What are /r9k/'s thoughts on libertarianism? Being socially liberal/fiscally conservative seems like the only rational choice.
>>28707523
The individual is more important than society, you should only live for yourself and act in your own self-interest
>>28707523
I am a nationalist libertarian. Basically, libertarianism with strict immigration policies and also businesses should not outsource their work to other countries.
>>28707523
Selfishness is the logical choice in the absence of compassion. But people who lack compassion are evil or autists, possibly both in your case.
Individualism is a cancer that leads to hedonism and general degeneration.
>>28707584
You're not a libertarian. Perhaps a paleo-conservative or, as they say in Europe, national conservative.
>>28707610
Hedonism is fine in a libertarian society, because others don't have to pay for it. In a truly libertarian society the most able (and yes, sometimes the luckiest) would rise to the top.
It's good because people can be as "hedonistic" as they want (generally, without crazy illegal shit), which IMO is a pretty important right.
Libertarians would supplant government rights with business rights and in so doing render us in the loving hands of corporate conglomerates even more so than we already are.
In order to secure liberty from the iron gauntlets of the strongest and deliver it into the withered hands of the elderly and the tender hands of youth, we consent to a government which will help curtail infringements upon the liberties of others.
There was this one senator - polly haven't heard of him - called Bernie Sanders...
>socially liberal
Yes, the world needs more pants shitting, safe space seeking trigger-lords. Go fuck yourself.
>>28707640
>Hedonism is fine in a libertarian society, because others don't have to pay for it.
The difference between us is that I take moral issue with hedonism. It is wrong that such behaviors occur, because they cause unnecessary suffering for its practitioners, and the degenerate of society as a whole, which causes unnecessary suffering for everybody.
>It's good because people can be as "hedonistic" as they want (generally, without crazy illegal shit), which IMO is a pretty important right.
Rights don't exist.
>>28707523
I believe people shouldn't be dicks to each other and support each other in need. Libertarianism is an exact opposite of this idea.
I agree with most libertarians on most views except economic.
>Personal liberties: They're all awesome, except for anyone (corporations and individuals) being able to flatout lie, bash, and discriminate openly, moreso corporations, lies shouldn't be published to the masses as truth in the name of free speech.
>Economic liberties: Really depends, I love the idea of free trade. But, I don't like the fact that with libertarianism, the upper class can continue doing jackshit, not giving a penny, because "taxation is theft"
I'm not a fan of libertarianism simply because libertarians fail to realize (or don't care) that their lives are guaranteed to affect others and others are guaranteed to affect them, there is no such thing as the individual, sure, you shouldn't bow down to the community's needs and sacrifice your life for it, but you also shouldn't (indirectly) treat others like shit just because it's "your right" to do so.
>>28707610
nah senpai, >>28707584 is a paleo-libertarian, nothing wrong with that.
>>28707843
Forcing people to support others in need is the biggest dick move at all. Liberals always try to hide it, but at the end of the day, it's about using the threat of violence to get others to pay
I feel that libertarians have this unresolved cognitive dissonance between small-scale social and economic systems and how they might function on the large scale. I honestly cannot see how a libertarian society could function with a population over 10k, let alone 300 million.
Personally I feel that the state is simply the most effective method of wealth redistribution and can execute large-scale civic works most efficiently on a national level. I'm fine with taxes because paying back society which has provided the roads I use, the school I went to, the security I enjoyed, entirely reasonable. Midhandling of public money occurs and politicians should answer for their failings, times when this doesn't happen is a political and social failure, rather than a structural failure.
As for privatisation and free market theory, there is far more evidence in my country (UK) that points towards privatisation being a fucking terrible idea for vital public services (transport, utilities, internet services, education, health). In many cases free market capitalism cannot overcome the physical limitations of reality. The risk/reward ratio to the investments required for most civic work that provides a meaningful boost to people's lives is generally untenable for corporations, and require massive subsidy from governments in these 'free market' scenarios.
>>28708069
That's a good point. If I had to name my views, it wuld be closest to social anarchism.
No rules and rulers. Everybody cares and helps each other, but noone is forced to.
Not that it's humanly possible.
>I believe people shouldn't be dicks to each other and support each other in need. Libertarianism is an exact opposite of this idea.
No, it means that you are not a dick by helping your family and give to charities, instead of being a dick and taking it from others by force through the government for your own self gratification.
in a libertarian society, it would be possible for people to create a smaller socialist society if they chose. If they wanted to be a part of it, they are free to opt in and put their money toward the community.
The reverse of course is not true....Libertarianism is the most moral philosophy because people can live in communities with any philosophy they want, without forcing others to opt in.
>>28707523
>Being socially liberal/fiscally conservative seems like the only rational choice.
False.
Most socially liberal bullshit is alright, but a lot of it is like trying to treat a symptom rather than a cause, especially when it's a serious problem. That really does nothing to prevent it happening aside in a few circumstances.
Fiscally conservative only matters when there is a ceiling on the economy. It'd be a lot more beneficial to spend because an economy is just money getting passed around. Doing it wrong is probably worse than being fiscally conservative but ideally it's probably better to spend, especially in certain areas.
Libertarianism is too isolationist.
>>28708139
>libertarian society
>charities
Kek
>>28708172
Like seriously, who in their right mind would start a charity in a libertarian society?
>>28708149
What about creating a smaller society of murdering serial-rapist islamic fundamentalists? If we can be anything we want in this glorious libertarian utopia, I choose that one.
(inb4 v&)
Libertarianism is the natural choice for people who take in consideration consequences and morality.
The State is always cancer.
Yup. Supported Ron Paul and Rand Paul. I'm libertarian because I should be able to have sex with 15 year olds without fear of imprisonment.
>>28708242
You don't need libertarianism, that already exists and its called Saudi Arabia.
>>28708428
It's funny how all the worst places in the world seem to be the most libertarian.
It's almost as though having a weak, corrupt or non-existent government is a recipe for social failure.
>>28708422
Why not communism? Or, hell, even the cops? Get that blue wall shit backing you up, namsayin?
>>28708702
>Saudi Arabia
>weak government
>non-existent government
b-but wut abot muh roads
>>28708702
>I will just wait for the State to become strong and non-corruptible!!
Typical statist cuck
>>28707523
>libertarianism
>freedom
>>28708746
Hey it looks like you left out
>Corrupt government
Did you forget?
>>28708824
Libertarianism is against the State in general, the only reason you mentioned corruption is because you are mentally challenged.
Libertarianism is on the front page of Reddit. Gary Johnson 2016.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/4ka9tu/the_woes_of_a_twoparty_system/
>>28708875
I thought Reddit got over its libertarian phase.
Though come to think of it, were most of them actually libertarians or was that just a meme to boot?
>>28707734
and we need more big businesses and big government fucking us over without lube
back to pol with you
>>28707523
I agree that its the best way forward in this page of the history book but its not THE best version of society
>>28708923
There are a lot of libertarians in /pol/, actually, not eveyone there is a State's cock sucker nazi with army fetish
Is joining a militia a libertarian-approved activity?
I don't give a fuck about economics, but social liberalism is responsible for the downfall of the West.
>>28709008
militias are either fbi honeypots or full of autists and bubba types
>>28709029
Whites' predisposition to cuckoldry and negroid worship are responsible for the downfall of the west.
If you're a libertarian in today's society than you are pretty much following the philosophy of Ayn Rand and what she was stating in Atlas Shrugged, that's basically the world Libertarians want to live in.
It's funny because most people thought Ayn Rand's philosophy was garbage and shitty, same for the book. I personally enjoyed it but I don't know if I can fully agree with her philosophical viewpoints.
>>28709295
Fuck, forgot the picture.
ORIGINAL FUCKING COMMENT
i have many of the same political beliefs as libertarians, except i am completely against the idea of open borders, which almost all true libertarians are for. this alone pushes me away from libertarianism. i'm also completely fine with having a strong military, however, i do think that organizations such as the NSA have grown out of control and need to be reigned in a bit.
although i'm against quite a few taxes, ESPECIALLY the implied carbon tax that looms whenever someone brings up man made climate change, i do not believe that all taxes are excessive.
>gadsen flag
>WANTING to be cucked hard by your boss
>>28707705
>big business is bad.
>bigger government will surely be better.
I'm cool with the notion of self-sufficiency, but at the same time I don't think reducing the size of government is the way to go about it.
If anything the government should be larger but held to stricter, enforceable standards of efficiency. Modern government agencies are wasteful as fuck (compared to a private sector equivalent) which is a much larger problem than spending tax money on [thing I don't like].
>>28707523
The Anti-Libertarian FAQ: http://raikoth.net/libertarian.html
