Why haven't you taken the technocratic minarcho-libertarian-monarchism pill yet ?
Why haven't you taken the technocratic minarcho-libertarian-monarchism pill yet ?
Because I got out of college years ago. Half of those words were made up since then and the other half are gibberish. Nobody off the internet or older than about 22 even recognizes what you just typed as human readable language.
you're wrong
>ideology based on fad words, not values
i'm sure this'll go far
The regime where the monarch and the aristocracy arent aristocratic at all because no taxes lol.
- Democracy is a flawed authoritarian system. It is the tyranny of the collective on the expense of the individual. When there is democracy, groups of people organize to give more power to the state - and so on during every electoral process.
In my proposed system, a king would be appointed by an automatic process, using maybe artificial intelligence, based solely on his intelligence, his ability to govern, and his honesty.
His task will be to manage the 3 and only fundamental powers of the state : National defense (military), borders protection, and courts (NAP enforcement). Nothing more, nothing less.
Citizens of the state would be free on every level. The only law would be the NAP.
Non-citizens will have no rights, and the king could use force to expel them.
Nice redding spacing you phone-posting normalfag. Nothing you said makes sense. I hope you die in a car accident while posting.
you seem mad
>here's how my completely hypothetical form of government with no basis in reality whatsoever would work
no one cares you larping faggot. go write a fantasy book
Gay as fuck desu. Make taxes voluntary and only give white male taxpayers voting rights. Elected goverment is fascist not bound by judges or international laws. Then keep the state minarchical with only responsibility being security military and infrastructure.
Technocratic-minarcho-libertarian-monarchic-theocracy*
There. Fix’d. Now I’m 110% on board. When do we start? Also, today as everyday.
All hail the emperor of the greatest nation that has ever existed, high king of mortal men, man above all, excepting of course the great God of Gods in heaven, Jesus Christ, amen.
“A voice on every world praising God.
A hand on every world creating wealth.
A mind on every world creating knowledge.”
>2018
>Not being an anarcho-monarchist
Filthy plebs.
>Unbiased artificial intelligence
The very first thing that will happen in your government - is disputes would begin about who maintains / programs said AI.
I've thought about this a lot, ultimately any AI arbiter you imagine will be subject to human bias given enough time, no matter what safeguards you imagine.
>Minarchist fascism
Please explain, most people would consider this a contradiction. I forsee at least some cultural proscriptions in any fascist system.
Put simply, libertarianism can be stated as "Fuck off and leave me alone."
Fascism of the type Jow Forums wants is "Fuck off and leave us alone."
If you want a better understanding, read Hoppe. Libertarianism/minarchism is only possible in a society that agrees on its fundamental principles. Anyone who doesn't would have to be expelled. Hence the fascistic elements.
Nah, I've taken paracetamol
fucking this
this is clearly a LARP but:
>technocratic
you realize the current speed of technology advancement is generated by jews right? you're playing into their plans with that one.
>minarchy
the snowball effect is real and you'd realize that should your lunatic hivemind of a state ever temporarily succeed in its creation.
>libertarian
well yes, but to what extent? I don't give a shit if someone decides to grow weed but I don't want children smoking that for example.
>monarchy
if you're that sure about installing a monarchy libertarianism is a brainlet choice. feudalism has been much less successful than absolute monarchy.
I've read some Hoppe - I don't recall him describing his society as fascism?
When I think of fascism, I think of medals for women with lots of children as in Nazi Germany, state religions as in Ancient Rome etc.
But it seems like a pedantic thing so no big deal. Incidentally I strongly agree with the Hoppean conception.
He definitely doesn't describe it as fascism, but if you've read hoppe you're familiar with "Physical removal", which most people would consider fascistic. IE if you don't agree with these rules, you aren't allowed to try and change them, you will be thrown out.
Fascism is kind of hard to nail down. It's not fascistic for a woman to have lots of kids, but women in fascist countries had lots of kids. Many, many states had state religions long before fascism was conceived of. I would say it hinges more on the idea that the state has been perfected, and must be beyond questioning. Which again, mirrors Hoppe.
See even Mussolini though killed very few people (less than 100). Not sure about expulsion, but I'm sure he did at least some of that.
So yeah, as you say hard to nail down fascism. Even among contemporary fascism you've got things ranging from Francisco Franco's Spain to Legionnaire Bulgaria
Well, the removal of the right to vote is a kind of expulsion. Again, it goes back to the idea that "we've got it right, and we're not going to allow ourselves to be questioned."
If you read about the aesthetic philosophy of fascism, it really does all hinge around this idea of the perfected state, or the state as art.