Why aren't you a libertarian socialist?

Why aren't you a unicorn?

>corporations
>efficient

Because that’s an oxymoron.

because im not gay lol

>enforcing theft of property and redistribution to niggers is libertarian

Gas yourself.

The only thng that dont have both is amprin goodd luck living like that

you're confusing socialism with communism. Also when communists claim to abolish "private property" they really mean large landholdings and modes of production

It's called syndicalism, and feel free to read up on how well it worked in italy and spain

>voluntary handing the spoils of my work to people who voluntarily choose not to add to society
this is not even meretz cucked this is hadash-balad retardation

Attached: 1551703693915.jpg (640x640, 104K)

because the only people who care about putting people into little mental boxes are kikes.

THE COWARDS, THE FOOLS

HIDING IN THEIR

MENTAL BOXES

>Shy-nee
>Meh-tul
>Box-es
Another suburban FAMily morning...

Remove the bottom left & we're good.

Doesn't matter what form of government you have if the people running it are corrupt human trash.

I'm unironically voting for Hadash this election

Attached: 1377135981447.png (300x196, 28K)

Your pic related is basically
>I have such little experience with human beings, I think they are all equal, and deserve equal outcomes

Private property and personal property are different, and when people say socialism they mean 15 different things depending on who’s talking. Nobody is trying to end individual home ownership, they want to end huge holding companies, exploitive loans and owning houses as an investment instead of a used utility.

Noam Chomsky is talking about workers controlling production, and most of the American left is as well. Some want industry nationalized, many do not. Labor union activists that earned workers rights in the early 20th century were largely socialists- but nothing like the Bolsheviks.

I think all humans are morally equal.

You are confused about what private property means. It also puts restrictions on how the government can confiscate the property you use for your home, business, etc.
Socialism gives the government absolute power to confiscate your property. In terms of how they view property, socialists and communists are the same.

>tfw UK education sank even lower than US education
What a timeline

What constitutes a "human" according to your circumsized ass, Schlomo Shekelstein?

Attached: Capture+_2019-03-14-16-13-00.png (720x1196, 98K)

Government already has that power.
This idea that government is in any meaningful way "limited" by itself ("checks and balances" and whatnot) is a complete ideological fabrication.
Whatever the current legalistic, economic and propertarian status quo is, that is the state the government want to keep.
Your precious "rights", including "property rights", are spooks. The only effective way to combat governmental overreach is through collective action and democratic accountability.

Do you really think I'm some ultra-reactionary jewish supremacist?

Replace goyim with the average American

Socialism is not conducive to liberty as you need to have the ability to enforce wealth redistribution.

The bottom right quadrant might as well be called unicorn land.

Socialism cannot exist without liberty.
Liberty cannot exist without socialism.

Hahaha real fuckin funny Tieg O'kane, Irish are basically the niggers of Europe.
I think you're a bog standard kike, yes.

Attached: SNA12JACK-280_678681a1-235x300.jpg (235x300, 25K)

Not only does government have that power, they bail out banks giving intentionally predatory loans as a means to confiscate property intentionally.

The cops can take your shit if you are a suspect. Monsanto can bankrupt your farm through persistent legal harassment when you’ve done nothing wrong. There are so many bullshit ways to lose your property under the current system.

Woah, you are actually retarded
This is impressive even for nu-pol's standards

ergo, unicorn land.

Modern social-democracies like Sweden, Norway, Germany and even France, while not fully socialist (with the possible exception of Norway), embody libertarian socialist ideals.
It's not hard to imagine a society similar to Finland, but with a vastly expanded worker cooperative sector.

does a dog stop to think it's superior as it eats a rabbit?
Does a kike think it's superior as it subverts?
It's hardwired into your dna to be a tribal subversive, you're literally pushing for an ideology that would benefit your people & hurt Goyim ITT lol. Unfortunately you're so radical, due to all kikes having lightweight schizophrenia, that you're unable to see that & because you benefit from it you have incentive to deny reality. So that's why you people need to be wiped off the map, far too dangerous for humanity.

Pro-tip: if you see a political compass that has 3 negative options, and 1 positive option.. it was made by a biased retard who can’t put his own beliefs aside for 1 second to make a funny joke.
This is why the left can’t meme.

That political compass test is absolute garbage
Not surprised at all by it being so popular here after Spekr was made

> Why aren't you a libertarian socialist?

Pretty sure I am.

Attached: chart.png (480x400, 17K)

Based

Because i don't suck a fucking nigger cock like (((OP)))

1. Libertarianism is gay and Jewish
2. Socialism is gay and Jewish
Any further questions?

The lower left should say "Social Tyranny", you mongrel.

I'm a libertarian, but definitely not a socialist.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 127K)

Centrists think themselves the referees but they're more like the ball.

Bottom left should say
>tranny

Which is why you so gleeful joke about the state killing people for holding certain views?

Kek what a great line. Better than a ziggy calendar over here

The green square is not liberty. That' the purple square. The green square is Sodom and Gomorrah, and as such invites tyranny to correct itself.

In what way is the purple square not "Sodom and Gomorrah"?

>Spekr
right-libertarian sack of shit
Half the time I felt like it was begging the question. e.g. "Contracts to obtain, retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one's private property should be regulated by the government" is completely irrelevant because all of these unspecific "contracts" are rooted in and based on governmental enforcement.
Or "In order to protect the poor from the rich, limits on profits, production mandates, and controls on prices of goods and services are necessary" - who wrote this nonsense?
Even the traditional political compass, with all of its faults and short-sightedness, is better than this garbage. At least it seems to be vaguely AWARE of political thought outside the standard American talking points.

Also their media organization (or whatever it is) is a very disgusting example of astroturfed garbage.

Also also, I absolute hate it how right-libertarians keep trying to steal the word "anarchist". You already stole "libertarian", come up with something actually accurately describes your views. Something like "propertarianism".

most other humans are lemmings. Being red pilled is a waste of time unless you are redpilled soley for yourself.

It's the most accurate right now, still those tests are trash if you know anything about politics
And the traditional compass will still be the trashiest of them all

>flag
No big surprise.

The greatest redpill is the realization that almost everyone who ever got "redpilled" was blackpilled right from the start.
The Jow Forums mindset is rooted in a deep and profound nihilism. Being "redpilled" is, therefore, an individual coping mechanism.

Pol is a containment board and a set of memes for retards

flag checks out

>flag

based and heterosexualpilled.

It's trash, mate.

In fact, let me just start listing all the biased "questions" I encounter as I go through it:
>People who think they are entitled to keep what they earn are merely being selfish and should be forced to pay their fair share.
implying taxes are theft, implying you "earn" anything in a vacuum and aren't benefiting from the current state of society

>Government budgets should be balanced by curbing expenditure and not by raising taxes
implying government budgets should be balanced

>profits and losses should be socialized
Implying losses aren't being socialized already.

>Individuals who engage in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money as mutually agreeable commodity or item
Implying such "voluntary exchanges" among individuals aren't an extremely rare occurrence in capitalist societies

>public entities should be able to compete with private enterprise
Why is choosing a negative answer here pushes me to the right?

>Employment and compensation agreements between employers and employees are private and should not be encumbered by social engineering
Implying wage relations aren't inherently a form of "social engineering".

>Private employers and employees should be required by law to bargain with each other through a labour union
>Membership in a labour union should be a requirement for obtaining employment.
If it's "required by law" then it isn't a real union.
And like what the fuck. What sort of image of unions do these people have in their heads? What the fuck do they think a trade union IS?

>Education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality, accountability, and efficiency with more diversity of choice.
No comment.

>Health insurance companies exploit the sick and dying to make a profit and therefore should be regulated by the government.
What if I think USA-style private insurance companies should be outright ABOLISHED?

I didn't say it's not trash, mate

(replying to each point of yours is irrelevant anyways)

>Why don't you eat rigid jelly?
>Why don't vegetarians eat steak?
>Why don't you swim in a dry ocean?

Private property requires the state to exist. Without the state, there's nothing stopping workers from keeping their full profits or people from using "owned' land to farm without permission.

>Individuals should be free to determine the level of health insurance they want, if any.
What if I live in the USA, want maximum health insurance (as it is in any civilized country), but cannot afford it? Can I "choose" to have complete coverage, then?

>Socialised welfare programs should be phased out and replaced with a private voluntary system based on insurance, charity, and mutual aid.
They keep misusing the word "socialized" like that.

>Most people will not voluntarily help the poor, therefore it is incumbent on the government to provide welfare services so as to combat poverty.
Most RICH people will not voluntarily help the poor. At least not in meaningful quantities. Otherwise, they wouldn't be rich.
Like basic class relations 101 - the poor are poor in large part because the rich refuse to give up their privilege.

>Charity and civil society will weaken if government does not have the power to direct such activity.
This completely misunderstands (or misrepresent) the leftist critique of charities. The problem isn't that DA GUBBERMINT isn't involved enough. The problem is that these are inherently undemocratic and unaccountable institutions. They keep and reinforce the power of life and death in the hands of the wealthy.
There can never be true justice in charity.

>In order to preserve global stability the government needs to embrace foreign political alliances and act as a policeman for the world.
What if I'm not American?

>Rights are not inalienable and can be suspended during times of war.
implying rights exist

>Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.
implying "economic freedom" requires either.

>Some rights can impose an obligation upon others to fulfil that right.
At these point they're just quoting Hayek.

And my absolute favorite:
>All people are born with an inherent right to their life...
yes
>liberty...
yes
>and property.
lol

this post is embarassing
do you get your education from Jow Forums memes?

I will give them credit, their description of libertarian socialism somewhat on-point.

freeblr.org/faq/resource/politics/what-is-libertarian-socialism

Too bad they couldn't resist slipping in there a reference to Lockean theories of private property. How about reading the actual libertarian socialist critiques of private property?

The descriptions are nice, the test isn't
As I said, it's just the least trashy compass (and that tells a lot about political compasses)
What do you think about PolitiScales?

Most do, sadly

>What do you think about PolitiScales?
too engrossed in the current zeitgeist
has at least wider political imagination than this spekr garbage

This

you're absolutely right. these replies are literally anarcho communism oxymoron tier.

great comment man.. i have a feeling no one really listens to you ever, so im here to make your day

taking credit for your nation when you just leech and jerk your tiny dong

have you ever gone to college you fucking wop?

>The descriptions are nice
Their description of democratic socialism is very negatively loaded.
They evidently have zero grasp of even basic Marxist theory (as seen in their "Authoritarian Socialism" and "International Socialism" articles). Which is not to say Marxism isn't trash, but if you're making a political test that claims (((objectivity))) you could at least open a wikipedia article.

Also hilarious enough they actually do the "Nazis were socialists" bullshit.

>If you give up all your posessions (to me) then you'll be free!

The "communism" part of "anarcho-communism" is more among the lines of the "final utopian stage of socialism (and human society more broadly)" 19th century definition of the word, not the "Marxist-Leninist rule through a self-declared communist party" 20th century definition.

Cute leaf

>if you let me extract rent and profit from your work, you'll be free!

who says Im not

how the hell does libertarian socialism work?

I sure this jew has pulled some tricks but he is right on this.

Attached: 1544323664990.jpg (975x600, 165K)

Remember all the worker cooperatives Israel used to have?
Imagine having them back around.
Also imagine no compulsory military service, or religious coercion, or restrictions on liberal freedoms (so you're free to deny the holocaust to your heart's content!).
Also generally much more democratic (and meaningfully democratic) institutions. So, for example, a better voting system in national elections, more accountability and transparency (especially at the municipal level) and a general deregulation of individuals' lives.
Oh, and instead of landlords and foreign speculators driving housing prices through the roof, imagine having almost-free public housing available for everyone. You know, like we used to have. Oh and development is decided democratically by local citizens, instead of by faceless committees.

But you can keep imagining various mechanisms and institutiosn all day long. The point isn't how it "works". The point is the fundamental political instincts that animate the ideology, which are a compassion and respect for all living things.

youtube.com/watch?v=b3m4aRQ9QvQ

Every government can corrupt. Affairs of postmodernism show humanity at large corrupting easily. You can't avoid temptation, only confront it and seek a solution.

As for government liquidation: The tax-funded armies and police forces are the only thing between you and the slave labour of Apple, silly anarchist.

Newfag btw, I didn't mean to get up-myself, it just feels too good man.

>Dude we need to, like, redistribute the wealth but also, like, respect personal freedom and stuff. I don't really know how it would work in a government, but this weed should help me figure it out.
There is no "left libertarian." There's only "authoritarian left" and "retarded left".

Why haven't you repented yet?

Thats called ancap dumb kike

Pretty based.

Attached: scale.png (1186x1054, 73K)

if you don't let me opt out of forking over my property to you, you're not a libertarian
at all
in any sense

SLIDE THREAD IRAELI JET HAS BEEN SHOT DOWN IN THE GAZA STRIP SLIDE THREAD REPOST IN ALL JEW SLIDE THREADS

all of you leave this site forever

Attached: why-indeed.png (573x30, 2K)