Welcome to the libertarianism.
I'll be your guide.
>>75632334
Welcome to Brasil,
How do you take your anal lube?
Actually, I will be your guide
>>75632334
>brown people
i already hate it
>>75632334
https://fortheargument.com/2014/02/17/no-somalia-is-not-a-libertarian-paradise/
>>75632334
Looks fun m8
>you will never scour the high seas with your nig-nog crew, raping and pillaging the ivory coast as you attack and evade maritime police
>>75632334
ok, real question:
The roads thing is bullshit and easily solved, but I would like someone who believes in absolute libertarianism to explain to me how you would:
a) Limit environmental harm (Ie. logging an entire forest because there are no regulations)
b) Stop people from abusing their kids.
c) Keep a handle on forced prostitution and human trafficking.
I definitely lean towards libertarianism and will be voting LibDems next month, but I think their has to be limits.
Also if you admit that you are fine with full fallout level degeneracy I would accept that as a legitimate argument.
>>75632922
Fuck. Ivory coast, Horn of Africa, same thing right?
I'd rape them both.
>somali-piracy-more-sophisticated-than-you-thought
Oh? Have I misjudged yet again?
>>75632922
actually sounds pretty good to be honest. we should start a /pol/tard pirate crew and see how many hours we can last running guns from yemen to mogadishu.
what do we have to live for anyway
>>75633104
>human trafficking.
What's the problem, mate?
Everyone in the libertarian society can sell your useless kid.
>>75632334
looks fun, probably lots of rape
>>75633104
>Common law does not apply in a minimal government society
>Lawsuits cannot happen
>>75633104
By absolute libertarianism I guess you mean anarcho capitalism.
>a) Limit environmental harm (Ie. logging an entire forest because there are no regulations)
In an anarcho-capitalist society there's no public property, so if you're logging an entire forest, you're logging your entire forest. The sustainability of your forest is your business and private companies tend to optimize their businesses.
>b) Stop people from abusing their kids.
Denounce people who abuse their kids to your private law firm, if they're not protected by a private law company that adheres to society standards (NAP) they'll be branded as outlaws and expose themselves to any crime, including someone stealing their kids.
c) Keep a handle on forced prostitution and human trafficking.
Prostitution, at least the damaging part of the trade is mostly due to necessity. When one is poor, bringing food to the table doesn't understand of humiliation. When one is poor, and the choices are starving or selling your cunt, the choice is usually clear.
Capitalism limits this necessity by generating wealth unrestrained, so the need for prostitution is reduced. You can't just forbid someone of selling their integrity or projecting your life standards into others when you're not offering a better solution to them. Capitalism offers this solution, given enough time to work.
>>75632334
Libertarianism =/= Ancapism
But even the Ancaps got this covered, 7 years ago in fact.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtGkTRnocZI
Nice try slut
>tfw nationalist libertarian
Ancaps and the open borders crowd make me want to fucking die.
As much as I think libertarianism is great, the libertarian party isn't mature enough to properly participate in politics.
Trump 2016
>>75632685
>implying this wasn't coordinated by neocon cucks trying to make the LP look bad because Gary Johnson is steadily gaining media attention
>libertarianism
>no government
if you're going to try and criticise something at least gather some basic knowledge about it first.
>>75634098
Gary Johnson threw Peterson's gift of an antique replica flintlock pistol in the trash. FUCK that guy.
>>75634173
I don't like him either but being a minarchist myself its the closest I can get to my beliefs
I still support McAfee even though he won't win. I'll probably end up voting trump if my parents don't disown me
>>75634261
18 btw
>>75634261
HE THREW AN ANTIQUE FLINTLOCK PISTOL IN THE FUCKING TRASH
VOTE TRUMP
source on this?
I havent seen this
>>75633612
ok makes sense with the kids and prostitution. but do you really think if we removed logging regulations then logging companies would only log a sensible amount? We have logging regulations BECAUSE if companies were left unchecked they would already have logged the whole of tasmania and moved onto somewhere else etc.
For libertarianism to help I think you need an intense sense of national pride.
How could we transition from our current state of entitlement into a country with limited regulation?
Westerners are self absorbed and have lost all sense of community.
I think the only succesful transition could be made after a period of extreme hardship.
>>75634469
Literally google it. It's confirmed by many sources.
>>75634547
Firstly, I don't know the exact situation with Tasmania but I'm going to make a few assumptions.
You have logging regulations mostly because forests are state-owned and they need to provide temporal permissions to companies, companies obviously don't care about sustainability of their model because the land is not theirs and in a few years they won't have access for it anyway.
States are awful managing these resources because one bad month in the polls and they'll force the machine to increase jobs/make a quick buck, so, when one of these ways to make a quick buck is chopping down an entire forest, they will do it, like in Brazil amazon or Soviet Russia with the agriculture draining every single lake.
I don't believe companies would be interested in depleting a forest and moving somewhere else if they could develop a long-term sustainable plan, like many examples in of private forests in Northern Europe, but they can't, because these forests are not really theirs.
>>75635067
yeah actually that makes sense. I work in conservation, and one of the big tests people are skirting around at the moment is the legalisation of the rhino horn trade in south africa, which would allow private game reserves to harvest the horns frmo the rhinos and sell them, giving them enough money to hire the best possible security to protect from poachers.
Rhino horn grows back at ~1kg a year and the current going price on the black market hovers around USD80'000/kg, so you don't need a calculator to work out the fuckin jurassic park levels of security you could afford if your reserve had 50 - 100 rhino on it.
Interesting political issue to watch, whether you care about animals or not.
Ayn Rand, Rand Paul, and Paul Ryan walk into a bar.
They all die because the alcohol was tainted and unregulated
>>75632334
Could you please show me the way to the roads?
>>75635363
I appreciate the open mind debate :)
As anecdote, I had an argument with a socialist friend because she was claiming that these reserves in Africa are all about the rich people shooting something alive.
Obviously I exposed that I don't have any particular love for this practice but I understood that the sustainability of these animals against poachers relies on the income these rich people bring to the reserves, which allows them to get security and create a sustainable model.
She almost ended up admitting she'd rather have animals disappearing or with heavy endogamic problems because alpha males hoard all the females instead of being shot for sport. My point of view may be cruel but I'd like my children to live in a world where there are rhinos and elephants. Even had to use the argument of a superior alien race either eliminating us or having us in the same sense of freedom these animals experience for her to realize what she wants is counter-productive for the animals.
>>75635873
yeah i hate the canned hunting, but the truth is its necessary to sustain the national parks.
A family of fat americans paying a total of $400 for a safari doesnt pay for shit, but one very fat american paying 25'000 for an elephant hunt can protect 10 more.
>>75633612
This looks just like socialism in the sense that it's an extremely different reimagining of society like some utopia that won't end well. Pass.
>>75636980
You want to select a law frame that dictates that you need to give X% of your money to a fund in case any of the protected people get a cancer or something? You're free.
You want to select a law frame that allows you to keep 100% of what you earn excepting the protection fees? You're free.
You want to select no law frame, just not coerce other people, and get a gun to protect yourself from intruders? You're free too.
You want to select a law frame that allows you to intrude other people's houses and coerce them to give you money? Other law frames won't like this and they'll declare you a criminal.
