/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL

>>133744358
>giving property rights to bourgeoise shitlords
absolutely disgusting

File: what_we_actually_are.png (2MB, 5000x7500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5000x7500px

Bump for private death squads!

>>133744569
Class ideology is a cancer.

No step on snek

File: gold.jpg (39KB, 445x316px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 445x316px

Can we talk about libertarian banking? I accept the Fed is awful but I do not trust gold to create a stable economy. What is your ideal banking system?

>>133744720
You could set the Fed up as a simple clearinghouse as it was originally intended to be. Then just let the interest rate float on the market.

"Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State . . . . It is opposed to classical Liberalism . . . . Liberalism denied the State in the interests of the particular individual; Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual."

>>133744720
Cryptocurrency, obviously.

I'm not big on futurology, but I would love to see a world where everything is radically decentralised by P2P technology.

>>133745055
I was thinking about this too.

File: 1498184784450.jpg (37KB, 473x601px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 473x601px

>>133744358
>promoting a usurious ideology created by Jews meant to benefit the creditor class and subvert Catholic social teaching

disgusting

>>133745345
No, it's an Anglo ideology. Jews just like money, so obviously every economist regardless of doctrine is a Jew.

>>133745493
>It's an anglo ideology
desu this
we've had a strong tradition of natural rights for centuries of thinkers

>>133745039
>The state is the true individual.
Could you be any more mystical?

>>133745345
I remember when /pol/ attacked ideas not people

>>133744358
Thanks for posting. Bump for interest.

Is anyone else convinced that Nord races are socialist by nature? It seems to me that germans, swedes and the sort are bitterly opposed to individualism, and value inter dependence. while remnants of the British empire value liberty, high class/culture and oppose dogmatic collectivism.

>>133745760
It just means that values, preferences & ideas are culturally created in the state organization. The individualist notion that individuals create their own values independently is wrong, i.e. not the true reality. If we want stronger values, we need a stronger state.

>>133744720
Barterism.
And the right to create currency.

File: 1984.jpg (444KB, 863x1200px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 863x1200px

>>133746245
>while remnants of the British empire value liberty, high class/culture and oppose dogmatic collectivism
lmao

>>133746245
I wish we were. Liberalism and individualism is gay and permeates everything.

>>133745493

Anglo might as well be another word for Jewish if you look at the history of British empiricism.

>every economist regardless of doctrine is a Jew

Economics used to be a moral philosophy. To think that humans are tools for the economy, and not vice versa, is to think like a Jew, and that's what libertarianism promotes.

>>133746473
Genuine societal values are not created by the state, they are created by individuals in a society interacting with each other. It comes about naturally. In fact the only time you see the state creating values for a society is when a certain chosen people decides to push multiculturalism, gay acceptance, and generally destructive degeneracy. This is not to say I am opposed to you and your kind collectivizing to create the ideal society for you. I'm just saying that the state has nothing to do with it. You should govern yourselves. Not governed by someone who thinks they're above their people.

>>133746595
>the right to create currency.
so just eliminating counterfit laws?

Why does /pol/ now hate free trade?

>>133746623
Well duh, that's what happens when you let the ZOG in. But to be clear, I consider American liberalism Anglo as fuck.

>>133746655
I would say it's the Jew run state forcing values on your people that are incompatible with your natural inclinations.

>>133746245
The truth is that there are strong urges amongst all people to be both "socialist" or egalitarian, and individualists. Look at a tribal setting; most people are of relatively equal standing and the crops and hunts are generally shared amongst the people. At the same time, people have always striven to acquire the goods they personally seek and this leads to individual preferences and eventually to status differences. Both are true statements about the character of human societies.

>>133746755
Well I would say the moral philosophy of liberty started with Aristotle. His philosophy was partially adopted by Anglo Christians in the middle ages, it brought great success and legacy and created what we know as mainstream religious Christian Libertarianism. The Jewish influences were much later. They started showing up at the early 20th century.

>>133747700
I didn't really make my point. The philosophy that evolved into Libertarianism was around long before the Anglo ages, but it has never been Jewish until modern times.

>>133747116
What do you think the state is? There can't be anything above and beyond humans interacting with eachother, that's a confusion. Liberal democracies are not just states, they have ideological baggage in the form of individualism. If you understand that values are culturally created you can see why democracy is a poor way of translating these values into a policy that's supposed to represent the people. In order to have real unity between people and government you first need to have real unity between people. Fascism ties people together so tightly that preference, equality, government lose their meaning.

Individualism is just as much of a collective idea as collectivism. The difference is that collectivism has positive impact on a people and individualism has a negative impact.

>>133748010
the concepts of economic and personal liberty date from the early modern period in Europe, roughly 1500 to 1700, when people learned to respect religious conscience and the foundations of liberal economic theory were laid down.

This is the problem with thick libertarians. You people always end up lapsing in your commitment to NAP in favor of the second set of values and preferences you adopt.

>>133748368
You're absolutely right about liberal Democracy. How could anyone have property rights if you could just vote them away? Liberalism and Democracy are a combination born to fail.

While fascist states can come about naturally and voluntarily it's often not the case. Communist dictators and corporatists are examples of this.

The alternative we want is non coercive. No fascism without contract with the people. No force without consent. This way those who want to be lead can be and those who are rugged individualists can govern themselves the way they see fit. We want a plurality of government. Not forced collectivism.

>>133749363
Fascism doesn't need consent. Consent is also an individualist idea. The key thing is that we are peoples, organisms in superorganisms, this is a fact and consent has nothing to do with it.

>>133748589
What thin Libertarians fail to realise is the nuanced position of thick Libertarians. We never assume a position of forcing our values on anyone. We do however choose not to associate with those that reject our values. If we create a community based on our values you have no right to change the way we organize nor do you have a right to live in our community. None of which violates property rights.

File: >libertyfags.png (76KB, 947x748px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 947x748px

Look, it's your guy Justin Amash voting for Pentagon funding of transgender surgeries
This is what you libertyfags are supporting

>>133749576
That's my point. If there is no consent it is a state. A state that will subjugate the people it claims to protect. In a sense, it's phony nationalism, which is just as bad as our state enforced multiculturalism.

Genuine nationalism is spontaneous, and based in a culture created by individuals. The Nation forms in consent, not by the force of the state.

>>133750107
He's a cuck libertarian.

>>133750107
/lrg/ is a stand against libertien faggotry. Cucks like him are crypto leftists.

most libertarians support technology and economics and such.
But what do you think about Varg's argument?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COVt9ewNoek

File: Degeneracy.png (2MB, 800x1975px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 800x1975px

Bump.

>>133750167
Again, what do you think a state is? What disqualifies it from being spontaneous?

I'm telling you that personal liberty is a meaningless concept, unlike the concepts of home, family, comradery, purpose.

>>133752597
And why is liberty more meaningless than those?

>>133752597
The state is coercion and violence. It is not a people governing themselves according to their interests and values. It is a man who points a gun at you while claiming it's in your best interest.

I believe in family and purpose. But I cannot do what's best for my family if I am enslaved to the state. The state will always prevent me from doing what is right. If the state comes before the individual, then it follows that the state comes before the family as well.

>>133752799
Because it's just not true that human beings become more free if there is less social discipline. Humans are the most free when they are tied to the social structures of family, state, people, e.t.c. with no chance of escape.

So home, family, comradery, purpose are not meaningless because they are not self-contradictory, they represent complete ideas. Personal liberty is a concept presupposes that atomized and rootless humans are the one's that have liberty when it's really not true.

File: 1500057176291.jpg (352KB, 1200x1014px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1200x1014px

>>133752799
>muh liberty
people don't want liberty, nor do they thrive under liberty

people need something giving their lives meaning and direction. Otherwise they are aimless

>>133753361
>It is a man who points a gun at you while claiming it's in your best interest.
You think that way because you recognize correctly that the modern state isn't in your interest. That doesn't mean all states are against their people's interest

>>133753448
>people don't want liberty, nor do they thrive under liberty
Prove it.

>>133753434
You clearly do not understand the meaning of liberty, to purpose that - "Humans are the most free when they are tied to the social structures of family, state, people, e.t.c. with no chance of escape". Completely self-contradictory, used to justify emotional dogma.

File: 1499964024573.jpg (695KB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 2560x1707px

>>133744358
Reminder to the Britbong owner of the /lrg/ pastebin:
Reminder that "Objectivism" deserves a mention in the OP as it encapsulates Nationalism, Capitalism, Meritocracy, Individualism, and Libertarianism all rolled into one. Libertarianism is only useful as a technical qualifier and is literally incomplete Objectivism. Objectivism without the epistemology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erytcpYpzRk

File: 1498107337369.png (90KB, 530x525px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 530x525px

>>133753703
Nobody supports libertarianism. But nationalism is something that millions of people will willingly give their lives for
The ideas of king and country motivate people far more than abstract idealism and abstract concepts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2_RbFfkAv0

>>133753361
How dumb are you? If people cannot govern themselves to your standards in a state organization then why would they be able to do so in any other organization? I'm only saying that we're not really obliged to tolerate people who are "out for themselves" and we are not obliged to let them hold resources as property.

>>133753434
Having little social discipline has nothing to do with freedom and the responsibilty that comes with it. It seems that "freedom" and "individualism" to you means only abandoning your family, your people and your culture. And not the freedom to do what is right by your loved ones and by your people.

People often forget that freedom is a moral principle. When a society is immoral it is not free. It is enslaved to degeneracy. There is no separation of liberty and responsibilty, they are the same thing.

>>133753797
I can add objectivism to the end of our list, sure.

>>133753971
>Nobody supports libertarianism.
But, anon, people don't know what's best for them.

>>133753703
That's the fundamental fallacy of individualism, that the ego can create values independently. In reality the ego itself is a social structure and you are just embarrasingly unaware of the real situation. Values are created socially, if we want to evolve our values must serve social ends.

>>133754151
>I'm only saying that we're not really obliged to tolerate people who are "out for themselves" and we are not obliged to let them hold resources as property.

>>133754023
The state is not a people governing themselves. The man with the gun is not an extension of the people when he threatens those people. When people govern themselves justly it is not a state, but property. A nation. Not to be confused with a nation-state.

File: 1499970008864.jpg (354KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 2048x1152px

>tfw you are free

>>133753604
My point is that when people govern themselves it is no longer "a state" but rather a nation.

>>133753448
>cherry picking
Every society, no matter what the system, will have low-life degenerates such as those in pic related.

>>133753971
that's probably why Ron Paul did so much for the cause

he's held up as a personification of the ideas. putting a face to the ideas helps people rally around them

>>133754693
>tfw its not my business what happens in Walmart and I don't really give a shit
feels pretty good desu

>>133754457
By people who "are out for themselves" I assume you mean egotistical criminals, robbers, theives, rapists and murderers and not people who on their own desire seek to better themselves and their families in a virtuous way. An I right?

>>133753797
>objectivism encapsulates nationalism
how?

>>133754693
>>133753448
>Conflating liberal Democracy with liberty

>>133754916
but you have to walk down the street and see their fat ugly bodies lumbering around

imagine walking down a street where literally everyone is attractive
what would it be like? can you even imagine such a thing?

>>133754591
Everyone doesn't have to liken the state with "the man with the gun" just because you do.
Besides, my father had a gun and while he didn't threaten me he was sometimes strict.

We want the kind of leaders that live and die with the people but who will lead and not just go in whatever direction the wind is blowing. People are not equal, and they don't have equal capacity to lead. But they should be tied together so that equality doesn't matter. Muscle cells aren't jealous of brain cells.

>>133755086
I mean that individual wants and wishes are tolerated as far as they coincide with those of the state and no further.

File: 1498608268725.jpg (44KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 499x499px

>this cringeworthy thread again

Why are autismcaps so desperate to fit in?

>>133750107
I like Amash. Id much prefer a budget he'd make that funds this then a budget by some establishment cuckservative that doesn't fund this.

>>133755454
What you're describing is not the state. It's natural and non coercive. Your father was acting in hs own interest. And that's a beautiful thing that he put you in his interest.

>>133756115
It's such a meaningless argument
>it's natural and non coercive

What in this context isn't natural? What does it mean for an organizational scheme to be "natural"?

Why isn't it coercive? When I was a child I didn't always have the option, legal or otherwise, to disobey my parents.

File: 1486906021117.jpg (286KB, 750x400px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 750x400px

>>133755138
Nations are an inevitability and their existence unavoidable and since their existence is unavoidable they should be regarded and administered objectively and not subjectively (which spawns globalism). True Nationalism lies in the affirmation of the societies that free men wish to craft and the self interest (isolationist if they choose) objevtive reality demands they live by.
What Objectivism denounces is Nationalistic Mysticism, where the collectivism of racial groups, economic classes, or the leftist parts of organized religion is replaced the "Nation".
Have a quote:

>"Once, you believed it was ‘only a compromise’: you conceded it was evil to live for yourself, but moral to live for the sake of your children. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your children, but moral to live for your community. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your community, but moral to live for your nation. Now, you are letting this greatest of nations be devoured by any scum from any corner of the earth, while you concede that it is selfish to live for your country and that your moral duty is to live for the globe. A man who has no right to life, has no right to values and will not keep them."

Objectivism DOES affirm Nationalism with the only caveat that it always be subordinated to Individualism.
Rand termed this as "to subordinate Might to Right.

File: 1499988663836.png (242KB, 450x496px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 450x496px

>>133754154
Thanks.

>>133756500
The state is a product of evil. Nature means from God. Meaning it is a moral right. The kind of coercion used by the state is a moral wrong. Your relationship with your father was one of property rights. You cannot govern yourself at that age and so as you come from him he is your rightful owner.

Natural rights and objective morality is the debate

>>133755594
Plenty of us are Minarchists numbnuts. We treat the AnCap yellow/black as a 'good enough' approximation since presumably anarchism is preferable to statism.
An Minarchism>Anarchism argument can proceed from here.

>>133757404
God doesn't care about property rights. You are grasping.

>>133757826
>God doesn't care about property rights.
Says fucking who?

>>133757826
You think God is a Deity, rather than a force innate to the universe. You're mistaken. As a fascist I would expect you to understand gods laws are not subject to man's whim. That's why we will be free in the end. You don't seem to be a statist. You're just confused about truth and the natural order. You will have your fascism when you learn to be moral.

File: 1494970979644.png (174KB, 960x464px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 960x464px

>>133744720
Let the free market decide what currencies do what, the best system shall prevail.

>>133744720
You understand that graph is in relation to fiat?

Would be better if you put gold vs house prices to see its stability. That graph could very well indicate volatility of the dollar.

>>133757826
Why wouldn't god care about the best method to avoid conflicts over scarce resources?

File: 1493545528995.jpg (92KB, 562x689px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 562x689px

What would women look like after a few hundred years of being bought and sold and bred like dogs.

Would they develop the same crazy variety dogs have? Or is that impossible with humans?

>>133753448
Aren't those people enabled by a degenerate-enabling welfare state?

Who would want to associate themselves voluntarily with someone who has no self-control? Those people in a libertarian society would be pariahs, condemned to live with their degenerate kin and assume massive costs for their life choices.

>>133758335
You are the one trying to attach your trademark ideology to God in some sick anthropomorphism. Stop telling me what I think God is, you don't know.

File: GHRatioB.jpg (67KB, 600x467px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x467px

>>133758660
its not much better. Trully crypto will win out over physical currency.

>>133759044
There is no real reason why you couldn't create radical alterations to human physiology with eugenics, however the process with humans would be extraordinarily sluggish because we live so much longer than doggos and reproduce at a slower pace.

>>133759088
I'm not convinced you know yourself.

>>133759142
unless of course theres a war and someone turns the electricity off, then it vanishes into the ether

>>133759217
>reproduce at a slower pace
there is a lot more flexibility there than you might think
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina

>>133758599
That is the stupidest fucking picture.

File: commies.png (71KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x800px

>>133759777
>on /lrg/
>shares an opinion WITHOUT an argument to back it up
fuck off

>>133744569
>taking property rights from plebeian retards
Hey, two side of a coin, right dummy?

File: devezas_pict_17.jpg (120KB, 500x271px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 500x271px

>>133759142
Post gold standard abandonment, with gold becoming a commodity, will also add speculation to the picture.

Prior to it, only wars and disruptive technologies created big fluctuations.

>>133760047
I agree it's a stupid picture. If someone believes that freedom will be achieved through increments of public domain has not really thought it through.

So far experience tells us that if people begin perceiving that the state (and therefore, the people) have power over something they shouldn't have power over, it leads to more of that, and never less.

You might have small periods of prosperity but the sustainability is awful.

The only way to achieve real freedom is self determination. Secession, reducing state power, agorism.

>>133744569
when you can't compete in real life with freedom you gotta make some idiotic rules i guess, commie cuck

>>133760649
Now that's an opinion I can get behind.
I just posted the picture to shitpost.

>>133759417
>and someone turns the electricity off
most of our money is already not physical, not mention debts and contracts and what not.

>>133760203
Your saying there was no speculation before abandonment? not trying to argue legitimately asking

File: Eagle.png (538KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 800x800px

Hail /lrg/. Later my brothers.

can someone post the picture of the populist libertairan party platform from last thread

>>133759590
Sure but putting all of the moral and ethical objections that I would have to such a thing aside, your rate of complication and death would probably be sky high. Humans are not evolved to reproduce like that normally, and regular practice Csection birthing will have detrimental effects in the long run. Some indication already that more women are cropping up with hips too thin to give birth naturally.

Reliance on technology for successful reproduction is a severe deficiency.

File: IMG_0621.jpg (93KB, 1200x625px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1200x625px

And can you tell me how, without a centralized authority your NAP and property rights will be useless because there isn't a state to maintain your firearms and your private property? And can you also explain how you would maintain higher technology and modern appliances without going back to primitivism, which, funnily enough, might lead to localized Communist/Communalist endeavors?

File: Lewposting.jpg (122KB, 1200x1437px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1200x1437px

>The Egalitarian Menace | Lew Rockwell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rPFmCD---Y

>>133765948
lew is pretty based
deserves more exposure imo, as a speaker

File: 1490036706888.jpg (22KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 403x403px

>>133766407
he's the perfect link between Rothbard and Hoppe.