Libertarian Society

File: image.jpg (52KB, 510x506px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 510x506px

>>1480654
It's the only kind of rational system which supports individual liberties against the myriad of authoritarian collectivists who prefer using force to achieve their own definition of the "greater good".

File: 1447916474936.jpg (280KB, 500x779px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 500x779px

Pure ideology

How can a libertarian society exist with capitalism being the economic model? If there is no state and no hierarchies, who controls the money? If there is one central bank controling the money supply, it's not really a libertarian society anymore. So does that mean everybody can start to creat their own curriencies?

>>1480665
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, but if you're saying socialism is better, then I can deny that. I come from Denmark, and even our "Social democratic" society doesn't work, we're getting poorer every year. The more extreme versions of socialism are even worse, for example; look at Venezuela.

>>1480654

Its all great until China invades you.

>>1480677
The free market would create it's own currency, and that currency would better, than that of the state.
That sounds familiar? Today we've got Bitcoin, which actually is safer, than the currency of the state, as it isn't being controlled by politicians, whom want votes.

>>1480696
If the libertarian society were to be imposed on only one country. It would need an army, and the state would have to provide it, that would be the only task for the state.
In my description, I were talking of my vision for a libertarian world, which would mean, no "countries"* would have an army.

*"Countries" in brackets, as there would be no borders in this world.

>>1480717
I agree with you. The state should have the power to regulate the free market to make sure, that monopolies aren't created, and that consumers are properly informed about the products they buy.

>>1480654
All libertarianism is socialism

"Libertarians" who imagine a distinction between statist oppression and corporate oppression are ignorant cuckolds

>>1480695
Lmao you dumb shit, neither Denmark or Venezuela is socialist.

A socialist society is one in which industry is controlled by the workers.

>>1480827
You have much to learn of socialism, if you're saying Denmark and Venezuela isn't socialist countries. Next you're going to tell me that USSR weren't a totalitarian socialist union? That turned out great for everyone.

>>1480855
Denmark is not socialist in the slightest. Absolutely not one bit. A welfare state isn't socialism.

Venezuela is simply the appropriation of private industries by a corrupt and illiberal government.

>>1480654

Yes, let me tell you how interested I am in pontification on freedom from sociopathic minster that vocally supported AUGUSTO FUCKING PINOCHET.

In the end, Friedman, like Hayek, was nothing more than a knowing and self aware propagandist who had no compunction whatsoever with the liquidation of democracy as long as the markets were "free."

A despicable human being, whose ideology should be openly ridiculed.

>capitalism and not chaos

>>1480662
I like how all the bad ideologies and vague "tyranny" are conveniently lumped together on the opposite side of anarcho-capitalism and classical liberalism, really makes you think.

>>1480654
>no armies
This would make a libertarian nation vulnerable to any militarized nation that wants its resources. It doesn't seem reasonable to assume that all the citizens would decide to form a serious organized resistance, especially those who don't own whatever resources the invaders are after. Those citizens would have nothing to gain, but a lot to lose, by fighting off the invaders.

File: Rothbard-quote-cc.jpg (13KB, 303x166px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 303x166px

>>1480654
>Start a libertarian thread
>Quote a socialist in the OP
You fucked up, son.

>>1481174
And the profit motive somehow cannot exist in a socialist society?

>>1480855
>You have much to learn of socialism, if you're saying Denmark and Venezuela isn't socialist countries.
Actually he's right you pretentious knob.
In neither of those countries do the workers control their own means of production. Denmark is just a form of extreme Welfarist Capitalism and Venezuela is another matter entirely.

>>1480665
What so you mean by that? I see it said a lot on /his/.

>>1480654
If that's libertarian then what the fuck is anarchy?

Libertarians are more idealistic than socialists. They're just barely a step above Stanlism and ancaps.

>>1480855
Look up the primary definition of socialism. If workers don't control the means of production, it's only socialist in name. Free hand outs are not the goal or the defining feature of socialism or communism. An abundance of consumer goods is supposed to be the result of workers seizing control of the means of production. Neolibs have twisted it to make you only see the end result of handouts, so they can seize power while being in charge of handouts, undermining socialism.

>>1480654
that is more of an ancap society

I think generally our society leans too much towards "statism", we could legalize weed and prune the government a bit.

>>1480924
>monarchy
>bad

>>1480910

He also '''''supported''''' (by that you mean visited) China and the USSR. Why does nobody talk about that?

>>1480654
a true libertarian society, like all 'pure' forms of society, it impossible to sustain in the real world.

all societies are polities, that is, mixtures of multiple systems that unite into a working whole.

>>1482025
I'm loving this meme. Proper libertarianism just hasn't been tried out yet.

>>1482046
oh, so the idea of polities is a 'meme' now? Well, it's one that's been around for over 2000 years. Read about it in Aristotle's 'Politics.'

>>1481844
XD

ancap rothbard fanboys are a huge embarrassment to the libertarian movement and cancer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CM_--di7L8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ha4ea53UGI

File: socialism vs capitalism.jpg (117KB, 720x554px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 720x554px

>>1480665
Meanwhile in reality...

File: socialism bob sponge.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>1480827
Venezuela is socialist though.Don't be a dumbass,if the socialist party controls the state and the state controls the means of production,it fits the definition of socialism

File: b247068f79153148ed4b8f33f0be3167dc1381ff.png (117KB, 961x974px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 961x974px

>>1482137
No.

>>1482137
No they don't. They don't even control the means of production of toilet paper. They're just socialist in name.

File: heheh.png (149KB, 360x406px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 360x406px

>>1482130
>Cuba was more prosperous when Batista was in power because they built some skyscrapers

>>1482142
You seem to fail to realise that the state can be a tool for the workers to control the means of production.Oh well you autists will just hide yourself in pure sophistry to convince yourself that your dumb ideology may work some day.
>>1482146
Venezuela imports most of the toilet paper.90% of the economy is oil extraction,and that sector is purely control by the goverment

>>1482156
Cuba was objectively more prosperous with Batista.Cuba was wealthier than Italy of Austria before Castro and its median income was 70% of that of the median one of the US.This is supposed to be a history forum,you should know this crap

>>1482159
A socialist government should not be setting price controls on something they do not have control over the means of production of.

>You seem to fail to realise that the state can be a tool for the workers to control the means of production.
Not him, but that doesn't mean a state run economy is a socialist one. A state needs to be controlled by the workers, and the state needs to control the means of production.

>>1482166
>A state needs to be controlled by the workers
Through the party by representation.Inb4>muh representation has to be direct
> and the state needs to control the means of production.
The Venezuelan state controls 90% of the economy and expropiates daily hundreds of the few factories that are opened.They are just incompetenet(that is a given with any socialist goverment)

>>1482169
>Through the party by representation
A socialist party doesn't always mean socialist policy or socialist governance. There's a whole lot of bullshit attached to the word socialist that has very little to do with actual socialism that socialist parties feel they need to do.

>The Venezuelan state controls 90% of the economy and expropiates daily hundreds of the few factories that are opened.
But they don't own the means of production of toilet paper.

>They are just incompetenet(that is a given with any socialist goverment)
There are lots of incompetent governments. It's just that capitalist ones will get foreign investment from capitalists who want to use their capital. Those capitalists stay the fuck away from places where they might lose it.

It says more about how much control over capital capitalists have, and how vital capital is to economic development.

>>1480710
Is this bait? The value of Bitcoin has collapsed more than once. Even one if it's developers, Mike Hearn, has abandoned it.

>>1482176
>A socialist party doesn't always mean socialist policy or socialist governance. There's a whole lot of bullshit attached to the word socialist that has very little to do with actual socialism that socialist parties feel they need to do.
You posted the definition of socialism above and in Venezuela the ruling party does that.
>But they don't own the means of production of toilet paper.
They don't produce toilet paper,they mostly buy it from abroad.
>There are lots of incompetent governments. It's just that capitalist ones will get foreign investment from capitalists who want to use their capital. Those capitalists stay the fuck away from places where they might lose it.
You don't need foreing invetment to have a functioning economy,you just need an efficient and capitalized economy,something that socialist goverment s always fail to do,as they just focus all the resources in very few projects

>It says more about how much control over capital capitalists have, and how vital capital is to economic development.
It says more about how inflexible and inneficient socialists economies are.

File: messi's philosophy.png (448KB, 819x460px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 819x460px

>>1480654
What do you guys think about Messi's trial defence?

>>1482180
>You posted the definition of socialism above and in Venezuela the ruling party does that.
That was a different anon, but even then, if you use the flowchart, no they don't control the means of production.

>They don't produce toilet paper,they mostly buy it from abroad.
Exactly comrade.

>You don't need foreing invetment to have a functioning economy
You need capital to have a functioning economy. Unsurprisingly capital resides or flees to capitalist states.

>you just need an efficient and capitalized economy,something that socialist goverment s always fail to do,as they just focus all the resources in very few projects
You do realize there is such a thing as market socialism, yes?

>It says more about how inflexible and inneficient socialists economies are.
Apparently no, you're not aware of market socialism.

The centrally planned economy meme was from trying to rapidly modernize backwards economies, and because the anti-caps lumped together with the socialists, and Marx described a non-market utopia, and they started this retarded anti-market meme because they say the market as part of capitalism.

And the market is part of capitalism. It can also be part of socialism. Marx titled his book Das Capital, not Das Markets, because the issue was capital. Society without money and markets was supposed to be the result of post-scarcity, not the path to communism.

Anti-market socialism is a retarded meme that was memed by both Soviets and western powers.

>>1482193
>That was a different anon, but even then, if you use the flowchart, no they don't control the means of production.
They do.Directly and indirectlyThe Venezuelan goverment controls almost every aspect of the economy.
>Exactly comrade.
Socialism=autarchy
>You need capital to have a functioning economy. Unsurprisingly capital resides or flees to capitalist states.
Capital stays,unless they move it or destroy it.The problem is the lack of modernization of it,as resources are always poorly alocated in socialist countries.
>You do realize there is such a thing as market socialism, yes?
A failure.Yugoslavia was shit.Tito was just a meme.
>The centrally planned economy meme was from trying to rapidly modernize backwards economies, and because the anti-caps lumped together with the socialists, and Marx described a non-market utopia, and they started this retarded anti-market meme because they say the market as part of capitalism.

And the market is part of capitalism. It can also be part of socialism. Marx titled his book Das Capital, not Das Markets, because the issue was capital. Society without money and markets was supposed to be the result of post-scarcity, not the path to communism.

Anti-market socialism is a retarded meme that was memed by both Soviets and western powers.
Socialism in itself is antimarket.It doesn't allow the free exchange of things,as it aims to control production,and kill any private production or investment.

File: Liz.png (243KB, 398x398px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 398x398px

>>1482164
>Cuba was objectively more prosperous with Batista.
It was a brothel and gambling joint for American MOB members run by a bent military regime backed by America. People toiled in the fields cutting sugar cane all day while their kids starved at home, poverty was abundant. At least under Castro they've managed to acheive a reasonable HDI now regardless of the fact they have a miserable GDP and have been under US blockade since the 60s.
>This is supposed to be a history forum,you should know this crap
Yeah it is. You should.

>>1482159
>You seem to fail to realise that the state can be a tool for the workers to control the means of production.
No I don't. The people of Venezuela have no control over the means of production through their own state, stop spouting bullshit.

>>1481865

No, by supported I mean publicly praised and directly worked with a brutal dictatorship on economic policy.

Friedman, and Hayek with him, were nothing more than knowing and unrepentant propagandists who considered democracy totally fungible so long as capital was free.

>>1482137
>it's called the socialist party therefore the country is socialist
Next you'll tell me that China is communist

>>1482244
>At least under Castro they've managed to acheive a reasonable HDI now regardless of the fact they have a miserable GDP and have been under US blockade since the 60s.
Cuba has the same health stadistics than before Castro you moron.They always were developed.La Havana for example was the first city with a hospital that used X-rays for medical pourposes.Trying to hide that Cuba was more developed in sheer and baseless rhethoric solves nothing.Poverty was fewer,CUba had the lowest levels of desnutrition of the WHOLE AMERICAN CONTINENT YOU MORON.Why do you have to lie?Lies wont make your dumb ideology less true

File: pleased fedora.gif (1MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x360px

>>1482475
>Chavez and Maduro aren't socialists

>>1482476
[Citation needed]

>>1482177
I love the lack of a reply to this.

>>1482177
And yet thousands of people use it and find it satisfying.
Besides, Bitcoin is an unprecedented project in the human history. Some hiccups are to be expected.
At least capitalists are working towards their goals unlike socialists who only sit on their asses and bitch about porky while their ideology slides into obscurity.

>>1480654
>I'm studying economy at a keynesian university in Denmark

you mean new keynesian right? you understand that's perfectly compatible with libertarian thought? (as well as other political ideologies aside from extreme ancappers or commies)

File: immanuel-kant-russia-shot.jpg (81KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x480px

>No taxes, no armies, freedom and no state regulations.
>libertarians actually believe that this will work
>they actually believe that you can have rights without duties

Can anyone explain exactly to me why libertarians are so goddamn stupid? What makes a person with a functioning brain come up with such moronic ideas?

File: dur.png (4KB, 390x397px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 390x397px

>>1482142
>>1482146
>>1482475

>>1482719
>functioning brain

Libertarianism is literally applied autism anon.

File: Bread.jpg (181KB, 964x647px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 964x647px

>>1480665
>Socialist society

>>1482142
You're argumenting against yourself. "Democratic control" - That's what the workers have through the socialist party, therefore it is a socialist state.

>>1480654
>No taxes, no armies, freedom and no state regulations.
Which shall be fun for 15 minutes, until the neighbouring country invades you, as has happened throughout history.

>>1482719
Because those are anarchist positions, not libertarian ones

>>1480654

Libertarianism doesn't work for the same reason that "the free market" doesn't work: left to its own devices it essentially destroys itself and transforms into the ideology that it was supposed to contrast with. The only realistic endgame of a libertarian society is one entity devouring all the others and basically becoming the defacto "ruler".

TL;DR - libertarianism is impossible because forming clans and hierarchies that dominate others is apart of human nature.

>>1482192
It might be debatable, if your pic didn't have such poor contrast.

>>1480654
No thanks, we've had enough of feudalism.

>>1482208
>pure ideology

>>1480654
>What are your thoughts on a libertarian society.
My thoughts are that within your society, sub-societies will form and one or many of them will emerge as the 'authoritarian' states you tried to abolish. Eventually they will take over your libertarian society.

>>1480654
I have some great plans for a combo prostitution, drug and chemical weapon retail space and can't wait until I can buy enough children to make my dreams a reality.

Alas, I fear that the jackboot of the state will forever prevent my dreams from coming true.

>>1482719

'Libertarianism' is perfectly compatible with Kantian political and moral philosophy.

>>1482159
>You seem to fail to realise that the state can be a tool for the workers to control the means of production.
But it's not unless the state is controlled by the workers.

>>1483132
Except not all "socialist parties" are actually democratic.

>>1480695

Denmark is socialliberalism, a product of Social Democracy.

Social Democracy is not socialism. Social Democracy is capitalism with socialist elements. Which elements depends on which state.

To this date, Social Democracy is the ideology that has produced the most well off states in terms of egalitarianism. Though ideology alone cannot be attributed to these countries success, there are other factors as well.

>>1480654
>libertarian society

It would simply be conquered and destroyed by the neighboring non-libertarian societies.

>>1482244
Gotta love when retards like (You) jump into the debate without knowing any statistical facts and just spout memes, propaganda and appeals to emotion.

>>1482142
>>1480827
>ONLY MARXIST DEFINITIONS ARE VALID !!!

No, fuck off. There are many forms of socialism.

>>1480654
Autism
>>1480662
Autism

>>1482475
Retarded commie

>>1482164
And if USA just fucked off and not tried to cuck Cuba cause muhhh commie threat? Would Cuba under Casto be a much better place if it wasn't raped by the US and A?

>>1489054
>shieeeeet, the white mans economics is why i's be po

>>1489054
Cuba should be annexed by the US, it was a mistake letting them declare independence after we won that territory from Spain.

It's a natural state of being. People naturally participate in commerce. Socialism and it's system of bureaucracy and welfare naturally finds a home for criminals and other dejects within its system. So called "sick pups". Look at any school, hospital or police force and you find abuses of power everywhere.

We should just annihilate all these forms of government intervention which are in fact hindrances to economic growth, which shouldn't come as a surprise since economists since time eternal have been pointing out that government intervention is always a source of inefficiency.

You waste the first 18 years of your life being institutionalized by socialized education and you learn nothing about life or the real world - then maybe, you fall sucker to the college scam, and waste another 3 - 5 years. Or even more. And you get older and you continue to learn nothing about life. Then you graduate, have insane debt, and learned nothing about surviving in a commercial capitalist society - all because of socialism. Why not just get rid of all of it?

Why not drop out at 13, get a job doing whatever, and work your way up early on. Get ahead while you're ahead, instead of listening to socialist dribble about degrees and worrying about pointless grades.

File: inmemoryofthe1940constitution.gif (3KB, 432x216px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 432x216px

>>1482476
Here's some statistics to support your argument,

http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/FACTS_Web/Cuba%20Facts%20Issue%2043%20December.htm

your welcome I have college work to do right now but ill just drop this and at some point I'll post some links to history papers I wrote here or in its own thread. This is my first post on /his/ im a /int/ and /pol/ poster originally /int/ though.

t. Cuban American

>>1489243
You have to go back

>>1489248
im not a nazi or a trump supporter im actually center right no need to expel me for browsing /pol/. Plus I was born and raised in the US I'd get on the next boat or plane to Cuba after I finish my education if it was democratic and free with some semblance of a capitalist economy again If that's what you mean.

>>1489100
>get a job doing whatever, and work your way up early on
How exactly do you expect to "work your way up" without even having a basic knowledge of economics or algebra?

>>1489857
Learn on your own, read a book.

>>1480654
I think that asking a society to do nothing collectively is asking far more than asking them to do something collectively.
Humans in their natural state have always, and will always view inequality, oppression (of which there are many forms), cruelty, exploitation as a negative things. For an ideological standpoint to essentially prevent people from collectively addressing that problem is not only unrealistic, but morally reprehensible.

>>1489260
MNR was an AnCap. Many libertarians aren't. Minarchy really is the best form of government. As a minarchist myself, I think children below the age of reason are the only conceivable example where positive duties can be forced upon individuals. Depriving a child of food, because of its inability to feed itself, is tantamount to aggression against it.

>>1480654
Jesus christ, you people are now infecting Europe too! You're like a zombie outbreak, stop infecting the lecture halls. Go back over the pond!

>>1489260
only the kids hit puberty kick him straight to the curb imo

File: 1469503258394-4.jpg (24KB, 448x340px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 448x340px

>>1480654
>muh private property

I think when most people say "libertarian" they immediately think of anarchy.

>>1488805
Yeah meanwhile you're making a great image for yourself.

File: 1446564997221.png (444KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 800x600px

>>1489243
>im a /int/ and /pol/ poste
Not even gonna open that link, gas yourself.

>How many keynesians does it take to change a lightbulb?
>None, the invisible hand of the free market will do that job.

>>1489100
I'm partially with you with how socialized institution are inherently problematic, but it's ridiculous to then say school and university are useless or 'scams'. More and more activity requires skills that require schooling.

I'm a physicist and there's no way I could do my job now without my 4 years undergrad and 5 years graduate school. The education is required. There's no way me or my peers could do our research and produce our new technologies without all the learning, and more and more jobs and products require similar skills.

>>1491413
>Depriving a child of food, because of its inability to feed itself, is tantamount to aggression against it.
How is this any different from the poor (especially those who cannot find a job due to disability, lack of skill, etc)? Refusing to donate money or food to them would be tantamount to aggression, just as it is with the child. The only difference is that they have no "designated caregiver" like a parent, but the same is true of orphaned children.

>>1491672
Unfortunalty a handful of economist and philosophers has been mistaken for the entire libertarian movement, which at least in the US is a mixture of classical liberals, miniarchists and a few anarchists, with most of the leaders being one of the former

>>1480662
/r/ing the ancap post about getting your bitcoins stolen and paying the cops by commission

>>1492688
physicists aren't really a critical profession anyways. To 97% of the population, it really doesn't matter if light is a wave or a particle or both. Yeah, for the few with gifts / passion university is beneficial.

When I say scam, I'm referring to the torrential amount of students with debt they can't pay off and jobs they can't find. Simply because they have no experience and they are psychologically institutionalized by a system that has nothing to do with the practical world.

Most skills you can learn on your own or on the job.

>>1480654
If there is no army then it won't stay that way for long

Also that sounds more like anarchy than anything else

>>1481187
Milton a socialist?
Are you a fucking moron?
Go kill yourself

>>1494557
physicists are the reason good country xyz has atomic bombs, that's a pretty fucking critical profession

File: IMG_3804.jpg (371KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1600x1200px

>>1480654
>I'm studying economy at a keynesian university in Denmark

literally the worst place to be a libertarian or indeed a capitalist of any kind

>>1480665

gave me a chuckle pham

this is modern day Venezuela, socialist paradise

>>1482137

the fact that this gif even exists is a testament to the sheer quantity of delusional fucktards who believe their precious ideology cannot possibly be responsible for poverty or backwardsness

compare Venezuela to Chile, or North Korea to South Korea. The difference is plain as day. Look how people vote with their feet

File: its chicago time.png (61KB, 361x440px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 361x440px

>>1482137

>>1488810
>SOCIALISM CAN BE WHATEVER I THINK IT IS !!!

More likely than not, such a society would be a pile of carnage and shit where human life has no value. I've never talked to a self-proclaimed libertarian who doesn't hold completely delusional beliefs about their system, or doesn't immediately start giving ground to where the state should intervene.

>I would happily work for more than 12 hours a day seven days a week
>the hand of the free market fixes literally any problem you can think of

The best part is where in their heads they just replace a judicial bureaucracy with a corporate one and think there's any functional difference within the two.
>Well, we wouldn't have NATIONAL building regulations, but all companies would institutionalize their own tribunal that would regulate it and dish out punishment if regulations aren't met.

Apply this for literally any subject.

Libertarians are just delusional fucking an-caps. Just accept there is a role for the government, like - say, protecting the markets from monopolies, and let's have a reasonable discussion about how far reaching its power should be.

>no (very little) government = freedom

Honestly it flies it the face of what we know about history and political science. It's ironic because the only place in the world where libertarians exist is in countries that have a strong government and many liberties.

It's as naive as communism.

>>1480654
>freedom
>capitalism still exists

>>1480654
dræbe dig selv min mand

>>1480654
I have no reason to respect something as stupid as "private property", lolbertarian "freedom" is the most spooky thing ever.

>>1497210
Dette

File: Portrait_of_Pierre_Joseph_Proudhon_1865.jpg (8KB, 220x286px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x286px

>>1480654
>No taxes, no armies, freedom and no state regulations
Combine that with no private property and we have a done deal.

>>1480654
It is an economically prosperous ideal, but it is stupid in nearly all other aspects, since it throws most caution to the wind. There is no matter of legitimate protection, outside of whatever you can hold onto and use as a weapon to defend yourself. There is no management of criminality and no legitimate military to eradicate enemies of your "state" or whatever libertarians prefer to call their form of "governance." The thought of a restrained government is not a terrible ideal, given that most government are overbearing bureaucratic systems which takes years to accommodate a ruling or decision, especially militarily speaking. The government would be able to boast a lengthy and healthy economy due to the lack of laws and overbearing systems looking down on most modern entrepreneurs, so the private sector is a definitely growing aspect for this type of governance. But, it still does not account for the likeliness of dealing with a country with a military coming down and taking over your free "state."

>>1482719
I think libertinism could work on a small scale.
But it wouldn't go over very well in the large scale of things.

>>1480654
>no taxes, no armies, no state regulation
are you dumb? how can that work out?

>>1493961
You do realise, that there's a difference between libertarianism and anarchism. What you are describing is anarchism.

>>1497210
google translator, eller er du bare ordblind?

>>1500974
..And the difference is?

>>1480654
The money supply would be scary volatile.

Is there any option other than regional banks issuing their own money? Bank runs and therefore depressions would be really common (as they were before banking was regulated).

Plus all the industries with negative externalities. People will choose convenience over a clean environment to the detriment of all.

I could go on and on, it's a stupid idea top to bottom. Honest question are you still in your first year or two? I studied economics in college too and after the initial micro courses when they explain competitive markets everyone goes crazy libertarian. If you take a careful look at macro or political economy or economic history this usually goes away.

True Libertarianism probably wouldnt work. What I think is best is social and economic libertarianism, but the government still enforces regulations to prevent things like environmental damage for the sake of profits and enforces law to prevent things like violence. They should have the role of a referee on the sideline that lets the game continue to play as long as nobody is physically harming anyone else or fucking up the court we all have to play on.

>>1501360
>True Libertarianism probably wouldnt work.
How do you know when it has never been tried?

am I the only one on this board who associates libertarianism with classical liberalism?

>>1501850
The sad reality is there will never be a nation that adopts these values or promotes economic freedoms, political freedoms, and social freedoms. It is not an ideal that easily springs forth and it is often times too easily overridden by bureaucratic systems, to where you are only operating with a fraction of the freedoms that societies that libertarians aim for would offer. It is just the basic nature of governments and people changing their governments.

>>1501862
libertarianism is the modern meme version

>>1481174
I don't think>>1480665 is comparing the technology. I think the image says humanity can go farther working together instead of unregulated fighting motivated by profit.

>libertarian doesnt necessarily mean fighting and fucking people over for profit.

the easiest way to make money is to fuck people over, enslave(either without consent such as being bought or with consent such as the slave asking for loans) people, generally treat people like shit. some one will do it in a libertarian society and theyll have an advantage that everyone will eventually want.

>>1501914
Where does one draw the line, in such a system?
The exclusive laissez faire motives seem to vary greatly depending on the person, so where is government held and what do forces like police and military lie on this system?

>>1499429
this guy gets it

>>1500509
I think this is the same with socialist/comunist systems.....liberterianism i think has the same human condistion issues which break dow real hard in big scale settings

people are nasty in large groups, they panic, easily manipulated, they have too many different wants and needs to reconcile without stepping on peoples feet

i think in a large scale setting the attemp to restrain government to the point of almost nonexsistance would just end u producing strongmen who would end up becoming tyrants

File: number-of-regulatory-restrictions[1].png (27KB, 692x703px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 692x703px

>>1480654
>no armies
>no taxes

Enjoy getting invaded and having no means of protecting people from force and fraud.

Not to say I don't sympathize, mind, regulations are fucking ridiculous and a symptom of the "there oughta be a law" problem, but anarchy and any system too close to it is fundamentally self-negating. The NAP doesn't enforce itself.

>>1501128
Not that anon, but libertarianism allows for a small state to act against theft, murder, invasion, etc., so it's not completely self-negating like anarchism.

>>1480710
>bitcoin
>safe
oh i get it, you're retarded

>>1502143
>, but libertarianism allows for a small state to act against theft, murder, invasion, etc
how tho?

>>1492688
>but it's ridiculous to then say school and university are useless or 'scams'. More and more activity requires skills that require schooling

As someone who's generally pretty friendly with libertarianism, that's one of the things that gives me the most pause; even my "gas the FAA, drone wars now" ass can see that for-profit schools are utter shit. There's also the issue of creating a permanent underclass if there's no public school/vouchers/whatever, but maybe charity or some shit could help that.

>>1502161
Same way as a bigger, more intrusive government, it's a question of magnitude. There would still be police funded by tax dollars, they would just enforce a smaller set of laws, which could mean they wouldn't need as many tax dollars.

File: hqdefault (41).jpg (5KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 480x360px

>>1480654
Taken to its extreme (which most Libertarians don't) it's doomed to end up back where we are now, as eventually, a faction of men will form with the ambition and power to form new government-like and monopoly-like entities.

The fact that we evolved into this current state of government organically is something that most political philosophies tend to ignore. Without an external mechanism to prevent it, or a drastic genetic level change to the psyche of its key components, this tangled web we weave will tangle again in due time, every time, regardless of how you straighten it out, just as surely a creme rises to the top and as gravity forms the stars.

>>1480710
wiki defines bitcoin as a payment system. how is it currency and not just a payment system?

>>1502143
many libertarians are not strict miniarchists either. Its more a political movement than a coherent ideology like marxism

Property is a spook just as much as anything else. Spooks are okay, but Libertarianism is spooky as fuck when it pretends to be anti spook.

>>1502312
>Marxists
>coherent

>>1502352
coherent as there is a clear systematized ideology.
Granted there are libertarian writer who have done this but they do not necessarily reflect the entire movement

>>1502356
>coherent as there is a clear systematized ideology.
>Granted there are libertarian writer who have done this but they do not necessarily reflect the entire movement
Are you serious? There's hundreds of Marxist revisionists that contradict each other. Marx himself changed his mind a few times. /pol/'s favorite Frankfurt school of cultural Marxism proves that Marxism isn't a clear systematized ideology.

We obviously need a military, thats like getting smart but being a 100 pound weakling, no one is gonna respect you cause they know they can bitch u out and they know that you know it too

>>1502362
yes I am aware of that, I am not praising marxism. stop being so anal.

>>1502312
This too, libertarian often has the same meaning as "conservative" or "liberal," a leaning rather than an ideology itself. Libertarian can just mean you want to reduce some regulations and smoke weed.

>>1502377
I'm not saying you're praising Marxism. I'm saying you're retarded.

>>1502381
modern "marxist" to use the term loosely have taken several different directions, but they all hold the writings of Marx as their core. If you disagree with Marx you are not a Marxist.

cultural Marxism isn't even a proper term

>decriminalize all drugs
>abolish arbitrary age of consents and make pedophilia/CP legal as long as both parties consent and no one is harmed
>get rid of nation states and remove arbitrary borders allowing for free movement of peoples

why is this so hard to do?

>>1502466
Why is it desirable?

>>1502466
>abolish arbitrary age of consents
that has nothing to do with libertarianism, you are trying to mix pedophilia and libertarianism together to make it look bad

I could find plenty of monstrous leftists and claim they are all the same, but I don't, because it is bullshit and also petty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria#Sexual_predator

>>1502403
That doesn't mean they're coherent. Most of them are filthy revisionists.

>>1503398
It doesn't matter whether you are a left or right libertarian, pedo acceptance is the future.

There is no reason why there should be laws restricting consenting sex between two individuals regardless of age.

>inb4 sex is harmful

>>1503459
Yo just out of interest are you a libertarian?

To be free is doing as you like, within your possibilities, and having minimal (if not completely avoidable) repercussions.

>>1503459
We will have lolibots long before actual pedosex is legal.

>>1480654
If this is a libertarian society, whats the difference between it, and anarchy?

>>1503459
Children are fucking idiots, and those that want to have sex with them are degenerate.Their degeneracy will be soaked up by the child like a sponge.

>>1488794

Underrated post.

>>1480654
libertarianism is babies first ideology. it's a nonsense term for people who want roads and police and fire departments but don't want to pay for any of it. labeling yourself libertarian is a useful thing, it lets others know to ignore anything you say about politics

>>1481174
literally never been true. scientists are driven by a search for knowledge. inventors are rarely made millionaires by their inventions

>>1480665
/thread

>>1480710
this is so stupid i think its meant to be serious

>>1480654
>What are your thoughts on a libertarian society.
>No taxes, no armies, freedom and no state regulations.
Are thoughts even needed here?

If you can't get up right now and do whatever you want, something's wrong

ANCAPs are the dumbest of fucks.

>>1480654
>No taxes, no armies, freedom and no state regulations.
My thoughts are that this is completely unworkable in the real world and I say this as someone who sympathizes with libertarian thinking on social issues.

File: rbomb2.jpg (58KB, 256x350px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 256x350px

>>1480654
Requires constant vigliance and effort by the individual to prevent subversion by covert powermongers. So it's not going to work.

Just like every other political ideology doesn't work.

We're all fucked.

>>1480654
It's my kind of utopia. But it mustn't contain stupid people or democracy or else it will fall

>>1480665
you could just flip that image around your post means nothing

>>1491828
so reasonable lel

>>1482555
>>1482601

I think arguing for smaller governments and maybe some decentralization would be a much more productive endeavor,

>>1504222
This post really does not make sense

>>1503459
Just ruining someone else's life for your own enjoyment.

>No taxes= no infrastructure, public libraries, roads, electricity, water. Either some enterprising merchant becomes Lord Humongous off the ensuing monopoly, or we all have to be Bear Grylls.

No armies= we become instant free province territory for any state with a standing army and lots of slingshots.

Freedom and no state regulations = brigandry, rape mobs, warlord militias imposing a "teeth tax" .

>>1480717
But how could that exist without taxes?

File: 1459962923196.gif (161KB, 921x155px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 921x155px

>>1505840

>>1489100
You are retarded if you think people could just drop out of school at 13 and could become a doctor or lawyer

"Socialism" is kind of inherent to humans, due to us being Social Animals, in fact it is reasonable to think we are the most social animal on the planet, due to our ability for communication made for another capable human to understand.

>>1489060
>I'm going to pretend that I don't know what an embargo actually is
>Iran doesn't exist on my map alalalalala
>neither does modern Russia. Russia stronk and don't need no oil exports.

>>1489890
Who writes economics and algebra books though...

>>1495257
According to Hans Hermann Hoppe's views, yes, Milton Friedman was a socialist. He supported the existence of a state, therefore he was a socialist.
>>1497088
Wow, don't be so stupid. Most people abstain from killing because they know it's ethically and morally wrong, not because of the law. A murderer loses his natural rights when he kills someone, so he could be killed as a punishment. As for working 12 hours, you can't seriously believe that the state gave you "workers rights". Henry Ford saw that the employees would be more productive if they had the weekend off, and if they worked 8 hours a day. In a free market of judicial services there would be competition. Therefore, only the most just private courts would have profits.
>>1497218
>>1502350
Private property is the only ethical solution to the scarcity of goods, and it's the most efficient one.
>>1505376
okay
>>1505395
Democracy is opressive.
>>1507469
Individualism is inherent to humans, because all decisions are made in the mind, which is individual. The fact that humans are social animal doesn't mean that things should be owned collectively. Without private property, there would be no profit and no prices. Without prices, the economic calculation is impossible. Above all that is the ethical argument. In Socialism you'd have to accept the collective decisions (and in democracy too), sou you would have no power over yourself, which is ridiculous.

>>1507997
>He supported the existence of a state, therefore he was a socialist.
......... What?

Freedom above all.

>>1508067
I'm gonna try to explain, but I'd recommend you read his books for an understanding right from the font. I'll adapt to my words. He says there are 2 archetypes of a political model: a socialist one and a capitalist one. The capitalist one represents freedom and advocates for private property, is anarchist, blablabla. The socialist one represents slavery and advocates for collective property. So, say you support the existence of the state, in which the state has a monopoly over judicial services. You support that the state socializes a service for everyone. Thus, you're a socialist. The same applies for regulations, it's slavery. So, either you're free, or you aren't free. Doesn't matter the size of the state. It could be 100% socialist (like King Jong Un would support), or 2% socialist. If you're still not free, you're not free, you're still a slave. Therefore, only anarcho-capitalism/voluntarism is capitalist. All the rest is socialist, even if 0.0000000001% socialist. I hope you could understand that.

>>1481198
Thats the problem it does still exist. People always want more. In free market economies people can get more by being more productive and profitible. In socializt countries people dont get much more by being more productive. An i dividuals income in a socialist economy is more closely related to a fraction of the nations GDP. Therefore in a socialist economy people "earn" more by finding ways to avoid work or more often goverment corruption. See Hugo Chavezes daughter who is somehow worth Billions.

>>1508122
So let me get this straight, capitalism is all about "muh freedumbs" while socialism means "muh big government"......... Holy shit the memes are actually true. Socialism can exist between both in libertarian or authoritarian positions. What you described
>So, say you support the existence of the state, in which the state has a monopoly over judicial services. You support that the state socializes a service for everyone.
Sounds way too much like the welfare state which has nothing to with socialism. State intervention into a market is nothing but statism. Socialist advocate for the workers and community control over the means of production, distribution, and land and capitalist advocate for privatization, wage labor, and profits for the boss. And markets can still exist in a socialist economy hence market socialism or mutualism if your an anarchist.
Basically socialism isn't about the state, and capitalism isn't about freedom for all.

>>1508231
Capitalism isn't about freedom, it's about private property. Socialism is about collective property. Private property comes from the right to auto-property, meaning your the owner of yourself, so if you do homesteading on something, that thing is yours, because it's an extension of you. Even in "anarcho"-socialism/communism/anarcho-mutualism, there would be collective property, which is unethical. You couldn't vote, for example, because speaking would be making use of private property

>>1482142
Israeli Kibbutzim are pure socialism and they are all failing except a few lucky ones

>>1482046
nothing works without a hierarchy

libertarianism would devolve rapidly and turn into something else entirely

you can't just make up a theory and then expect it to work out flawlessly, it fucking doesn't work at all

>>1499429
taxes, armies and state regulations are required to take people's property

lol this thread is still going

>>1507997

hoppe is a retard though and jumps through incredible logical hoops to justify his positions on things like migration

his whole dichotomy socialism vs capitalism is also incredibly basic and incredibly naive considering capitalism isn't some natural state of man and needs a state to maintain it (private property rights, law enforcement etc)

libertarians really need to get beyond utter trash like rothbard/mises/hoppe and so many of them wanting a return to the gold standard

>>1510103
No, you just need to be stronger than the other guy.

>>1510113
and hope that the strongest person is the epitome of moral righteousness and shares it with the community thus allowing your utopia to exist

What´s going to happen if this individual suffers from a type of mental disease or brain damage? (which does affect his or her decision making).
Also, prices are not necessary to solve the economic calculation problem, they are not and will not be the only way to track economic movements, these reinforce the idea of private property, or "public property" in case many people use or paid for it. As for "making decisions" our best bet it´s on cybernation and advanced technology, humans suffer from "neural lag" and other sorts of errors in the mind which supercomputers do not, so cities will eventually be runned by supercomputers which can also track economic movements and make economic calculations, just like you do not have to tell the refrigerator when to turn the engine on and off for refrigeration, the supercomputers can also run technologically advanced city systems efficiently.

>>1494321
Not him, but I'd say that you have a responsibility to feed your children because you're the one who brought them into the world in the first place, and hence made them need feeding; you're not usually the one who made a poor person poor, though.

>>1510434
Nationalized industries can be very inefficient, policy makers are only interested in perceptions and politics, managers are only told to fulfil various quotas. The problem is a poor choice of objectives and goals rather than one of technical efficiency.

Government has a role to play in the economy, but voters can only monitor a limited amount of government. Libertarianism merely recognizes these limitations, it is a completely valid point and very smart, but due to all the damage control, black propaganda, memery and strawmanning this message doesn't seem to be getting very far.

>libertarian country
>no army
>no taxes
>attacked by country with army and taxes to replenish costs of war
>destroys industrial areas and major wealth sites
>no tax money to replenish costs of having property destroyed
>no army to resist
>inb4 b-but the people
>inb4 warsaw uprising
warsaw wasn't facing icbms

>b-but gavin mcinnes will save the day!

>>1503459
Children can't consent though.

>>1480654

Even if you assume people won't go about raping and murdering each other, a society with no taxes, armies, or state regulations cannot exist.

If you have no state, then a free man will see that absence of power and become the state. All of the failings and abuses you associate with a state are attractive to the person who heads that state.

>>1480662
that graph is what those ideas 'promise'
which none of them delivers, so its completely bogus

File: helping ... god.jpg (88KB, 409x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 409x600px

>>1480654

Libertarianism is a manifestation of impotence and mental instability.

>>1482130

Embargo a small island for 50 years and then wonder why they have shitty cars and laugh at them for it.

Look I am not a socialist, but Cuba has a better life expectancy than most countries in the region, healthy care and a very high literacy rate.

It's just a shitty comparison, that's all.

File: highest standard of living.jpg (414KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1024x768px

>>1482875

>>1513666
>Libertarianism is a manifestation of impotence and mental instability.
>inb4 thats not realy capitalism!

>>1507997
> As for working 12 hours, you can't seriously believe that the state gave you "workers rights"
Given that just for the 8 hour work week, most laws that made it were either constitutional reforms, and/or unions forcing them to grant those, half a century before fags like Ford or Ernst Abbe got into business(heck, even in America, they were multiple bills passed about thathttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/09/viral-image/does-8-hour-day-and-40-hour-come-henry-ford-or-lab/ )yeah, it came from state laws and/or socialism, not antrepeneurs wanting the competitive edge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day

>>1510434
No, super-computers aren't absolved from the economic calculation problem. Besides, it would place absolute power in the hands of the ones coding the computer. Stop drinking Fresco's kool-aid.

File: brain_grylls.jpg (31KB, 462x300px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 462x300px

>>1508122
>>1508268
>people actually defend and espouse this ideology

>>1511103
>People won't have tanks and weapons in their back garden with an airstrip and jets in a libertarian society.

If the army no longer exists you will have to take matters into your own hands, no matter how ridiculous or inefficient it gets.

>>1508231
>"Community" control
>Freedom

Jesus haven't we learnt that capitalism with a safety net is the best idea

>>1482384
Hayek praised, but Friedman praised only the economic policies ( but not all as they made some stupid ones ). Would you dislike a doctor for saving peoples lives when they live under a dictatorship? The same applies for economists.

>>1480654
I am no libertarian but I'm huge supporter of libertarian "state".

I have lots of semi-criminal friends, give them more freedom and less policing(cuz it's not financially valuable) and I'll get rich by leading them to plunder rich faggot's houses.

>>1489243
Not only does your link fail to provide a comparison on health care, which means that it doesn't even, by any stretch of the imagination, even remotely illustrate anything you claim, but it also shows an increase on literacy rates and food production. In fact, the only negative comparison is per capita food consumption, alas, it's a crude picture as it is measured in calories. As if eating twinkies was the epitome of nutrition.

Why are you people even allowed here?

>>1480662
>he thinks authoritarianism is bad
>he's a money-worshipping trash on top of that

Hope you enjoy swinging when the day comes

>>1508122
>All the rest is socialist, even if 0.0000000001% socialist.
This is just semantics, according to his own definition he is right, but in the real world it is difficult to be 100% anything so it is kind of a useless definition. I hope you grow out of being a Hans Hoppe fanboy, realize how the human mind can play tricks on you and how you need to take a pace back and view things rationally.

>>1514068
Your leaders are human like everyone else, it follows that if you can't even look after yourself, a ruler is going to do even worse with the added responsibilities and burdens. Ignoring other factors, autonomy is optimal, everyone is their own ruler and faces both the benefits and consequences of their actions, learning and growing as they do.

Of course in the real world there are other considerations that might cause you to favor hierarchical authoritary or heterarchy (democracy) over autonomy, but they are necessary evils to achieve a practical goal, not proof authoritarianism is inherently good. These systems can become corrupt and need a healthy dose of individual rights to temper them.

>>1514220
>Your leaders are human like everyone else, it follows that if you can't even look after yourself, a ruler is going to do even worse with the added responsibilities and burdens.
Hold up. Where do you get off with the ridiculous implication that a leader has to "look after you" in the same way as you have to "look after yourself"? The leader isn't there to buy your fucking groceries and do the laundry. They're there to make decisions in relation to where the entire group is heading.

>libertarian
>society

Those 2 don't work together. Libertarians are literally the "get off muh lawn" types. People avoid them. You're weird reclusive faggots.

Also
>be libertarian """"society""""
>get invaded by the organized socialists next door
>become slave

Who will uphold property rights in a society without a juridical system? This always baffles me. How can libertarians believe the state is bad but also believe in such an obvious spook such as property right.

>>1480654
>p.s. I'm studying economy at a keynesian university in Denmark
>fukk taxes! taxes r theft! but im still studying at a public founded university wew!

>>1480654
>What are your thoughts on a libertarian society.
An ideology based upon a totally idiotic axiom (NAP) can only result in failure anon.

File: lolbertarians.png (858KB, 599x900px) Image search: [Google]

858KB, 599x900px

>>1514489
No, Market will provide, Market is benevolent, release it from its chains and gaze upon its glory!!!

6000 years of human civilization and still no record of a purely libertarian society, its like communism, its an idea but doesn't work in reality.

>>1514516
Somalia is.

>>1514520
Somalia is just a shithole anon. You can't really consider the timespan between the government imploding and the warlords deciding to ignore the NAP as long enough to make it a libertarian society.

>>1514529
Libertarianism would Somalia itself very quickly tebehe.

>>1514529
Sure you can. Because why wouldn't the warlords ignore the NAP in any other case?
>excuse me korknak the mutilator, you are violating the NAP
>im so sorry i will stop pillaging now

>>1514536
I was trying to say libertarianism is so impossible it couldn't last enough to be called a society anon.

>>1514536
Korknak the Mutilator sounds like a Conan character.

>>1514529
Libertarianism effectively means anarchy. There's no better example than Somalia

>>1514547
>Libertarianism effectively means anarchy.
No, because NAP. Anarchy is easy to achieve, libertarianism is just absolutely impossible.

>>1514559
Yeah sure, I get what you're saying. But any society that Rothbards itself ends up an anarchic shithole inevitably.

libertarian is a political label it is not synonymous with the NAP.

>>1514605
True, but the NAP is simply the best way (in spite of still being idiotic) by which its proponents try to argue the feasibility of a libertarian society. It's not like libertarianism has offered better alternatives to that bullshit.
Reality is that a society that aims to maximize freedom is only going to self destroy. Association comes with limitation, only a moron wouldn't get it.

>>1514644
I'm not so sure the libertarian movement of today reflects anything more than a desire for limited government in the classical liberal tradition. Rather than the ancaps and miniarchists they are portrayed in this thread

>>1514660
>libertarian movement of today
We're not talking of a bunch of fools who misname themselves. OP asked about libertarian societies, not some party.
Libertarianism is a specific ideology, just because a few old style liberals call themselves libertarian it doesn't mean the word's meaning changes.

>>1514676
libertarian originally referred to socialists. the meaning of words changes all the time with use.

Its certainly not a clean cut ideology in modern America anymore than conservatism or liberalism

>>1514707
Well then there's no fucking point talking about anything. Provide a valid definition for the current conception of libertarianism if you don't wanna talk about the Rothbard kind.

>>1514719
Fine, Libertarianism is a broad political movement centered in the US that mostly encompasses classical liberals and miniarchists

>>1514730
So what would a modern libertarian society look like, ours? Robber barons USA?
The modern world is already mostly classically liberal.

>>1514754
Well prostitution and most drugs would be legal. any social services would be limited to local governments if at all, and we would have much stricter federalism, at least in the US where we have a federalist system. Any environmental regs would have to be bassed on property rights or lawsuits.

I suppose a lot of the hardcore people would want to go further, but realistically even if put in power the libertarians would not accomplish half that

>>1514776
>Well prostitution and most drugs would be legal. any social services would be limited to local governments if at all, and we would have much stricter federalism, at least in the US where we have a federalist system. Any environmental regs would have to be bassed on property rights or lawsuits.
So effectively robber barons USA. That system was abandoned anon, get over it.

>>1514803
I hate to use this meme but...

Not an argument

File: TFuturistCover.png (252KB, 1270x600px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1270x600px

The concept of Cybernation for regulating city systems is much more efficient than any type of political system. Designing society it´s like designing an airplane, so it depends on how efficiently the city systems are designed, and how they connect with each other, made possible through technology and highly skilled technical people.