What is the libertarian endgame?

>>133473026

The end game is to become more and more leftwing as amrikwa becomes less white

The endgame is to make it so there isn't a game.

freedom

The end game is an Objectivist society of reason, morality, individualism, and capitalism. On the other end of the spectrum is mysticism, immorality, collectivism, and statism.

>>133473026
Slavery to corporate Jews.

>>133473026
F R E E D O M

>>133473026

end game is to have people move into their country and vote to take away their liberty. Honestly the biggest meme of all time, everyone has their libertarian phase but it's a pipe dream

>>133473026
>libertarian endgame

To get all of you to fuck off with telling us what to do

>>133473435
As opposed to slavery to the state and some phony "common good"?

>>133473494
>voting
Democracy is a fucking meme.

>>133473552
>Ancap flag
>Expecting anything he posts to be taken seriously

>>133473537
MOM IM 15

>>133473026
Getting to live without some so-called authority being able to dictate what we can and can't do, and how much of what we do has to be for the benefit of others

>>133473026
World where every goy accepts jewish ways.

recreational nukes?

The endgame is talking about a theory of government that only lives in the minds of thinkers, but plebs, bad people, and the Julius Caesars of the world fuck it up.

We can't be free if we don't recognize our white privilege, lads!

Good luck convincing a bunch of sub 100 IQ muds about the virtues of free market capitalism

File: mfw14.jpg (50KB, 520x336px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 520x336px

>>133473622

>>133473026
Nuking down private citizens with affordable mini iNukes when they fail to pay their monthly oxygen fee after they found out you deliberately destroyed the environment so you could charge them for breathing clean air. None of it matters though. Your science slaves are near to completing the mind uploading device so you will soon become the first sentient singularity and branch out to more lucrative planets and clientele.

The game never ends. You must fight forever to keep liberty above all

>>133473402
Morality and reason (and probably more importantly, community) are enormously incompatible in a top-down oligarchic pure-capitalist society.

File: Libertarian-leade-2.jpg (57KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 512x512px

This sums up our end game

>>133473708
Oh, they don't need to be convinced. The savages will be killed as militants in the inevitable civil war and the ones that cannot survive without handouts will die shortly after. Call me psychotic, but it's true.

>>133473026
All the BBC they could ever wish for.

>>133473026
I invite my married and gay mexican friends over for a bowl after we go shooting my new Dragonav I just imported for Russia for the low market price of $400. HHNNGGGGHHHH..

>>133473663
I'll rape and murder your family cause you said no one can dictate what i can or cant do. Go drink bleach you fucking autist

File: 1498995189023.png (73KB, 432x450px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 432x450px

>>133473026
Luxury Automated Gay Space Communism, but instead of being enforced by guns it's enforced by an ever present Stefan Molyneux simulated AI that is implanted in all humans at birth that constantly reminds them that dissent is not an argument and is in fact a violation of the NAP.

>>133473800

Well, shit
If that day ever comes, you have my gun ancap

>>133473788
The morality is not a duty to others. It is a duty to yourself. The honest capitalist will develop a reputation as the preferred business partner due to his trustworthiness and critical thinking skills.

>>133473388
All freedoms are derived from sovereignty, it's a necessary criteria. Libertarianism not only fails at securing its people's sovereignty, but abandons it entirely. It's a dysfunctional ideology and only found among the disconnected, autistic outcasts, as well as defeatist americans.

>>133473026
For you and all your Socialist cronies to leave us the fuck alone and stop trying to force me to give you gibs

To create a political culture where voters understand the real world and the flaws of government.

Perhaps also to teach them about freedom, agency and individualism so they are less dependent on government, among other things.

>>133473969
This

File: IMG_8670.jpg (617KB, 1097x1590px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 1097x1590px

>>133473026
a world where the eternal jew can finally rule over his goy cattle through the power of the shekel

>>133473969
>Libertarianism not only fails at securing its people's sovereignty, but abandons it entirely.
Please be more specific than "people" and describe what we're achieving sovereignty from. And freedom, as a concept, comes from the right to do business. The ability to voluntarily exchange goods and services is the key to personal freedom.

about as naive (pure) ideology as communism.
silly shit on its own.
some writers contain decent critique but offer no solutions to issues of (crony) capitalism.

>>133474155
Can't have cronyism if you don't have a state to bribe.

Wew, that was easy.

>>133473026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX5C2KGURcE

>>133474228
wtf im now for globalism no borders no religions

>>133474323
>no borders
*except private property borders

open borders, weed, and property rights

>>133474409
How are you going to prot-
>state forms.

>>133473969
>Implying that libertarianism isn't about total sovereignty of self

Nice strawman faggot. Don't you have a bull to prep Sven? Wouldn't want to oppress your wife's Somali boyfriend now

>>133473026
Child sex slaves.
All libs and ancaps are pedos in disguise.

>>133474481
Guns, private investigators, booby traps, etc.
It's not that fucking hard.

>>133474538
>traps
>fucking
>hard
Just what I said.

>>133474103
Find a dictionary or leave the USA if you find the term ambiguous.
>And freedom, as a concept, comes from the right to do business. The ability to voluntarily exchange goods and services is the key to personal freedom.
It doesn't. There are no natural rights that cannot be infringed. Neither negative nor positive liberties exist without the will and strength to secure them. You can assert your right to self-defense, but if there are more men with more guns wanting what you're defending, God will not descend to the earth to protect you or your right. Your rights, your property and your life are forfeit. What protects from the mob is the same as what protects the mob, the state, enforcing law enacted in the ideal of the common good. Without a common people the concept of the common good crumbles.

>>133473881
as soon as you lay a finger on one of them you've violated the NAP and I'll shoot you and blow up your house in self defense

what now faggot?

File: 1480636893568-pol.jpg (147KB, 606x427px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 606x427px

Hoppe and Paleo-Libertarianism are where it's at. Everyone else on /pol/ can go fuck themselves.

>>133474323
>globalism
There's your problem, how about not painting all libertarians with the leftist brush? As a minarchist I'm arguing for the sanctity of personal sovereignty and a small government, not giving worldwide power to a handful of cucks who are going to use it to press their own interests and morals on 7 billion people.

>>133473969

"Those that would trade essential freedoms for a small amount of security deserve neither"

-t. Mr Lightning Kite

>>133474538
>Implying any of those will be enough to stop a state from forming

Also, in an ancap society what do you do if a bunch of people decide on their own to form a state? They pool their resources and capital, and this new state has enough power to conuquer all their neighbours and annex them into their own state. Ancaps cant do anything to stop it

>>133474483
You cannot have total sovereignty of self unless you are the God of a monotheistic religion. Read some Heidegger and Arendt for critique of this silly thought.

>>133474707
Libertarianism is a slippery slope to degeneracy. Just listen to "total sovereignty of self", that's basically sneakspeak for "individualism & degeneracy rampant.

Small government is impossible, ,smaller government is possible.

>>133474622
People will naturally defend what is theirs, the NAP is only a rationalization of a basic human action. We are a stateless society, not a lawless society.

>common good
>common people

These concepts aren't real. The individual is the fundamental unit of society. The individual is the smallest possible unit that can reason. A collective does not reason, all of its conflicting individual thoughts would destroy itself.

>>133474831
Insurance companies would panic, seeing as their clients are under this oppressive regime. They pull resources and services out of the affected area and starve out the statists. Private armies finish them off.

Ancaps base their entire ideology on the assumption that most people will be happy to live in a stateless society. They have to assume that human nature is good and incorruptible enough that no one would even try to form a state, annex other citizens and hoard power for themselves. They could not be more wrong - most people like living in a safe state, most people like to follow and not lead, and most people would quickly learn to dispise everything that ancaps strive for

>come home from work
>snort a few lines
>have a gangbang with 10 beautiful, std-free prostitutes for a reasonable price
>when you're done, hit up your friends with your cheap, fast, no-limit internet connection
>they get there almost instantly on your private highway with no speed limit
>shoot your mg42 in your backyard while smoking the nicest Cuban cigars money can buy
>smoke a couple bowls before you head off to bed
>everything you just did was legal and at no point was there a single fear of government intervention
name one other system of government that allows this lifestyle

>>133473026
Slaving away in a sweatshop with no health and safety regulations for 2 dollars an hour to try and pay your extortionate landlord's rent

>>133474854
>Implying I haven't

Fuck off with your counter enlightenment bullshit. You and your socialist religion can fuck right off

>>133473026
Complete minarchy.

>>133475235
This....guy literally has no idea what he's talking about

Are libertarians against collectivism? What if it it not coerced and as in most people's self interest?

>>133475374
Voluntary communes are fine. I don't give a rat's ass if the commies starve on their own retarded ideas.

>>133475266
What total sovereignty of yourself do you have when your life depends on external factors such as water, food, air? or when youR "private borders" require other people to secure them and thus, you trusting in them to protect them? You don't have total control. You can have more or less control, but not total.

>>133475235
But according to this logic, wouldn't everyone who isn't a neoliberal be openly rebelling against the government right now?

>>133475370
Provide some counter points then. Tell me how you can convince most people to abandon their basic instincts and live in a stateless society.

Ancaps are as utpoianistic as communists.

>>133473026
Placating the globalists

>>133473969
Libertarianism is not anarchism

>>133475506
Degrading state power over time seems to be the best solution.

>>133475374
it's fine as long as I'm not forced to be a part of it

which, by the way, is the answer to every question that starts with "are libertarians against..."

>>133474880
Just like the indians naturally defended their land? Like you're naturally defending your cities, your neighborhood, and yourselves from the negro savages?
You aren't and you don't. There are no natural rights, or anything that's naturally yours, without the strength and will to secure it. The only natural approach to property is you take what you can. The nation state is the end game of this natural process of agglomeration wherein the largest possible united people demand of the world their own sovereign rule, their land, their property, their lives and their future. The solidarity of the people in proclaiming this an assertion of strength through numbers.
>These concepts aren't real
They are, as much as any word, and the pattern emerges even in chimps. Peoples claiming lands, the pattern predates our becoming people.
>The individual is the fundamental unit of society
The family is.

>>133473026
To not be treaded

>>133475981
are libertarians against might is right?

>>133475466
What? No, because believe it or not, most people would rather live in a state that temporarily has a different ideology to them than not live a state at all.

File: Space City.png (2MB, 2048x1024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1024px

>>133473026
Unleashing humanity's maximum potential.

For it to work, you need a strong and smart populace though that isn't lazy and is willing to grab the bull by the horns and get the work/research done to make things happen. Life with meaning takes high energy.

>>133475506

The perfect society is one that exists without the need of government, it is through that lens that we must structure society; limiting government to an extent to which it becomes vestigal and just vajishes.

File: 1447082468826.jpg (25KB, 319x397px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 319x397px

>tfw people continue to confuse Libertarianism with Ancaps

>>133475549
It's the same exact thing, only with the naive assumption that property rights would persist were you to disassemble what protects them.

File: 1492042576170.png (32KB, 676x548px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 676x548px

>>133475370
not an argument

File: FSPFags.jpg (25KB, 308x464px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 308x464px

>>133473026
What the fuck happened to good ol' backwoods libertarianism? Resistin gummint through force of arms, white power, Jesus, and morality. When did the urban children start this whole lolbertarian thing so they could do drugs with impunity, hand over the entire country to gigantic corporations, and fuck anything that moves? Is lolbertarianism a left wing psyop to undermine individualism in this country?

>>133475549
But anarchism is libertarianism.

>>133476205
I'm not against a state upholding laws that protect the people.
I just want it gone from the economic sense, I'm still for a state military and certain laws need to be upholded by the state

>>133476154

At least ancaps are consistent

Libertarians always talk about how the government is shit at everything, and yet they trust the government with defense and justice?

>What is the libertarian endgame?


weed is legal. selling sawdust sausages to child prostitutes is legal

>>133476207

unflattering drawing of bill kristol

>>133476246
The jews hijacked true constitutional libertarianism and created a new generation of autistic narcissist ancaps and dude weed libertarians who will never be taken seriously

>>133476318
You're making a strawman by saying that I think government sucks at everything.
They are economically inept, but they serve a good function with the military and making laws universal for all in the country.

File: aleppo.jpg (22KB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 460x259px

>>133473026

>>133476318
No. Libertarians are pro-militia. If the US government were to call the militias together to DEFEND the nation, we would gladly do it. However what we call "defense" these days is offense.

>>133476038
>Just like the indians naturally defended their land?
Savages against a technologically advanced force.
>Like you're naturally defending your cities, your neighborhood, and yourselves from the negro savages?
We aren't legally allowed to do anything about them.

>The only natural approach to property is to take what you can.
The solution to the tragedy of the commons is very simply to privatize.

>And the pattern emerges even in chimps.
Savages are tribalistic, who knew? Please tell me when chimps were able to industrialize.
>Peoples claiming lands, the pattern predates our becoming people.
You mean people as in individuals. Homesteaders and frontiersmen pioneered property. We only developed as a society when people had their own permanent farming territories.

>The family is.
The family does not think, only the individuals within that arbitrary collective think. But you're only recalling what you were taught in middle school health class and you don't actually know why that's the case.

>>133476205
>only with the naive assumption that property rights would persist were you to disassemble what protects them.
I think you are so ignorant you can't separate ancaps from libertarians. Small hint, in practice they are nothing alike.

>>133473026
The Constitution

>>133476314
So you draw up a bill of rights and all is well for a while, then the pleb masses start growing discontent living under your rule where only negative liberties exist, all their efforts at securing positive liberties voluntarily without infringing on people's negative liberties doomed to fail due to adverse selection either lobby aggressively or break out the guillotines. And it's gone.

>>133476318
>Libertarians always talk about how the government is shit at everything
nice strawman

government is usually inefficient but can be good at some things. national defense is one of those things.

File: 1499880273309.png (602KB, 793x794px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 793x794px

We have so many nuclear weapons. Why don't we use them on Communist China or Communist Germany or maybe even on Communist Canada

File: ancap2.png (782KB, 793x794px)

782KB, 793x794px

>>133476595
>This is the part where we start physically removing filthy leftists.

>>133476431
Yeah, that's about what I figured happened while I was away in the Ozarks. I was out of the loop and then some rich kid I went to school with wanted to talk about libertarian ideas, I was down for it until he started spouting off about hedgehogs, fucking any/ every hole, and dudeweed; I was lost. Oh well, I'll just rebrand myself as a Jeffersonian Anarchist and move on.

>>133476563
They all autistically link Mises institute pages so what's the difference?

>>133476595
Right, when it was the case that government was out of most things it went well, much better than in the rest of the world.
That we strayed from that and invited more governmental involvement is the fault of the people, and they will feel it when everything the government promised cannot be given because it simply is not there.
The constitution prohibited a lot of government activities it now conducts, it's simply unconstitutional but no one dares block a government program because it's the people who voted for it.
Fact is that societies with this much government involvement will suffer under it, under a libertarian system it will flourish

>>133473026
You know those ancap ball pictures that say crazy shit, well that is the end result of liberalism, it just leads to ever greater degenerate shit.
>I don't need no state telling me I can't snort 10 grams of coke a day with my child wife
Literally cancer

>>133476713
>>133476720

HE HAS SPOKEN
GET READY FOR NUCLEAR WAR FAGGOTS
FUCK YEAH

>>133476595
>lobby aggressively
not possible
>break out the guillotines
and I break out my ak and call my trained militia together and kill the shit out of them

>>133476795
>inb4 muh degenerates will magically die off without the government

>>133476713
Save enough to plaster our own urban megaregions, please. Unfortunately the Mormons will survive, but we can work on that later.

>>133475943
>>133476144
But you guys do realise you're in the vast minority right? Dispite the fact that a large amount of people are fine with government control as it is (and some even want to see it increased), there is a limit to which people are willing to see the government devolved.

How are you going to decentralise the government anyway? With force? Then that's coersion. Using the state a mechanism? How can you be sure your politicians won't become corrupted by a lust for power? With education? What, are you gonna educate the basic instincts out of humanity and convince people to give up their security for some ideological pipe dream?

>>133476795
>I don't need no state telling me I can't snort 10 grams of coke a day with my child wife
explain what is wrong with this statement

pro tip: you can't

>>133476863
>implying the vast majority of degenerates in america wouldn't eventually die off or move away without the nanny state constantly providing for them

>>133476939
Fuck off you degenerate pedo.

>>133476903
Dismantling a coercive institution using violence isn't exactly immoral. There are some decent politicians out there. If we can vote in the moderate libertarians, than we can see state power slowly shifting in our direction. And we don't really need to educate everybody, only the top "intellectuals" in society. If we get the respected authors and thinkers to support our cause, then we'd have won.

>>133476503
>Savages against a technologically advanced force.
So they failed for a lack of strength. How did that work out for them?
>We aren't legally allowed to do anything about them.
So you fail for a lack of will. How does that work out for you?
>The solution to the tragedy of the commons is very simply to privatize.
>tragedy of the commons
Has nothing to do with it.
>Savages are tribalistic, who knew?
Yes, so it's real and it predates mankind.
>You mean people as in individuals
No, I don't.
>We only developed as a society when people had their own permanent farming territories.
Yes, the advent of agriculture lead to permanent settlements, and population booms which lead to farming people's growing massive and claiming formerly unthinkably large territories, conquering the known world from smaller groups of hunter-gatherers. What's your point in bringing this up?
>The family does not think
The individual doesn't perpetuate himself. He's not a unit in society. Only in an economy can you reduce people to individuals.

File: ConsiderTheFollowing.jpg (20KB, 296x241px)

20KB, 296x241px

>>133473026
We want to take over the world so we can leave you alone.

>>133476725
The basic premise of libertarianism is small government that only exists to enforce to rule of law (police, justice system etc) and protect its citizens from foreign invasion (army) meaning that the government should not and will not act as a active player in the realm of business (privatized and open healthcare, energy, water, exploitation of natural resources etc) and only exist as a referee to enforce fair trade (which is debatable). The focus being private property rights and laissez-faire capitalism. Ancaps on the other hand, like the name anarcho implies, want no state at all. No democratic officials, no state, no army, no nothing, a free market jungle where you can do what you want with an even bigger emphasis on private property rights (enforced not by the state but by the individual himself) and non regulated markets.

That is the very basic gist and of course there are lots of ideological branches like Minarchism, AnarchoCapitalism, Libertarian socialism (pure retardation like every other left leaning libertarian off branch), Geolibertarianism and a few others.

>>133477102
my bad I misread your post, thought it said wife's child as in some cuck shit

libertarians aren't ancaps, we're against child sex/marriage/slavery. those actions take sovereignty from the child and thus violate the NAP

>>133476781
And because of people's penchant for abandoning some of their negative liberties in favor of being able to claim some positive liberties, the whole document is now defunct, the USA losing its sovereignty, its people supplanted by a brown and black horde, the government neither representing its people's interests, upholding its founding principles nor honoring the will of its founding fathers.

It's no longer inviolable, the "God-given rights" gone for lack of men defending them. You can't make law contrary to human nature because it will crumble.

The only way ANY of this works is through massive population decline, social homogeneity, and a return of the faith based agrarian community. None of you lolbertarians can stomach any sort of hard work, accountability, community, or self- denial. Your hedonistic Tesla brand Gay Automated Drugs and Pedophilia Space Station™ dreams are laughable.

>>133477445
You want to take over the world so you can get all the money that government gets without providing anything in return.
>buy up all land
>charge yearly rent to have your house built and exist there (essentially a tax but you won't call it that because muh two private individuals agreement)

>>133476835
until a group of people forms a state stronger than your memetia and absolutely, without a doubt, demolishes you.

>>133477257
You're comparing a pre-industrialized society to another pre-industrialized, yet significantly more advanced, society. We're talking about warfare between post-industrialization.

I'm sure tons of militia groups would LOVE to clean up Chicago or perhaps Detroit. We just don't want to deal with the state throwing us in jail for trying. It's not that we don't have the will to do something, it's that there is a serious incentive not to do it because of the threat of imprisonment.

The tragedy of the commons considers a predicament where everybody is out for securing their own resources. Which is what you described. Privatization solves this by making sure that the person who takes someone else's claim gets kicked off.

Just because it's old doesn't mean it's good. Tribalization dehumanizes people below their own individual judgment.

My point in bringing this up is that private property is essentially the advent of civilization.

The individual is a unit in society as the individual is the smallest thing that can survive on its own in the system, not unlike the cell.

>>133477614
It has existed long before you have what you have now, and in that time it did well, everyone wanted to come to the U.S, now it's nothing special.
You cannot help the man who won't help themselves, if society is is hell bend on regulations for farmers or a single payer healthcare you cannot stop them by force (although Pinochet did it decently, probably the best dictator you can ask for).
What you can do it engage them in debate and try to persuade them, it worked in the 80's with Thatcher and Reagan to an extent and it will be possible again in the future, because the current system either reforms or crumbles.
let society be free to sin but remind them every step of the way of the path they are taking.

>>133477673
>wanting to keep the money you earn instead of giving it to a corrupt institution to put wherever the fuck they want is a bad thing
wew

An issie that seems to be coming up here is that utopian libertarians are being grouped with realist linertarians. The utopians are called out for thinking thaf the world will be an easy place to life if libertarian policies were adopted.

It would not be easy.

In a libertarian world, people who can organize into companies and produce would be successful while those who do/can not will die. It would be ugly/terrible. However, realist libertarians believe that the selective pressure produced would eventually produce a better world.

In practice, I suspect it would play out just like national socialism, but where the nation is replaced with the corporation.

>>133477634
>None of you lolbertarians can stomach any sort of hard work
>The only political ideology that puts the focus on the individual and his work as the only means to provide for himself and strips away state safety nets and nanny state coddling unlike natsoc/fascism, any left leaning ideology, socialism and communism is the one that can't handle any sort of hard work.

Go apply for welfare hippie nigger.

>>133477738
this can be said about every political and economic system, what point are you trying to make?

>>133476205
>Swedish
>Retarded
>Central State dependent

Checks out

>>133477186
>Dismantling a coercive institution using violence isn't exactly immoral

And what if most people support the state? If you're using violence to achieve your own political goals, that's coersion. If you succeed you're forcing your ideology on the unwilling masses, which is immoral coersion. What makes you think your morals are superior to everyone else's?

You have too much faith in human nature, friend.

>>133477953
That libertarianism utopia of memelitias gets btfo by state armies.

>>133478051
national defense still exists in a libertarian society friend. we're not ancaps

>>133478042
Popular opinion is irrelevant. The state steals capital from the taxpayers, an act of coercion. To abolish it is moral. The people that are negatively affected by this action are only losing what was never theirs to rightfully own in the first place.

You also seem to believe that removing a forced morality is a forced morality on its own, which is quite silly. There would be law other than the nonaggression principle, which is up to the victim to enforce.

>>133477900
You wouldn't be keeping any more of the money you earn, you would be paying your money to "private" organisations that offer all the things a government offers.
>property rent
>private police fees
>road fees (privately owned roads with toll booths every few miles)
And on top of this it would eventually just become a few big monopolies that would essentially function as a governments but would be completely unaccountable for any actions they take, and probably more corrupt.
>mister smith bought the gold package legal process and you bought the silver package, so enjoy paying him a fine when he hurts his hand punching your face. Also your police insurance rate just rose because you had to use them this year and have become a larger risk client.

>Yfw /pol/ is literally about to pull a rome

>>133478398
and those things would be subject to a free market instead of being controlled by government, aka the most inefficient entity in the universe

not to mention you have the freedom of choosing where that money goes as opposed to a percentage of every pay check being forced to go towards shaniqua's food stamps

>>133478398
>unaccountable for any actions they take
How so? Companies have to uphold the reputation of the shareholders and appeal to the market by providing quality services for a low price. No company is safe from competition, not even the largest companies. They are only large because they were the best at appealing to the market. They are also held back by profits and losses. If a company does not operate on a for-profit basis, it will fail.

The state, on the other hand, requires no free market support. The state can be as inefficient as it pleases because it creates its own funds through taxation.

>>133478706
>reputation of the shareholders
Sorry, meant to say for the shareholders.

>>133478584
The average pleb wouldn't have much of a choice, huge conglomerate no1, 2, 3, etc
All offering pretty much the same thing. A white ethno-state is where it's at. No nogs, strong borders, low crime rates, degenerates physically removed.

>>133478398
The difference between giving your money to the government and giving your money to a corporation is that you can choose not to give your money to a corporation. They have no power over you if you take your business elsewhere.

>>133477825
>Just because it's old doesn't mean it's good
You said it wasn't real. It is real, and older and more widespread than mankind. If we can finally agree to the reality of it, you're free to argue against human nature if you think that productive.
>We're talking about warfare between post-industrialization
And how does that make any difference save in the source of strength? Does that introduce more criteria for the existence of rights than the strength and will to assert them? Less? If it doesn't, you're just wasting time making pointless distinctions.
>Which is what you described
No, what I described was the foundation for rights and the process by which they emerge. That might makes rights, not might makes right.
>My point in bringing this up is that private property is essentially the advent of civilization.
Don't be fucking stupid. We have no fucking insight as to the legal systems or economies of early man. What we do know is that the advent of agriculture lead to a population boom of those peoples, leading them to massively expand and supplant the much smaller tribes of hunter-gatherers. Where did their rights go?
The oldest recorded law very much accommodates slavery, hardly champions of individual rights. The conquered do not have rights. Their property and their lives are forfeit for they have not the strength to protect them.
>The individual is a unit in society
No. The individual is a fragment, not a whole, not a unit. He cannot survive and doesn't perpetuate himself(or society), he must form a family to do so. The family is the smallest unit, the atoms that make up society. And similarly nice when split.

>>133478706
Who holds world mega corp accountable? Largest private military, so nobody fucks with them, you try and they stop offering you water and food services, literally starve to death. Their "competition" doesn't do shit because they are just working with them and also don't give a shit about you, also doing so would harm their profits.

>>133473026
Leaving citizens alone and letting them make decisions for themselves

>>133478830
>The average pleb wouldn't have much of a choice, huge conglomerate no1, 2, 3, etc
I don't really care, what anyone else does with their money is their own business. If they don't like their options there will most likely be a local competitor they can pick. If not, they can start their own business and take advantage of the market themselves

>All offering pretty much the same thing
If they're all offering the same thing then one could improve their market share by improving their product or lowering prices

>white ethno-state
As appealing as it sounds, look at all of the leftist tumblr cucks, antifa, neolibs, etc. there's still a ton of whites in those groups, and I don't buy that getting rid of all the nogs will suddenly change their minds.

in a libertarian society there would be no welfare so the majority of nogs would die out or leave anyway. those that stay and survive would only be able to accomplish that because they're smarter than the average nog, and if anyone chimps out someone can just shoot their ass instead of waiting for the government to do it for them

>>133478380
>Popular opinion is irrelevant

How so? Popular opinion is just about the most important factor that needs to be realised if you want to start thinking seriously about implementing your ideology into the real world.

>You also seem to believe that removing a forced morality is a forced morality of its own

That's because it is. Morals are ultimately subjective, and it is immoral to forcibly remove someone from something they see as morally good. It dosent matter if a handful of ancaps think that the state is evil, its still immoral to deprive people of it if they were already content with it.

>>133479010
They would all be the essential the same, and work together. You would end up getting more fucked than you do by the current system.
Fascist ethno-state is the only thing better than what we already have.

>>133473788
Why?

>>133473630
DADDY WELFARE STATE IM A MINDLESS SLAVE PLEASE GAPE MY ASS SO THAT I FEEL LIKE I HAVE A PURPOSE IN LIFE

>>133479195
>degenerates physically removed
All the nogs in white skin would be removed, so we wouldn't be dealing with antif, faggots, etc.
Although I think they could be returned to normal in most cases without the media pedalling white guilt and self hatred all the fucking time.

>>133479758
It's your version of the ''one execution away from a socialist utopia''

>>133473026
Leave me the fuck alone and let me live my life.

>>133479853
Nope, I want to kill as few white as possible, hence my opinion that most would revert to normalcy once they aren't having degenerate poison pushed down their throats 24/7

>>133479758
>All the nogs in white skin would be removed, so we wouldn't be dealing with antif, faggots, etc.
and what makes you think they wouldn't immediately start lying about their beliefs as soon as word got out they were about to be executed? and then what makes you think they wouldn't continue to hold those beliefs and constantly subvert everything you've set up?

let's not pretend like all white people are saintly and above average intelligence. just because the average white man is better than the average black man doesn't mean there aren't some retarded white people and some genius black people. why would you intentionally try to keep the former and get rid of the latter when the free market can just naturally get rid of all stupid people for you?

>>133480042
>Why don't you want to race mix goy?
>w...what about Muh based black man?
t.summer pol

>>133480212
utopian idealist

>>133480212
>implying that's even remotely similar to what I said
go ahead and keep defending antifa and white male feminists, pretending they can be reformed

File: AHAHAHA-FAGGOT_o_.jpg (22KB, 367x476px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 367x476px

>>133473026
>What
have somebody else plow and pave their street.
protip: most cliches become cliches because they are true.

>>133480331
Obviously not all of them can, but many on the left are just following the the path of least resistance without thinking where that road takes them, those are the ones that can be saved. The ones that are devoted to it need to be removed.

>>133480496
>many on the left are just following the the path of least resistance without thinking where that road takes them
why would you want such weak people on your side?

How to win at ancap society
>payday loan usury
>bending dumbfucks over the table >private judge agrees to help bc contract/terms of service
>buy a straight piece of land 500 miles long, anyone who stands in way buy all land around theirs and deny entry
>charge six gorillion to cross a 100 ft piece of land 500 miles long

>>133474622
U retard are thinking of ancap society not libertarian. Read a book.

>>133479382
You really think every corporation would be unethical if the market was free? Any smart businessman knows that you don't keep customers if you treat them like shit. Ethno-fascism isn't going to work for the same reason any form of authoritarianism isn't going to work - you can't kill an idea. Trying to suppress dissenting schools of thought will only succeed in making their proponents sneakier about spreading it.

>>133480901
people would just fly planes and helicopters over it

also have fun paying for security to guard all 500 miles

>>133473026
Corporate Feudalism.

Not remembering why you became liberatarian and then introducing the same problem you had in the first place

>>133480614
Not everyone is born to lead, and for some to lead others must follow.
I don't hate the people that follow, just as I don't hate a tree for not being a dog.

>>133481022
Yes I do think that all successful corporations would end up being unethical. Why really compete when the guys you're friends with own all the other companies and you can work together to maintain your power and wealth with minimal effort.

>>133481531
But a fascist government wouldn't?

>>133473026
Death and suffering.

>>133473791
You don't need to take over anything to leave people alone. You want to take over the world so you can control everything and everyone.

>>133481266
The problem isn't people who follow but people who blindly follow, or those who follow the path of least resistance for the sake of the least resistance

In your society these people would be allowed solely because they're white while hard working, critically thinking minorities (however rare they may be) are not allowed. In a libertarian society these people would naturally be filtered out as they either starve to death or leave

>>133481986
No, see, we take over the world so that there's no other form of government to NOT leave you alone.

Libertarianism is democracy of action, which is only slightly less shit than regular democracy.

>>133481767
I won't lie it quite possibly could, and given enough time (generations) it probably would, along with all things. Although I support this over every alternative as it is an solution to our immediate problems, with the hope it would hold strong for as long as possible.

>>133482627
That's the problem, though. It might give you what you want in the short term, but long-term people are going to start suffering. Better to deal with corporations, because even when they're corrupt, like I and many other people have said, it's as easy as giving your money to corporations that aren't. A large consumer base means more influence, and if you prop up ethical companies then they're less likely to become corrupt over time - and if they do, you go somewhere else, rinse and repeat.

>>133483119
It would not fix anything if there was just corporations, in my opinion there would be unlimited potential for corruption.
Just switching around all the time isn't a solution, in fact it would probably prolong the problem as people would just keep saying "maybe this time, this company will be different", that is if the already established companies didn't just buy out or block in more violent ways the opportunity for other companies to start up and chalange them.

>>133476205
>Libertarianism=AnCap
When will this meme die?

>>133484016
Okay, then that's where the minarchist part comes in. I still think the government should stay out of the market as much as possible, but having protection against monopolies could solve the problem provided that was the extent of their influence.

>>133478520
The "far-right" circles of the internet have been in a perpetual state of in-fighting since the beginning of 2017 and I don't think it's going to end.

File: 1490789832254.jpg (61KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1000x800px

>>133473026
die in the streets because it turns you are not part of the 1%

Interstellar weed colonies

>>133485626
all according to plan

>>133485626
>since the beginning of 2017
Since the internet becoming publicly available, and much earlier than that in other arenas.

The "far-right" will never be united, and never has been, save for in opposition.

>>133486681
It's gotten really bad though lately. The schism between the alt-lite and alt-right, the feud between the authoritarian and libertarian sides of /pol/, the purity spiraling within the alt-right itself... it's all really intensified over these past few months.

>>133487018
Because Trump won, and with his campaign we got fresh meat back on the menu.
>purity spiral
what a shitty meme

File: 12072017165230.jpg (147KB, 862x518px)

147KB, 862x518px

To be a pawn chess piece like all other ideologies.

File: devideAndConquer.jpg (587KB, 1629x2269px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1629x2269px

>>133487018
You have to ignore the devide and conquer commies. Alt-right / alt-light are both shit lefty memes.

The authoritarian anons arnt really as against us as some of them think or as some libertarians think. They want to enforce ethnic nationalism as a way to promote national identity.

National identity is essential to the future of the US. Its essential for a "nation" to have an identity, to have common morals. Classical Liberalism this is the idea of the social contract.

The question is whether or not we can accomplish unity again without an authoritarian intervention. This is a serious question we have to think about.

The answer remains to be seen, but we have the same endgame.

>>133473026
Death to all monarchs.