal either way. if that homeless man gets his own place, why does that bother you?
>>74141124
No, libertarians believe that the government is used to do whatever people have the right to do or less. That's pretty simple. The government can be very large and economical in a libertarian society, but it just wouldn't be infringing on people's rights, it would be doing what people are able to do, which anything that doesn't violate another's rights. that's a lot of shit. The government is basically seen as a way to make things easier. Sure we can police ourselves, but why not coordinate a police force? that's the point of libertarianism. It's people coming together and figuring shit out.
>>74134858
kekekekekekekekekekek
>>74141369
This one is more appropriate.
>>74140633
Libertarianism was the forefront of philosophy of several founding fathers
however, modern day "libertarianism" is nothing like what they talked about and discussed. To them, it was about civil rights, natural rights, and freedom of the individual to do as he'd like.
To modern "libertarians" the ideology is about maximizing personal economic gain to the detriment of everyone else around you. The focus is on banking, commodities, labor, and the lack of government interference in fucking everyone else over.
I call this form of libertarianism, "jewish libertarianism" or (((libertarianism))) as it erupted out of the minds of jews like rothbard and rand, and not whites like John Locke.
>>74134726
i just say national libertarian
>>74142022
>I just say rectangular circles
>>74142077
libertarian principles with strong borders
wow that was hard
>>74141962
Yes but that is also in line with conservatism. The founding fathers probably wouldn't be condoning gay marriage or tranny bathrooms.
>>74134726
In its true form libertarinism is nothing more than economic Darwinism. So a truly Libertarian society wouldn't need to close its borders. There would be no hand outs or equality quotas for third worlders so they would either starve to death or have to sell them selves into slavery since they couldn't compete in the work force. The few that were capable of competing would really have no reason to leave their own country as they most likely are already doing well there but if they did they would still be a tiny minority.
>>74141962
not necessarily. regulations are more often than not written by the big fish for the big fish.
You could have lots of regs that only favor the big fish, by giving them special privileges ("free trade" deals) or selective regulation/enforcement. Or you could have big govt that favors common good.
The same two possibilities exist for a small govt.
I don't see it as a matter of big or small govt...its what is regulated, and how it is regulated.
>>74142130
Not hard. Perfectly understandable: "I dislike state intervention. Except when I like it.
>>74134726
How about libertarian with closed borders for everyone who isn't white?
Because I really want this.
>>74142077
You seem really autistic about this.
What's your ideology?
There seem to be 2 camps trying to conflate libertarianism and ancapism.
>anti-libertarian that wants to show how stupid it is aka the Russian itt
>autistic ancap that wants to attack anyone that isn't as autistic as him
>>74142459
>>74142530
Vanilla Libertarianism
>>74142561
My ideology is "making fun of people who can't even formulate a coherent political position."
>>74134726
Hypocrisy
>>74134726
Only temporarily at best. The rich will ALWAYS betray nations, because internationalism makes more money.
>>74142640
>I'm a pussy that can't say what I believe because having others criticize my own beliefs scares me, so I just autism over what other people believe
Okay anon, I'll file you into the "autistic ancap" section.
>>74135921
Not a human.
>>74142459
libertarian =/= ancap
minimum intervention not 0 intervention and in that ''minimum'' strong borders/army/enforcing contract is included
its really not hard i know youre from brazil and have an iq of 85 but still that should be enough
"the u.s. govt is a voluntary association is not forced to accept everyone"
Fixed it for you walltards.
Also, my id says gAy lol.
>>74139774
What exactly is the difference between a libertarian and an anarcho-capitalist? No, seriously. Fucking tell us.
How will you enforce borders? If you answer government you lose the right to saying that taxation is theft
>>74142943
Wikipedia is pretty cool
>>74142826
Kek
Show how. Do it, faggot. Libertarians are just special snowflake ancaps who want to be called something else. You guys are more full of bullsshit than a cowpie.
>>74142959
>every libertarian ideologies have no governemet and tax 0%
>>74143066
Not an argument.
>>74142959
You can't fund a state without taxation. Taxation fundamentally requires force and therefore is theft. One of the few responsibilities the state has is defense such as the enforcement of invasive species.
I'm so tired of this "you need immigration for cheap labor" meme.
You don't need immigration for that. What you need is to get liberal arts out of colleges.
There should only be two types of colleges. Tradescools to learn trades and colleges for STEM majors. Get all the women and arts students out of colleges in those early years after high school and stop wasting time and money in colleges, when they should be the ones who are driving cabs, waiting tables, picking fruit and working as janitors etc while they practice writing, playing guitar, painting picture, writing poems etc in their spare time until they are good ending enough to make money off it or quit because they realise they suck.
You don't need a college degree to be an artist. You need to get real job because chances are you will fail and get you need to get used to working those jobs.
We don't need a bunch of pakis and Mexicans for those jobs. All those hipsters and women studying useless degrees in college should be doing those jobs.
Young white musicians should be driving cabs not some stinking paki who doesn't belong in the country in the first place.
>>74143095
Taxation is theft
>>74142793
>>74142826
>Can't understand capitalism is inherently internationalist
>Still haven't noticed liberal-globalism is the official ideology preferred by the capitalist establishment
>Unironically tries to reconcile nationalism and conservatism with free-market capitalism
>Will die of old age without even understanding what's happening around them.
If you really want to know, I'm a socialist. You may rage now.
>>74143072
show how a whole ideology works and all the hows on a post on 4chan? youre a twit or something?
you want me to write a book maybe?
>>74136172
80+ percent of Mensa members are libertarian. If you weren't a retard you would understand why
>>74137082
When does posting this faggot stop being a thing
>not an argument
yeah I get it already
>>74143128
>You don't need immigration for that
Your capitalist overlords disagree. And it's THEIR opinion that matters.
>>74143144
>If you really want to know, I'm a socialist
i knew it was obvious youre from a shithole and youre autistic as fuck
its all i needed
>>74143128
Liberal arts is not useless to society however. Much of our culture and thought comes from educated men.
Liberal arts should not be subsidized.
>>74142943
>ancap
>no government, until some strongman creates a dictatorship there
>libertarian
>minimal government to serve basic functions like national defense
>>74143097
They are different philosophies. This is not really open to reasonable debate.
You also have to consider all the subsets of both cause there can be a lot of differences, just as in "capitalism" and "communism".
>>74143227
Not an argument
>>74143188
http://www.millcityrecords.com/mndensa/charges01/asimov.htm
>>74143144
>the whole libertarian ideology SUDDENLY FALL APART AND IS 100% IMPOSSIBLE if you have strict immigration
>>74143272
nice meme, have a pepe
>>74143179
Libertarians are so different from ancaps, you just can't explain how, huh?
Now this isn't a strawman, it's an honest to god question: is there such a thing as a libertarian who didn't spend at least most of their lives as a leech on some other person (in /pol/'s cases, in their parents' upper middle class house)?
>>74143246
>minimal government to serve basic functions like national defense
There is literally no such thing as a government small enough to satisfy a libertarian.
>>74143269
>They are different philosophies.
Now that's a super fucking stretch.
>This is not really open to reasonable debate.
You're right, because they're the exact same fucking thing and all this quibbling is nonsense.
>just as in "capitalism" and "communism".
I don't see how spelling "shit" two different ways means it's two different things.
>>74136851
NATIONAL libertarianism on the other hand seeks to maximize autonomy for the nation.
Just like gay marriage isn't a gay union between a man and a woman, it's a marriage between two gays.
>>74138355
>hurrr restricting freedoms
Are you gonna restrict my freedom to fuck you in the asshole until you bleed?
You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you? Time to bend over...
>>74142959
Taxation of labor is what most liberatarianism, Ron Paul liberatarianism, is talking about. Minarchists advocate for voluntary forms of taxation.
>>74134726
Classic libertarianism. Like Stef Molymeme.
>>74143128
Oh yeah, and also remove the government-backed student loan bubble that is occurring.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2014/04/19/student-loan-profits-show-government-should-get-out-of-student-loan-business/#2eed5fc33371
>The basic argument in favor of government involvement is that the private sector will not loan money to students because their future earnings and, therefore, their ability to pay are too speculative. This first led to the government providing guarantees to private lenders and then to the government under President Obama eliminating the middleman and making the loans itself.
>Would some people be turned down for student loans under a private system? Yes, some surely would be. Is this a bad thing? Probably not.
Private insurers would deny many liberal arts pursuers since they won't be able to pay back their loans, thereby eliminating the cancer "college experience" pursuit that is happening among young adults. Literally liberal arts is an artificial construct of the government-backed student loan industry.
>>74143375
>>They are different philosophies.
>Now that's a super fucking stretch.
>>This is not really open to reasonable debate.
>You're right, because they're the exact same fucking thing and all this quibbling is nonsense.
>>just as in "capitalism" and "communism".
>I don't see how spelling "shit" two different ways means it's two different things
Having a state
vs
Not having a state
>>74134726
Hi Steph, nice to see you're finally taking the real redpill.
Hope to see you leave your retarded stateless, anarchistic ideals that stem from your mother opressing and hurting you - you are projecting her authority which she abused on the state.
Hope you're doing well, I appreciate your show.
>>74143557
>If some students cannot borrow money for college because they will likely be unable to repay their debts, the student is probably better off without the loan. If such a system means some students are encouraged to study a subject expected to produce earnings upon graduation rather than a subject which is not, society will not only survive but likely benefit.
>Rather than calling for the government to lower interest rates to eliminate the profit, we should be calling on the government to get out of the student loan business and let investors earn the profits.
>>74143230
I didn't say liberal arts was useless for society. I said studying it at a college is.
You don't become a great artist, musician, writer, etc by going to college. You do it by practicing your art or observing the art of others. Going to college and listening to someone who failed to be a great artist tell fill your head with their opinions is a waste of time and money.
Women shouldn't be sitting around in colleges listening to old lesbian teach them how to hate men because women deserve equality in the work place. Women should be waiting tables and working in supermarkets until they meet a man who wants to wife them so they do not have to work and more.
All these liberal arts faggots have been told they will be a success if they go to college so they go and study useless degrees like philosophy and women's studies. Then when they are done they get the rude shock that they I'll be working in a cafe the rest of their life and writing a blog in their spare time.
You don't need college for that. Cut out the middle man, go work in a cafe, study your liberal arts in your spare time and write your fucking blog, if you have the talent and dedication you will get rich and famous of your arts without college.
>>74143641
Oh yes, libertarians are well known for how pro-state they are. Fucking kek.
>>74143375
>There is literally no such thing as a government small enough to satisfy a libertarian.
>optimization is bad
Moving towards the right direction by lowering government overreach in health care, social security, futile alternative energy projects, wasteful spending on defense, etc can only be beneficial to the nation. Now do we know the perfect conditions? No, but we do know which path to start heading towards and can bring many issues to resolve.
>>74134726
Borders and nationalism can't exist in a libertarian world. The existence of national borders contravenes the libertarian requirement of smallest possible government and nationalism contravenes the right to benefit yourself above your fellow citizens.
>>74143846
>optimization is bad
Oh no, it's great. It's just that claiming that's what libertarians want is a lie.
>>74143206
And I don't care about what any overlord thinks capitalist or otherwise because I am right about everything.
>>74134726
Why the fuck would you be Libertarian and not realize that people should be able to come and go freely from any country?
>>74143375
The government being small has really nothing to do with it. As long as the government doesn't infringe on anyone's rights then there's no problem. A state with 300million people could be more free than a state with only 6 million.
>>74143375
>Libertarians are so different from ancaps, you just can't explain how, huh?
http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/libertarianism.html#A6
enjoy
When did this libertarians want open borders meme start? Libertarians are not anarchists. Without borders you can't secure your freedumbs. For fuck sake, letting non-whites into a country who vote for social programs is anti-liberty
When I attended local LP meetings there was a strong contingency of anti-immigration/ pro-borders people, and this was a few years ago.
>>74134726
What do you mean by libertarian?
Some Libertarians argue that the smallest entity is the best. So you could even have your 100% white 1488 local "state" (or better community) if you want and it would be "libertarian".
>>74135296
this
>>74143642
Who is Steph? You mean Stef?
>>74134858
>protectionism
>libertarian
Lol
>>74143816
Whoa that guy looks like me.
Even the libertarians who believe taxation is theft believe in a state with authority and no exceptions based on wealth.
I dont think that would work, but i suppose strictly speaking, taxation is theft because it was yours to start and can't opt out.
>>74143881
>libertarian requirement of smallest possible government
That's called minarchism not libertarianism.
We have autistically specific labels just for autists like you.
Border defense is a basic requirement of government,
>nationalism contravenes the right to benefit yourself above your fellow citizens.
That's called communism, not Nationalism.
>>74135296
That's why Brazil will never develop, it's full of communists.
>>74134726
Objectivists believe in free markets, strong national defense, and border control. None of that ancap autism.
>>74143968
>As long as the government doesn't infringe on anyone's rights then there's no problem.
But therein lay the problem. To a libertarian literally everything that goes wrong is the government's fault. EVERYTHING. Bad season for crops? Solar eclipse heralding bad tidings? Gubmint. Wife cheated? Gubmint. And the libertarian solution is always the same: SAVE ME CORPORATIONS! WE NEED TO GET RID OF MORE GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS ARE TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT GUBMINT!!!!
You're literally the most insufferable faggots on Earth. Of all the hideous, irritating religions on this planet, yours is by far the most grating and pernicious.
>>74143981
You can't sum it up in one or two sentences. You stupid nigger. I can sum up the difference between fucking COMMUNISTS and Capitalists in probably two sentences, but you can't sum up IN YOUR OWN WORDS the differences between ancaps and libertarians?
>>74144266
>Even the libertarians who believe taxation is theft believe in a state with authority and no exceptions based on wealth.
A baldfaced lie.
>>74144381
pay me and ill do it nigger. otherwise fucking google it you fucking autistic child
>>74136172
But it does, son of communists.
>>74144354
border control? dont think so
>>74144381
This is some ugly bait
it's called fascism
>>74144482
Yes, they do. Control of borders is necessary for national defense.
>>74144504
Not an argument.
>>74144450
Not an argument.
>>74144578
You don't have an argument. You literally just said libertarians blame natural disasters on the government like an idiot.
Just like any area of the political spectrum there is a wide range of beliefs. You cant claim that every single person who identifies as libertarian is essentially ancap anymore than you could claim that everyone who identifies as conservative is a neo con.
/pol/ Has developed this belief that unless you identify by some certain obscure name of explicitly state your beliefs every time you speak then you just get lumped in with whatever section of the political spectrum they feel they can ridicule you most in.
I believe in the protection of everyones rights before all else, the free market, self determination and minimal government. So I chose to identify as libertarian. But I also believe in merit based immigration and several environmental controls from the government as it only takes one guy to fuck a river.
That doesnt mean I cant identify as what I chose.
Every single political philosophy is going to contain a dozen schools of thought that will contradict others. It doesnt mean you get to create one that holds the worst beliefs of them all and lump everyone in there.
>>74144608
>do x
>no
>not an argument xD
off yourself
>>74135296
HUE HUE HUE ORDO E PROGRESSO WHITE MAN AUTISIC RETARD HHUEBIRHURRHUR BR BR BR
nice government you cocksucking faggot. Communist niggers or CIA plants, who will ou get this election cycle?
>>74144721
Not an argument.
>>74144578
>>74144608
Not an arguement
>>74144803
Not an argument.
>>74144572
Ayn Rand would disagree.
>>74144821
That meme never fails to crack me up no matter how badly it derails threads.
>>74144886
Mollypoop is a living, breathing meme.
>>74134726
>Be in libertarian society
>Buy up a 10cm deep strip of land along the border
>Put up a "NO SPICS OR NIGS" sign on your own land
Checkmate, open borders faggots.
>>74144381
>baldfaced
You must know some pretty shitty libertarians of this is the case.
I was joking about that guy looking like me, I have very sexy hair and lots of it.
>>74144874
As she dies on welfare.
I just watched the Joe Rogan podcast with Gavin McInnes last night and Gavin's philosophy is exactly that, libertarianism with strong borders.
>>74144886
It's a shit meme for autists like Stef with no humor
>>74145029
>Gavin McInnes is retarded
Thanks, leaf, we already knew.
>>74144874
You're confused. Objectivists advocate that all immigrants into the nation be vetted for disease, background checks, not coming from enemy nations, etc. Border control. They don't advocate that people waltz freely across national borders.
>>74145019
And I'm not an objectivist. Anon was making a wrong claim, like you are.
>>74134726
Can someone cross your enter your property without permission? The same applies to countries which are also a property over one territory.
>>74145205
Well I'm not Ayn Rand. I was just making a correct claim, as you are not.
>>74145140
You are either a troll or don't understand Ayn Rand.
Crossing a boarder is not an initiation of force.
people already have gated communities with strict rules and heavy scrutiny over who gets in to the community.
I don't see why you couldnt do that in a libertarian society on a bigger scale.
Basically just define your borders. Build a big ass wall or something, and then only let people in who share the same libertarian ideals. Vet them with tests, background checks, whatever it takes.
I don't think "free movement" is necessarily inherent in libertarian philosophy. Essentially the immigration policy is just a self defense measure, and that's all the libertarians say should be funded anyway.
>>74145353
>as you are not
Not an argument
Having a small gov is not the same thing as having no gov, regardless of how its funded.
How is having some of something different than having non of something?
If it will work is a totally different debate,
>>74145550
Because libertarians DO NOT want ANY state.They just lie about it constantly.
>You're an anarchist.
>NO I'M NOT!!
>So you want regulations for-
>GET OUT YOU FUCKING STATIST REEEEEE!!!!
>>74145371
It certainly can be, if your crossing the border would put people in harm's way. This is why Objectivists advocate that immigrants be vetted for disease and background checks before entering the nation. I mean, you can deny all you want that Objectivists advocate border control, but a simple google search proves you wrong.
>>74145664
Some may not want a state at all, but they are using the wrong label.
Having a state and having lots of regulations about things that are not an INITIATION OF FORCE are not the same thing.
This might be an interesting time for me to mention that I'm not a libertarian.
>>74145684
http://www.ariwatch.com/ARIonImmigrationIntroduction.htm
>>74145684
Even if there are health checks, I don't think that is what OP was getting at.
>>74146204
This is why I called you confused. You're confusing open immigration with the idea that people would move across borders in an uncontrolled fashion, without being subjected to vetting processes before entering the nation. Objectivists advocate border control, which is what I stated.
http://www.peikoff.com/2015/09/21/to-yb-what-do-you-think-about-the-immigration-crisis-in-europe/
>>74146544
Crossing a boarder is not an initiation of force. if an immigrant did break a law,they would be subject to that law's punishment.
But in the context of this thread, which is basically stopping immigration(brown ppl), no way Ayn would agree.
>>74146872
There is certainly a context for stopping immigration of certain groups altogether. Like I said, crossing the border can be an initiation of force if doing so puts others in harm's way: If you have any number of communicable diseases, if you're a violent criminal, if you come from an enemy nation, etc.
Listen to that podcast from the director of the ARI, who advocates that Muslim immigrants should generally not be allowed into Europe, and then tell me again that Objectivists don't advocate border control.
>>74147107
I did, I think he is wrong.
If the immigrant initiates force, you deal with it then.
>>74138355
>I want freedom and liberty for everyone
within the country's border.
It's called national liberalism (but it's classical liberalism essentially)
>>74147107
>>74147449
This is according to objectivism btw. "others in harm's way" is a subjective term, and opens the door to all sorts non-objectivist policies.
>>74147449
>Objectivists don't advocate border control!
>gets btfo
>ok well they're wrong!
Fukken kek. Here's another, from Amy Peikoff, who advocates the same kind of position. It is not an initiation of force to deny entry of individuals who have proved with their actions that they are not rights-respecting.
https://dontletitgo.com/2015/08/20/a-response-to-ed-mazlish-on-immigration/
>but Rand wouldn't agree!
Rand wrote very little on the subject of immigration, stating only that the principle for any such policies should be the defense of individual rights. So you have very little basis from which to make a statement like that.
I think the people that knew Rand personally and agreed with her ideas have more authority than you about what constitutes as an objectivist position on the subject.
>>74147994
Please dont ever type "kek".
I am talking about consistency with objectivism. Knowing Rand herself does not make you free from being wrong.
If the immigrant in question is an objective, provable threat as an individual, then they can be denied. Denying a group is collectivism.
>>74134726
It is "indecisive erratic faggot" and it's terminal, might as well just kill yourself now.
it's on the same level as Libertarian Socialism
a dumb fucking contradiction
>>74134726
no idea, but an AI-selected isolationist technocracy is probably better than our current system
>>74135296
>the green flag speaks
>the green flag accepts the blatant homosexuality of his country
>the green flag will host the olympics
>the green flag will have its economy destroyed for this matter
>the green flag loses
>we all win
>>74134726
Libertarian Nationalism seems unrealistic. If you allow the free market to reign supreme over your society it will eventually find a way to remove those borders, as history has shown.
>>74148282
Kek. I was commenting on your assertion that "Rand wouldn't agree." Considering how confused you are about how these ideas actually work, and that Rabd herself wrote very little in the topic specifically, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that the people who knew Rand personally and agreed with her ideas are more qualified than you are to state the objectivist positions on concrete political issues.
The whole purpose of border control, from the objectivist standpoint, is to ensure the security of the nation. Those who wish to enter the country must be able to demonstrate a history of actions as rights-respecting individuals (and be free of contagious diseases, etc).
If we are at war with a nation or those ascribing to particular ideologies, that is basis enough to deny members of that group entry into the US. For example, Europe should not be letting in Muslims that openly seek to undermine their host nations and establish Shariah Law.
So now you have gone from "Objectivists don't advocate border control" to "an objectivist border control policy should keep out harmful people."
That was pretty entertaining to watch.
>>74134726
It used to be called America.
>>74149191
Your words, not mine. I am defining an objectivist as someone who understands the principles of objectivism.
In this thread, we are talk about border control as in keeping out all these muslims by force.
Keeping out provable threats is not an initiation of force. Every immigrant is an INDIVIDUAL.
