PREV THREAD I'm so done with libertarians. I swear they're worse than neocons. Related, if the entire state of Texas could just get nuked into a giant molten pile of spics, libertarians, and neocons that would be fantastic.
>taxation is theft
It's just not.
"Render to Caesar what is Caesar's" - Jesus
Rousseau was wrong about plenty of things, but both he and Hobbes were right about the fact that THERE CAN BE NO SCALED ECONOMY WITHOUT GOVERNMENT.
> muh property rights
There is no private property without a government. Without a government you wander, and if you don't wander you are raided. You "private property" exists for all of the 5 minutes before a stronger family group moves in.
> muh God-given rights
God gives no rights to men. Romans 13 says to obey your government, for it is the sword in God's hand, punishing the wicked and rewarding the good.
THAT SAID
For a white nation, it is good to have amongst ourselves right to fair trial, right to own and retain property, etc. These are a white man's rights because we are civilized. That's why the form of government the fathers provided was effective, it was a white man's government.
The second it stops being white men under that government it stops being an effective government.
You should be praying to God for a white monarchy to take hold in the US if you want ANY chance.
>OP complains about immigration which is government policy. >Demands more government.
OP is legit retarded
Isaiah Young
>God gives no rights to men. Romans 13 says to obey your government, for it is the sword in God's hand, punishing the wicked and rewarding the good.
How's that working out for you, faggot?
Hudson Jones
Pretty fuckin good, I live a place where I can raise my white family in peace and prosperity.
Robert Morales
>THERE CAN BE NO SCALED ECONOMY WITHOUT GOVERNMENT. it's more their can't be an economy without security as the cheapest method of exchange is theft so you need to disincentivise it with force I say this as a fascist
Camden Russell
Precisely
Brody Bell
Holy fuck man are you fucking retarded? Are you really trying to use the "well but what if a small community of pedos decide to pass their children around" as an argument against libertarianism? First and foremost, children can not give informed consent, therefore you are committing child rape aka you violated the NAP.
Alexander Collins
The 4 year old has liberties and rights. Libertarians protect those rights and liberties above all.
A libertarian would protect the rights of the 4 year old, not abuse them. The person abusing the 4 year old is NOT a libertarian by definition. There is nothing difficult to understand here.
Stop believing pol memes. You have been successfully influenced by pol psy ops discrediting any ideology that harms the (((agenda))), like an honest money supply.
Figure it out.
Wyatt Torres
Until government collapses under the weight of the burden that supporting the 3rd world imports in the U.S imposes... then they start wandering into your neighbourhood.
Look, theee is a need for (limited) government, I get that. But government should ideally be something close to what your founding fathers laid out, not the bloated, corrupt, corporate/oligarch controlled shitpile it is now.
Parker Lewis
so let me get this straight , parents dont have any right to command over their child because then it would be slavery , according to you , so what stops her from sucking on jimmy's balls , if not parent's ?
Josiah Thomas
a 4 year old wont think to do such a thing. .
Alexander Brooks
see:
Luke Perez
we already have child soldiers in africa , what is stopping us from having child prostitutes ?
Luis Parker
If you were content with the place you lived, you would have named it.
Lincoln Russell
Its infringing the childs rights. A libertarian protect those rights, not exploit them. Also, they would be earning money from prostitution and soldiering which I assume is getting stolen from them by their "pimp" which is another violation of rights.
Again - LIBERTARIANS PROTECT RIGHTS. LIBERTARIANS DONT EXPLOIT RIGHTS
just get this into your head and you'll be less retarded and less influenced by pol psyops
Luis Gonzalez
>Its infringing the childs rights. A libertarian protect those rights, not exploit them. Also, they would be earning money from prostitution and soldiering which I assume is getting stolen from them by their "pimp" which is another violation of rights.
what do you mean a child says "damn , really want a lolly pop " jimmy comes right in , gives a lolly pop , an d in exchange he gets his dick sucked both parties consent , what is the problem ?
Elijah Taylor
Stupid faggot OP.
Describes anarchism, rails against it, calls it libertarianism, thinks he has a point.
Kill yourself POS.
Christopher Williams
Sorry for being late I had to leave, now I'm back. The relationship between a parent and a baby is kind of a grey area one. Of course you're gonna have to do things the baby won't like such as force feeding etc or else it will die, since it doesn't know any better, until it grows up and can make rational decisions on its own. You do not technically own your kid but like I said, you do have a moral imperative to do things your baby won't like for its own good. That doesn't mean by any means that your children are your property though. The parents obviously can protect their children from predators just like they can protect their children from thieves etc, I already told you anyone who tries to commit sexual acts with a child violates the nap and you have the right to stop him since he no longer respects the tenets of libertarianism.
Jayden Anderson
>both parties consent Ok so you don't know what you're talking about. Consent is meaningless without the context, that's like saying "I pointed a gun to his head and he consented to giving me all of his money, officer, nothing wrong with that", children do can not give INFORMED consent, since their brains aren't capable of understanding the ramifications of their actions yet that's why having sex with a drunk chick is considered statutory rape even if she said yes
Dominic Allen
>"I pointed a gun to his head and he consented to giving me all of his money, officer, nothing wrong with that" that is not the same as giving a child a lolly pop and in return getting a blowjob from her , the child can still refuse , >, since their brains aren't capable of understanding the ramifications of their actions yet that's why having sex with a drunk chick is considered statutory rape even if she said yes fair enough , so if jimmy wants get his balls sucked by a child he will violate the NAP of the child you said that > The parents obviously CAN protect their children from predators just like they can protect their children from thieves etc, I already told you anyone who tries to commit sexual acts with a child violates the nap and you HAVE the right to stop him since he no longer respects the tenets of libertarianism. not that you , as a parent MUST protect your child from predators or as a citizen you MUST NOT turn the blind eye on such crimes in normal society you HAVE TO stop the predator as a parent , but in ancapistan it is only an option
Charles Bennett
I already told you, anyone who tries to do anything sexual with a kid has violated the nap, has betrayed the tenets of libertarianism and you have every right to enforce the rule of law on him if you are the legal guardian of the child. If the parents of said child are sick individuals who pass their children around they are also complicit in this crime and the community will have to deal with them by taking them to court or if they pose a further threat by removing them from the community altogether
