/liberty/ - Libertarian General II
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: /liberty/ - Libertarian General II
This thread is for the discussion of the libertarian ideology, decentralization and current events, local or global.
(Other one maxed out)
-Recent articles or events:
>Hans Hermann Hoppe on the EU: A Sinkhole of Economic and Moral Perversion
https://lewrockwell.com/2016/07/hans-hermann-hoppe/sinkhole-economic-moral-perversion/
>The Death of Conservatism, by Paul Gottfried.
https://lewrockwell.com/2016/07/paul-gottfried/death-conservatism/
>Abolish government police, by Murray N. Rothbard.
https://lewrockwell.com/2016/07/murray-n-rothbard/abolish-government-police/
-Sources of information:
>http://www.libertarianism.org/
>https://mises.org/
>https://lewrockwell.com
-Questions:
What are the prospects for freedom in your country?
Do any parties promote the reduction of government and decentralization there?
Best founding father
All bullshit, mutualism is the only real libertarian economics and philosophy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/kevin-carson-austrian-and-marxist-theories-of-monopoly-capital
"The Triumph of Conservatism":
www.libertarianismo.org/livros/gkttoc.pdf
I really don't like Johnson. He seems like a wimp and a intellectual lightweight.
Why should I vote for him fellow libertarians?
Posting gun control ammo
Daily reminder that the figure of the church is the only logical and ethical replacement of the state.
>>80863825
Johnson is the guy who made the LP the party of the failed republicans.
2/10 Would not vote ever again.
>>80863825
>Why should I vote for him fellow libertarians?
You shouldn't.He is just a centrist.
>>80863825
Because voting for either of the main parties would just be maintaining the status quo?
And if Johnson keeps rising in the polls he''ll be included in the presidential debates
>>80864032
How was the papacy not just another form of government?
>>80863825
Toss him your vote because it moves the Libertarian party further into the spotlight.
>>80862867
Legal cannabis and mushrooms for tourism.
>>80864306
>How was the papacy not just another form of government?
It was based around favours not around coercion.The church was a massive corporation.
Is anyone checking the links, though?
pls? ;__;
>>80864598
>>80864623
>>80864681
Do you realize how little favor do you do to your views when the only response you're capable of is spamming memes?
>>80864758
That's rich coming from anyone who posts on /pol/.
Where do you think you are?
>>80864598
>A pay cut is the same as armed robbery
Retard
>>80864623
>>80864681
>>80864772
>>80864802
Just look at all these arguments
>>80864758
>can't respond to memes
lel, and he even thinks his snowflake ideology is worthwhile when he can't answer to 4chin memes
>>80864631
I read the one of Hoppe.Pretty interesting guy
Friendly reminder.
>>80864904
not an argument
Do you have anything new or are you just going to post the same ones in every thread?
>>80864907
People have already responded to your memes, but you keep posting them knowing that posting erroneous information and misrepresentations of other people's points is very easy as opposed to refuting them, which takes a good deal of writing to explain them in a honest manner.
>>80864894
>Where do you think you are?
Apparently, not a place where politics is actually discussed.
>>80864631
I'll read them later when I have some time.
>What the founding fathers actually said.
"No taxation without representation."
>What ancap hears.
"No taxation...."
>>80862867
yes, here had born 2 parties. We have 2 largest parties UDI and RN both are liberal in economics but conservatives in morals things. But now Amplitud and Evopolis are liberal in economics and morals
>calls themselves free
>still enslaves themselves with capitalism
what did libertarians mean by this?
>>80865197
Just use a filter.
>>80862867
Every form of anarchy is a meme
>>80865215
>Apparently, not a place where politics is actually discussed.
Bingo. Maybe 5 years ago you could have been in your lolbertarian hugbox. But now your lolbertarians have converted to Nazis and stormfront has taken over moderation.
If you want to talk, go to reddit you fucking faggot. This is baord for planning things and kekking memes.
>>80865252
I said it last thread and I'll say it again:
The founding fathers were comprised of over 40 different people with mutually exclusive views. No one can used them as a justification for their ideology.
Jefferson is the closest to libertarian you can get with them.
>>80864681
>>80864802
not an ancap but if you think ms paint memes are legitimate arguments you're a simpleton
At least we know that NEETsocs are triggered as fuck by this threads.
>>80865485
>this is a good thing.
Edgy kid confirmed.
>>80865393
>surprised a self identified nationalist is a fat autistic loser with no friends
>>80863107
>How much capital is actually privately owned today? Most capital is now owned collectively by corporations and managed by hired employees in the interests of their share-holders.
The majority of cars, houses and computers are privately owned by individuals. A lot of capital is in the hands of the state, and it isn't collectivized by any means. The capital that is in the hands of coroporations also isn't collectivized, you usually have a few high-ranking executives who can do with it whatever they want.
Your argument only works when we assume that corporations as a whole can hold property. To say that Google owns server farms is convenient, it beats looking up who its CEO is, but it should not hide the fact that the property of Google is not the property of all the employees of Google.
>>80863225
I'm not reading an entire Wikipedia-article on the off-chance that it could be important. You didn't even bother to summarize it. As a general rule, I don't read shit posten in a nepalese wallpainting hobbyist community when I don't even know what to look out for.
>>80865668
Basically.
>>80865491
>Jefferson is the closest to libertarian you can get with them.
But the funny thing is if you actually read Jefferson you'll find out he was a reactionary who hated commerce and banking and wanted America to remain an agrarian economy based around private ownership of farms where families controlled their own surplus production. He obviously didn't want the American population to become proletarianized corporate workers.
>>80865575
Not an-cap but what you said is similar to an ad hominem. An argument is an argument no matter the medium.
>>80865485
>your lolbertarian hugbox
>stormfront has taken over moderation
So you talk negatively of our hugbox from five years ago, then you proudly proclaim that you now have a hugbox?
>If you want to talk, go to reddit you fucking faggot.
>This is baord for planning things and kekking memes.
You don't like reddit, but you claim this board is reddit?
>>80863825
Fuck no. Especially when he has a neo-con, pro-Patriot Act, pro-Iraq War, gun control savy, globalist governor as a VP.
I mean hell, Romney said he'd rather Weld as the main ticket, that's a massive red flag right there.
>>80865951
I choose my words carefully. I said
> closest to libertarian you can get
Also note that Jefferson was not willing to use the power of the state to bring about his vision.
>>80866128
Fuck off shill. Not an argument.
>>80866113
>Implying the press and literature faggots don't have an inherent left wing bias and look out for their own.
I hate Gary Johnson almost as much as Bernie and Hillary, and his supporters are just as annoying as bernouts because they act like superior hot shits despite supporting the "Best candidate," a candidate that 90% of Americans have no idea who he is
>>80866401
stfu Stormfront Shill. Take your memes to your shithole. This board is getting a cleanup.
Also Molymeme is a goddamn ancap you dimwit.
>>80865706
A CEO doesn't own the corporation, the corporation and its capital is owned by its share-holders collectively and is managed by hired employees to maximize their rate of return. Most capital is collectively owned and managed in this fashion, state run corporations are just state monopoly capital.
"Cars, houses and computers" are not capital in the sense I mean it, capital at its core is a social relation not a thing i.e. wage-labour. Financial assets and such just hides this underlying fact at a high level of abstraction. Also capitalist development eventually reaches a point where "growth" will actually destroy more old monetary value than create new monetary value and result in a general decrease in net profitability... so to maintain the yield-value of their assets capitalists and vested interests must resort to political measures to curtail further investment and productivity increases. Home owners for example don't want devaluation of their real-estate so they resort to lobbying government to impose regulations to maintain its value.
Its funny that conservatives are so paranoid about inflation but see the necessity of financial assets and real-estate indefinitely inflating in value.
>>80865442
Every form of governmental anarchy is a meme, sometimes a period of anarchy must happen to cleanse a society or build new ones, a happening is one such period of anarchy
>>80863825
nah he's a fuckwit just right in mickey mouse or take the bullet and vote for authoritarian Trump (like me.)
>>80866046
>>80866113
>Literary critics I never heard of don't like Rand, but they like Orwell, therefore left-libertarianism is better!
That's fallacious as fuck.
One more thing, the quote from Whittaker Chambers is slander in its purest form. I'm not a fan of Rand, but not a single word of hers can be used to support genocide. Not that I'm surprised that this would come from Chambers. The guy was an all-around asshole, even after he left the commies. Which was after ten years, mind you. This man is no moral authority.
>>80865197
>>80864023
Can anyone tell me that the info-graph is bs? I do not want to live in a world where it is so simple yet people refuse to listen
>>80862867
Why do ancap think that their retarded system won't fail do to the same reason as ancom. As in human nature.
>>80867721
>Why do ancap think that their retarded system won't fail do to the same reason as ancom
Ancap is sustituting goverments woth corporations,what is called the church model.
>>80867891
So you are just renaming the dam things?
What is there to prevent insurrection, decay or simple refusal of the retarded system?
>live in libertarian paradise
>protect my private property with web of land mines as is my right
>neighbors' 10-year-old son wanders into my lawn to get his baseball and gets blown up
>parents come to me to complain
>tell them he deserved it for not respecting my property rights and would've probably grown up to be a statist anyway
>dad punches me
>sue him for violating the NAP
I sure do love freedom
>>80867620
It really is that simple anon. More guns, less crime.
>>80867721
The only thing in human nature that goes against lolbertarianism is envy. And envy is despicable and only to be fought against.
>>80867984
>So you are just renaming the dam things?
No.Private ownership vs public property is a pretty big difference.
>What is there to prevent insurrection, decay or simple refusal of the retarded system?
Physical removal
Guys, I'm leaving for today. I'd be grateful if any of you had the initiative of opening another thread like this from time to time, that's what I'll be doing myself whenever I'm over here and nobody has opened one.
Remember to add links useful links you find and whatever else when writing the OP, if possible related to current events. Do not let all your arguments be memes just like the pathetic tripfag spamming the thread. My sources are often The Mises Institute, Lew Rockwell articles, The Cato Institute and others as such. Any other ones will be welcome, of course.
See ya guys, I'm busy today.
>>80867721
Because ancap does actually give answers on "what will happen if X does Y to another person?" and how will that prevented, judged and etc, whereas all ancom ever did was literally evade the question and say things as "it wouldn't happen because people would become good once we educate them because human nature doesn't exist".
Ancap isn't the law of the jungle.
>>80867992
Nice meme.
>>80867620
Interests. Government is literally a mafia and obviously won't let you protect yourself.
As a matter of fact more often than not "terrorists", "mafias", and other organizations as such either work directly for the government or make them a favor allowing them to grab more power in the name of "the common good".
>>80866552
>everyone who disagrees with me is biased
>everyone who agrees with me arrived at their conclusions through Pure Reason
>>80868139
>lolbertarianism is envy
You forgot honor, moral decency, the wish to protect ones tribe, seeking justice.
Do people not realize that ancap will not only stop attacking organized crime, they will fully permit it. They will disband the law system and replace it with an easily bribe-able system/
And there will be nothing to maintain decency or to protect a nation. As police and military will be gone.
>>80867984
>What is there to prevent insurrection
Muh guns shall not be infringed.
>decay
Degenerate don't thrive without gibsmedat. Anyway you can discriminate against them.
>refusal
When there is little "system" to begin with, what are you refusing? Property? Then you get physically removed.
>>80868399
>You forgot honor, moral decency, the wish to protect ones tribe, seeking justice.
None of these are even remotely prevented from happening in libertarianism.
>>80864894
>spelling "shield" wrong
>>80866882
>A CEO doesn't own the corporation the corporation and its capital is owned by its share-holders collectively and is managed by hired employees to maximize their rate of return. Most capital is collectively owned and managed in this fashion
I never said the CEO owns the corporation, you dumb shit. I said he owns its assets. Granted, that may or may not be true, but in many cases, it totally fucking is true, no matter what the share-holders think about it or how the law defines ownership this week.
>state run corporations are just state monopoly capital.
I never mentioned state run corporations. Not sure why you thought this was relevant.
>"Cars, houses and computers" are not capital in the sense I mean it
Which brings me to how you lefties keep redefining words. How the fuck would I know what you mean, if ten leftists would give me twenty answers on what capital is?
>capital at its core is a social relation not a thing i.e. wage-labour.
Meaning that wage-labour is capital, that it's a thing or that it's a social relation?
>>80868175
>No.Private ownership vs public property is a pretty big difference.
Like the fact that Public Propriety is required for a functioning nation. Without it nations will not exist as the army, police and diplomatic system will cease to exist
>Physical removal
So basically using force... Like a governament
>>80867448
>I shot the mailbox again, on purpose
top kek
>Anarchist capitalism
>real
>>80868596
>Like the fact that Public Propriety is required for a functioning nation. Without it nations will not exist as the army, police and diplomatic system will cease to exist
Not really.
>So basically using force... Like a governament
Force is used by everyone,and is needed to maintain a system
>>80868596
>So basically using force... Like a governament
If you really want it this way, then yes. I guess you can say that libertarianism is about each person having his government.
>>80868510
>No police to protect people from crime
>No army to protect people from foreign invasion
Basically you want feudalism back.
>>80868408
>Muh guns shall not be infringed.
Numbers, tactics... the fact that troops fighting for a cause are more loyal then mercs
>Degenerate don't thrive without gibsmedat. Anyway you can discriminate against them.
What are nobles and rich fuckers
>When there is little "system" to begin with, what are you refusing? Property? Then you get physically removed
The destruction of the necessary systems for the survival of a nation.
>>80868596
>physical removal
By a weak rentacop contract company. What would stop me from stockpiling weapons and overthrowing the local government in an ancap system?
>>80868587
>>80866882
>>80868587
Continued:
>Financial assets and such just hides this underlying fact at a high level of abstraction.
It hides what fact? Saying that something is a social relation does not mean you don't have to define it, and it confers preciously little insight into anything at all. You could call murder a social relation between murderer and victim and it would help neither your case nor the poor idiots trying to make sense of your bullshit.
>Also capitalist development eventually reaches a point where "growth" will actually destroy more old monetary value than create new monetary value and result in a general decrease in net profitability...
Aha. Why?
>so to maintain the yield-value of their assets capitalists and vested interests must resort to political measures to curtail further investment and productivity increases.
>Home owners for example don't want devaluation of their real-estate so they resort to lobbying government to impose regulations to maintain its value.
Of course people turn to the government when they have a government that routineously takes measures like that. How that's a feature of capitalism is beyond me.
>Its funny that conservatives are so paranoid about inflation but see the necessity of financial assets and real-estate indefinitely inflating in value.
I don't, but then again, I'm not a conservative.
>>80868767
>Not really.
Yes really you potato. Without police you won't have a common law that all people follow, you won't have law basically.
Without a army and just using militias and mercs you are less competent than a standing army not to add that militias have poor discipline and mercs are easily bought off.
>Force is used by everyone,and is needed to maintain a system
And what differs your system from a government?
>>80868408
>property
Property doesn't exist senpai. It's inherently theft of our common birthright to the earth.
>>80862867
Daily reminder @summerfags that libertarian threads are paid shilling to skim some trump votes.
The current society is the natural successor of previous "libertarian" societies. Don't fall for the (((individualism))) meme, designed to destroy the coherence of white societies!
>>80869055
Nothing really.
It basically chooses to ignore the effect patriotism or religion has on a group of people. Heck even extended families might be able to muster a capable enough force to take over.
>>80868977
>Basically you want feudalism back.
If you wan to call anything that is not a central state feudalism I won't argue semantics too long. Words have meaning, and people having their property by contract and by civil law without state mandate does not make feudalism.
Private securities have proven to be more effective than bureaucratic police in many American towns (to only give contemporary examples).
>>80862867
Rothbard himself saw the error of his ways and became a closed borders, race realist, Holocaust skeptic. What's your excuse libertarians?
>>80869179
>Yes really you potato. Without police you won't have a common law that all people follow, you won't have law basically.
Police doesn't have to be financed publicly.It can be delivered privately or by none gubermental authorities.
>Without a army and just using militias and mercs you are less competent than a standing army not to add that militias have poor discipline and mercs are easily bought off.
It really depends.Militias are usually enough for defense and again there can be armies without a goverment.For example the brotherhoods in medieval europe.
>And what differs your system from a government?
Little room for centralization,easier segregation and that goverment functions would be fulfill by companies and corporations,not public entities
>>80869224
>common birthright to the earth.
>>80869601
Link or gtfo
> b-b-b-but he endorsed david duke
For political reasons only.
>>80869699
>inherent right to private property
*laughing out loud.gif*
>>80869224
>common birthright to the earth
Enjoy poverty and the constrain of all minute detail of your life.
But you probably don't care, because you will be sublimated in the collective awesomeness, won't you?
>>80869601
>What's your excuse libertarians?
>He hasn't read Hoppe
>>80869055
>What would stop me from stockpiling weapons and overthrowing the local government in an ancap system?
That there probably is no local government, for one. For another, military conquest is a bit harder than "take gunn nd shoot peoepl", especially if a sizable portion of the population is armed, which is what most ancaps advocate. And before you bring it up: No, buying yourself an attack helicopter would not suffice. Even if that wouldn't make the demand for affordable SAM's skyrocket, you'd still have to land the thing at some point, and then all it takes is one guy throwing a pipe bomb in your backyard to end your crusade of unfathomable badassery.
>>80869224
Rights exist because someone uses force to enforce them. Inherit rights only make sense if you have a deity to create them.
>>80869630
>Police doesn't have to be financed publicly.It can be delivered privately or by none gubermental authorities.
Police without a central judicial system is worthless. Without common law it doesn't matter.
>Little room for centralization,easier segregation and that goverment functions would be fulfill by companies and corporations,not public entities
What stops someone from forming a mega corp?
>>80869802
The only birthright that people have is what others choose to.Private property was just a natural evolution of production,as a result of distribution of labour
who else rw anarchist master race here?
>>80869559
>Private securities have proven to be more effective than bureaucratic police in many American towns (to only give contemporary examples).
yup, heres one from detroit, which statists fumble over themselves to avoid defending
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuNt5tER2Tg
>>80868587
CEO's are just employees hired by corporations. Corporations are immortal collective institutions that generate profit by mixing the fixed-capital it owns with employed waged-labour. The corporate form of enterprise was already the predominate form of business by the turn of the 20th century.
A tractor isn't capital it's just a tractor in itself... if I employee someone to use the tractor then it becomes capital. If wage-labour didn't exist capital in any meaningful sense wouldn't exist and capital accumulation [private or public] wouldn't occur.
The nature of capitalism is to progressively collectivizes ownership in this form and transforms populations into employees and share-holders of itself.
>>80863489
>Kevin Carson
Oh, that fatass bitch who complains about "splainy men" on twitter? Yeah? Ahaha!
>>80869252
> implying libertarians don't like western society
> implying we don't know that whites created the culture that created capitalism
>>80869952
>Police without a central judicial system is worthless. Without common law it doesn't matter.
In some places of South Africa private forces are the only thing keeping people fullfilling the law
>>80869888
In our natural state, pre-civilization, humans were free to roam the earth. Capitalism artificially limits where I can roam. If I wander too far to the left or right I could be shot by a gun-weilding maniac defending his "property". How is that freedom, ancap faggots? It is unnatural and wrong.
>>80869252
libertarians are like 90 europeans m8
>>80869979
You have the right to what you produce. You do not produce land.
>>80870139
90%*
>>80870145
welcome to reactionary primitivist anarchism
>>80869747
It's known. I don't know why a libertarian wouldn't be "race realist" or for "close borders" though.
Rothbard was an ardent proponent of voluntary partition of segregation and unsegregated areas even in his youth.
Before dying he gave one of the most anti-cuck speech going both full libertarian and full nationalist for a memetic concentrated red pill.
>https://mises.org/library/nations-consent-decomposing-nation-state-0
>>80865442
why wouldn't spain have good portugal memes?
>>80865024
Of course they don't - this is a big game of make believe being played by deranged naked apes on a mudball spinning through space.
Consciousness is the mother spook, the horror from which all reality springs. The question is, how do you want to die? Or do you want the choice at all?
>>80870098
Bullshit.
Property existed long before civilization.
Try walking through the mud huts of uncivilized brutes in Africa and explain to them why you should be allowed to pass. They remove or kill you for trespassing. If that's not property I don't know what is.
>>80870145
>You have the right to what you produce. You do not produce land.
Rigths dont exist.Period.The only thing that exists is consensus passed down through traditionThe development of private property was just a result of the distribution of labour,and the most efficient way for that matter
>>80870440
It's a matter of degree. I gaurantee you the kill zone didn't extend to 95% of all land. A domicile exemption from common ownership would be perfectly reasonable.
>>80870513
>rights don't exist
Of course they don't. That's why any ancap society would fail. The disenfranchised would rise up and remove the imaginary "rightful property" of their feudal overlords.
Theresa May's inauguration as UK PM today.
That dress.
>>80870513
To elaborate on this:
Rights are a distilling of already accepted mores in a culture to help codify moral and legal standards.
They allow for a "first principals" approach to law as to help people guess as to what's allowed and what isn't in a society without requiring them to know the law exactly.
>>80867620
Well, after the Dallas shooting, there's now two exceptions to the mass shooting taking place in a gun free zone.
>>80862867
thanks for the links, Spainbro. I always enjoy reading about Hoppe, since I've finished "Democracy, the God that failed" a few weeks ago.
>What are the prospects for freedom in your country?
Utter shit. You can get jailed for uttering the wrong opinion.
And Germans are natural sheep. That will not change in the near future imo.
>Do any parties promote the reduction of government and decentralization there?
We have 1,5 parties that, I would say, fall into this category. But they are both not very consequent in doing it.
>>80869824
Argumentation Ethics is turboautism that's perhaps even worse than the NAP. Hoppe is a nationalist who's looking for rationalizations to justify his larping as an ancap too.
>>80863825
Don't. This country needs Trump now. Libertarian values can come later.
>>80867603
honestly 5. stage is just a clarification of the 4th
>>80870595
> It's a matter of degree.
> Better backpedal my absolutest statement after I was proven wrong
> A domicile exemption from common ownership would be perfectly reasonable.
And now you've proven that your approach is based on utilitarian values rather deontological values, and that you're willing to compromise your "right" to the Earth.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you have a right to the Earth and I'm infringing on that with my private property, or I'm not.
>>80869114
Capital by its own development must destroy the value of old assets by innovating and increasing productivity and output... but allowing a rapid general devaluation of old capital to occur will destroy everyone's life savings which is stored in the form of stocks. Remember the '08 wall street?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmi8cJG0BJo
You cannot separate capitalism from capitalist interests or history. Powerful wealthy vested interests want to maintain their power so they will work together to achieve their collective aims. All you got to do is look at history. How did we get here?
Ancaps want to abolish all forms of politics and political structures but that's just pure Utopianism because those with power will use their power to gain more power.
>>80866908
You can get a Nobel Prize for being brown like Obama and being shot like Malala
>>80871000
there's no nap in most hardcore anarchism
>>80871307
Nobel prize in economics britbong, not the peace prize.
It's not even a real nobel prize: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences
>>80871211
your domicile isn't your property. It's just in the public interest to not have people stepping over each other.
You know very well what I meant. You're just deflecting with logical wankery. Of course my values are utilitarian, why else would they exist?
>>80862867
Neither of those ideologies will ever make it into space.
>>80870369
>I don't know why a libertarian wouldn't be "race realist" or for "close borders" though.
The vast majority of them aren't and would be absolutely appalled by these ideas. They would turn into full SJWs the moment you brought it up. Your movement is not yours anymore; it's owned by people like Reason, Cato, and C4SS. Why do you persist in this ideology when all the important people including the founder have moved on to nationalism?
>be libertarian
>get on r/4chan
>see post dissing libertarians
>see that it is describing anarcho-capitalism
everytime
>>80866113
We can save the LeftLib vs RIghtLib argument after the Stormshills leave.
>>80866908
>Orwell
>only respected by edgy teenagers
>while he wrote a book that is the most solid argument against the state acquiring too much power.
>while 1984 gets praised by respected academics on both sides of the political spectrum to this day
That doesn't sound biased and illogical at all, AnCap.
>>80871498
libertarianism is not edgy enough
>>80870440
"Property" couldn't exist before civilization... "individuals" didn't even exist... only tribes and families. Tribal territory isn't property but based upon complex kinship rules.
Read pretty much anything on anthropology. Property is a legal concept... the product of positive law that developed down the road.
>>80871419
There are two different types of anarchism: the original one, which is a Marxist heresy against communism; and the libertarian one that Rothbard invented, which most certainly is based on the NAP and is what we're talking about here. Ancoms are right when they point out that Ancap isn't "anarchism." The two groups are ideologically unrelated regardless of how much Rothbard wanted to unite them.
>>80871653
it didn't exist in a form as we know it today
it was communal property, private property is a made up modernist idiocy
>>80871465
> You know very well what I meant. You're just deflecting with logical wankery.
The vast, vast majority of your ilk are deontological. And I'm not the one switching tactics by using "rights" and then talking about "the public interest".
Do rights matter or not? Is the "Right to the Earth" a "right" or is it a utilitarian principal?
> Of course my values are utilitarian, why else would they exist?
There are other value systems than utilitarian fellow burgerbro.
>>80871735
well, I'm in a different form of anarchism then those 2
>>80871498
I really love that ass. It's like it's a gift.
>>80865041
Your strawman fails to regard the importance of labour unions
>>80871882
What kind would that be? I suppose you could split off mutualism as a third category but my point still stands that Ancap is fundementally different from Ancom and the former, aside from to a few thinkers like David Friedman, a deontological model based on the NAP.
>>80872371
to clarify it is anarchomonarchism, which is derived from national anarchism (ironically, as I see it, it is hard antinationalist)
known followers were tolkien and dali
as I see it has a good spirit, but excuse me if I'm sceptical towards anything other than natural and divine law
>>80869179
>Without a army and just using militias and mercs you are less competent than a standing army
The population would be well armed, on par with the Swiss, that I'm pretty sure of. Other factors, like equipment, no idea, but that could very well be top of the art, too. Keep in mind that we're talking about a defensive war here, one where you have no central leader on the defending side. Waging a war like that requires a military that is vastly superior, not just slightly better.
>not to add that militias have poor discipline
Not necessarily. The Serbs put up one hell of a fight against the Germans, and I don't have to remind you of the War of Independence.
>and mercs are easily bought off.
Again, depends. Some mercs might be patriots. Sounds idealistic, but from what I read of the CEO of Blackwater, it's not that far off. The guy has been called a fanatic in the past. Getting him to attack American soil probably wouldn't be easy, if at all possible. Even mercs that are more opportunistic probably would not want to shit up the town they live in, at the very least. We're talking about men who may have children that go to the local school, or who may have a favorite bar they visit every weekend. If you promised each a million dollars to fight on your side, which is half the prize of a battle tank, many would still decline because that would mean throwing away their old life, and people don't want that.
>>80872476
second part is about nap
>>80869952
>What stops someone from forming a mega corp?
Economics. Namely, diseconomies of scale and competition. Creating a monopoly in one business is hard enough. Having it span so many businesses that you have state-like power, good luck.
>>80872476
>anarchomonarchism
Wouldn't that just be feudalism? Sounds like medieval Ireland.
>>80871735
There are two different types of anarchism: the original one, which is a Marxist heresy against communism; and the libertarian one that Rothbard invented, which most certainly is based on the NAP and is what we're talking about here.
This is what the dirty ancoms want you to believe. Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner were relatively close to Rothbard, and Mikhail Bakunin can suck a dick, that guy didn't fucking invent anarchy, no matter how much the closet-marxists pretend otherwise.
>>80873210
it is just like early fedualism
>>80862867
FLORDIA FAGS
DON"T FORGET
VOTE AUGUSTUS SOL INVICTUS FOR SENATE
http://invictusforsenate.com/
Guys, I just found a very worrying article in LRC, if I was an American and lived in the cities mentioned I would be very interested in reading it for my own safety.
There's a list of CITIES YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE IN IN JULY 15TH.
https://lewrockwell.com/2016/07/daisy-luther/day-rage-scheduled-july-15th/
>>80873518
Forgot to mention: POTENTIAL HAPPENING.
>>80862867
>libertarianism
>2016
COME ON PEOPLE
>>80873518
Glad to see some Spaniard are interested in Libertarianism. Spain really could use a dose of it, no?
You haven't answered your own questions of your OP. Are the Cuididanos or whatever they are called a libertarian party?
>>80873820
>>80873872
why do you do this? your strawmen and memes won't "turn" anybody into Nationalists
>>80874200
>Are the Cuididanos or whatever they are called a libertarian party?
Ciudadanos=liberal democrats in the UK
>>80874308
Becasue i like to mock lolbertarians
>>80874066
is that supposed to be an argument?
I think children shouldn't be able to exercise their full rights until they have reached a certain age (as we handle it right now, in fact).
>>80870011
>CEO's are just employees hired by corporations.
Did you listen to anything I said, wanker? I don't care about their legal standing! The CEO can do with the assets of the corporation as he pleases. He'll be fucked if he just sets them on fire, but that doesn't mean he's not their owner.
>Corporations are immortal collective institutions
Irrelevant. What the corporation "owns" is really just owned by the CEO. Corporations cannot act, except maybe in a weird legal sense which, again, is fucking irrelevant here, because the positive law could declare the CEO to be a cucumber and it would mean nothing.
>immortal
Saying that corporations are immortal is like saying that a stone is immortal: It's nonsensical, as stones can be neither alive or dead, and neither can corporations.
>that generate profit by mixing the fixed-capital it owns with employed waged-labour.
I don't have the slightest clue how that's supposed to be relevant. Really, I don't.
>The corporate form of enterprise was already the predominate form of business by the turn of the 20th century.
And even back then, it wasn't collective ownership.
>A tractor isn't capital it's just a tractor in itself... if I employee someone to use the tractor then it becomes capital. If wage-labour didn't exist capital in any meaningful sense wouldn't exist and capital accumulation [private or public] wouldn't occur.
That doesn't make capital a social relation. Also, the definition is crap. Why bring in wage-labour? What if I use my precious means of production myself?
>The nature of capitalism is to progressively collectivizes ownership in this form and transforms populations into employees and share-holders of itself.
Not even your basic observations on corporations and "their" property are correct, and your argument depends on these observations.
>>80870925
>Utter shit. You can get jailed for uttering the wrong opinion.
>And Germans are natural sheep. That will not change in the near future imo.
This, sadly
>>80863472
That's not Alexander Hamilton.
>>80873820
The same is true of literally all economics...
>>80873246
No they're absolutely right that the intellectual foundations of Ancap and Ancom are fundamentally irreconcilable. Who gets to use the word "anarchist" is just semantics because people can't agree on definitions, so that argument will go forever nowhere.
>>80873872
Hilarious but fails to mention that every single one was a Jew who promoted cosmopolitan utopias based on absurd and autistically applied logical principles and the dissolution of all national and ethnic identity.
>>80874480
>is that supposed to be an argument?
It's not, just making fun of you guys.
Seriously though, how would libertarianism deal with the impending mass-unemployment thanks to advancements in drones, autonomous driving and AI?
inb4 the truck-drivers will become an AI-specialists.
>>80873246
Dammit, forgot to greentext.
Also, reCAPTCHA just asked me to identify sandwiches, and there were only hamburgers. What the fuck.
>>80874838
Don't worry brah, they'll all get advanced degrees brah.
Anarchist reporting in. End coercive government altogether. Let the people maintain their own roads n shit. This will kill the leeches
>>80874200
No, they are the same social democrat mess all the other parties are, although more rational ones. If I wanted a rational and maybe working social democracy I would vote them because their program is the most likely to make it work: C's proposes a rationalization of public spending and a reduction of the number of public employees, which of course in our country means you are Satan and want the poor people to starve. They are the only ones which both propose the social democratic model and are brave enough to point its flaws, which is exactly what will make them never win.
>Glad to see some Spaniard are interested in Libertarianism. Spain really could use a dose of it, no?
Probably more than half of our population depends on handouts of the state for their direct survival. Libertarianism is no longer possible in Spain, we have far crossed the point of no return.
The only thing left to happen here is the collapse, and nobody seems to realize how bad the things really are.
>>80874640
Maybe it's truth, that is why i don't care for economics.
>was a Jew
You had to screw up everything with this 3 words
>>80875059
Pic related is how our debt-to-GDP advanced during our much despised by the left draconian "austerity".
All our gov. ever did those four years is brab about their humble results in employment and growth while totally ignoring our rampant deficit.
>>80874970
Or the leeches will kill you.
>>80874838
The market will fix it
Autism: The Thread
>>80874548
Mainstream economists focus on market exchange of goods as if production doesn't occur... they don't have a good theory of institutions and can't explain why corporations should exist with all their over-head expenses... if markets are so good at allocating goods why does production become centralized and planed under a military command-control style? The economy is dominated by corporations not market exchange between individuals.
Wage-labour is the central feature of capitalism. You cannot understand capitalism without wage-labour. Higher profits lower wages, higher wages lower profits.
>What if I use my precious means of production myself?
You would just be preforming direct labour and controlling yourself... you would be in full control with no master over you
>>80875304
>NAtsoc
>Calling anyone an autist
>>80875503
Both are autists
>>80874838
>Seriously though, how would libertarianism deal with the impending mass-unemployment thanks to advancements in drones, autonomous driving and AI?
Well, that's a question that every economic/state-system is due to answer, no?
I personally think it will pan out by itself. We had no mass unemployment when the weaving loom was invented and when the machinisation of agricultural production took place (agrarian sector employed smt like half of the population).
People will find new things they are interested in and they want to pay for, which creates new markets.
There are youtube channels now where people watch other people eating ffs. EATING. Noone had thought of such a bullshit before, but if it pays his rent, why should anyone care?
>inb4 the truck-drivers will become an AI-specialists.
>it's bad that we need less people to uphold our standard of living
>>80871265
>Capital by its own development must destroy the value of old assets by innovating and increasing productivity and output...
It decreases their monetary value (usually), but not their utility. My computer is probably worth two hundred dollars by now, and it's still functioning perfectly. Innovation and increased productivity only means that I can get a new computer that offers more utility, and it's the same with all other assets. Net utility rises.
>but allowing a rapid general devaluation of old capital to occur will destroy everyone's life savings which is stored in the form of stocks.
I don't have stocks. Most people I know don't have stocks, either.
>Remember the '08 wall street?
The one caused by the artificial housing bubble, due to the interference of the state?
>You cannot separate capitalism from capitalist interests or history. Powerful wealthy vested interests want to maintain their power so they will work together to achieve their collective aims.
And if they don't have collective aims? For example, because they wanted to steal customers from each other?
>All you got to do is look at history. How did we get here?
I'm not writing your argument for you.
>Ancaps want to abolish all forms of politics and political structures but that's just pure Utopianism because those with power will use their power to gain more power.
Which only means that the system can't last forever, but the same is true of every system.
>>80875503
> Between 1959 and 1974, Spain had the next fastest economic growth rate after Japan
>To help achieve rapid development, there was massive government investment through key state owned companies like the national industrial conglomerate Instituto Nacional de Industria, the mass market car company SEAT in Barcelona, the shipbuilder Empresa Nacional Bazán. With foreign access to the Spanish domestic market restricted by heavy tariffs and quotas, these national companies led the industrialisation of the country, restoring the prosperity of old industrial areas like Barcelona and Bilbao and creating new industrial areas, most notably around Madrid.
Are you implying that Spain shouldn't return to Natsoc? And that Franco wasn't a great economic leader?
>>80875289
Impossible. Cities will crumble and leeches will be choked.
>>80875503
Anarchocapitalism is legitimately more autistic than anything Nazis or Neo-nazis have ever come up with. There are even many studies on the autism of libertarians. I can only imagine what the results of these studies would be if they tested r/anarchocapitalism or the Mises forums while they were still around.
>>80875860
It wan't natsoc m8.In fact the most natsoc period was horribly bad (1939-1959).The last period of Franco was a period of opening the market and liberalizing it
>>80863489
Voluntarism.
>>80876015
>massive government investment through key state owned companies.
Sure wasn't ancap or even lolbertarianism
>>80875726
>Well, that's a question that every economic/state-system is due to answer, no?
Capitalism has a simple, maybe effective answer. UBI.
>I personally think it will pan out by itself.
Wishfull thinking
>We had no mass unemployment when the weaving loom was invented and when the machinisation of agricultural production took place
>It's totally the same guise
>People will find new things they are interested in and they want to pay for, which creates new markets.
Like? And what will happen when the service industry gets automated?
>There are youtube channels now where people watch other people eating ffs.
Entertainement works in a low amount of people producing content to a wide audience. You can employ millions in entertainment.
>but if it pays his rent,
To very few people
>>80867620
Yeah, it is definitely overstated. Far as I know, the data shows that gun ownership is either a wash or modestly positive in hwhite countries (i.e. correlation lower than .25 between rates of gun ownership and homicide). Such as the third world is, however, they will remain shitty. Culture and race matter more than gun ownership in determining rates of criminal violence.
>>80868208
lol that's Judaism internalized m8
Remember "set police dogs on dirty niggers" Rothbard.
>>80876192
Wishful thinking is believing the government will afford you more good than harm.
>>80875994
>Anarchocapitalism is legitimately more autistic than anything Nazis or Neo-nazis have ever come up with
M8 the neo paganism thing is as autistic as it gets,and Himmler trying to find the spear that pierced Jesus just shows how autistic nazis were.>>80876133
>Sure wasn't ancap or even lolbertarianism
It wasn't.But the period of prosperity came with the technocrats,that liberalized the economy
>>80876192
>new technology simplyfing production
no, totally not the same
>>80875893
Or they will choke you.
>>80876084
Everyone leave thread
Autismus maximus arrived
>>80875503
Thank you for the pic, friendo.
Here, have this.
>>80876380
You're a brilliant soul poverty-boy. Stunning.
>>80876352
No, because the industrial revolution simply moved the labour necessity from the country labourers to industrial centres. It shifted populations. It also oppened the service industry, something that employes like half of 1st world nations.
Automation today will simly replace the workforce. People will not be able to compete with robots.
>>80876317
saved ;)
>>80876554
>a slovakian calling me poor
>>80876833
>German and Scandinavian ancestry
>Slovak
>Portuguese
>not a spic
Pick one of each, poverty-chan~
>>80876684
>it will be like this, i can see into the future
>>80876380
Highly unlikely. Do you fear the absence of government? In that case you yourself are a leech on the people.
>>80877270
>do you fear the absence of government
If that day ever came I would literally rape and pillage my way to wealth.
>>80877440
Have fun dying and early and violent death~
>>80862867
This argument is ridiculous. Right-libertarians have the advantage in one slight area: the fact that you can choose to live in a commune or a competitive system. Both options are accepted in a right-libertarian system. Only one is accepted in the left-libertarian system since it absolutely cannot stand the idea of private property and thus makes impossible any security to the individual.
>>80877641
are you saying I should be oppressed by a government?
>>80877082
So what do you think automation will be?
>>80877270
>Highly unlikely
Source? What makes you think that?
> Do you fear the absence of government?
I do. I have elderly family. I have a autistic cousin. My brother has poor health.
>>80877641
>Have fun dying and early and violent death~
ideology
>>80876317
Read the entire paragraph on the upper right corner. It points out the very methodological errors in the study that "proved" libertarians would easily betray their moral principles. Ask questions about respecting the property of others and the results will be a whole lot different.
The other claims and comments are also pretty fucking damn fishy. One is George Monbiot calling libertarians antisocial bastards, which is hardly prove that we actually are antisocial bastards, two others are tongue-in-cheek comments about how libertarians being heartless does not refute their ideas. If my response to being called a sociopath is to laugh it off, apparently that means I'm a sociopath.
>>80877440
The people's militias will take a lot less bullshit than the police/military of today. You will have an easier time getting there in todays world
>>80878068
>The people's militias will take a lot less bullshit than the police/military of today.
What if my raping gang is bigger then your militia?
>>80874654
>No they're absolutely right that the intellectual foundations of Ancap and Ancom are fundamentally irreconcilable.
Yes, totally agreed, but there's also individualist anarchism, which shares the same spirit as anarchocapitalism and has a longer tradition than anarchocommunism.
>Who gets to use the word "anarchist" is just semantics because people can't agree on definitions, so that argument will go forever nowhere.
Also agreed. Not sure why some people get such a boner from this discussion.
>>80877942
It's not the government you'd need to worry about busting into homes in Texas or the south~
>>80878068
If I was a wealthy industrialist, couldn't I hypothetically hire an entire rape gang to overpower your militia and satisfy my sick depraved fantasies?
>>80876192
>Capitalism has a simple, maybe effective answer. UBI.
UBI is capitalistic? It has more to do with libertarianism than with capitalism imo.
>>It's totally the same guise
It's very, very similar. We are using machines to automate a huge (unpleasant) part of the work that has to be done today which uses up enormous amounts of manpower.
>Like? And what will happen when the service industry gets automated?
No idea. If I knew that I would start doing that right now and probably be rich in the future.
As I said: we have found useful things to do in the past, things that people were willing to pay for. That's how humans operate. They make things and if they are useful and other people give them something in return they keep doing it. It's unpredictable what we will enjoy in the future.
>Entertainement works in a low amount of people producing content to a wide audience.
There are channels for all kind of bullshit on youtube. No TV-station or theater or opera could offer such a variety of topics and special interests.
We will not all work in entertainment or journalism but surely a field of employment emerged that wasn't there before.
>>80874838
>Seriously though, how would libertarianism deal with the impending mass-unemployment thanks to advancements in drones, autonomous driving and AI?
Common fallacy. ANY technological advancement removes a potential "job". That's the whole point of technology- to make things easier to do. Why did you wait until "advancements in drones, autonomous driving and AI" to start complaining about impending "mass unemployment" due to technological advancement?
Technological advancement makes it easier for business to provide their good/service. This also means that the market will have an increasing amount of competitors.
More competition=less profitable industry.
Less profitable industry=investors put their capital somewhere else.
In other words, human capital goes elsewhere.
Human capital is not "replaced".
>>80878130
>>80878368
What percentage of the population is good? What percentage would join such a gang? It will be 98% vs 2% most often. And even if its 80% vs 20%, gangs will not risk their lives for that. Militias will be for defending against invading nations. Not gangs.
>>80878368
You could do that now. Good luck getting more people than conservatives with guns in the U.S. that would happily slaughter you and your pillaging dindus.
Mechanization, which is what you are talking about, only marginally increased productivity, allowing the initial drop in employment to be more than made up for by an increase in demand. Automation, on the other hand, has increased productivity beyond the capacity for demand to offset it's effect on labor. New investments go to skill heavy service sectors that are out of reach for the majority of the population, thereby creating a dangerous underclass.
>>80879130
>>80878683
was replying to this guy.
>>80871470
First they laughed
>>80864023
What is the 'EU'?
>>80879012
I would just target the people who decided not to pay for the militia, and who henceforth arent entitled to its protection.
>>80878130
Then they'll still lose because the militia are cyborgs. Seriously, you can "predict" anything if you make up scenarios, with no basis in reality. Rapists don't grow on trees, and neither can you just will a loyal army of them into existence.
>>80878340
>which shares the same spirit as anarchocapitalism and has a longer tradition than anarchocommunism.
How is ancom and ancap even different from each other? The first is capitalism of the individual and the second is capitalism with some sort of "voluntary syndicate group"-thing which makes decisions completely on consensus basis.
>>80879436
And you can figure out who's protected and who's not... how? And you know they wouldn't be willing to protect free riders... how? If I had just a slight change in moral principle, I'd happily slaughter you sub-human pillagers for free - many other people would as well. Welcome to the South!
>>80867620
It's mostly that simple, the majority of guns aren't used for murdering others but for self-defence and suicide.
However the section on the UK is completely wrong, mainly because there are huge differences between what constitutes a "violent crime", in the US a violent crime is defined as:
>In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force
(source: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime)
Meanwhile in the UK the definition of violent crime takes up 6 pages and can be found here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/116226/user-guide-crime-statistics.pdf
The tldr of it is that "violent crime" in the UK is defined as "all crime against the person", this includes many different types of crime that the US statistics don't include. Moreover the second part (the number of recorded violent attacks soared) isn't quite right, the trend was downwards, it looks like this claim is a combination of two things:
>A change in how violent crime is recorded
>Inclusion of standardised reporting
These two points add up to what appears to be an increase in crimes, when in fact it's just an artefact of how the crimes are recorded (pic related) I found this blog:
>http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swann-is-the-uk-really-5-times-more-violent-than-the-us/
Which looks at the claim in depth, not the best source I know but the only one I have, he estimates the actual rate (as compared to the US) to be between 271 and 776 per 100,000
>tldr: starts off well, then goes to shit. I wouldn't trust it.
>>80879506
You're not willing them. You're paying them to rape. It would work because ancapitalism is an autistic system that ignores basic elements of human culture.
>>80879635
I would pay someone to find out for me. If the militia just handed out its services for free, no one would pay them, commie.
>>80879742
Its not ancapitalism. Its anarchism. Simply the absence of coercive government in all aspects. Commerce would die and so would the leeches who live off it.
>>80879825
I wonder why the American Red Cross gets paid even though they hand out most of their services for free?
Hmmm... reelly maeks u thnk...
>>80879825
Everyone would have their own defenses methinks
Hey guys, instead of voting for something positive, but not exactly what we want, lets throw our votes away and give another election to the Democrats in a show of how great and relevant our ideology is!
>>80880362
>if you don't support Mussolini you're supporting Stalin!
What other people do is not the responsibility of anyone but those people. I'm not responsible for you stupid fucks forcing your values on other people by violence - that's your evil.
>>80866113
>Ayn Rand being portrayed as a libertarian figure
-Ayn Rand has stated that she could "deal with a marxist with a greater chence of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect" in reference to libertarians
-Ayn Rand refers to the libertarian party as a "cheap attempt at publicity".
And you choose to portray Ayn Rand as a libertarian figure....for what reason? I already know what that reason is- Rand is an easy target and leftists are far better at ad hominem than the discussion of ideology.
How many times were you dropped on your head, anon?
>>80878484
>UBI is capitalistic? It has more to do with libertarianism than with capitalism imo.
how so?
>It's very, very similar. We are using machines to automate a huge (unpleasant) part of the work that has to be done today which uses up enormous amounts of manpower.
But industrial revolution opened up lots of jobs (in industry and services).
What jobs will automation open up?
>we have found useful things to do in the past, things that people were willing to pay for.
wishfull thinking
> They make things and if they are useful and other people give them something in return they keep doing it. It's unpredictable what we will enjoy in the future.
automation. people will no longer be required to do things, sice machines will do them with much more efficiency
>There are channels for all kind of bullshit on youtube.
But only a handfull of those generate enough profit to maintain a life
>but surely a field of employment emerged that wasn't there before.´
wishfull thinking
>>80862867
Paleoconservative masterrace reporting in.
>>80878925
Nazi germany bro. I thought it would have taught us a good lesson
>>80879506
ancap is a make up scenario, you fucking autistic.
>Rapists don't grow on trees, and neither can you just will a loyal army of them into existence.
>rape gangs don't exist
>What is rotterham
>>80880125
>what is police
>>80879130
>Automation, on the other hand, has increased productivity beyond the capacity for demand to offset it's effect on labor.
Fallacy. Automation is hardly a "new" thing.
See automobile manufacturing.
Increased productivity= greater competition = less profitability. Read my original point.
Are you going to bring out your productivity ruler for every piece of technology and pull out your arbitrary ban hammer? The internet has "increased productivity beyond the capacity for demand" by your own definition.
Try again.
>>80881115
>a tiny minority of people are a majority
>"if I project my autism on others I won't have to feel as bad xD"
J e j .
>>80881473
That guy's not worth talking to. Read the thread.
why are shills trying to equate ancap with libertarian?
>>80881763
Anarchism falls under libertarianism. Libertarianism doesn't fall under anarchism, because anarchism is a more exclusive term.
Fuck off.
>>80880871
You are so close to anarchist! Whats holding you back? Dont be scared
>>80880887
Come on man. You know the power of the Nazis was not their 'spirit' but rather the funds received from the Roman Cult? I think an anarchist nation could survive in a world of superpowers. The People's Militia would be large though.
>>80881593
Thanks for the heads up anon. I'll be more careful next time.
>>80881854
so you're saying they are two different things?
>Anarchism falls under libertarianism
no it doesn't
I don't know why people bother arguing with leftypol
The guy's clearly delusional
How does one settle disputes over private property in a libertarian society?
>>80882049
>no it doesn't
>Libertarianism 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
Literally kill yourself.
>>80881763
Because ancaps and lolbertarians don't know to explain the differences. All they do is say "WE NO WATN BIG GUBMINT!!!!!" and then say their special snowflake ideology, usually libertarian together with another word.
>>80881473
>Automation is hardly a "new" thing
Robotization, if you want.
>>80881495
>i will dodge all criticism by saying "tis owi a minowity xDDDDD lelelelelel"
Govenrment corruption is only a minority. Government coercion is only a minority.
>>80881888
Paleoconservatism isn't close to anarchism, it's basically an uncucked libertarian. I can't be an anarchist because I believe in strong border control, a strong national identity and upholding western values.
>>80882236
Like you settle disputes with anyone else ever. You can talk it out, fight it out, or drop it. Which is exactly what happens now.
>>80862867
>blue eye
>black hair
Typical ancap cant into science and logic
I'm Libertarian because I think the idea that the nation exists to allow its unit (the individual) to fulfill their needs and wants, but Anarcho-Capitalism and UPB is contridicted by nature by the fact that there's an entire class of organisms that kill other animals and steal their property, their flesh called "Carnivores". Nature has determined that theft and violence are indeed more preferable in some situations.
>>80881888
>Come on man. You know the power of the Nazis was not their 'spirit' but rather the funds received from the Roman Cult? I think an anarchist nation could survive in a world of superpowers. The People's Militia would be large though.
not an argument and wishfull thinking.
>>80882244
yea and anarchy upholds slavery and serfdom
>>80882349
>Government coercion is only a minority
Yeah, because everything the government does *totally* isn't fundamentally forceful. Absolutely. You're brilliant. Poor yet absolutely stunningly brilliant.
Try naming something government does that's claimed to be uniquely legitimate of government to do that isn't coercive. I'll wait~
>>80882404
Borders will only go so far in solving the degeneracy problem. Coercive government breeds degeneracy though. Anarchy is the only solution
>>80882417
Let's say it's a dispute we can't settle over (there is plenty of people who are bad neighbours)
The usual way to settle this is in a court of law. Are you seriously saying people should fight eachother violently over property?
>>80882645
>>80862867
In the current state, open borders plus welfare state for illegal immigrants, American are de facto slaves of a foreign nation.
How would the libertarians fix that, since they disagree with border control, yet have also become sjws in this election, who would not dare deny handouts to undocumented illegals?
>>80882709
>Yeah, because everything the government does *totally* isn't fundamentally forceful. Absolutely. You're brilliant.
It's not to me. Unless you think free exchange of goods and services is coercion. Are you a fucking commie or what?
>>80882864
I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they can - and do even now.
Look up DRO's. They're courts for all intents and purposes, they just don't force you to pay for them even if you're not using them.
>>80882349
Does "robotization" change the point of my argument? Go ahead and try me, anon. Are you too sacred to read the actual argument being presented? Continue your whining, mental midget. I need another laugh.
libertarian = degenerate
>>80875994
>Anarchocapitalism is legitimately more autistic than anything Nazis or Neo-nazis have ever come up with
>wanted to kill everyone in europe who wasn't "aryan" despite having lived there since neaderthal times
>>80875815
>It decreases their monetary value (usually), but not their utility. My computer is probably worth two hundred dollars by now, and it's still functioning perfectly. Innovation and increased productivity only means that I can get a new computer that offers more utility, and it's the same with all other assets. Net utility rises.
Capitalism is about the accumulation and growth of monetary values not utility. Companies don't produce goods for their utility but the monetary profit they can acquire. Production for utility would be communism. Capitalists need to maintain the monetary value of their capital or else the system cannot work.
Remember real-estate is the prime collateral loans are issued against today. Deflating the value of real-estate would cause a liquidity crisis and all capitalists governments are dedicated to inflating the value of real-estate and financial assets to keep the bubble from poping and bringing the whole system crumbling down. Permanent inflation has to be integrated into the entire system to function.
>I don't have stocks. Most people I know don't have stocks, either.
How are you going to retire? All people in the first world are vested in the stock market at this point. That's why Marx is wrong today, the working class has vested interests in seeing their retirement plans exist tomorrow so they are largely afraid of revolution.
>The one caused by the artificial housing bubble, due to the interference of the state?
Derivatives are a creation of capitalists. Also capitalism [wage-labour] cannot exist without the state to maintain the whole rotten structure.
>>80863825
I'm a libertarian, voting Trump. This is a very important election. We can't let Hillary get in office. I would normally condone voting for someone like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson, but Trump is the only one who can beat Hillary, and I don't see Trump as some kind of extremely statist / authoritarian figure.
Here's a good way to look at this election. No way will the libertarians win this time around, so if you can't see yourself voting for Trump or Clinton, voting libertarian is a good protest vote. Neither party gets it and both partys get to see the libertarian party "steal" "their" votes.
>>80882864
Yes. He is a ancap, probably a sheltered one, since he posts veryday here religiously.
>>80882722
It isn't about solving degeneracy, it's about keeping our country alive. A nation without borders is no nation at all. The vitriol against borders and nationalism is what turned me away from libertarianism/anarchocapitalism. The nationalistic drive is what gave us so many technological advantages, especially during war time. Should you be willing to defend your country and always agree with her no matter what? No, of course not, but nationalism is important for society, and borders are what allow us to be a nation.
>>80882985
>free exchange of goods and services
>free exchange
Oh, so taxes are voluntary then? Great! Good to know! There won't be any problem in not paying them then~
HEY GUYS IM A LIBERTARIAN CHILD PORNOGRAPHY SHOULD BE LEGAL YOUR NOT FREE UNLESS YOU COULD GET A 5 YEAR OLD BOY HOOKED ON HEROIN WHICH IS ALSO LEGAL AND THEN MOLEST HIM
>>80883364
Looks like you really thought that out. Fucking kike.
>>80883267
>He is an ancap
Poor, stupid, *and* dishonest! You're a triple-threat there senpai! I bet the ladies can't stay off you!
>>80883213
>I don't see Trump as some kind of extremely statist / authoritarian figure.
are you fucking kidding me? he calls himself the "law and order" candidate and called himself the "king of debt"
>>80883364
More like
HEY GUYS IM A LIBERTARIAN
ALSO I'M ANTI-GUN, HERE'S MY VP, A GUN GRABBER
ALSO, DONALD TRUMP IS A RACIST, WE SHOULD DO MORE FOR OUR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
VOTE BERNIE 2016 I MEAN VOTE JOHNSON 2016
>>80883075
How do they enforce the decisions of the DRO if the losing part doesn't think he is wrong?
>>80883292
Your country is literally wops paddies kikes spics niggers and now mad arabs. What the fuck are you a nationalist for
>>80883527
>he calls himself the "law and order" candidate
Libertarians are not anarchists. We don't all just want to "abolish the police" like BLM.
>>80883527
He's the law and order candidate because he supports the police, unlike the BLM terrorists. Don't be daft.
And he says he's the king of debt because he's a business man that has expierence with it and knows how to get out of it. I know you're a leaf, but come on.
>>80883478
>supporting a philosophy in which jewish usury is encouraged
>supporting a philosophy where rich jews are all powerful
>calls others kikes to fit into 4chan forum
>>80883097
Yes, because reobotization is completely different from the automatization up until now. Robotization straight up replaces human labour. Automatization up until now was simply moving the workforce around, from fields to factories, from factories to counters.
>>80883765
Could always be worse, imagine if we were Canadian? Gross.
>>80883707
The losing part agreed to subject himself to the decision of the DRO regardless of outcome when he went in to settle the dispute. He's thus contractually bound by whatever the result is.
>>80883780
How do you figure libertarians support jews? I'm fascinated with the mental gymnastics you must of preformed to get there.
>>80883765
And they are now Americans. Controlled immigration is fine. All we have to do is deport the illegals, enforce the border laws (which includes extremely heavy fines to businesses that hire illegals) and go back to having an immigration cap from each country.
>>80883918
Yeah but he thinks the decision is balony and doesn't want to accept the decision (yes people are this annoying in real life), do the DRO enforce the decision with force then?
>>80883310
>Oh, so taxes are voluntary then?
On my part, yes.
>There won't be any problem in not paying them then~
I would have to forego all the perks of living in my country.
>>80879742
>You're not willing them. You're paying them to rape.
So for some undiscernible reason, you use up a sizable portion of your wealth to create an army made up entirely of criminals. You know, this group of unorganized, notoriously unreliable people, often black and with an IQ of around 85. You also pay for their weapons, possibly for intel, and you try to come up with an attack plan. If you lose, you will probably die, and you almost certainly will lose your wealth. If you win, you're left with an army of rapists that want steady wages and will literally shit up your neighborhood, and you will be on the lookout for reprisals against you and your family for the rest of your life. How exactly is that plan feasible? How, even if it was feasible, would it be beneficial in the eyes of anyone but the most shortsighted gangbangers?
>>80884129
>no regulations´
>open borders
>no tariffs or anything
>no labour protection
Uhmm, let me think...
>>80884145
>Yeah but he thinks the decision is balony
How much regard do you think courts have for the opinion and outrage of someone who is convicted of a crime now? Do they just let him go if he disagrees with the verdict?
>>80880815
>>UBI
>how so?
Well, I'd say so because it would give out some fixed amount to everyone and then everybody is on their own. It's quite a minimalistic government thing to do.
>But industrial revolution opened up lots of jobs (in industry and services).
>What jobs will automation open up?
Again: We don't know. When the weaving loom or the steam engine was introduced people had no fucking idea that they would soon be working in the service sector.
It just looks like it when we look back at history now. But back then they had no idea how these innovations would revolutionise their societies. No one could predict that there were absolutely gigantic metropolises to be created which would give rise to unseen new professions (bath attendants or street cleaners or sewage construction or the whole hospital staffs).
>wishfull thinking
That's not helping. I can answer >pessimistic thinking to your posts as well. We'll just have to wait and see.
>automation. people will no longer be required to do things, sice machines will do them with much more efficiency
Do you think we will have no human interaction at all anymore?
>>80884245
>what is nazi germany
>what is stormtropers
Well, not rape gangs, but you get the point
>>80882430
what? i know a lot of people with blue eyes and black hair.. myself included
>>80884398
I doubt you're upset about open borders, wet back.
>>80883779
I don't know how you can call yourself a libertarian and support a state police force...
Trump wants to massively grow the military-industrial complex, the prime array of direct state planning and distortion in the economy. Welfare transfers might not be totally fair but they don't distort the market in the way of direct government expenditure. Also "businessmen" love government debt because it gives them a place to park their savings with a 0% risk. That's one of the dirty little reasons you won't find many businessmen calling themselves libertarians who aren't hucksters.
>>80884189
>On my part, yes
So if you didn't pay them, nothing would happen to your person or property, since otherwise it wouldn't be a completely free exchange given you were under the threat of some duress.
Brilliant. You have a very real and solid understanding of how taxes work. Not delusional even in the slightest.
>>80884129
ancap lolbertarians support a society in which rich jews would be able to rule over people like cattle , literally acquire private armies and be able to put you in perpetual indentured servitude / slavery , very few if any laws restricting them. The only place of refuge will be drugs and sexual degeneracy
they just probably haven't thought it out if they don't realize it
>>80863825
Border control and the upcoming demographic reality should be top on your priorities this election. You can try all you want but Libertarians are NEVER going to sell their ideology to groups of people who advocate welfare states as the ideal to their progeny. If Hillary wins you're never going to have the chance to sell Liberty again. Call it fear mongering on my part, but if you've done your research you know it's true.
>>80884544
Lol, when did I call myself a libertarian?
And libertarians are not ancaps anyway, libertarians believe one of the main responsibilities of government is to protect the citizens, which includes funding a police force.
>>80884506
>Well, I'd say so because it would give out some fixed amount to everyone and then everybody is on their own. It's quite a minimalistic government thing to do.
It would tax the companies to give to everyone, irregardless of position or income. I thought the libertarian thing was negative income tax
>We'll just have to wait and see.
exactly.
>Do you think we will have no human interaction at all anymore?
Nice strawmen. people will no longer want to socialize. Genious conclusion.
I only said that people will no longer be required to work, or at least the majority won't.
>>80884439
No they have police to enforce it. Which is why I am asking you what a DRO would do if one part refuses to live up to the decision the DRO has reached?
>>80862867
How do you expect me to support your ideology with that fucking faggot image in the OP
>>80884801
The exact same thing as courts do now. Force the decision on them - a decision they *EXPLICITLY* agreed to abide by before they even started the dispute resolution process. You don't get out of a contract you agreed to by just saying "I don't wanna", unless that were allowed by the contract. And no one makes contracts with "I don't wanna" as a void condition because that would be an almost meaningless contract.
>>80883814
But does it replace human capital?
Technological advancement makes it easier for business to provide their good/service. This also means that the market will have an increasing amount of competitors.
More competition=less profitable industry.
Less profitable industry=investors put their capital somewhere else.
In other words, human capital goes elsewhere.
Human capital is not "replaced".
^Read this again before making another stupid comment, anon. ROBOTS fall under technology. The internet is also a technology that has replaced many job functions that fall under "human labor". Are you too fucking stupid to read, anon?
>>>80881473
>Increased productivity= greater competition = less profitability
I didn't respond to that because it makes no sense. Why would increased productivity necessarily make it easier to enter the market? If anything the capital costs of new tech make it easier for monopolies to form.
My original point still stands. Automation in its modern form has increased productivity beyond the capacity for physical demand for goods. People would have to buy dozens of cars to employ the same number of auto workers we did in the past. Specialty service's (biotech, finance, consulting) on the other hand experience increased demand, but these sectors need highly skilled labor, out of the reach of the average person.
>>80881593
>>80882167
KEK. I know I just BTFO you ancap faggots when you admit you cannot successfully debate me.
>>80884543
>ebin
>>80884651
>So if you didn't pay them, nothing would happen to your person or property, since otherwise it wouldn't be a completely free exchange given you were under the threat of some duress.
it would, becasue i would be breaking my part of the deal in the social contract.
If i want to enjoy forst world infrastructure and living, i must pay. You are just filthy nigger who want to have 1st world lives but don't want to pay for them.´
>>80884778
>create a bunch of useless laws
>have to create massive bureaucracy to enforce them all
I think communities can police themselves better than the state
>>80885244
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTqEePlZiqk
>>80884673
not just jews. In an ancap society with full automation, customer service would be the only viable mass employment sector. Enjoy being slaves to women.
NEW THREAD
>>80885480
>>80885480
>>80885480
>>80885091
Because there is a police force to enforce the contract. Have you ever heard of non agression pacts that were broken? Why did they broke them? (hint, because nobody was enforcing).
>The exact same thing as courts do now.
So the courts would be just like today courts?
>>80884724
>Border control and the upcoming demographic reality should be top on your priorities this election.
I agree very much with this. I'm wondering how many libertarians actually support open boarders, versus how many want a stronger boarder.
It's really a question of whether they imagine the entire world as a libertarian society, which isn't really realistic, or if they just want the USA to be a libertarian society. I'm a libertarian but I think we need a strong boarder, and I'm biased towards the legal citizens which are already here. And I think if people want libertarianism to spread, we need to start on a smaller scale.
>>80885269
Right, private police forces are totally the way to go. No way that could go wrong or become corrupt, and we'll just say fuck the poor people that can't afford to pay for their own police.
>>80885384
tacit approval. You aprove by living within it.
Your autism is showing, bro.
>MUH CONTRACTS!!!!!!
>MOM, I WILL ONLY MAKE MY BED IF YOU SIGN A CONTRACT!!!!!!
>>80885586
>Have you ever heard of non agression pacts that were broken? Why did they broke them? (hint, because nobody was enforcing)
Yeah, because no violence takes place while police exist. All violent crime is just an illusion, since nobody ever does anything violent while police exist.
Nobody is this stupid.
>>80885871
>>80885908
>Nobody is this stupid
I take that back. You certainly are.
>>80885908
>Yeah, because no violence takes place while police exist.
>Police is not 100% efficient
>REMOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!! WARGH!!!!!!!
Nice
>>80885960
Holy shit, i will kill myself now. I will stream it just for you, give me your mail
>>80885807
And police forces now are immune to corruption because...?
I guess all the instances of police corruption in the world are just an illusion!
>>80886293
They may not be immune to corruption, but they are certainly less likely to be corrupt and more fair than a private police force that works for the highest bidder.
>>80885242
You're pretty stupid anon.
Technology increases the productivity of a business does it not? That increased productivity is a result of technology making it easier for that business to provide their services, does it not?
The internet, for example, has made it VERY easy for anyone to create a storefront which gives access to ALL internet users. Doesn't this result in a more competitive market or not, anon? Doesn't more competition make you less profitable, anon? In order to be profitable you now must differentiate yourself from the rest of your competitors or invest elsewhere.
>People would have to buy dozens of cars to employ the same number of auto workers we did in the past.
According to who, anon? Don't the complicated electronics in cars nowadays require human capital in the R&D department, for example?
By your logic, we'd be better off if we gave construction worker spoons instead of shovels.
You're easily the dumbest kid on this thread, anon. Start crying- you never had an argument.
>DIS technology is too productive- WHERE'S MUH GOOBERMENT
LOL what are you going to do anon? Pull out your productivity ruler and measure the amount of unemployment a new technology will create?
Reach for the stars, mental midget. This is too easy for me.
>>80886289
Thank you for establishing definitively that your IQ is substandard and that you're not worth addressing ever, being of shit-genes, born to shit-stupid parents, and who is likely a physically weak, abject failure in all aspects of his miserable life. Ja ne retard-chan~
How would libertarianism function in a post-work/post-scarcity society? We're fast approaching the end of a lot of human labor and there will be many people who's skill sets simply aren't needed and production is controlled by someone like Google who developed the AI. So at that point, even dissolving government, there would still effectively be a government controlled by large corporations due to the extreme cost and resource requirement to develop AI and create machinery to automate making starting it at a small scale impossible.
>>80886459
>but they are certainly less likely to be corrupt and more fair
In what world is a group with a perceived monopoly on the use of legitimate aggressive force "less likely to be corrupt and more likely to be fair" than groups that have to compete with others for their money?
In what fucking world?
>>80886632
>and there will be many people who's skill sets simply aren't needed
I didn't know people were incapable of retraining. That's news.
>>80886511
>muh internet
I did an entire term paper on how the internet has lead to a decrease in employment in the service sector. Just look it up on google scholar if you're not too retarded to use it.
>muh internet is the only form of productivity increasing tech
you're an imbecile if you can't see how large corporations can use expensive tech to put themselves at an advantage
>who says it doesn't take the same number of people to build a car
Reality
You are a profoundly ignorant individual.
