In a hypothetical three-way race between Trump, Hillary and Johnson the libertarians would walk away with 11% of the vote, according to Monmouth University.
In an interview with CNN, Gary Johnson stated the debate committee requires 15% polling in order for a presidential candidate to be let into the debates. Coupled with the libertarian's party lawsuit against the committee for this high percentage, we could see a libertarian on the debate stage this election year.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2016/03/25/gary-johnson-polling-in-doubledigits-against-trump-and-hillary-n2138829
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/03/26/libertarian-candidate-gains-in-polls-gary-johnson.cnn
>>69026488
I'm voting for Johnson. Everyone is butthurt
>"Waaaa why arnt you voting for MY canidate, a bloo bloo bloo!"
Fuck you, it's America, I get to choose
>>69026862
No one's butthurt, they're just laughing at you for throwing away your vote
>libertarians
>robust national defense
does not compute
>>69026862
I'm voting for Johnson too. This board use to be more Libertarian... seems like most of our Libertarians have gone full populist with either Sanders or Trump. And we're supposed to be the Party of Principle.
>>69026985
>"throwing away your vote" to support the candidate of your choice
Christ almighty, that's pathetic of you.
>>69026488
Fuckin libertarians gonna throw the election to hillary. Hilarious
>>69027098
Liberatianism != anarchy
If anything, most Libertarians believe a strong defense is necessary for protecting the people's freedom from external forces.
>>69027343
This. Liberty is a fragile thing. Libertarians know this better than anyone.
>>69027178
Voting for Johnson is pretty much throwing your vote away because Johnson has a 0% chance of winning (He recognizes this) and it will just practically be a vote for Hillary as it splits the Republican vote (few if any Democrats will seriously consider voting Libertarian)
>>69026985
>throwing away vote
>only MY candidate matters
I've said from the beginning that if it was Trump vs Clinton that I would vote for Gary Johnson. Only the trumpfags are butthurt about it, because all the others i know are berniefags and they see that as a shitty race too
>>69027480
>Voting for Johnson is pretty much throwing your vote away because Johnson has a 0% chance of winning
So? Unless you're adequately politically aligned with Trump or Cruz, switching to them because "muh wasted vote" is weak and down-right betamaximus.
>>69026488
I voted for Johnson in 2012. This year I'm torn. I still agree with Johnson, but I really feel like we need Trump. After seeing what has happened in Europe, I feel very strongly that we need to stop immigration. So it is going to be very difficult for me to decide.
I have to admit, I have been disappointed in /pol/'s constant cocksucking of Trump. So many people on this board have gone full retard with Trump. A bunch of man children spouting awwooovement and posting anime and don't even understand his policies, let alone politics. You see this all the time when Trump supporters post very transparent threads asking something like,"Why wouldn't Sanders policy work?" or "What's so bad about immigration?" and you just know that they are arguing with someone on FB but can't come up with their own ideas. Then there are threads that just flat out ask "This guy is talking bad about Trump.Help me refute him. What do I say?" It's pathetic.
It's also pathetic how many people here have shifted their ideals just to align with Trump. You see that a lot in "I side with" threads. The fact is, the most important factor for change in America is eliminating the hold of the two party system. And voting for a third party helps in that effort, probably more than anything. But at the same time, voting Trump has a similar effect.
The libertarians need to get their shit together and cut ties with the Republicans. Maybe if Trump gets fucked over by them, that will really help people open their eyes. For this reason, I was hoping Sanders would do better so the super delegates could steal it from him. I just wish that the libertarians could get the money together to have their own version of the primaries and the debates. I think that is going to be the only way. Getting in the debates during the general is already too late.
i cant stand libertarians. smug, pretentious, arrogant intellectuals who love their ideology only because it is simple and elegant. but the world is not simple or elegant. they will vote on their principles and make no compromises making themselves irrelevant or worse throwing the election to hillary. bunch of assholes.
sure whatever, put gary johnson on the debate stage.
>>69026862
Damn right brother, lets legalize freedom
>>69026488
If we didn't have a candidate like Trump, my vote would've been for Johnson.
>>69027877
Trump is a confident, successful man. His policies literally don't matter
>>69027130
Totally agree. But like i said, it's the immigration issue. If libertarians could see the danger of Islam, it would be much better.
>>69027193
They'd take more from Hillary than from Trump.
>>69028077
The owners of property reserve the right of admission.
>>69028077
Look at it like this, Islam restricts the freedoms of others when applied to government and accepted in western nations, how do you think libertarians feel about that? We oppose that sort of line of thinking, no matter where it comes from.
>>69027896
>i cant stand libertarians. smug, pretentious, arrogant intellectuals who love their ideology only because it is simple and elegant. but the world is not simple or elegant.
You do realise that Libertarians are Libertarians EXACTLY because the Government will never be able to control or regulate the complexity of society, right?
Libertarians oppose a planned economy, because Governments are not suited for regulating highly non-linear and complex systems, like the market.
Libertarians oppose Government dictation of social issues as well, because the individual knows best what is best for themselves. Governments can't regulate a society's social values, and will often hurt the people in the process.
>>69026488
I hope he candidates, this two-party dictatorship needs to end.
>>69028077
>Liberty
People have the liberty to excersise Islam, but tennants like Shira deny liberty, so they are a no go
Many Bern victims are saying they will sit out, vote green, write in bernie or vote Republican over Hillary
This will only help us
I used to be a libertarian and I held alot of Democrat views
>>69027877
Populism has a history of not delivering. When a man stirs shit up and doesn't have a proper plan other than "I'll get good people in cabinet positions and it will be great" it should be obvious that there is something amiss.
Look at how often South America has flirted with populism and how often it has led to ruin.
>>69026488
Gary Johnson is a retarded speaker
It would be hilarious if he landed on the main stage
>>69028867
A better way to phrase it is that people are free to practice any religion they want, but to force it on others is disrespectful of the liberties of others.
Please put him up
I hope Bernie goes independent and the Republicans nominate someone other than Trump
Let's just had the presidency to the legislative branch since no one will reach 270 in that scenario
>>69028366
>>69028532
>>69028867
That's all well and good, but it sounds to me like you're saying,"We'll let them in, but once they fuck up we'll kick them out". I think we really need to set a strong precedent for the rest of the world right now. That's why I'm leaning Trump ATM. But I don't know. I just don't now. I voted for Nader too.
>>69029396
I really do hope Bernie runs independant. But he won't. That would sink Clinton.
I predicted this would happen. The libertarian faction of the Republican Party would never support an autocratic populist like Trump.
I wouldn't be surprised if it permanently secedes after Johnson gains serious momentum. Libertarians within the GOP are fed up with the corrupt Establishment.
>>69029706
Well Bernie is closer to Trump even policy-wise than he is to Hillary. Hopefully he doesn't pussy out.
>>69029545
The US is a lot stronger on personal liberties than the EU. We have it in our blood that we stand for the right to life, liberty, and property. Muslims would get their shit pushed in in the US, even under a libertarian government. Imagine a federal law passed to allow concealed carry without a permit. Rape gangs would not survive the night.
>>69029545
>We'll let them in
That's up to the private communities. Maybe some communities won't even let them in. That's my libertarian POV, though.
Also, if we were to have a democratically elected minarchist government, I don't see why we should be able to vote for a president democratically but not be able to vote for the closing of borders democratically, too. It sounds inconsitent with democratic ideals.
That's my libertarian POV, though.
>>69029354
Well said Ameribro
>>69029905
Libertarians are just pissy that Trump took the anti establishment fire that they held
I for one love how Trump pisses literally every faction of American politics off (except for the average American)
>>69026488
Fuck Gary Johnson.. he called me a racist. I wouldn't vote for him if he paid me.
>>69026488
>America discovers multi-paty system
It's about time
>>69030076
This is the other problem with libertarians. Too idealistis. You are talking about a libertarian society, I am being realistic. I'm talking about what would happen with a libertarian president, not fantasy land.
>>69030529
That's why I added my second comment about a minarchist government.
>>69030298
Can I get a story behind this?
Libertarians believe in Homo-Economicus just like Marxists. Materialistic in the extreme.
How does a Libertarian society deal with hostile alien influence (kikes)?
How does a Libertarian stop giant capitalists fucking over native workers in favour of cheap labour abroad? No matter how low taxes are, they'll never make as much money at home as they do in China. And when money is the sole object of their existence you can bet that's what they'll do.
How does a Libertarian society deal with businesses intent on spreading morally repulsive shit like interracial porn, or scat fetishes?
Why do so many Libertarians support open borders? Because it's good for GDP, of course!
I'd vote libertarian if they weren't such cucks socially and immigration wise. Would Gary Johnson deport the 30million illegals here, that will within a generation secure victory for the democratic party forever?
Answer: no. This election is about survival to me, and while I appreciate a lot of Libertarian views, I think there are some issues we need to tackle now with Trump before it's too late.
>>69030937
To add on to this; we need a president who will stand with our native Europeans once the conflict breaks out against Islam. They'll need our support.
>>69029102
> Johnsons a bad speaker
> Bush was once president
>>69030739
>How does a Libertarian society deal with hostile alien influence?
The attempts of a singular group to limit the liberties of others should be dealt with swift a just punishment according to law.
>How does a Libertarian stop giant capitalists fucking over native workers in favour of cheap labour abroad? No matter how low taxes are, they'll never make as much money at home as they do in China. And when money is the sole object of their existence you can bet that's what they'll do.
This is a result of trade deals that have been hidden from the voice of the people. Simple put, these things are the result of a controlled economy, not a free (or more free) market. In a less controlled market, everyone would be able to compete for wages, driving the cost of labor up rather than down.
>How does a Libertarian society deal with businesses intent on spreading morally repulsive shit like interracial porn, or scat fetishes?
That is up to the individual's way of raising their children to be moral. Morality should not be dictated by a governmental body.
>Why do so many Libertarians support open borders?
This is a meme. Immigration would likely change very little from the way it is currently in the US.
>voting for an open borders faggot
Johnsonfags are cancer.
>>69026488
>>69026862
>>69026985
I used to be a Trump supporter. I am now #Hairy4Gary
>>69030739
>How does a Libertarian society deal with hostile alien influence (kikes)?
Getting rid of democracy that gives powers to degenerates, like muslims and people like you and installing a Technocracy.
>How does a Libertarian stop giant capitalists fucking over native workers in favour of cheap labour abroad? No matter how low taxes are, they'll never make as much money at home as they do in China. And when money is the sole object of their existence you can bet that's what they'll do.
Doesn't matter, robots will take up most of the jobs in the near future anyway. Also, Libertarians believe that nobody is entiled to anything else than mentioned in OP's pic.
>How does a Libertarian society deal with businesses intent on spreading morally repulsive shit like interracial porn, or scat fetishes?
Libertarians don't give a shit, because Libertarians are in favour of freedom. If those things are someone's thing, who gives a flying fuck. How idiotic do you have to be to think that your insignificant morals matter. Existentialism and freedom is were it is at.
>Why do so many Libertarians support open borders? Because it's good for GDP, of course!
Actually, the majority does not if it limits the basis of freedom and the meritocratic Technocracy .
>>69029545
>"We'll let them in, but once they fuck up we'll kick them out".
Yeah, because that's working so well for Europe.
>>69031534
>This is a meme. Immigration would likely change very little from the way it is currently in the US.
So 1 million legal low-wage third worlders a year, and practically open boarders with Mexico?
>>69031534
>more people competing for jobs means higher wages
Gary Johnson has not been chosen as the libertarian candidate yet you tards. They also have a primary
>>69026488
11 perecent too many, can anybody here name some reasons someone would vote Johnson over Trump, genuinely curious. Is it because of the whole wall thing?
>>69026488
>the libertarians would walk away with 11% of the vote
And you're proud of this?
>>69031930
I hope John McAffee wins, meme magic could make him an even better meme than Trump.
>>69026985
Hmm you know I never thought of that. If I don't vote for one murderous bastard the other one might win!
>>69028707
that doesn't excuse being willfully ignorant of how the election process actually works and voting against their best interests in protest.
>>69031886
Sensible immigration means that we give people the chance to become part of the American people and establish themselves in a land based around liberty rather than suppression.
Contrary to popular belief on this board, this is part of what it is to be American. Everyone who can cut it should get a fair chance and that doesn't mean they get hand outs while they rape and pillage.
>>69030739
>Materialistic in the extreme.
Money is not the only objective. In fact, the quintessential libertarian economic theory that is Austrian economics considers the fact that humans also consider something called psychic profit (example: a man may be willing to work in a less profitable endeavor but that he loves doing)
>How does a Libertarian society deal with hostile alien influence (kikes)?
You may have a point here. Leftist ideas are pretty persuasive and could undermine a libertarian (anarcho-capitalistic) utopia. In my ideal world, these people would be confined to their own communities and live by their rules, but pragmatically speaking, it may be necessary to remove them or simply prohibit them, even if this goes against freedom.
>How does a Libertarian stop giant capitalists fucking over native workers in favour of cheap labour abroad?...
>Why do so many Libertarians support open borders? Because it's good for GDP, of course!
See Hoppe >>69028366. Also, in a free market, it's possible that factors of production (like your native workers) are allocated in endeavors that are different than the ones in China. Comparative advantages.
>How does a Libertarian society deal with businesses intent on spreading morally repulsive shit like interracial porn, or scat fetishes?
You don't. They're free to consume that shit. You're also free to criticize them and speak against them, since this doesn't infringe on their freedom.
>Libertarianism
>>69032077
>And you're proud of this?
You're not proud to see parties besides the corrupt GOP and democrats gaining traction? Are you that indoctrinated?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbI7gxxbYpo
>>69031684
nigga tell me you do not pronounce gary as rhyming with hairy, that's retarded
>>69032357
Oh I agree totally, but I'd rather we go back to our immigration where our immigrants did as good, or better than our native population on average.
Nowadays the MAJORITY of our immigrants are on welfare, and it's not fair to people all over the world if only people from the southern boarder can flow in illegally, effectively taking their spot.
>>69032774
This is how the Libertarian party deals with miscreant immigrants who don't contribute to society. We don't pay their pills, we don't pay for their groceries, they must adapt in our society to continue living. It doesn't matter who comes, what matters is what they DO.
>>69032774
>but I'd rather we go back to our immigration where our immigrants did as good, or better than our native population on average.
This was literally never the case.
>>69033184
pill = bills, but yeah healthcare too, lets throw that in.
>>69033267
Yes it was. There was a point when immigration laws were stricter, and only the best could come here. They were more educated on average, and took less benefits.
Also the argument "it's what it means to be an American, to let people come here if they want" isn't necessarily true. If you look at the last several decades it is, but if you go back further people tended to despise immigration even when it was Europeans like with the Irish, Italians and Greeks.
>>69033589
>There was a point when immigration laws were stricter, and only the best could come here.
Feel free to specify this time.
>If you look at the last several decades it is, but if you go back further people tended to despise immigration even when it was Europeans like with the Irish, Italians and Greeks.
More than that, even in the last several decades people have despised and excluded immigrants. Koreans come to mind, for one. We like to talk big about immigration here, but throughout history we've never really accepted the groups that come to immigrate for at least a generation. Only in the past decade has the "muh immigrants r good people dey dindu nuffin" rhetoric come into vogue.
>>69032759
Bitch, you say "13" like "thudain". You don't get to talk about how others pronounce things.
>>69033972
>Feel free to specify this time.
Ann Coulter's book, Adios America talks about it and cites sources. I really don't feel like looking it up though, guess you'll have to trust me or ignore it.
>>69026488
>"We're libertarians! Free market is efficient market, keep the government away from the economy and private-owned businesses!"
>"They won't show us on TV, sue those bitches, mr. judge please fine their asses and make them invite us to their channels!"
Yeah, right.
>>69033589
>"Born in other countries, yet believing you could be happy in this, our laws acknowledge, as they should do, your right to join us in society, conforming, as I doubt not you will do, to our established rules. That these rules shall be as equal as prudential considerations will admit, will certainly be the aim of our legislatures, general and particular." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258
>The policy or advantage of [immigration] taking place in a body (I mean the settling of them in a body) may be much questioned; for, by so doing, they retain the language, habits, and principles (good or bad) which they bring with them. Whereas by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, and laws: in a word, soon become one people. George Washington letter to Vice-President John Adams November 15, 1794
>Strangers are welcome because there is room enough for them all, and therefore the old Inhabitants are not jealous of them; the Laws protect them sufficiently so that they have no need of the Patronage of great Men; and every one will enjoy securely the Profits of his Industry. But if he does not bring a Fortune with him, he must work and be industrious to live. Benjamin Franklin. Those Who Would Remove to America. February, 1784
>>69026488
muh lolbertarianism
14/88
>>69026488
"Libertarianism" is code-word for "Anti-White"
>gubmint gets small
>freedom everywhere, people do what they want
>so do corporations, who are also people
>laws get broken
>liberty gets infringed
>courts get heavily corrupted since the government is so small and tax incomes are near to nothing (their income)
>corporations do as they want
>people get sick of it, aka the 200 million mexians who crossed the border (borders wont ever be protected under libertarians, that would mean less competiton)
>they vote for some communist who promises a bigger government and higher wages and better healthcare (bernie right now)
>say he doesnt get assassinated, america turns into a commie shithole
people will always find a way to keep others down, funny how libertarians need to run for president so they can force others to follow their policies. libertarianism is watered down anarchy. libertarianism shits on democracy
>>69034402
>>69034513
you know /pol/ used to be libertarian right
of course not, you're newfags just like everyone else on here now
>>69034546
So the founding fathers weren't democratic? Are you really this retarded toothpaste?
>>69034402
>>69034513
I want stormfront to leave.
>>69026985
>Throwing away your vote
Stop eating up this lie that the major parties push to keep themselves in power.
The irony is that the only reason why voting to a 3rd party is throwing away your vote is because people think voting 3rd party is throwing away your vote. If people voted for someone they actually liked instead of voting for the "lesser of two evils" maybe we could actually get another party in power.
>>69026488
>implying 11% of the populace even know who Gary Johnson is
Don't kid yourself
>>69034311
Yes but this was when they were taking immigrants basically from only North Western Europe, particularly of protestant faith right? That's a bit easier to deal with:
Whereas by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, and laws: in a word, soon become one people.
We don't want Germans or Swedes because their skin is too swarthy - Benjamin Franklin
I don't think they would approve of this multicultural drowning of the anglo-American people and culture.
I would like to hear their comments if they were relevant to today's standards where we practically discriminate against Europeans, and take in 1 million third worlders for humanitarian reasons, that only hurts the native population.
>>69034402
Libertarians are pro-gun and anti-affirmative action. How is that anti-white? If anything whites and asians will prosper more.
>>69034720
The founding fathers hated democracy you retard. Learn history before trying to educate others.
>>69034608
I've been here since it was /new/ you faglord. We grew up and realized that lolbertarianism is a one way street to the SJW paradise we're living in now.
At least until it's cuckery leads women to vote in migrants and breed away our civilization.
>>69034546
>start my own corporation
>abide to the law, advertise my company with this, attract consumers because of it
>outcompete the others
>others notice and start following the law
>>69034546
Lullo, als je gewoon een Technocratische meritocratie hebt gebeurt dat niet.
>>69026488
>Allowing a third party into the main debates
Even though I probably wouldn't vote for him, that would be a HUGE deal. Would love to see Hilary v Johnson v Trump. Johnson would probably come out looking like the most sane.
MAGA though.
I would rather see Austin Petersen, but Johnson is fine too. The LP has my vote.
>>69026862
godbless you burguer for actually trying to shit on the bipartisan system
>>69035110
>We grew up
Sure you did, leaf. Sure you did.
The truth is the newfag stormfront shills drove away all the old /pol/ posters and now treat this board as a dumping ground for shitty memes and trolling.
>>69032231
If I vote Johnson it won't be in protest, it will be because I want him as president. The fact that you think people shouldn't vote for their preferred candidate because you won't like the outcome is very telling about your mindset.
My vote belongs to me. It's not for any candidate to "lose" because they never had it in the first place.
Furthermore, we got into the situation this country is currently in precisely because the "lesser of two evils" is still evil. I will vote for the candidate I think is good, not the one that is least bad.
>>69028077
We do or at least I do and I'm a first generation immigrant.
>>69032231
Neither of the two major parties work in my best interests so why the hell should I vote for either of them?
>>69034720
The founding fathers weren't modern libertarians you absolute fucking retard. In case you haven't noticed, global economics and geopolitics have developed a bit since the 18th century
>>69027098
We'll be safer by not letting Saudis and Israelis buy out politicians and use them to advance their own foreign policies.
>>69028160
Libertarians tend to take equally from both I. Presidential elections but people get butthurt anyway.
>>69029354
Use a stronger word then "disrespectful". Use something like "illegal" if it is, it fucking better be, illegal.
As much as I love the libertarian ideals and party we need a guy with showmanship or/with charisma badly.
>>69035553
You will be costing trump the election either way. Regardless of whatever you tell yourself to make you feel better, the less votes trump has the less likely he is to make america great again and the more likely shillary will jew the us for eternity.
>>69035197
>if i play by the rules, others will too
you'd get sabotaged in no time. and also, its not that easy to enter markets.
>>69034720
never said that. what i am saying is that they are dead nowadays and arent seeing what america turned into. the kind of country they wanted to create isnt the one it is today, right? whats the point of trying to create an america the founding fathers left behind if it can, just as easily, turn into the one today? your founding fathers were wrong. by the way, the us was created in the 1700s. discoved like 300 years earlier, but back then going 300 years back you wouldnt see as much of a difference in technology and power in different countries, just think about that
>>69030365
It's not about discovery, we've had multiple minor parties since forever. The problem is that the system as it stands is stacked against any third party getting any kind of shot. The average American may start to see the issues with that but with Trump running in the Republican party, it won't be in this election.
>>69026488
>ending corporate welfare
>giving generously to help those in need
Pick one.
>>69026985
There are benefits for receiving 5% of the vote in the general election. Even if they don't win, it's a step forward.
>>69026488
>Libertarians
>"l-look at this graphic, guize! Libertarianism is literally perfect!"
>>69035968
i always love when you irrelevant third worlders stumble onto /pol/ and pretend your opinions on US politics are worth even a grain of sand
i understand your countries are cucked hard and basically US puppets but maybe let the real men worry about the fate of the world, eh?
>>69035002
The founding fathers saw both the strength and weakness of democracy, which is why we have the checks and balances that we do today. That doesn't mean our election process is or has ever been considered not democratic.
>>69026488
We /freedom/ now
>>69027480
But if hes even 10% now, libertaeians will have a chance for 15% next time as people sees theres more dontwannabeaslaves. And if libs get 15% next time, they gonna have a chance for 30 next time and so on. Remember, Hitler got like 10% of votes in his first election.
>>69031534
>Simple put, these things are the result of a controlled economy, not a free (or more free) market.
No you stupid fuck, lowering regulation in America would not magically force China to pay its workers a living wage. No matter how you cut it, American labour will always be more expensive than Chinese labour. Removing barriers to foreign investment would simply mean every single big corporation bases its factories in India and China, and then sells the products to gullible ameridiots. Kind of like how it works now, only your economy wouldn't be propped up by military adventurism and arms production, because all of that shit would move to China as well.
>>69032759
>garbage sheepfucking islander trying to tell a civilized country how to speak
>>69026488
never thought he would be that high
I wish libertarian candidates had a chance but terrorism, poverty and greed are huge obstacles
>>69036197
Worst part is that you'll probably complain when hillary wins, raises your taxes, opens borders, and perpetuates corporate welfare and lobbying culture.
Just remember whose fault it is
>>69035731
why do they always ignore this? next thing they're going to tell me england is the biggest threat to the us
>>69034608
>the majority of people on /pol/ used to hold a ridiculous ideology
>this means you must hold it too
Hmm...
>>69031534
>In a less controlled market, everyone would be able to compete for wages, driving the cost of labor up rather than down.
Globally, perhaps, but it would result in less wages at home.
Get it through your thick heads; the concern of the nation and its government is not the world as a whole, but is promoting the interest and prosperity of the nation. Absolutely free trade may produce more X Y and Z globally, but if it reduces the local prosperity of the nation in the process then it is ultimately wrong and harmful for that nation.
You can talk about global free trade when the entire world is united under a singular super-state.
>>69036584
>Just remember whose fault it is
Certainly not yours, because you have no say in your fate. Now go make more money for ameri- i mean the western world, third worlder.
Libertarianism is objectively right and anyone who disagrees should be deported to Zimbabwe so they can live in a Socialist utopia.
Libertarianism is objectively wrong and anyone who disagrees should be deported to Somalia so they can live in a Libertarian utopia.
>>69036672
>this means you must hold it too
No, it means you're a newfag. Which is what I said, newfag. Fuck off back to stormfront.
>>69036612
Because they believe that the world works as if it were some textbook case, where everything was able to be compartmentalized into nice, easy to digest problems with similarly simple solutions. They read about the founding fathers and think 'wow, I just need to be a little more like them!' all the while forgetting that nobody is like them anymore for a reason, because the world is constantly changing.
The only ideology more intellectually bankrupt than libertarianism is its down-syndrome brother, anarcho-capitalism
>>69026488
What are your stances on border security, libertarians? I actually agree with you guys on stuff like tax cuts, gun rights, and non-interventionism, and I don't mind DUDE WEED LMAO. But the open borders cuckoldry ruins it for me. How do you know if mass immigration won't turn your libertarian utopia into another corrupt Latin American socialist shithole?
>>69036707
this
>>69036821
So basically you're just saying that oldfags are all complete retards? In that case newfag is a compliment, thanks
>>69034289
It's not channels that refuse to allow minor parties into the debate, it's the two major parties colluding to prevent a competition on ideas. While these parties are ostensibly private organizations, they have used their massive influence to maintain their power over every level government. You may not see that as a issue, comrade, but many view that as anti-liberty.
>>69036930
oh trust me, they know how their policies will work out in real life
>>69036820
>get deported to Somalia
>enjoy the lowest rates of HIV and crime in Africa outside Botswana, which is also a free market society and get a job the Coca-Factory
>obtain cute muslim (well, as cute as nig nogs can be) wife who will do whatever I say
>can do anything I want other than kill people because of xeer law
>>69036820
Anarchocapitalism is wrong, minarchism is totally right.
>>69037029
>So basically you're just saying that oldfags are all complete retards?
Well, at the very least they were genuine about their political beliefs, instead of being underage memer nu-right hipsters.
>>69026488
>tfw libertarianism will never be possible because the left are brainwashed by jews and the right are brainwashed by christians
>tfw muslims are still the worst people on the planet
>>69036144
This
Voting for Johnson for primaries since hilldog or sanders will win my shit state anyway (CA).
At least he'll have a chance to be on stage.
Then I'll probably vote trump for presidential. Not like it matters, my district is all berniefags
>>69037196
Also;
>can actually have ivory piano keys because there are no nu-male animal rights activists
>>69037228
>Only libertarians can be genuine about their beliefs
Kill yourself
>>69027480
I'm voting Johnson, but Bernie would be my next choice. Bernie has similar social policies, which I find more important. I would never vote Trump, he's far too authoritarian. Pic related.
Also:
>"On occasion, Bernie comes up with libertarian views when he talks about taking away the cronyism on Wall Street, so in essence he’s right, and occasionally he voted against war"
>Ron Paul
>>69036099
>you'd get sabotaged in no time
I see the Romanian internet service market as an example of what a free market can achieve. In a country like Romania! (sorry Romanians, but you'll have to admit the world opinion of you is kinda low, like the opinion of my country)
>its not that easy to enter markets
It's much easier in a free market. And that's why the corporation institution exists.
>>69036099
>it's not that easy to enter markets
Because of government regulations pushed by powerful businesses to stifle competition. Try harder, please.
>>69037450
That's not what I said. I just said newfag /pol/ is ruled by underage memer nu-right hipsters, which is objectively true.
>>69037558
>Objectively
Show me the 'objective' data you lying sack of shit
>>69037066
so youre telling me 2 massive parties (companies) have monopoly tier power and use that power to make sure competition isnt a problem to them? luckily the goverment cant do anything about that, since that would mean they are disturbing the free market of political parties.
>>69037732
>Show me the 'objective' data you lying sack of shit
Your existence already proves far more than any data could.
>>69026488
I was a libertarian too until I started fashing. Libertarians will openly embrace the degradation of our society. How can you prevent people from rejecting traditional roles and thereby destroying the fabric of society if you can't regulate their actions?
You foolishly assume freedom is an ideal unto itself, but freedom serves no purpose. Why should we be free when we can be tempered by morality and forethought? Instead of perusing hedonistic tendencies and pointless gratification, you can fight for the betterment of your country and people.
>>69037776
Natural monopolies are a myth. Monopolies are only created by governmental policy.
>>69034218
>>69036538
Make like a tree and kill yourself.
>>69037776
I'm speaking from ignorance here, but doesn't the American election system have rules (in other words, market regulations) that impede the presence of more parties?
>>69037953
>Libertarians actually believe this
Protip, anon. States themselves are natural monopolies that grabbed the monopoly on force within their territory.
>>69037889
Wow, what a surprise, another intellectually bankrupt libertarian who makes comments full of hot air and immediately folds when called on them.
>>69038093
Seals are far from innocent
Libertarians should be sent to re-education camps.
>>69037945
A society is a group of people with common culture and goals. As soon as you start forcing anyone to do things they don't want, like give Tyrone welfare, it naturally degrades society because you no longer share a common goal.
Tradition doesn't matter. Who cares? What does matter is that people's bad habits, such as not saving money or being fat don't effect other people. "Tradition" is worthless. Good habits are timeless.
>>69037953
Because it's more efficient for companies to establish a monopoly by using the government than it is for them to establish it naturally. Without a strong state, monopolies will still form. They will just do so somewhat less efficiently.
>>69026488
They need to advertise for God's sake. It's getting sad at this point. It's like a boxer who's throws thethe match. He doesn't even want to win
>>69026488
I probably won't vote for him but good.
>>69038210
>who makes comments full of hot air and immediately folds when called on them.
pretty rich projection coming from a nu-right hipster
tell me again how trump is a good businessman because he said so
>>69038316
If there is no adequate competition, of course. But then when a monopoly exists in that scenario, the market power of smaller competition grows, in theory, due to the ability to have lower costs for labor/production/service etc. If a monopoly occurs, it is re-balanced by the power of prices.
>>69026488
If trump gets railroaded I'll vote for Johnson. Let us all welcome Hillary Clinton as our new and first woman president of the United states
>>69031534
>Immigration would likely change very little from the way it is currently in the US.
You wut m8? Immigration has fucked us up, in the 90's the Clinton administration quadrupled our immigration limit from 250,000 to 1 million in that time the Democrats have imported and made welfare slaves out of multiple immigrants as long as people keep voting in Democrats.
Immigration is only okay when it is limited to small numbers and we know who we're letting in.
Us libertarians get a bad name for things like open borders shit and most of it is because of people who can't articulate their ideas about it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
>>69027130
If you were about principles you wouldn't support Gary Johnson since he is all in for the private prison industry. Spin "reduces costs" all you want but it's nothing but a way for private corporations and the state to profit off of making more thing illegal so more citizens can be imprisoned. Make less things illegal FIRST and then you might have a reducing cost argument. As it stands, the private prison industry, supported by Gary Johnson, lobbies constantly to get more citizens imprisoned by making more things illegal.
>>69037514
you're telling me the ISP's in the us arent as good as in romania because of the government? ISP's in the us arent government controlled, and as far as i know the government isnt doing anything to bring quality down
>>69037945
The thing is that "the betterment of your country and people" has lots of subjective, individual interpretations, which may not coincide with some sectors of the population.
Thus, when you enact a policy for the "common good", you affect those that are not aligned in that "common good", because there is no common good, only individuals.
Remain calm, though. "Degeneracy" in a libertarian society is privately funded. Your tax money won't subsidize Keisha and her third nigglet.
>>69038300
Bad habits are the result of society bankrupt of traditions, morality, and societal pressures that enforce good habits. For instance, in East Asian countries obesity is ruthlessly restrained by a society that shames the fat into losing weight. Traditions like celebrating Christmas or whatever isn't going ot prevent this, but they are vital for maintaining the national identity, which is critical to the persistence of a society.
The reason why our society is degrading so rapidly is because societal pressures have all but vanished. People aren't shamed for their terrible behavior and, when they are, they are coached to ignore the shaming. This is why parents are capable of sending their children off to gender reassignment surgery at age 14. Shame is the primary tool by which good habits and actions are enforced and our society is shameless.
>>69038316
Monopolies form, but they can only form in a free market in a legitimate way. Standard Oil was a monopoly because they were better than the compeition. They weren't killing anyone to maintain their monopoly. But those monopolies never last forever. AT&T was the biggest supermarket chain in the US at one point, where are they now?
>>69038498
>nu-male hipster
Libertarianism is almost 350 years old. Nice try you jewish shill. You can say whatever you want, but Dequaan is NEVER getting my money.
>>69038600
>the market power of smaller competition grows, in theory, due to the ability to have lower costs for labor/production/service etc.
Only if the existing monopoly is not sufficiently big; a sufficiently large firm can out-compete any smaller firm at any level, can absorb that loss, and then return to normal prices.
>>69038654
If there's any regulation impeding you from disposing of your property as you want, that's a market regulation. I'm pretty sure it's actually easier to start an internet company in Romania than in the US.
>>69038600
The monopoly will die eventually, of course, but that's irrelevant. By the time the monopoly dies, the people in charge of it can move on with their newly acquired hordes of wealth and create a new monopoly on some other industry, or even just invest it normally. They've already looted billions, after all.
In essence, the economy survives but it is unnecessarily stifled by the monopoly and profits that would go into the development of industry are looted by the monopoly's benefactors.
>>69038498
I have nothing more to gain by talking to autistic libertarians, sorry
I'm not even a Trump supporter, nice assumptions though
>>69038791
It greatly depends on the industry and the available of resources as well. A larger monopoly would have more operation costs to extend its reach in the market.
>>69038778
>Libertarianism is almost 350 years old. Nice try you jewish shill.
i didn't call libertarianism nu-right retard, read before responding
>>69032357
But don't you agree at least that some ethnicities would assimilate better to your libertarian society than others? Libertarianism/classical liberalism is, after all, a uniquely Western phenomenon. Mexicans or Salvadoreans just won't assimilate into libertarianism as well as Danes or Welshmen. Surely strong government regulations should play a role in immigration policy, no?
In 1995 the CPI index stood at 150.3. In 2003 when Johnson left office it stood at 181.7. That's a 20.9% increase over the same eight years.
In other words Gary Johnson increased spending in New Mexico at approximately 240% the rate of inflation -- or about double and a half as fast as prices rose.
Do you define that as "fiscally conservative" or "responsible"? I do not. Further, can you find any part of spending in this chart that he actually cut during his time in office or did every single one of these bars get bigger?
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3019136
>>69038945
But it can also afford those costs simply the sheer scale of its operations; a small time auto-manufacturer has to purchase raw-materials; Ford OWNED his own sources of raw materials.
I heard also he only ran in 2012 to pay off debts from the 2008 run
How do other libertarians think importing millions of middle east and Latinos who democrat going to help push the cause long term?
>>69038717
2000 years ago, it was British "tradition" to worship oaktrees. When was the time an anglo did that? Only nu-male pagans do shit like that. Tradition isn't inherantly good. East Asian countries retrain obesity, but why? If some fat fuck wants to be fat, then let him be. It stimulates the economy. But he shouldn't get a penny to pay for his healthcare because its his fault mummy never taught him not to be a fat shit.
I don't care about shaming. What I care about is other people bad habit effecting me and good people. Smokers should be allowed to smoke all they want, because it gives people jobs.
Free-market capitalism is the only system that can make bad people give good people oppertunity.
>>69039053
In a phrase, assimilate or die.
Without handouts, immigration is not as big as an issue. If an immigrant does well for himself by working hard and contributing to society rather than taking handouts and watching day-time TV, it would be against libertarian principles to deny him the chance to do so.
>>69038664
Your thinking is on the wrong track. Instead of thinking of society as a collection of individuals, you must realize that is a single unit. The "common good" is what's best for the societal unit. We are cells in the body of the nation. We are useful only as we benefit the nation.
One of the few benefits of the libertarian society is that it will at least allow us to separate ourselves from the degenerate, but it is a minor positive. The societal unit is shattered by the greed of its cogs. Keisha will still degrade my society's morals and indoctrinate my children to be cucks and sluts. The society could scarcely recover its values and moral compass.
I am a classical liberal in my beliefs and ideals
But the libertarian party sucks, have you ever actaully hear Rand Paul speak, the man rumbles on in the most incoherent way possible.
The not only can libertarian cannot win any election, most of the hipster like card carrying members are actually proud of this fact.
This moronic belief they are superior but they are "too good" for most Americans to understand.
Fuck the libertarian party, win locally, build to state wide, then national. The libertarian party has only been wasting money and time do presidential bids since the 1970s.
Let's see you lazy pricks actually put your beliefs into abilities and i will vote for the libertarian president then.
Sincerely, a disappoint classic liberal.
To the people arguing about monopoly, here's a quote from Rothbard's "Man, Economy and State" regarding Rockefeller
>>69037477
>Libertarian
>Sanders
Pick one. Sanders is right about what's wrong with the govt but completely wrong about how to fix it.
>Be Sanders
>See that the government is corrupt
>"I know we need more government control that will do it."
The man is a moron
>>69038778
AT&T and Standard Oil are bad examples because they were both broken up by the federal government, but I see where you're coming from. The monopoly eventually dies, of course, but only after creating an incredibly inefficient system that slows the wheels of industry for decades. As soon as they out compete the industry, they begin screwing the consumers for profit at the top. Essentially the poor are looted for the rich to waste on luxury goods. It's a delay on the progress of society that can be prevented by simple anti-trust laws.
I would vote for McAfee. He sounds badass. Johnson sounds like a beta faggot.
>>69039483
That would only be possible if we were clones with the same subjective values. But we're not. We all have different upbringings, different ideas and different points of view, that are not even static.
There is nothing wrong with people of similar ideas associating voluntarily, and that's the beauty of the free market. The problem is when you force everyone on a "collective", according to the person in charge of course.
>>69039694
Broken up unfairly though. What is wrong with Standard Oil controlling most of the market when they are the most efficient group? Standard Oil wasn't inefficient, it undercut its opponants which meant a lower price for the consumer. They also innovated their transport massively, which in turn led to new innovations in other markets. The poor only benefited from Standard Oil. If they didn't, they wouldn't have bought from them.
>>69039415
Anglos never did that, it was celts who were druids. I would argue that tradition is inherently good. It maintains the national identity. The reason Anglo-Saxons don't worship trees is because druidism is not apart of their national identity. Rather, Christianity is. By strengthening the national identity, people are more eager to make sacrifices, big or small, to benefit their nation. Soldiers, for example, are willing to fight and die for their country because they are indoctrinated with the national identity. They want to protect it at all costs. The national identity purchases loyalty from the citizenry, which is more valuable than any petty freedom.
East Asian control obesity because an obese person is less efficient than a fit person. They simply contribute less to society. Usually the shame comes from people close to the individual who do simply want what's best for the person. Their quality of life is better if they're fit and the society is better off if they're fit.
I agree with the general premise of free market capitalism, but the system must serve to benefit the society. In areas where it does not, such as when monopolies arise, we must intervene.
>>69039538
>Rothbard
>>69040186
Well, Rothbard is quoting Leeman, so if you're going to follow the retarded ad hominem path, direct it against Leeman...
>>69039689
As you can see, I did not agree with him on economic issues. My environmental answers probably made him score pretty high, too.
>>69040083
Standard Oil would undercut the competition to force them into bankruptcy, then buy out the bankrupt competition, then start raising prices to shaft people. They were revolutionary in their tactics, which is what allowed them to undercut people, but they still screwed people over. The only reason they were allowed to persist for so long is because only the very rich owned automobiles and were particularly harmed by the increased oil prices, so there wasn't much public demand for Standard Oil to be broken up.
The owners of Standard Oil deserved to get very rich for their innovations (and indeed, Rockefeller was the second richest man in American history), but they didn't deserve to shaft the American people forever.
>>69026985
>throwing away your vote
>implying your vote counts
>>69028980
Trump is more of a statement, you can see how the other republican candidates started incorporating his ideas at later debates, while i do consider myself more of a libertarian i think you guys need trump to move that window a bit to the right first since it been going to the left like crazy in the recent years
>>69039535
This
You fucks should all be drooling over trump since he will in fact stop the left wing, clean shop of all the phony small government republicans and stop the importation of millions of socialiats voters
Instead you're all too scared to tell people you're a trump supporter and so you vote for Johnson
>>69040367
Gotcha
>>69026488
The patriot act was bi partisan as fuck.
>>69040456
Trump is just another communist. He is for single payer healthcare system and public works projects to employ people. He is literally a planned economy socialist.
>>69039535
This is true. The LB is full of one issue retards, literal anarchists and anarcho capitalists
>>69039827
This is where the national identity comes in. People must identity as pieces of a whole and as brothers/sisters of their fellow citizens. If we raise people to hold this view and other views in common, they will work to pursue the same ideals and thereby benefit society. Some ideas people have are simply wrong. They would not benefit society by implementing them. So why entertain them? Why allow people to develop world views that are not beneficial to society?
The free market is essential to a modern society. Free economic association drives up innovation and can do so in a controlled way that benefits everyone in the long term. However, bringing this policy of free association into the realm of society at large is risky. They will invariably develop poor opinions and use the power of democracy to steer the country into the wrong direction.
So long as the person in charge is a good leader, there is nothing wrong with him dictating the course of society. There must be checks on his power, but it's essentially a good policy for society to have one vision. Without direction, society will be tossed about by the decadent, hedonistic, and foolish. We are lost like an astronaut in interstellar space, with no idea which direction is up and which is down. People turn for answers but society gives them none, and therefore they suffer.
>>69026488
He's being brought in to stump trump and give Hillary the win. He was always plan b
>>69037477
>Libertarian but support environmental regulations
Isn't a strong EPA contradictory to libertarian doctrine? You're regulating the individual's interests for the benefit of the collective. That's heretical.
>>69040456
I'd rather write in Jim Webb than Trump but Johnson polling is making me look at GJ again.
>>69026488
I voted for him in the 2012 election since I hated both Obama and Romney. Voting trump this year though.
Things kinda suck for me as centrist, I understand the views of both sides and can see both of them as valid while at the same time seeing their flaws and downsides, making me unable to choose between the two and I always end up dropping out of the conversation
>>69040897
>People must
>If we raise
>Some ideas people have are simply wrong
>good leader
Look at these words and feel the tone. Do you see this desire of controlling people? You're essentially telling them how to live. Let them live man, they know more about their lives than you, or this "good leader". Only interfere if they interfere with your life.
>They will invariably develop poor opinions and use the power of democracy to steer the country into the wrong direction.
This is the only thing where we agree, in the sense that democracy can be exploited for antilibertarian ideas. When A and B get together to take from C, give a part to D, and line their pockets a bit, that's democracy used for violence.
>>69041344
Jim Webb. You can't for straight into a libertarian govt. Bring in centrist and bipartisan people, than vote in more centrists and legitimate Libertarians in the Congress and Senate. Once you have this a Libertarian for president will be possible, I'll give it another 12 years minimum to be ready for a LP President. If shit hits the fan and an ideological war were to happen than I could see it happening sooner.
>>69041737
Why is controlling people or telling them how to live bad?
>Let them live man, they know more about their lives than you
>Literally "mother knows best as how to raise her children"
Just because someone is living their life, doesn't mean they're doing the best, or even a particularly good job at it.
The nation, society, and civilization itself is a conglomerate of everyone's lives; no single person is an atom, separate from everyone else.
No matter how much you deny it, every man's actions affects and reverberates around him; everyone interferes with everyone unless you literally forgo human contact, live off the grid, and make your very existence a net-zero.
>>69042168
>Why is controlling people or telling them how to live bad?
Literally the same argument that Leftist shits use
>>69042168
>Just because someone is living their life, doesn't mean they're doing the best, or even a particularly good job at it.
That's your interpretation. Any mistake they do, its their responsibility.
>The nation, society, and civilization itself is a conglomerate of everyone's lives; no single person is an atom, separate from everyone else.
I couldn't care less about the people living 300km from me. I only care about the people around me.
If you think libertarianism means living the hermit life, erase that idea from your head.
>>69042563
Leftists are bad because they're leftists, not because they respect authority you filthy anarchist.
>>69042571
>That's your interpretation. Any mistake they do, its their responsibility.
Any mistake they make affects their peers, any decision they make or moral they hold reflects on others. No man is an atom.
>I couldn't care less about the people living 300km from me. I only care about the people around me.
And yet, the people living 300km away affect you. You may not care about their day to day lives, but they none the less affect you and everyone else.
>If you think libertarianism means living the hermit life, erase that idea from your head.
Wrong; the only way to be perfectly libertarian, in the sense that your actions have no effect on others, is to be the proverbial hermit. It's utterly inhuman.
The three biggest problems with Libertarians is that they are selfish, individualistic to a fault, and short sighted.
They care only about themselves and those close to them.
They do not care about the effects their actions have on others and on society in the wider scope of civilization.
They care only about the time they are alive, and give no thought to the future they will never see.
They are morally and emphatically bankrupt shells of people, utterly inhuman in their mannerism and beliefs.
>>69042626
Libertarians =/= Anarchists
What are you twelve?
Anarchists literally believe in no laws at all, let people do anything and everything.
Libertarians believe in limited govt interference, non socialist taxes and believe in personal liberties.
Only regards believe libertarianism is anarchy. Grow up kid.
>>69026488
>DUDE WEED
>lmao just open the borders senpai
2 reasons I will not be voting Libertarian.
>>69041019
I don't know, Gary Johnson believes national parks should continue to be protected and that companies should have to label GMO foods. McAfee is against offshore drilling expansion and fracking. Rand Paul had said he would be in favor to giving tax breaks to the alternative fuel industry. From Wikipedia:
"[Johnson] says "America needs to be a land with a clean environment," and supports "clean-air and clean-water action and believe[s] in conservationism." He cites the Environmental Protection Agency as an example of good government. Johnson has stated he agrees that human carbon emissions do impact the climate."
I understand it's the one thing I disagree with the party most on. Although I strongly believe in economic and personal freedom, it's only as long as it doesn't infringe on the freedoms of others. If corporations continue to burn fossil fuels at the expense of receding shorelines in Florida where people would lose their private property, I think they're being violated. Many left leaning libertarians believe in the non ownership or collective ownership of natural resources due to scarcity, so I think this would be a similar view. If we could do it without regulations, that's fine. But there needs to be something, like taxing carbon emissions.
>>69043030
See
>>69040845
Most actual Libertarians can't even stand our choices
>>69043014
>calls others a kid
>has taken a deep swill of the anarchist-lite koolaid
Libertarians are just dishonest anarchists who like have some semblance of civility, but are too selfish to extend that civility to society as a whole. This principle generally applies to any and all political systems that attempt to reduce human society into an ideology.
>>69043008
>Any mistake they make affects their peers
If it affects their property, that will be taken to the courts.
>And yet, the people living 300km away affect you. You may not care about their day to day lives, but they none the less affect you and everyone else.
What would happen if this person lives in another country?
>Wrong; the only way to be perfectly libertarian, in the sense that your actions have no effect on others, is to be the proverbial hermit. It's utterly inhuman.
The only relevant affection is regarding property.
>They are morally and emphatically bankrupt shells of people, utterly inhuman in their mannerism and beliefs.
This is funny coming from the guy that wants to tell people how to live their lives.
>>69043407
>If it affects their property, that will be taken to the courts.
>The only relevant affection is regarding property.
This is exactly what I'm talking about; despite your autistic insistence, there is more to civilization and society that a man's property; everything is linked together, economy, policy, morals, culture, tradition, everything affects everything else. You discard much of what makes civilization prosperous for its most shallow and transient facet, just to fit it into your narrow ideology.
>What would happen if this person lives in another country?
The same, since today's world is increasingly global. Maybe not so much if borders and inter-national communication and trade were restricted.
>This is funny coming from the guy that wants to tell people how to live their lives.
Because that is the nature of man! We are social, we are communal and civilized creatures! There are those above to be obeyed and those below to be ordered. Hierarchy and the authority is the very bedrock of any meaningful civilization or society, the individual is but a transient and small component of the whole.
>>69041033
Don't worry, you'll be able to write in Webb AND Trump. On the same ticket :)
>>69027896
The debate commission will not allow a third party on stage.
I voted Johnson 4 years ago, but I'm voting Trump this time. Only real chance to break the SJW monopoly in politics, mainstream media and education. That has to stop immediately.
>>69043932
>everything is linked together, economy, policy, morals, culture, tradition, everything affects everything else.
Perfectly compatible with libertarianism, as long as the cultures/traditions respect the property rights.
>The same, since today's world is increasingly global. Maybe not so much if borders and inter-national communication and trade were restricted.
Culture and tradition preservation cannot occur if we don't define property rights. Grouping everyone in a collective global blob is a sure way of ending cultures and traditions. See >>69028366
>There are those above to be obeyed and those below to be ordered. Hierarchy and the authority is the very bedrock of any meaningful civilization or society,
As long as they are voluntary, I'm fine. Voluntary order is based on respect and reputation. But you propose order by force. So much for being a civilized creature!
Libertarians will never get enough votes because people want to see the world burn so they go to extremism
libertarians are pacifists about internal issues so they can't bring happenings as people want
people are so neurotic and passionable about reality that they want the things that will bring the most change as possible
>>69043275
Libertarians are for government albeit limited so that it doesn't infringe upon the rights of the people.
Anarchists believe in no govt at all.
How retards like you still don't understand this is beyond me, your close mindedness is similar to that of the leftist cucks.
>>69041880
Yeah dude that guy's pretty awesome
>>69044620
Legalizing weed and prostitution is not radical?
>>69044951
it's not radical enough if it isn't without a happening or a revolution as passionable people want
>>69031145
This is so true....... Ppl in Europe are seeing what's happened in Belgium and are eventually going to start doing something to stop the floodgates
>>69044605
>Perfectly compatible with libertarianism, as long as the cultures/traditions respect the property rights.
Except that having strong property rights is no gurantee of a strong culture or strong morals, it simply allows for enclaves of cancer to form and spread so long as property rights are respected.
Remember this; culture is not won through the adults of today, but the children of tomorrow.
>Culture and tradition preservation cannot occur if we don't define property rights. Grouping everyone in a collective global blob is a sure way of ending cultures and traditions.
What? there's a difference between not wanting indivduals to effectively their own sovereign territory, and being a no-borders cuck. You're conflating many different positions.
>Voluntary order
Is unstable, transient, and volatile. All lasting order and civilization is based on the shared acceptance of "we're in this together for the long haul, we ought not to just leave when the going gets tought", and this enforced by force and rule of law.
>So much for being a civilized creature
You have a very, very, very naive and simplistic view of civilization.
How ironic that the most "civil" of ideologies, libertarianism, be one of the greatest vectors for civilized collapse, fragmentation, and degradation!
>>69026488
He's by far the best candidate but I still don't want to see him running because he'll only suck away reasonable voters that would never have voted for the Democrats.
>>69044917
Tell me, anon; what's the difference between socialism and communism?
What's the difference between a christian nation, and a theocracy?
What's the difference between a despotism, and a tyranny?
What's the difference between 90 miles, and 100?
What's the difference between minarchy, and anarchy?
"Limited government" ultimately results in some infringement on your "natural rights" (kek), or else the government would have no power at all and may as well not exist. There s pragmatic value in limiting the scope of the various strata of government, but a small government is not intrinsically good.
>>69026488
Jesus Christ GJIDF in full force right now. I'm really starting to think there are coordinated shill raids for this stuff
>>69045318
>How ironic that the most "civil" of ideologies, libertarianism, be one of the greatest vectors for civilized collapse, fragmentation, and degradation!
All of what you say is simply refuted by the European experiment of multiculturalism, done for the "common good" btw. Hint: there are no libertarian European countries.
>we're in this together for the long haul, we ought not to just leave when the going gets tought
Don't you see the voluntary nature of it?
>What? there's a difference between not wanting indivduals to effectively their own sovereign territory, and being a no-borders cuck. You're conflating many different positions.
Many different positions that are still libertarian in nature, depending on whether you're a minarchist or an anarcho-capitalist.
Food for thought:
The past was a lot more laissez-faire than the present. The present, more socialist. Tell me, was "cultural degeneracy" more rampant in the past, or is it a more present phenomenom?
Maybe, JUST maybe, an economic system that values individual responsibility and the respect of other individuals tends to create incentives to be less "degenerate", hmm?
>>69035553
>>69035673
the fact that you think an election is as simple as voting for who you want to win shows that you have the mindset of a 12 year old. realistically gary johnson has 0 chance to win. you can cry about two party opression all you want, but that's how it is. you can either consider the options and vote for the best possible (or least worst) outcome like a rational adult, or you can vote based on hurt feelings like a petulant child.
>>69046465
>Hint: there are no libertarian European countries.
You assume that leftism is a pre-requisite for authority.
>Don't you see the voluntary nature of it?
In the absolute loosest sense of the word, yes, all human interaction is "voluntary", but there's a whole lot of cultural, social, and lawful restrictions to keep people in line.
>The past was a lot more laissez-faire than the present. The present, more socialist. Tell me, was "cultural degeneracy" more rampant in the past, or is it a more present phenomenom?
It was only Laissez-faire at points in history (and thankfully ditched quickly, after the obvious problems with the absolute free market became apparent), and you assume that I am socialist. Are you so narrow-minded that you lump all non-libertarians into the "evil nazi socialist comunists" camp?
>Maybe, JUST maybe, an economic system that values individual responsibility and the respect of other individuals tends to create incentives to be less "degenerate", hmm?
It doesn't, since you're forgetting that morality was quite literally legislated during that time as well. Not everyone is economics, you damnable autist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM
/thread
/obligatory
>>69046918
>You assume that leftism is a pre-requisite for authority.
No, but it needs it, and a public authority like that in a democratic system easily becomes corrupted with left tendencies (your country being the prime example)
>but there's a whole lot of cultural, social, and lawful restrictions to keep people in line.
Cultural and social restrictions arise from the bottom, i.e. are voluntary in nature and a result of human interaction. The authoritative laws that come later are based on that culture, and this is why different countries have different laws. That's why your country has a 2nd amendment, and mine doesn't.
>and thankfully ditched quickly, after the obvious problems with the absolute free market became apparent
Yeah, like rising the standards of living in any place they were instituted?
>you assume that I am socialist
You talk about the common good, this is the quintessential socialist phrase. I've never said you were a socialist, though.
>It doesn't, since you're forgetting that morality was quite literally legislated during that time as well. Not everyone is economics, you damnable autist.
I thought you were civilized, please don't use adjectives, only arguments please. It makes you seem weak. But see my comment regarding the voluntary nature of culture and tradition.
>>69026862
You know how that liberal prick McAuliffe won the Governor seat of virginia?
7,521 people voted for the Libertarian candidate they already knew wouldn't win, putting Cuccinelli at just 0.41% away from winning the election.
Look where this fucking state is now. Your one little vote does matter when it comes to deciding whether or not the Liberals win or not.
A third party candidate will never win until the two party system is destroyed and they are given proper media coverage.
>>69047826
>No, but it needs it, and a public authority like that in a democratic system easily becomes corrupted with left tendencies (your country being the prime example)
That goes to show the problem with democratic-republicanism then, not authority in general?
>Cultural... doesn't
Sometimes, but don't pretend that society is immune from social engineering. Law is just as effective at effecting cultural change as culture is at effecting policy.
Culture and moral being resultant from "the people" does nothing to confront the fact that it is just as coercive as force.
>Yeah, like rising the standards of living in any place they were instituted?
Anon, don't be facetious. It's not as cut and dry as that, and you know it. The free market does not result in universal benefit.
>common good
National good, and this is common across many political systems, and differs in implementation.
>I thought you were civilized
I am; I'm not a libertarian.
>>69026488
Hate libertarianism (freedom hating authoritarian here), but it would be pretty interesting to see him debate. Would also vote for him if it came down to a Hillary vs. Rato.
>>69048446
So I never understood self-avowed authoritarians.
Do you just like to have someone tell you what to do, you like rules and such, they give you certainty or...?
>>69048584
Personally, I like it for the sake of order, hierarchy, and the fact that all civilization is based upon some measure of authority.
There are those above you to command you, those below for you to command; you are equal to your peers in station and the gears of civilization click away.
Mobility is good, but rigid social hierarchy provides a measure of permanence and solidity to the chaos of life.
>>69049048
Well said.
>>69048584
It's not so much I like people telling what to do. I like freedom to a certain degree - I think everybody does. I lean slightly authoritarian.
Reason being that I think authoritarianism results in a more efficient government. When you allow people to bicker over non issues like gay rights, it results in nothing getting done on real issues like economics.
Take China for example. Their government gets shit done and if you disagree with the government, people don't go apeshit and protest, they just accept it. Obviously China is a very extreme example, but I think we should emulate that to some degree.
Also what >>69049048 says.
>>69049048
you do not need a state for this and you certainly do not need taxes of other people going towards it
>>69049786
Agreed; freedom is important to society, but it's important that it's not all important, and that it's okay and even necessary to sacrifice some freedoms for the sake of pragmatism.
>>69049809
Not necessarily, but it's generally easier and more efficient to do so rather than relying on voluntary agreement.
Do you really think a mob could become a proper, professional army based on voluntary agreement, without letting disagreement lead to treason or fracture?
Do you think a large group of people could agree to being communist without a state to enforce it, without letting greed or jealousy threaten their society?
>>69048445
>That goes to show the problem with democratic-republicanism then, not authority in general?
Shows the problem of using force through democratic institutions.
>Law is just as effective at effecting cultural change as culture is at effecting policy. Culture and moral being resultant from "the people" does nothing to confront the fact that it is just as coercive as force.
Voluntary interaction being as coercive as force? You might be more libertarian than libertarians!
>Anon, don't be facetious. It's not as cut and dry as that, and you know it. The free market does not result in universal benefit.
The evidence is clear cut. The more freedom, the better the standards of living.
>National good, and this is common across many political systems, and differs in implementation.
Semantics.
>>69050624
>Shows the problem of using force through democratic institutions.
It shows the problem of democratic institutions, and letting the plebes influence policy outsider their station.
>Voluntary interaction being as coercive as force? You might be more libertarian than libertarians!
I never said coercion was bad.
>The evidence is clear cut. The more freedom, the better the standards of living.
As much as a I despise the poor in general, it doesn't necessarily lead to a higher standard of living for them.
>Semantics.
Not at all; everyone who isn't selfish wants what is best for their people and nation, this does not make them "socialist".
>>69028867
>>69028366
He meant that retards like you guys go along with policies that allow islam because you think "In a perfect libertarian society, this immigration wouldn't matter"
"if everyone owned all the property, then they themselves could prevent muslims from coming"
You guys realize we already tried libertarianism before right?
it's called Feudalism
>>69039417
>implying johnson or anyone is going to remove social security and welfare at the same time as opening the borders, rather than just opening the borders
>>69026488
>mfw a shittertarian hated roads, having secure borders and a military because they believed that a bunch of drugged up lunatics with guns was a suitable replacement and that they could just pray to the almighty "free market" to magically fix everything because they were a petulant brat who spent most of their time throwing temper tantrums and violently shitting their diapers near me
>>69028077
This is really the only issue I disagree with libertarians with. Sadly it's probably the most important one right now with Sweden and Germany getting completely cucked so I must vote for Trump
>>69050987
>As much as a I despise the poor in general, it doesn't necessarily lead to a higher standard of living for them.
The Industrial Revolution and the China experiment with capitalism are examples of what happens when you adopt (imperfect) free market policies. Chile is an example too.
I won't be able to change your mind, anon. That's clear. You never said coercion was bad, well, hopefully you'll see why its bad for me to coerce you with force to align with my POV.
>>69051209
Feudalism was an imperfect anarcho-capitalist system, but now that you mention Islam... ever heard of the Crusades?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
>>69051831
I don't understand the difference between libertarianism and feudalism
in true libertarian society, wouldn't it eventually simply become a feudal territory?
>>69051991
What was imperfect about it?
tell me how feudalism wouldn't result from libertarianism.
>>69051991
>You never said coercion was bad, well, hopefully you'll see why its bad for me to coerce you with force to align with my POV.
It's bad because you're wrong, not because you're coercing me.
>>69028070
These are the kinds of cocksucking faggots that >>69027877 talks about.
I saw Gary Johnson at a grocery store in New York the other day. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.
He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying.
The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.
When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
>>69052405
The King's land and his vassals would resemble something like the private protection agencies of the anarcho-capitalist systems of Rothbard or Friedman. However, the difference in the systems lies in the freedom that the vassals have regarding the services the King offers vs. the services those private protection agencies offer. Ideally, they could change the service provider in a whim. I think that under feudalism, vassals were closer to slaves than free men. Systems closer to anarcho-capitalism would be Medieval Iceland and the Kapauku people.
>tell me how feudalism wouldn't result from libertarianism.
I'll be honest with you, anarcho-capitalism is pretty faith-based. It is hoped that we will develop the institutions that enforce the NAP and the defense of property rights.
>>69052405
Coercion is wrong if we begin from a natural rights moral system. This moral system is pretty objective vs. the imposition of a moral system done by a leader for the "common good", which is subjective in nature since it varies within individuals.
