This thread is for discussion of property rights, self-determination, natural order, right-libertarianism and the PHYSICAL REMOVAL of COMMUNIST FAGS from our board of peace. Reminder that this is the Libertarian RIGHT General. Left-Libertarians, Cosmopolitan freaks, Open borders cucks and other assorted libertine degenerates need to fuck off.
>LIBERTARIANISM DOES NOT MEAN OPEN BORDERS, MORAL DEGRADATION, HYPER-INDIVIDUALISM OR LAWLESS CHAOS. /lrg/ IS THE A STAND AGAINST THE LEFT-LIBERTARIAN AND ANTI-MORAL LIBERTARIAN MENACE, DON'T COME HERE PREACHING THAT GARBAGE AND DONT ASSUME WE SUPPORT THOSE LOSERS.
Questions are welcome, however many are repeated often. We advise you research the basics before asking.
Are there a lot of libertarians in England? Spoke with a gentleman from there and he had never heard of libertarianism and he was blown away by my small government views.
Nathan Sullivan
Libertarianism is illegal in UK. Can't even get a license for it.
Libertarianism is over. Have you even read Moldbug bro? We out here restoring the Stuarts, reading Carlyle, raising Thule (and Atlantis), and trying to complete the system of German idealism. Burn the books! #frogtwitter
Natural order and self determination seldom work together. Maybe if the was just a bit of a state to enforce restrictions on all those ideas like multiculturalism.. Also what’s your opinion on Natsoc asking for a friend
Not in the hoppean sense, no. Remember that what you guys call mainstream libertarianism (free speech, minarchy, personal rights etc etc) goes by classical liberalism here - not to be confused with libtard progressivism. Classical liberalism is still big, and there are a couple of harder explicitly libertarian parties eg libertarianpartyuk.com/
Joseph Cooper
Is it against the NAP to put my dick in some guy's butt?
Charles Edwards
I can agree with this
unfortunately the (our, not yours you poor, poor euro) 1st amendment defends communist speech too, so we can't "physically remove" them just for their words.
but I would say their active planning to "eliminate whiteness by any means necessary" in their inner circles with a year 2100 deadline constitutes conspiracy to commit genocide and they should all face trial.
Liam Watson
not if he's willing but that doesn't stop you from being a dirty faggot
Julian Morris
Fuck off libertards are what ruined this country
Liam Carter
You must let the chink put it in your butt first or you're a racist.
Jordan Fisher
>Natural order and self determination seldom work together >what is biological evolution drop the memeflag you stupid shithead. freedom of self determination is the essence of the natural order.
Michael Morris
no that's communists.
Brody Anderson
>natsoc
On paper pic related, bootlickers etc. In actual fact i reckon theres a bit of common ground, just getting to the destination by a different route, hoppe is often called a fascist by his detractors. Spoken to fair few people who think that a period of authoritarianism is needed to get back to the "high trust society" required for rw libertarianism.
Who were allowed to infiltrate because libertards let them because freedom maaaan.
Its funny that OP has to do damage control for his ideology just like the faggots on the left that come here are like NO BRO LEFT != LIBERALISM!! Well in the american context it might as well when every commie/socialist is some tranny or respects their comrades pronouns.
Lose the tunnel vision Jow Forums mindset of it JUST being "muh gommies" Its sorta like when i see people here directing anger directly at migrants and you ask them why are you mad at pedro when that accomplishes nothing. WHY arent you directing your anger at the people in charge the gatekeepers letting them in? see through the weeds and find the bigger picture
Ryan Moore
antional socialist economic basis worked frighteningly well and I wish I could find more about it. they based their currency on labor hours, as far as I am aware. scared the shit outta the crypto jews.
their social policy of forced adherence was unacceptable however. it's fine to kick noncitizens out for failure to integrate, as noncitizens have few rights, however their policy of jailing citizens for spoken dissent doesn't fly.
Robert Jones
There are a lot of academic papers, mostly behind paywalls, unfortunately. Also the original material though
Humans who partake in a r-type strategy of reproduction have self selected traits of contributing to a homogeneous society. K-type strategy focuses on the individual gains and thinks not for the future. Guess which is European and which is African. Meme flag dropped
Eli Morgan
>Who were allowed to infiltrate because libertards let them because freedom maaaan. you're thinking of unfettered state capitalism.
capitalism=/=libertarianism. you're thinking of anarcho capitalism. there need to be strict rules on what the government can and cannot do, such as allow dual citizens in office, permit cooperative monopalist megacorporations, and make decisions about education and curriculum content and funding. THAT is what allowed the cult zionists to subvert our society with forced egalitarianism.
we need to get the government out of our classrooms and the israelis out of our congress.
saying what you want is fine, not doing what you want at the expense of others. for example, littering should still be illegal, along with sitting naked on public benches, etc.
you've been brainwashed to mistake oligarchyism for libertarianism.
Benjamin Bailey
you'd think they'd be in the public domain by now, it's been fucking 70 years
Hunter Taylor
All ideologies have different facets, look at all the flavours of conservatism, or even fascism, from mosely, codreanu, mussolini, strasser etc.
Just saying dont confuse rw libertarianism with the dude weed lmao variety.
Michael Torres
I agree completely, Natsoc isn’t a forever thing eventually autocracy is corrupted by decadence. A foundation needs to be laid for any libertarian way of thinking or else the nation will be destroyed by those who seek a dopamine hit instead of building society
Xavier Hill
>Meme flag dropped thank you. I respect your opinion more now and appreciate the gesture.
I'm unfamiliar with your lettered strategy selection types, but I can tell you this:
I lived in a large city out west. it was full of blacks and mexicans. crime was through the roof. I knew plenty of people that got murdered, executed by the state, etc.
I moved to a 90%+ white place. there is no crime. I was born there.
it's not that I didn't want to improve the western city, but knew I coul not. I also knew my voting power would be increased by the move. for example, where I live now, my vote in a national election is worth about 15x that of someone in california.
I want to do what I can to support the greater good. I vote against gun control, any race issues, things like that. I do what I can to improve society through my economic and political behaviors.
that's not to say I don't disdain niggrish behavior. I am strongly in favor of capital punishment. that doesn't mean that I haven't worked with and known several (not many, mind you) very well spoken, well educated and well integrated blacks. mexicans and asians are more common.
I identify as a libertarian out of principle. national socialism is authoritarian by nature, even if economically it's against things like welfare and financial/material redistribution.
I know very little about NatSoc so please correct me where needed.
Nicholas Reed
Has anybody ever read William Leggett's articles in the New York Evening Post? The Locofoco Democrats were as libertarian as modern-day Libertarians.
Brandon Collins
also I'm strongly against race mixing. diversity is the spice of life. consider the columbian exchange; european plants and animals that have been introduced here stamp out the preexisting natural species that make this place unique. the damage is done and I understand that the strong will survive, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.
Caleb Jones
ns germany actually had quite an extensive social welfare program, eg the NSV Mutter und Kind scheme. Effectively ns economics were a 3rd way between capitalism and communism - eg nationilised idustries mixed with private enterprise. Welfare was very different from modern gibs and handouts though.
Michael White
lots of democrats in the 70's-90's were actually very moderate. lately they've been pushed farther left by (((something))), and a need to further themselves from anything the loudest dipshits on the internet whine and moan about.
Gabriel Rodriguez
Don’t forget a currency system built upon time spent working instead of a floating fiat currency bound to plummet in a global economy. This kills the (((bank))) though do it will probably never be realized
Juan Lewis
>ns germany actually had quite an extensive social welfare program I did not know that. I did know hitler was strongly in favor of germans voluntarily giving charity to other germans. I watched him plead for germans to give charity, and recall something in the speech about being against forced welfare...
>eg nationilised idustries mixed with private enterprise. that's an issue with me. industries shouldn't be nationalized, nor should institutions be privatized. Prisons, for example. the privatization of the "prison industry" leads to completely unfettered capitalism, and a pseudo industry that benefits from recidivism. this endangers society as a whole, does a disservice to those in need of reform that are capable of it, and is an insult to the ideological concept of justice as a whole.
Nolan Gomez
Same here, our old school 80s lefties were pretty fucking sensible a lot of them. Theyd all be literally hitler now. Idk, yuri bezmonov has a lot of detractors but you have to wonder. Case in point a few years ago a lecturer in my old town got outed as ex-stasi, basically using his position to indoctrinate. And its easier to push in the direction you are already travelling, from moderate class sensitive lefty to nation wrecking progressive libtard who cares more for lgbtqwhvyu+ and immigrants than the native working man.
Sebastian Ramirez
It’s no problem and if asked I do it without question, RW libertarianism is a free steps away from National socialism. It puts less focus on the individual genotype and more focus on a general one. In the US at least I know plenty of white people who are quite niggerish in disposition and I share a disdain for them just as much. We have the same goal in mind with different paths to get there. Instead of success through capitalist and currency centered policy, it would be based on time spent working. This puts a want to help the community on the individual Level and promotes a strong local/national identity, almost a socialism that is accidental instead of forced. As for race mixing I vehemently oppose it. I consider humans to be categorized as sub-species. There is nothing particularly wrong with any sub-species they just have different goals. Anyone who believes in evolution and thinks that humans are all one group is doing some serious mental gymnastics. With this being stated anytime sub-species intermix the offspring will have serious problems due to the mixing of alleles that have never come into contact before creating mutants. Around 80% of the human genome goes into the creation of the brain so miscegenation is problematic from a purely biological standpoint Also I’m phoneposting so I’m sorry if this seems a bit scatterbrained
Benjamin Gonzalez
>pic related
I miss that site, ex US special forces guy who had loads of libertarian anime memes.
You dont even have to be racist to want strong national cohesion. I cant think of any multicultural states (except those that were born that way, like brazil) that didnt fracture along ethnic, religious etc lines as soon as there was a national crises. Look at numerous african states, or the the balkans etc.
Its also amusing that esp for africa when they slaughter each other colonialism is blamed for setting borders without consideration of tribal, ethnic boundaries etc. But surely thats just diversity, so its a good thing?
Chase Young
RARE
Xavier Walker
>We have the same goal in mind with different paths to get there >almost a socialism that is accidental instead of forced yes 100% agreed. >As for race mixing I vehemently oppose it me too ethically, but because of the "human" version of the columbian exchange, and the need for nature to take its course along with a respect for the rights of the individual, there should be no legal means to put a stop to it outside of the rapid and violent if need be expulsion of noncitizens. > I consider humans to be categorized as sub-species. I think I might be more radical than you in that regard. I'd consider the races outside of africa to be one species excluding the australasians (x. denisova), pretty much and the africans to be H. africanus >There is nothing particularly wrong with any sub-species they just have different goals. and different biology, different disease resistances, different environmental tolerances, different neurological capacitances... >Anyone who believes in evolution and thinks that humans are all one group is doing some serious mental gymnastics. /YUP >With this being stated anytime sub-species intermix the offspring will have serious problems due to the mixing of alleles that have never come into contact before creating mutants. Around 80% of the human genome goes into the creation of the brain so miscegenation is problematic from a purely biological standpoint actually that's not necessarily correct. "hybrid vigor" is a thing when the hybrid is viable. White perch and striped bass are a quick example I can think of off the top of my head. their offspring managed to be tolerant of freshwater in warm artificial lakes in the tennessee to texas area and now provide a substantial food fishery. I am however not aware of their impact on the local fish, but the lakes are artificial anyway. Also, I am aware that people are not fish. hybridization within genus leads often to new, more vigorous species.
“I can’t believe how racist and bigoted you are for saying all those mean words” blacks aren’t bad in a general sense, in Africa they can do what they want. In civilization though the average black man cannot abide by general conscientiousness selected for for millennia by European cultures
Jonathan Butler
2/2
that being said, invasive species, in addition to eliminating native species that the local environment depends on, can subsequently do tremendous environmental damage (detroit, for example, LOL) wasting entire ecosystems and making them fit only for more invasive species. >Around 80% of the human genome goes into the creation of the brain as far as I know something like 60% of the human genome is what moden geneticists call "waste" DNA that encodes for wierd vestigial shit like digitigrade limbs, elongated snouts and striped fur and shit, but I could be wrong. >Also I’m phoneposting SHAME >so I’m sorry if this seems a bit scatterbrained nah. totally sensible post, meng.
Cooper Bennett
The libertarians lost the narrative ages ago. They nominate actual gun grabbers for office in the US now.
Liam Martinez
The whole Libertarian movement died in 2016, get over it faggot. National Socialism or nothing.
>phoneposting I know mate but I’m out in the field right now so I can’t help it too much. It’s funny you mentioned Detroit, I grew up in Ypsilanti which is where I was handed my first redpill. I was always interested in personal growth where my “peers” were interested in getting their next nut. I’d suggest you read Edward Dutton’s “How to Judge People by what they Look Like” it goes pretty deep into this kind of thinking
Brayden Morales
This is exactly how you get people to not support your cause mate
A free market can easily be manipulated by those with ill gotten gains, particularly capital amassed from usury. Thinking socialism is inherently left wing is prime first order thinking. You can be fiscally middle while being very statist and traditional.
Juan Brown
>I was always interested in personal growth where my “peers” were interested in getting their next nut. DUDE. >I’m out in the field right now if you're on the clock you should really be focused on doing your job right, user, unless you're salary or something.
>I’d suggest you read Edward Dutton’s “How to Judge People by what they Look Like” I'm not gonna pre judge it by the name, but peoples physical appearance only expresses their inward behavior if they have made it so. just because someone's hideous or has a particular physiological trait does not mean they're evil or stupid. however, people are not books, and they actively try to portray on their "covers" what they want you to think they are like inside, if they are even capable of thought on that level
covered in gang tats? probably a piece of shit that needs to be forced into prison labor or be executed. hussie caked in makeup? probably a fucking filthy slut carrying all the std's and then some.
but I'll look into it. I don't like reading editorials, fiction, or opinion. I ONLY read nonfiction. but yes I'll look into it.
This has been a fantastic conversation. thank you for the discourse. I wish more of the intenet was like this. this is why I don't hate legitimate NatSocs. they're not extremists and are capable of rational intellectual discourse.
Jack Watson
Beautiful
Isaac Bennett
Finally it's back
Adam King
Capitalism and Communism are two sides of the same coin. You either worship the Jew by giving them endless amounts of money, or worship the Jew by giving them endless amounts of power. Either way, you put yourself into a checkmate
I’m technically always on the clock, Hooah. And I always appreciate a good back and forth. New ideas are key in self improvement, which is why I can always appreciate ancaps and RW Libertarians on particular freedoms especially speech. Living in an echo chamber may be comfy but it’s not practical
>natural order and self determination seldom work together Lmao what? One follows the other, people having control over their own actions, rather than all making the exact same choices or being programmed in the exact same way, instantly creates a natural hierarchy. The only way you can attempt to avoid natural hierarchy developing is trying to limit how much of an effect individuals making poor or good choices has (welfare for example). You'll always fail but you can still cripple the better and inflate the lower
Joshua Sullivan
And what happens once the top of that natural hierarchy amalgamates enough power and influence? They create a state to protect that power. Then under the guise of freedom they degenerate a national sense of being amongst the populace to create a slave state with promise that with enough elbow grease you too can become top class as well >see America.
Nathaniel Jones
>Hooah kek. israel thanks you, goyim. >Living in an echo chamber may be comfy I think it's a nightmare. where I am might be almost all white but it's mostly PC liberals, and I hear them all saying the same shit day in and day out. luckily the extremism and intolerance you'd find in large city progressivism isn't expredded verbally here, so once in a while you hear a good argument without angry words.
I would very much like your opinions on the authoritarianism associated with national socialism, and your personal opinions on any restrictions there should be on the restrictions of behavior and expression there should be.
Connor Smith
>And what happens once the top of that natural hierarchy amalgamates enough power and influence? They create a state to protect that power.
DING DING DING
Caleb Lopez
Iirc hoppe does deal with this in his Private Production of Defence where he goes into mechanisms to stop those types of situations (or explains why they would be unlikely). He also addresses the other common objection, the Warlords Problem, what stops a bunch of agressors banding together and taking over.
I cant find the pdf link rn, and the old /lrg/ site isnt there any more with all the free book links.
Jaxson Hughes
I am actually laughing at ppl who think this is sound logic. >muh free markets lol hope you enjoy working for amazon for the rest of your life cuck fag nigger
You can't possibly call yourself libertarian and be open borders or an egalitarian leftist. Libertarianism relies on voluntary arrangements between two parties. As a nation, we have a voluntary agreement with all of our fellow citizens on how to run our country and how to distribute the resources we put in to it. If a third part, such as illegal aliens barges in to our country, then they're causing harm to said said citizens by taking advantage of what was agreed upon. As for egalitarianism. It's this foolish idea where the state should intervene to create equality where it doesn't exists. So you're utilizing that same state we all agree it needs to be cut down to size, to prop up people artificially, thus making it unfair and unequal
where do you derive the NAP from? Much like a Communist's Dialectical Materialism, the NAP has no ethical or moral foundation. It is just something you axiomatically believe is correct.
Brayden Walker
>free market is the only moral economic system >free market is the only moral economic system >free market is the only moral economic system >free market is the only moral economic system >free market is the only moral economic system
Now this is the kind of general I can stand for. Fuck /sg/
Luis Nelson
That's not a valid moral standpoint. Once you remove metaphysics from the equation, you're bound by the simplest of counter-arguments. "Why?" Why is freedom good? Why is being rich good? Why is prospering good? Why is anything "good" to a secularist? Nothing whatsoever, without a metaphysical approach is either good or bad. And it is simply us applying biological factors such as evolution to describe our beliefs. But evolution has no moral compass. It is a set of chance occurrances that happened and caused us to be the way that we are. Following evolution and biology is neither intrinsically good or bad. And it is pointless to argue from that stance.
Nicholas Peterson
Only dumb or weak-willed Jow Forums users still believe in lolberg retardation at this point, so that's irrelevant. I just hope that this shitty general made for a dead movement doesn't dilute the catalog again. Jow Forums has and always will be a National Socialist board. Libertarians today frequently adopt Hoppeian-like positions, despite the obvious cognitive dissonance, to desperately cling onto their flawed ideology in the face of truth. Stop being spineless.
You don't need the state to enforce restrictions on multiculturalism because the state is the one that enforces multiculturalism in the first place. If the people were left to their own devices, they would choose to associate and deal with people similar to them. What you're saying is, let's give more power to the state to solve a problem IT created in the first place. >Fuck off libertards are what ruined this country. Really now? Tell me user, who has been in charge of this country since the first world war till now? Who gave amnesty to Mexicans in the 80's? Who bailed out Chevrolet, GM, wall street bankers and so on? Who has been starting criminal wars for the past 80 years, and who profited from said wars? Who has subsidized colleges, encouraging waste and skyrocketed tuitions? Who has utterly fucked our public schools? Daily reminder that the Rebuplicucks and their Communists fuckbuddies are one and the same
Juan Brown
>Israel Yea it’s becoming very clear to me who runs the military and it’s very unfortunate. They are killing our military through independent contractors like general dynamics and Dyncorps, as well as suffocating its personnel through impossible paperwork and everpresent bureaucracy. We aren’t a fighting force but a never ending money churn for private corporations controlled by you know who. Basically I see authoritarianism as a necessary step to create change. Democracy will never create change because there are too many options, opinions, and influences through capital to have a solid consensus. Also the level of public comfort is too high to warrant such change. As for restriction, it would be restriction on actions that go against national sentiment, and way of life for our peoples
Gavin Rodriguez
I’ll check it out thanks user
Chase Murphy
No, you do not have that right. Rights do not exist in a wholly biological and secular perspective. Whoever has the power to an action has the right to do it. A weak tribesman Neanderthal did not have any rights not because of anything other than being weak. He could not protect himself. In a statist society, a person with guns cannot have any rights to defend his property unless the state allows for it.
Aaron Cox
Yea I happen to believe that too. We're in such dire straits demographically that we need an elected dictator to solve the crisis before we're able to move on with our lives. When the crisis is solved, said dictator should step down and let the people rule again. Kinda like what they did in Rome
Josiah Martin
You just have to realize that once they go hoppean it’s quite an easy step to jump to National Socialism. Don’t treat them as enemies, because we want the same thing.
Jordan Collins
Libertarian free market =/= to current capitalism with its unnatural monopolies etc.
>"T]he basic axiom of libertarian political theory holds that every man is a self-owner, having absolute jurisdiction over his own body. In effect, this means that no one else may justly invade, or aggress against, another's person. It follows then that each person justly owns whatever previously unowned resources he appropriates or 'mixes his labor with'. From these twin axioms-- self-ownership and 'homesteading'--stem the justification for the entire system of property rights titles in a free market society."
>free market >natsoc Go home. You don't belong here.
Logan Jenkins
In order to have a successful nation the people of that nation have to deal with transgressions on their self and property. Rothbard often forgets that people are social beings who thrive in communities. Sacrifice of self is 100% necessary for the success of a community
Logan Perez
>which is why the state must be abolished no you fucking blind retard. To a secularist nothing "must" be done, because there is no moral truth. Just your blind subjective understandings of the world. >Why must the state be abolished Because it has a monopoly on force >Why is having a monopoly on force bad Because muh freedumbs and I have the right to defend myself >Why are freedoms good and you evidently do not have any rights because the state is the one that gave it to you It is an endless cycle of "why?" when you do not have a metaphysical grasp on nature. You just reassert your own axioms through imprudant tunnel vision
