Any classical liberals/libertarians here or is everyone a fascist now?

Libertarian: "If people are left aloneand the government gets out of their way then miracles can occur"

Nazi: "Sure, but only if those people are white and all the non whites don't screw it up"

Jow Forums: "Well then... We know what needs to be done, don't we?"

Reddit: "Please Jamal, fuck me in front of my wife and children again"

I simply can't trust libertarians anymore. Their beliefs are inconsistent at best and destructive at worst. To be a true libertarian you'd have to believe that open borders are good, tariffs and economic protectionism is bad, environmental regulations are bad, trusts/monopolies can't be broken up, polygamy and gay marriage is okay, etc. etc. And if you don't believe these things or even some of them, then you're de facto not a libertarian. And you have no reason to believe in the god of "live and let live." The truth is that shit never works in real life.

now a total faggot, amirite?

That be me, was fascist for a year or two before coming back into right wing libertarianism, neo liberalism to be specific.

Attached: 1554734948767.jpg (2807x3473, 562K)

>true libertarian
lmao fuck off with your puritanical shit

Liberalism is cancer in all its forms
Monarchism is the only way to go.

Attached: kzufdtiefwy01.png (2518x1280, 357K)

Ancap gang we out here

I'm a right wing libertarian and kind of a closet fascist.

It's important in this case though. Either there needs to be governmental controls or there doesn't. And if you believe there are cases where they're neededn then fuck off with "muh free market."

Classical liberal nationalist here

Believer in freedom here.

Attached: 77F6A0B2-93B6-4EA2-9542-054EDE512610.png (500x460, 30K)

you think libertarian is anarcho-capitalist? how fucking fat are you?

Im classical liberal but I try not to talk about politics outside of immediate family and friends. People get too hot headed when politics come up

North Korea is basically a monarchy, look how well things are going for them.

Attached: 1553720350660.jpg (712x717, 75K)

Libertarianism + White Nationalism

Nobody is lolbertarian. It is the least popular political position (of four quadrant political compass) in the USA.

Fascism (Universal Suffrage) is a leftist movement, read their manifesto

Jow Forums is and will always be libertarian, anything otherwise is just (((psy-op)))

Here's where you're wrong:
>you'd have to believe that open borders are good
Immigration is fine, but forcing communities to integrate violent criminals or political radicals that will usurp norms of private ownership is wrong and unlibertarian. Moreover, open borders + welfare state is an exceptionally toxic combination.

>tariffs and economic protectionism is bad
They are.

>environmental regulations
Not necessarily. Pollution is not a "right" and infracts upon individual liberties, therefore regulation of it is justified, at least in principle.

>trusts/monopolies can't be broken up
Nope, virtually all monopolies stem from the rent seeking and law being rigged in their favor anyways, not because they can provide the best service at the lowest cost.

>polygamy and gay marriage is okay
You're free to have your own opinion on gay marriage or polygamy. The only libertarian stance is that the state should not license relationships, but rather they should be contractual, just like they were in old times.

Minarchist reporting in

Attached: 1494382526257.jpg (500x900, 82K)

Fascism used to be something to cherish.

Now everything is fascism.

This post is fascist.

I would add that I believe many environmental regulations in practice, are unnecessary, but that view is not tied to me being libertarian.

What is the libertarian defense for an insular group determined to subvert the populace over decades?

I'm amazed how people shit on this flag when it was waving against the British. I blame the disgraceful school system.

Attached: 1776united-logo-patch-copy_grande.png (600x600, 300K)

I'm still here, and I mostly fit the classic liberal /libertarian description.

Not true, it's 3rd, greens are 4th.

Attached: lib.jpg (512x512, 57K)

secession
decentralize power as much as u can

>Immigration is fine
In other words, you don't want an actual nation. You want an economic zone where a bunch of people simultaneously from everywhere and nowhere go to live lives at each other's throats. Especially since police forces are unlibertarian.

>They are
Again. Because you want an economic zone. Who gives a shit about your neighbors honest jobs when corporations can go hire slave labor from the third world thus undercutting wages and benefits such as on the job training.

Libertarians are scum. They're jews under another name.

That's outside the scope of libertarianism. As long as it doesn't involve government power or extremely violent measures.

Libertarianism, at least from how I define it is classical liberalism + anti-statism. That entails the non-aggression principle, but within reasonable limits.

Don't believe the hype, this place is still mostly libertarian, like it's always been. I've been here for over 10 years

every fash ive ever met was once a libertarian

Attached: hmmmm.jpg (260x283, 8K)

>Why vote for retards when they can be birthed into the throne!

>זהות לא עברו את אחוז החסימה

Attached: Sad.jpg (290x282, 13K)

So, then no defense? Those groups do exist, and will try to take over a libertarian state. Thusly wouldn't a libertarian state fall to them?

Greens are not a quadrant, retard. "Economically right but socially liberal" i.e. lolbertarianism, is by far the least popular political position in the USA (and even less popular everywhere else on earth). I used to waste time debating lolbergs, until I realized that they are completely irrelevant.

Attached: figure2_drutman_e4aabc39aab12644609701bbacdff252.png (900x893, 700K)

Once libertarians understand that the whims of the populace lead to degeneracy, then they will become authoritarians. Classical liberalism works with a mature people hardened by war and suffering, not decadent faggots.

Aye sir, a thousand times aye...

I'm a minarchist. Anarcho-capitalists are as gay as socialists.

Attached: q6dtttnpvxxy.jpg (500x400, 24K)

Libertarianism just isn't marketed nearly as well as other ideologies, it had to do with the fact most libertarians are smug autists.

I'd be fine with living in the rugged individualist environment you fear, because that's my nature. However, I realize that's not most people's cup of tea, they need a sense of identity, a concrete legal system, and even hierarchies. But all of those things can be established through free association/dissociation.

A libertarian realizes that the state is nothing but a sprawling elected mafia. And it's able to control far more than a mafia can because it convinces people of it's various legal fictions, like the "social contract" and the "public good". Do you think we need gangs or mafias to be virtuous and maintain a sense of national identity?

Why would a libertarian give a fuck about 'degeneracy'?

Guess...

Attached: 1555501585934m.jpg (801x1024, 183K)

Lolbertarianism has nothing to do with classical liberalism anyway. Lolbergs are just too stupid and uneducated to actually read books, so they believe an autistic 20th century political philosophy created by Jews is the same as the "classical liberalism" of Adam Smith or John Stewart Mill (or that there is even a unified "classical" liberalism at all). Classical economists have more in common with Karl Marx than they do with neoclassical kikenomics like the Austrian school.

ancaps give us a bad name too

>Once libertarians understand that the whims of the populace
You think they don't you retarded facist faggot? Who do you think complain the most about the welfare state?

All libertarians are fascists when the SHTF. Libertarianism is a system for homogeneous white communities that no longer exist. In the face of diversity these men will always move to the far right.

>Classical economists have more in common with Karl Marx
Who is a Jew too, retarded NEETsoc

If that were the case, then yes, a state would simply be a necessary evil. I usually endorse a minimal 'night watchmen state' over full-blown "anarcho-capitalism". It would exist just to provide basic law and order, and protect its people from serious harm or danger. But in an absolutely bare-bones sense, and with strong constitutional limits.

so basically anarchy if it works, but minarchy if it doesn't.

LIBERTARIANISM ACHIEVED BY MEANS OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM

Attached: index.jpg (208x242, 7K)

Im not so sure, the number of noodle armed libertarians ive met who'd rather die than go against a brown person doesn't inspire much confidence.

so true

Attached: 1550878851007.gif (602x608, 2.48M)

Attached: PaulHoppeDukePierce.jpg (654x574, 53K)

Yes. My point was that lolbergs don't know what the fuck they're talking about, not that Marx is aryan or something

It's impossible for a libertarian to change stances from little gov to big gov. If they did they never understood what libertarianism was. Stupid Jow Forums meme that isn't true.

I'm a true libertarian. Not in name, but in practice. Not a faketriot lolbertarian like most rightoids claim to be while they support people like Trump.
People with their Gadsden flags were strangely silent when good goy Trump started talking about guns control. Yet when that nigger wanted to ban guns they flipped their shit. kek

Attached: 1555464192194.jpg (432x599, 53K)

>classical economics is more Marxist than Austrian

WEW LAD.

Classical economics was very similar to neoclassical, but it lacked a basis in marginalism, which the Austrian School helped provide.

The fascist will be the one pointing the gun at a libertarians head.

Not any more. Basically went like this
>Lolbertarian
>Fascist/NatSoc
>Christian Nationalist
>Christian Nationalism and Monarchy

Attached: Questions for Libertarians.png (935x379, 79K)

Libertarianism is unfortunately a losing position. Little by little everyone is strangling it to death and libertarianism does not give any arguments or morality to fight back. Who are you to say anything if groups around you do their own thing and that just happens to lead them suffocating you while at it? They didn't do it directly so no NAP violation so you just need to shut the fuck up and sit down like you have done for the last 100 years.

>Classical economics was very similar to neoclassical,
Not at all.

>>Lolbertarian
>>Fascist/NatSoc
>>Christian Nationalist
>>Christian Nationalism and Monarchy
absolutely based, took the same path myself.

Attached: 1555282176922.gif (500x250, 819K)

>capping your own posts

pic is sideways

Attached: 1555542934604.png (893x900, 710K)

>I'd be fine with living in the rugged individualist environment you fear, because that's my nature
Yes, I realized you're jewish.

>all of those things can be established through free association/dissociation
Technically. But it won't work in practice. Good luck getting corporations to not go to China and India instead of hiring natives. And if you're going to sit here and argue for a people to create a whole self-sufficient area inside the economic zone of libertarian paradise--then you have a nation within a non-nation. And your'e libertarian land had no reason to exist in the first place other than to wait to get crushed by people that actually have ties to each other.

>A libertarian realizes that the state is nothing but a sprawling elected mafia
A person who doesn't swallow blind talking points notes that some states are "elected mafias" and some are decent.

>Do you think we need gangs or mafias to be virtuous and maintain a sense of national identity?
Putting your deliberate use of words like "gang" and "mafia" to scare me with icky connotations, yes. If you have a group, it can technically be called a gang. And if you don't have a group, you don't have national identity.

I used to be a fat shit but then I exercised my right to lose weight.

You point about Austrian economics being Da Jooz economics is retarded, Jews contributed to every economic school.

Libertarians 4 million, Green 1 million.

Attached: stats.jpg (305x1041, 102K)

Nah I'm still a libertarian but I recognize most people just hate it.

The general public doesn't even know about them.

Regular anarchist reporting. Not really ancom or ancap. Here because this is the only place where anyone else sees the nonsense that is the current establishment.

Attached: 1554834805806.jpg (480x480, 42K)

Go to your passover seder, shlomo.

John Witherspoon's writings on marriage and the family were commonplace during the founding of America. They represent the socially conservative mindset of the time. That is the only way classical liberals are that different from your 2008 libertarian like Ron Paul.

Fascists are fucking retarded. They make for fertile trolling ground, though.

I meant classical liberal not anarcho capitalist

The entire "alt-right" was manufactured by the republicans, specifically because they were, and still are afraid of libertarians, and they are still trying to co-opt the movement and lump it under one umbrella.

Classical liberal here.

>hurr derr you sholomo

Attached: Brainlet_.jpg (645x729, 48K)

a libertarian society with a weak central government in the modern day is just nonsensical, doomed to fail. in the 1800s, sure, but today no. strong centralized governments are the only things that make sense today.

In this case, yes. Because libertarians can never answer them and just ignore it, pretending their dogmatic worldview wasn't challenged. So I stopped wasting time typing it up with each new thread and now I can just drop the pic and leave. Saves time.

Attached: 3ea7087c5fae8c2f5f592b1ddb3d99bd98c4889cef3b0b7f23553faca6a243d2.png (500x500, 195K)

Subverting isn't contributing.

Why?

It doesn't matter which direction it is, retard. The fact is most people prefer socially conservative and economically left, the complete opposite of lolbertarianism.

>Classical economics was very similar to neoclassical,

Marx's theory of profit and exploitation was pretty much just Mill's theory of profit and wage. He just copied it.

Marx was very much a "classical economist" to the extent that he can be regarded as an economist at all.

The lolbertarians lost me with their open borders garbage. Sorry.

Fascism is just the realization that your idealistic, libertarian, "just leave me alone lol" ideology will never exist because leftists are hellbent on destroying you.

It might be that way in terms of voting or policy by elected officials but on a daily basis or out of personal principle most people are libertarian leaning in the U.S.

>most people prefer socially conservative and economically left
Sounds like bullshit.
I need some stats there bub.

Attached: 1555464218101.jpg (1126x1154, 355K)

Just because Marx has a similar theoretical premise doesn’t mean his normative views on economics are similar.

>Get rid of govt
>Humans create their own power structures to fill the vacuum
>Shit ton of warring states
>End up taking them all over
>Try to install anarchist dream again
>Rinse and repeat

>Jews contributed to every economic school
>muh subverting
Only weakling retards get subverted, mutt.

Attached: Smug.jpg (499x499, 26K)

Still don't understand surplus value theory. He seems to have just pulled that out of his has by violating the is-ought distinction.