Democracy: The God That Failed

>>934835
It displays the thirst for unearned power that animated all sides of America, left or right.

Tldr Bullshit.

>>934835
Hoppe is neat.

>>934844
>unearned power
What do you mean?

>>934835
>anarchocapitalism

>>934940
Meh, I find it to be a much more coherent explanation of the theory than I've heard before. It's much more realistic in its demography.

>>934835
>I just finished the second essay, and I'm quite impressed with it.

Whats so impressive?

>>934835
The only actual contribution Hoppe has made to the world was recording and preserving Murray Rothbard's lectures on various subjects. His own ideas are shit.

>>935834
I find he has an ability to outline things that are logically obvious but that you maybe didn't think of because it's so counter-intuitive to the assumptions you're brought up with.
Like how war was conducted under monarchies versus democracies.

File: fukuyama_francis-300x248.jpg (25KB, 300x248px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 300x248px

HOR UP

HOR UP

IMMA RETCHU FINISH,

BUT LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IS THE BEST SOCIO-ECONOMIC POLITICAL ORGANISATION OF ALL TIME! AND THE FINAL FORM OF HUMAN GOVERNMENT!

>>936113
>I find he has an ability to outline things that are logically obvious but that you maybe didn't think of because it's so counter-intuitive to the assumptions you're brought up with.

Ive had that feeling before, experianced it with the political part of Gaddaffis Green Book.

>Like how war was conducted under monarchies versus democracies.

Did he manage to avoid the mistake of comparing warfare in pre industrial conditions to warfare in industrial conditions?

>>936137
He's not wrong

>>936161
>Did he manage to avoid the mistake of comparing warfare in pre industrial conditions to warfare in industrial conditions?

I found the comparison to be sound; he mostly stuck to comparing France after their revolution and other countries just before that or during the same time.
The just of it is that since a monarch is essentially a private-owner with the privilege of monopolized expropriation, a war is fought against other owners (monarchs), so it is like a mercenary war would be today in which it is very limited because disrupting civilian society will lead to a decrease in how much both of them can leech off of production.
He sights multiple primary sources describing how Britain and France could be at war, but people not involved with the crowns could travel freely and it was easy to forget the two countries were at war.

>>936199
>sights
*cites

>>936167
It is too soon to say. Not the anon you replied to, but it is extremely presumptuous to assume a form of government that has existed for a maximum of like three centuries is the end of history.

>>936244
He's objectively correct, he even write a book, The End of History and the Last Man, in which he makes empirical arguments to prove it.

>>936244
This.
Whig history is pretty naive.

>>936260
And what empirical arguments does he make for being able to infallibly predict the course of the entire rest of humanity's existence?

File: 1457846396925.gif (1MB, 320x213px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x213px

>>936260
>He's objectively correct, he even write a book, The End of History and the Last Man, in which he makes empirical arguments to prove it.

>>936271
Read the book.

File: pol reading list 1.jpg (520KB, 1016x1095px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 1016x1095px

>>936276
?

>>936276
Just give a brief fucking rundown. I'm not going to read 418 pages for an argument here when I have a reading backlog 2000+ pages long that I am trying to downsize.

>>936199
Thats an unfortunate and myopic view for a book published in the 2000s. That mercenary model could just as easily be applied to the modern monarchless situation.

How did he explain the first WWI out of curiosity?

>>936290
>>936279
The End of History and the Last Man by Francis Fukyama
Read it alongside Marx, Kojéve, and Hegel.

>>936309
I've read plenty of Marx, as well as Engels. And I don't see how you can prove that liberal democracy is the end of history; the assertion is absurd, because there are still many powerful states which are not liberal democracies, and there are still challenges to liberalism within many liberal democracies.

File: 1457532265809.jpg (54KB, 524x479px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 524x479px

>>936327
Just read le book

>>936298
I'm not doing it justice by trying sum it up in my own words.

Here's a quote:
"In addition, with public ownership and free entry into a democratic-republican
government, the foreign policy changes as well. All governments
are expected to be expansionary, as explained above, and there is
no reason to assume that a president's expansionary desires will be smaller
than a king's. However, while a king may satisfy this desire through marriage,
this route is essentially precluded for a president. He does not own
the government controlled territory; hence, he cannot contractually combine
separate territories. And even if he concluded inter-government treaties,
these would not possess the status of contracts but constitute at best
only temporary pacts or alliances, because as agreements concerning
public1y-owned resources, they could be revoked at any time by other
future governments. If a democratic ruler and a democratically elected
ruling elite want to expand their territory and hence their tax base, then
only a military option of conquest and domination is open to them.
Hence, the likelihood of war will be significantly increased."

For more, just search the term 'warfare' in this pdf: http://www.riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

File: Triple_H_WWE_Champion_2008.jpg (353KB, 1131x866px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1131x866px

>>934835
I've always thought of Hans-Hermann Hoppe as being an uncomfortably honest libertarian. In other words, he states truths about libertarianism that most libertarians themselves would be deeply uncomfortable admitting to a general audience.

For example, he equates a fully privatized government (%100 libertarian, no public government whatsoever) with a monarchy. He honestly believes that monarchies are superior because the king has a vested interest in passing down a well stewarded kingdom to his offspring. Triple H finds the direct correlation between the ancient monarchist arguments vs the modern anarchocapitalist ones (tories who were opposed to the American Revolution because they thought nationalizing the political process was literally stealing from the king).

Triple H (not THAT triple H) basically admits that libertarianism is a type of neo-monarchialism, that when you go that far to the right, it becomes a regression to feudalism.

the alternative to democracy is being cucked by a dictator

>>936367
>I've always thought of Hans-Hermann Hoppe as being an uncomfortably honest libertarian. In other words, he states truths about libertarianism that most libertarians themselves would be deeply uncomfortable admitting to a general audience.
I agree.

>libertarianism is a type of neo-monarchialism, that when you go that far to the right, it becomes a regression to feudalism.
1. Remember that he doesn't advocate monarchy, but just argues it's better than democracy
2. I think that once you've picked your side on the fundamental question of innate human equality, you'll either end up a feudalistic/natural law type, or a communist; everything else is basically just one side or the other taken only part of the way to its logical conclusion: this includes democracy which is obviously on the left/communist side. I think HHH does any excellent job of highlighting the contradiction between wanting freedom and using democracy to get it; since democracy is a lack of recognition of the natural inequality of humanity.

>>936353
Again, 418 pages while I am already on a 2000+ page backlog. I'm just too busy.

>>936354
Ah just another idealistic contrarian looking to cash in. Jack Weatherford is a good figure if you enjoy this type of work

>>936414
>Ah just another idealistic contrarian looking to cash in.
Is he wrong, though? That's the point of this thread.

>>936367
That doesn't really seem to gel well with how modern economies function, that kind of monarchical monopoly inst possible without a state.

>>936425
>Is he wrong, though? That's the point of this thread.

Its not black and white, but his arguments seem quite weak unless you take a very idealistic view of society and the economy.

>>936461
What I usually find is that those who see the state in a positive light disagree; those who see business in a positive light agree; or those who see one or the other as less worse, respectively.

>>936484
Interesting have you discussed it with other libertarian trends?

the monarchical model really doesnt seem to be something that would be able to do well in an increasingly service and global based economy. His ideas seem like the the kind that would have been really profound had they been written before the 20th Century

Honestly the only libertarian book (if you don't consider Leddihn to be libertarian) that I genuinely liked. It's quality literature.

>>936538
What of works like the Road to Serfdom?

>>936549
>le taxes are bad: the book

No. Exactly the type of moral crusaderism and cultism I don't like.

>>936386

Better than being cucked by the masses.

>>936611
>Better than being cucked by the masses.

You cannot get cucked by abstract concepts m8 you are just cucking yourself

>>936167
Liberal democracy has already collapsed.

>>936714

Mobs are a real thing- just go to a Trump or Sanders rally. I would rather get cucked by Mussolini then get cucked by a whole rally of idiots because they make up a big enough majority.

File: fed.jpg (99KB, 486x750px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 486x750px

>>936167

>>936768
>Mobs are a real thing- just go to a Trump or Sanders rally. I would rather get cucked by Mussolini then get cucked by a whole rally of idiots because they make up a big enough majority.

Of course they are but they dont run or organise the country under any system bar anarchy.

So right now you just cucking yourself by putting blame on a ghost

>>936819

Them choosing who runs and organizes the country against my will means that they are cucking me.