Why can"t you use your brains and become a libertarian

File: 1502206401197.jpg (3MB, 4131x3240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4131x3240px

>>137457539
6/8 of the mises founders were kikes. The endgame was always Jewish communism. Lolberts convinced the right that this garbage is okay.

>>137457539
The closed hand smitten by the closed heart is opened by the mind of needle shrinkage to the cranium penis.

>captcha SImpson Kings

File: 1500943501728.png (34KB, 500x590px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x590px

>>137457539
I already have

>>137457539
1) libertarians are for open borders and therefore for the destruction of culture and family
2) libertarians are socially permissive and therefore for the destruction of culture and family
3) libertarians are just anarchists that lack the courage of their convictions and therefore for the destruction of culture and family

>>137458206
this
/thread

File: shay175.gif (2MB, 500x193px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x193px

>>137457539
Da but I prefer minarchism over ancap

>>137458206
Only stupid people need protection from the state
If you can't rise your family and protect it you don't deserve to exist.
Don't expect the government take the role of your daddy.

Now gtfo bootlicker

>>137457539
Most of us have been through 10+ years of indoctrination by government "schools".

A lot of us have family members who work in the public sector.

The state is so pervasive in our lives that it becomes the default answer to any question.

To suggest retracting government becomes tantamount to suggesting to threaten everything their very lives.

It's not their fault. You've just got to have patience. Ask the right questions.

File: 1487281267239.png (2MB, 5000x7500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5000x7500px

>>137458206

>>137458206
>>137458330
>I know nothing about Libertarians the post

You cant be a libertarian withouth belief in personal responsibility. The founders of American Libertarian party had a deep love for Western Civilization and Christianity. The "Libertarian" party is literally run by usurpers that kicked out its founding members and is a disgrace to the liberty movement.

File: Welcome-to-pol-now-get-out.jpg (190KB, 727x692px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 727x692px

OP is a non-white shill. /pol/ is proud of its dual ethnic libertarian and National Socialist heritage. That said, I think we all know that cultural marxism and white genocide wont be stopped by defending your front yard with a shotgun until you die. National Socialism is our only solution, and no, chances are it wont be instituted by a vote given how small our populations are at this point. Youve had your chance to push for less intervention, now we need MORE intervention. Just remember, National Socialism is not a collectivist ideology, its a mix of collectivism and individualism, and it puts great weight on the importance of that individualism. Any regulations are done by non-materialistic people, with your own benefit in mind (If you are white). Its not a bad thing, its not jackbooted thugs kicking your door down (if you arent a commie, which you arent)

>>137458206
Libertarian minarchists, as typified by the Libertarian Party, are all of those things.

Libertarian anarchists, in the Rothbardian and Hoppean tradition, are not. Open borders are an act of aggression and expropriation on anyone living within them. Destruction of culture and family through state action is one of the worst of the state's violations of liberty. This is why the state must be dismantled and sold for scrap, so that meritocratic and discriminatory societies can thrive once again.

>>137457539
I want reddit to leave

File: Democracy,_the_God_that_Failed.jpg (14KB, 220x329px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x329px

>>137458206
Oh boy, someone didn't do his homework before posting. Read this book, it is a good read.

How the fuck is a libertarian for open borders if they absolutely respect private property and are against the expansion of the state, including individuals under its power ?

The expansion of state influence over the life and decisions of individuals are much to blame for the degeneracy and the destruction of traditional values (responsibility, family, self-ownership).

>>137460088
>Any regulations are done by non-materialistic people, with your own benefit in mind
Have fun with that lasting more than 5 seconds before being abused, as with quite literally every socialist system in human history. But this time it'll be different, right?

>>137460088
Shoo shoo socialist scum
The authoritarian cancer needs to die

>>137457539
Ive since disassociated myself from minarchists and constitutional libertarians. They are dishonest statists who are worse then natsocs.

>>137460756
B-but Ron Paul? Isn't he a minarchist / constitutional libertarian? He's done a fantastic job at spreading libertarian arguments.

>>137460401
Is libertarianism really popular on reddit or anywhere for for that matter?

nigga fuk yo shi ima mo fukn pirate

File: 1279042224710.jpg (50KB, 576x416px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 576x416px

>>137457539
>TFW ancaps are literal children fuckers.

>>137461070
>ancaps
That's a funny way of spelling 'social services'.

>>137460756
A central government is necessary for the right function of a country
Organization and protection of constitution, that's all I care.

It's feasible and has worked, I'm Ok with it.

>>137460756
Not to mention that there is actual historical precedent, in the form of the United States of America, demonstrating that their system is easily corruptible by the inherently expansionary nature of government.

>>137460959
Certain libertarian arguments, not others. He was familiar with Rothbard's works, and he is old enough to be socially conservative, so I'd say he is categorically distinct from mainstream libertarianism as it stands today.

>>137461267
Try to ask an ancap what age of consent should be and watch them dance around defending child fucking.

>>137461405
>A central government is necessary for the right function of a country
At least make an attempt to come up with an alternative to "necessary" government.
Otherwise you're just giving up. It's laziness and nothing more.

>>137460959
You have no argument if you say you are against the initiation of force, but still praise democracy. You have no argument if you claim government is a "necessary" evil because people are evil. If people are bad then why do we have a government which is made up of people? Minarchists fail to acknowledge the fact that any government is inherently coercive, solely to appear less "extreme" than a full ancap. They are to ancaps what the magapede redditors are to natsocs, in the way that they dont acknowledge the JQ, minarchists dont acknowledge the GQ.

I consider myself a libertarian and all of your qualms about libertarianism being in favor of degeneracy are unfounded.
True libertarians are not advocating for open borders as it would pose a serious threat to the proliferation of a libertarian society. Borders, like the police and the army, are somewhat exempt from the libertarian ideology and only cryptoleftists would argue that the NAP extends to noncitizens.
Furthermore, as a libertarian I would privatize all education and create a market for ideas and enlightenment, not only goods and services. This would inevitably undermine the state-funded Marxists colleges, where the professors are indoctrinating without impunity and any real inspection.
And I think we can all agree that the freest market possible is the most prosperous one, with all of the baseline regulations protecting the citizens from health hazards and monopolies.

In short, libertarianism would inevitably result in a much better society than national socialism or whatever you're advocating, even though national socialism is by far more preferable to international socialism and any other kind of society for that matter, other than the libertarian one.

File: capitalism2.jpg (455KB, 1024x896px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1024x896px

>>137460549
>>137460577
National Socialism is not an economic socialist ideology. You should really do some reading before making a judgement like that. The second guy is a beaner, but first guy Ill give you the benefit of the doubt. National Socialism never hurt any German person, and it was a thriving success. Everyone loved it, even the people who doubted Hitler at first became ardent supporters after he was elected.

He also achieved full employment, and brought Germany out of a worse depression than the US and the rest of Europe was facing to be the most powerful country economically in Europe at the time. Its just ignorance, and I say that in a non-antagonistic way - that prevents people like you from realizing these things. Ill say it again, its not economic socialism, its not "from the rich to the poor". Its socialism in a sense that everyone is united, the collectivism part. That people have a sense of togetherness, and care about eachother. Its not taking money. The only things that end up being taken from anyone would be for example - land bought at unfair prices during a currency crisis, bought with foreign money, by foreign people, who shouldnt be citizens at all.

Its things like how only members of the race can be a citizen. Obviously only Germans should be German citizens, with full rights, and the ability to protest, and own land and profit from the country etc. Theres no reason to allow China to buy up your oil sands, like Canada for example. None of this is radical. You own private property, until you use it in abusive ways, like running a crackhouse. They even allowed brothels in Germany etc, its not some authoritarian hellhole, it was a paradise, with degeneracy minimalized. Goebbels both wrote about these people who try to take fun away from everyone needing to be reprimanded, and about the brothels thing I just brought up.. I cant recall the exact context, I think Italian soliders or something, to keep their ruckus under control IIRC

>>137461674
Try to ask governments around the world and they'll all have different answers.

File: living in hitlers germany.jpg (774KB, 1899x1168px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1899x1168px

>>137461810
>>137460549
Also the whole ideology is based on higher values and people are chosen for their loyalty and dedication. Of course not all corruption can be weeded out, Goring was a fucking cunt for example, but thats one man, and he ended up marginalized for being the supposed #2. Goebbels had far more power than him as the #3.

>>137461960
Yes for most counties that is based on local morality which is should be.

If you dont have some line in the sand you have child fucking.

>>137461728
Source/quote of Ron Paul saying that government is necessary?

>>137461810
>Its socialism in a sense that everyone is united, the collectivism part. That people have a sense of togetherness, and care about eachother

Yeah, I get you.
It's called "Communism", everything you posted was tried in the USSR.

>>137461715
I see nothing wrong with it

>>137457539
Because I want to use state power to legislate morality.

File: jason_alexander.jpg (34KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x600px

>>137462278
>local morality
>being an actual moral relativist

File: IMG_2738.jpg (165KB, 584x782px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 584x782px

>>137457539
Because I'm not a naive teenager any more. Good luck with high school anon

>>137457539
Nigga I'm bigger than your definitions and labels

File: IMG_2744.jpg (152KB, 496x496px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 496x496px

>>137462589
>Being a literal child fucker.

>>137462828
>I'm not a naive teenager
>posts nazi stuff

You're not fooling anyone m8

>>137462493
Of course the dumbshit beaner thinks that National Socialists are communists. If it happened in Germany lets just say for example, not one dollar or inch of land would be taken away from any German person, no matter how rich they were. There was no wealth redistribution. There was reclamation of what is supposed to be theirs, based on land. They maintained private businesses however (this makes you dumb) and they had private property (now youre dumber) and they had personal reward for personal productivity (see, you really shouldnt say stupid uniformed things, bean) and also, another key factor - they believe races aren't equal, and that even man isnt equal. No man is equal, obviously. Even whites. Some whites are duds. Fact of life. Some animals are born retarded, and some are prize runners.

Communism is the total opposite of National Socialism, and youre the total opposite of politically educated.

>>137462885
I'm against it because I assert that my morality is correct.
You believe that morality can differ by location, meaning that this action could be morally permissable in some place.
You then can't condemn any action, or use it as an insult, without asserting that your values are the correct ones.

>>137463151
In fact, in a National Socialist perspective, any native blooded person who maintained wealth in a hostile climate where they had to compete with Jews who had an unfair advantage - is highly commendable and worthy of congratulations and respect. Good on them for being industrious and hard working, as long as they didnt maintain their success through morally questionable ways.

We already have regulated markets and a mixed economy. What I described isnt far off, the biggest problem is for non-whites, who suddenly find themselves unable to protest the system legally, or buy up all your land (like China) etc.

>>137463326
>>137463326
I think 16 is a fine age to set consent, but if some britbong country that is high on the jesus wants it set at 18 whatever I have no stake in the race of higher consent in another country.

If some sand nigger wants to set consent at 13 I think its fucked up and say they are a bunch of child fuckers, but unless I wanna move there and started effecting the politics I cant do much in another country.

>>137462589
>implying that he's a moral relativist

In the context of nationhood, morals are literally relative.

>>137463151
But you knew that lots of houses, business and land were taken from germans by the german government, no?
They could be jewish, political dissidents or whatever, they were germans and the state fucked with them, not only with their property, but with their life.

You're no more than a cuck my man, stop trying to make others control your life.

>>137463776
Besides, a libertarian society is compatible with national socialism. Communism is not compatible with either. NatSocs are fighting against a current violence against them, their society and their race - libertarians support that right to fight and win. Commies seek to actively destroy those things without provocation. Their very existence undermines individual sovereignty and the peaceable, voluntary interaction of people.

If non-whites want their own society, they can make it elsewhere, but they have no right to the property natsocs own.

File: IMG_2833.png (41KB, 220x280px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 220x280px

>>137463007
Libertarianism has never been successful at the national level. And in 2016 it sank deeper into irrelevance. I'm not advocating joining the nazi party. But libertarianism didn't even get far enough to fail, it's a non-starter

File: 1501943056156.png (231KB, 643x537px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 643x537px

>>137457539
>being over the age of 16 and unironically identifying as a libertarian

>>137463973
Mike Pence's website hacked; get a chuckle out of this

>>137457539
Libertarianism is for the gay.
My proof: OP

File: (((did nothing wrong))).jpg (156KB, 1113x1000px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1113x1000px

>>137457539
Selling out your culture, nation, or people for profit is a mistake the boomers made, and the younger generations are still paying for their mistake today. So will future generations. The most precious resource you have is your own people. Furthermore, "economics" is just a label applied to any human behavior which creates value. Value can be determined, manipulated, or manufactured by any nation, even one as poor as uganda. Do you think all these jewish hollywood movies featuring drug-inhaling coalburners riding a dick train with no other message would've sold well in the 1950's? No. Selling out your race for a few slips of paper or lump of silver is the worst investment you can make. If you want to become wealthier, nationalize the banks, and get rid of the jewish bankers.

File: this-is-a-horse.png (631KB, 827x959px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 827x959px

>>137464384
As I said, Jews bought up all sorts of land at unfair rates with foreign currency when Germany was in the dumps, and were the slumlords over the native population etc, profiting from their misery. You argue that a foreign people should be able to unfairly buy up what is rightfully white peoples, and profit from their misery and suffering etc. Why should Jews be allowed to own property if they arent even citizens, and arent allowed in the country? Tough shit bucko. Those werent Germans as much as Akmed isnt Swedish.

>>137464411
Im all for giving Libertarians a large parcel of land to play out their freedom fantasies on, after we secure our race together. I just think we both know that the "stay off my property" types arent what is going to go out in numbers, in a semi-collective way (wink wink national socialism) and put an end to this in organized fashion.

File: 1483739934811.jpg (49KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x667px

>>137463876
This Britbong country isn't high on Jesus. The state is our main religion now, sadly.

>but unless I wanna move there and started effecting the politics I cant do much in another country.
mfw literally every war ever waged to attempt regime change was started by a government

>>137458206
McKillyourself

>>137465378
What the hell does that have to do with anything?

>>137457539
because the movement was recently co-opted by fucking maniacs.

>>137465293
A right-wing authority that protects the individual is always preferable to a left-wing authority that destroys a society.

>>137458206
(((Libertarian Party))) =/= libertarians. I am permissive of degeneracy but my love for myself and drive for perfection keeps me on the right track. Not forced. The people who want to find success and happiness can find it.

>>137458206
you have shit culture and your family doesn't love you.

>>137459237
>Ask the right questions.
such as?

>>137465642
As long as the individual happens to also be right wing. Do you really not see how this breaks down?

File: 1487023159522.jpg (237KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 598x792px

>>137465429
McNotAnArgument

File: image.jpg (228KB, 1200x1431px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1200x1431px

THE WEST MUST BE SAVED!

RESTORE YOUR PRIDE, RESTORE YOUR CULTURE!!

STATES RIGHTS!! https://youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4 [Open]

CUT EPA!!


CUT DEP OF ED!!


MAGA

>>137464426
This and in other countryes besides the US people dont even know what it is and most of the few that do consider it rightfully retarded.
We have seen what a weak state does in eastern europe after the communim collapsed.People literally starved corporations and corruption ran rampant,civil wars and capitalist lords rising up.
In Russia this facilitated a new dictatorship,libertarianism and anarcho capitalism are a fast way to a totalitarian state.Most people will always need a state to controll them an if its not there someone will fill that power vaccuum up.
I am not even going to talk how such a state would fare in a war against another one....kek if you have neibbghouring countries you would get anexxed in no time.
White country or not white libertarianism and anarcho capitalism are reciepies for disasters.

File: 1488785731384.png (254KB, 1313x1248px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1313x1248px

>>137457539
>implying implications

>>137457539

Because I realized that libertarians are more interested in defending an ideology than actually producing positive change in the world.

Political discussion is fun, but we shouldn't forget why we are a having it in the first place.

Also, some things are better being left to the government to do (local police force, libraries) not because the government is better at doing them, but because they are invaluable assets to a functioning society and either can't be adequately replaced by a private org (police) or may fail to materialize (library/self-learning centers).

libertarianism is quite the romantic idea, but I live in the real world. I still hold the same ideals as valuable, I simply no longer find them infallible.

>>137468011
>can't be adequately replaced by a private org (police)
What on earth makes you think this is the case?

File: Untitled.png (2MB, 1600x1131px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x1131px

>>137457787
>>137458206

File: 71991a17aee10aea9b2a2a7dba25d9ec.jpg (140KB, 580x804px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 580x804px

All collectivists get the helicopter. You motherfuckers are the scourge of mankind.

>>137461754

NAP absolutely 100% applies to all human beings.

That being said, it sounds an awful lot like they are trespassing in this scenario, so you know what that means.

>>137468168
Because he's rational

>>137457539
this kind of bait is the equivalent of a flaccid dick
like why are yall even trying
its not even funny

and as always sagete

>>137468417
But you child fuckers are not?

File: 1502426667508.jpg (89KB, 960x468px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 960x468px

>>137464885
Child prostitution rings are an example of anarcho-capitalism when implemented. It provides a great form of wealth, is privatized, and is monitored by the invisible hand of the market (not the government and their pesky "laws"). No concern for morality (because that doesn't give you money) and only concerned with the bottom line [$@$].

Without at least some government intervention, capitalism quickly consumes lives without a care for anything other than the blood money it provides. Splicing capitalism (an already volatile political philosophy) with anarchism (an extremely chaotic political philosophy) only yields chaos.

Therefore, in order to be an unironic Anarcho-capitalist requires you to become a cuck to your already way-too-rich Jew overlords, allowing them to get richer, the layman to get poorer, and pretty much all human rights to be thrown out the window.

Anarcho Capitalists: 0
Everyone else: 1
/sage

>>137468656
>private security cannot exist
>only a violent monopoly on security, paid for by compulsory taxation, can adequately protect people from violence and theft
?

File: 1500921813455.jpg (78KB, 776x960px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 776x960px

>>137468824
We're not Muslims

>>137468011
You think the production of books was something of a problem until government stepped in?

>>137468168

Because when the police force is private, justice costs money.
Further, there is no real reason I couldn't just take the law into my own hands, after all, some other asshole started a whole corporation around taking the law into their own hands.

It would basically devolve into a wild-west scenario with rival "legal" gangs, which is not conducive to a budding society.

This shit is REALLY obvious, you are like I used to be though: blinded by ideology.
At the end of the day, that makes you no better than a commie.

Results > Ideology

>>137469268
This, it's why I'm a libertarian

Explain this to me: how does your government not just turn into feudalism?

>>137458206

Wow...that's all wrong.

>>137469039
>capitalism quickly consumes lives without a care for anything other than the blood money it provides.

slow down there maduro, jesus

>>137469039
Libertarian are only concerned with private property and not with money. There is nothing in libertarianism that would prevent one from taking all of his savings in order to burn them up on his front yard, nothing to prevent him from not working for any reason what so ever, nothing to prevent him from going on an ascetic retreat.

>>137468824
Since ancap are against aggression and the initiation of force, they must also be against rape, and thus are against child rape.

>>137467317
Do you really think like that? There wasn't a free market in Russia. Government regulations was bigger than now (progressive taxes for example). There wasn't lustrations for soviet nomenclature.

>>137469254

No, I think access to information is of paramount performance and we shouldn't just cross our fingers and hope some church supplies such a powerful accommodation free of censorship.

Before you respond, make sure your response isn't "the perfection of my ideology is more important to me morally than access to information is functionally to society."

There are services which could be provided fairly cheap which reap great rewards for society. Just because we have some retarded abomination of a a State right now doesn't mean that states are inherently a net negative.

>>137458206
Retardation the post

>>137461754
>True libertarians
No true scotsman?

>>137469268
>justice costs money
It doesn't right now? Police work for free? Judges? You should remind them of this and we can all save some money.

> there is no real reason I couldn't just take the law into my own hands
Aside from the people around you, the terms of the covenant community you live in, and the protection agencies they subsribe to?

>It would basically devolve into a wild-west scenario with rival "legal" gangs, which is not conducive to a budding society.
You realize this is the status quo on the international scale? As we speak, anarchy is at work. Where is the chaos? Where is the destruction of global societies?

>>137469407

Because you are so blinded by ideology you care more about memes than the progression of mankind?

>>137469268
It's bizarre that for some reason people are able (contractually?) to create an entity such as the state in order to take care of their security need but somehow would be absolutely unable to do the same thing at a smaller scale with private entities.

There is nothing preventing you NOW from taking justice in your own hand save for the ever present threat of force on the part of government. Likewise, in a system of private ownership and private supply of security, there would be the ever present threat of private reprisal.

I'm not too big of an ancap but some argument against it are just facile.

>>137469225
What should be the age of consent?

>>137469673
So if a 3 year old consents its ok?

strawman the thread

>>137470354
Children in such age can't understand the meaning of sex so it would be a violating of NAP

>>137470567
What should the age of consent be then?

>>137469971

Right now if you violate NAP and assault a homeless man someone can call the cops and they will attempt to arrive and break up the fight.
In your society, the NAP can be violated against the poor without consequence. More than that, actually, you can oppress anyone poorer than you without fear, just buy the local police force.

At least in my society police have to take bribes privately, in yours bribes are equatable to justice.

If the NAP is important to you, you need a way to enforce it.

>>137468354
This

>>137469750
In the rest of the eastern bloc after the 89 we got ravaged by corporations and corruption.Foreign corrporations came in and bought everything from infrastructure to land even most of the original stat property was sold of for bribes.
Industry was shut down and our economy produces nothing we are basically dependant nations of consumerists,if the west would cut us off we would colapse economically.
Back in the 90s people lost alot of jobs,some were literally starving,it was worse than the worst times of communism.You couldnt walk ouside without carrying a knife to defend yourself since mafia,crime and drugs ran rampant.
To me this was clearly the product of open market and the closest thing to anarcho capitalism,never again.

>>137469409
Depends on how you define feudalism. Each legitimate landowner would be sovereign. He would naturally have the ability to collect rents from any tenants on his land. However, he could not own serfs, nor press anyone into perpetual servitude. Tenants must be free to leave in order for an ancap society to remain as such.

On a related note, you should spend some time reading about how feudal societies functioned. Every class had a particular social and economic role, and obligations to fulfill within that role. It wasn't just Monty Python and the Holy Grail, peasants globbing mud, and kings riding around living a life of luxury.

>>137469673
>Libertarian are only concerned with private property and not with money.
>Anarcho-capitalism
>Anarchy: a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
>Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
>Anarcho-Capitalism: a political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.
>"its about land, not money. Trust me!"
ftfy

>There is nothing in libertarianism that would prevent one from taking all of his savings in order to burn them up on his front yard, nothing to prevent him from not working for any reason what so ever, nothing to prevent him from going on an ascetic retreat.
And nothing that would prevent a Hebe from adopting and selling children for money.

Anarcho-Capitalists: 0
Everyone else: 2

>>137469877
>free of censorship.

You think the government is not the prime purveyor of censorship in society? If you look at old books that used to be printed in France, you'll see a page where it is written "With the permission of the King".

Another example of government censorship is what Russia did against Ukrainian literature in 19th century, essentially banning all publication in Ukranian language in an attempt to choke their national spirit. Closer to home, the German government in Europe right now is the one pressuring private companies like facebook into helping them censor what's published on their site, while in Canada hate speech laws make the publication of certain book outright illegal.

I'll have you note that project Gutenberg is a private initiative, and so is google attempt to scan as many books as possible.

I would also like to know how censorship would happen in a society in which the principle of private property was respected. Only the state can force one to shut the fuck up.

Chris Cantwell is on Part of the Problem right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AQnYinTKc4

File: 1487015907485.gif (380KB, 457x340px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 457x340px

>>137470354
I'd propose sixteen, with sexual education starting at around twelve to fourteen, as human's have no concept of sexuality before puberty. I would also propose a minimum age of pregnancy are around twenty. Primarily for the babies health.

>>137470646
It depends on child's understanding of sex. Someone can know about it and understand it in 7 years and others only in 16

>>137470294

The wealthier man will always have the police on his side. There will be no justice for the poor and even white neighborhoods will turn into Detroit.

If you want wild west, just say it: be honest. The idea of private police forces is sorta dumb due to them being unaccountable.

at the end of the day, you are arguing nebulous ideology while I am arguing results. Results are more important than principles, the ends justify the means. To think that the principled means justify any end is commie-talk

>>137470354
>So if a 3 year old consents its ok?

It's unclear that children can consent.

>>137470812
>it's about land

I said it's about property.

>>137469409
Even todays capitalist sistem is a pseudo-fedualist sistem with money.All the rich families jewish or not controll much of the market,media and the state and their familly members inherit it.
True capitalism has died quite a while ago.....

>>137470652
>just buy the local police force
Why would anyone pay a company to protect them when that company will violate existing contracts at the drop of a hat the second someone jingles some coins? How would such a police force even survive for more than a day on the market? Who would pay for a police force that not only refuses to apprehend attackers in their presence, but does not acknowledge that even if your victim today happens to be a homeless man, it could very well be a client tomorrow?

Did you bother to think about this for more than a second, or did you get all of your information about the ideology from ancap ball threads?

>>137457539
because I don't like black people

>>137470976

Dodging some bullets here arent you? I was implying that a church-funded library would likely only contain a very specific subsection of literature.

Jeez, you actually didn't address my post at all, you just latched on to the word censorship and ran with it.

>how can censorship even happen without a state

are you retarded? a church won't let you host a satanic ritual inside it, discord wont let you be alt-right, go daddy is dropping domains.

All of this censorship should be allowed, but is absolutely private censorship.

>>137471019
Who enforces it?

What if I think I should be able to have sex with a consenting 15 year old? Doesn't you telling me I cant violate both mine and the 15 year olds NAP?

>>137471212

>why would anyone pay them

because they have no public police to turn to? So they hire them, the culprit pays them more, they return a portion of my payment for non-apprehension.

What recourse would I even have? What about someone who couldn't afford them in the first place?

File: screenshot-www.youtube.com-2016-05-30-04-00-29-774x437[1].png (114KB, 774x437px)

114KB, 774x437px

>>137458206
This is the typical libertarian (pic related)

>>137471207
You're think of an oligarchy, which technically we don't have in America, however money is the primary controlling force in our government. Which is why I want Libertarianism for America.

>>137471201
Who makes that judgement? Who enforces it?

If both me and the child consent and you say no doesnt that violate our NAP?

>>137471195
>The idea of private police forces is sorta dumb due to them being unaccountable.

If they're unaccountable how can they be accountable to the rich man? Moreover, how is it that any product in our society gets made in such a way that it is accessible to the poor person? By the same logic you used, the rich presumably has the power to influence markets there too.

But do you believe that poor people would only go into courts against the rich? That they wouldn't go into courts against each other? Presumably, then, the courts would not favor some poor over some other. In the case in which a poor person would go into court against a rich entity, I must admit that I don't know what it is that would guarantee that they would be prevented from being partial against the rich person. Two things:

1) If a court acquires the reputation of only ruling in favor of the rich without respect to the matter of the case, why would poor people want to have their case tried there?

2) The fee structure would presumably determine the incentives for the court. I can see courts basically operating like insurance company, charging people a premium over risks of using the service. Under this scheme, courts would probably have a tendency to charge to rich and commercially active MORE, not less, simply because they are engaged in more transaction with more people and have more property that can be attacked.

>>137458206
/thread

newfags who circlejerk around Hoppe the closet-fascist don't even understand their own ideology

>>137457539
I use my brain and that's why I'm not a libertarian

>>137471915
I don't think you understand what Libertarianism is, or what the NAP is. Think of America near after it's founding. It's kind of like that. A libertarian society would have police to enforce collective law. However defense of ones self and ones property would be available to individual citizens. The limitation to both sides would and should remain open to discussion. As well as would most likely be different for every state.

>>137471201
land is property though.
I think i get it though.

With that is mind, couldn't one make other people their property thus confirming my worry about this entire system?

>>137457539
Because freedom comes with its own duties.

Simple question:

A completely libertarian social order taken to its extreme, no not this memeball versions, can it defend a strong enemy?
Just imagine everything is now owned privately and you dont have a national army which soldiers are payed by a state how long do you think will it take to negotiate the deals between all individuals to form somethign that resembels an army to counter an invading army that is coming from a simple nation state?

Well the answer is, your libertarian sociel order, as ethically right it may be in its core will cease to exist when you dont follow the rules that your surrouding nation states confront you with.
It is as Clausewitz said once: The enemy gives us the playing ground and the rules.

>>137457539

I AM a libertarian.

I'm just not a braindead fucking anarchist.

>>137472481
>Aggression", for the purposes of NAP, is defined as initiating or threatening the use of any and all forcible interference with an individual or individual's property

stoping me from having sex with someone consenting to sex is "forcible interference with an individual"

File: St. Boniface.png (684KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

684KB, 512x512px

>>137471019
That gif is my new waifu
Thank you anon.

In exchange, here's a fresh meme hot off the press (use it on neo-pagan heretics).

>>137471788
What was the claim to refute? My claim was that the free market is perfectly capable of supplying people with the literature and the information they want. I mentioned that, throughout history, government have busied themselves more with the business of censorship than that of the dissemination of information and that, moreover, there was no possibility of censorship in a context of absence of aggression.

>private censorship

Your argument is not about access to information then but about how private entities (yourself included) should be forced to provide other people resources to spread their message. Why is it that a Church should be forced to host a satanic ritual, a gay wedding, or offer atheist literature, I do not know.

In a free society, I'm sure the gays would produce gay literature, the atheists atheist literature, and churches would keep printing bibles, each actor producing the opinion they wished to see widely adopted.

>>137472114
>If both me and the child consent and you say no doesnt that violate our NAP?

Only if we assume the child can consent. As to the first question, that of determining whether or not a child can or cannot consent and if so when, I must say I don't know. However, it must be noted that neither does the government, who merely sets some limit and not some other. Presumably, in a libertarian order, some (communities, parents?) would set the limit some place and another one in some other place. I don't know that there needs to be one single limit uniformly everywhere. Certainly, there is no single limit between different countries.

>>137472011
No, you don't understand. You are still thinking within the framework of the monopolistic provision of security. Why would anyone pay such an unreliable security company rather than any of the other offerings on the market? It's worse than just a waste of money, it's actively spending money to benefit any potential attackers.

>what recourse would I even have
Contract with a larger and more reputable agency, take them to court, and suck out as much money from them as you can get.

>What about someone who couldn't afford them in the first place?
They would be covered, in part, by the free rider problem. However, their standard recourse is self-defense, private charity, negotiating a cheaper payment plan with a given security agency, or actually being producting and paying for services consumed like a normal fucking person. Nobody owes them service, any service rendered must be voluntary.

File: jewishLibertarianismMeme.jpg (375KB, 708x588px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 708x588px

>>137458206
/thread
Libertarians need to take their jewry elsewhere

>>137472876
Putting it simple my take on it is the following.

Take away Libertarianism as an ideology, just put the Freedom of your own people first! Keep the taxes as minimal as possible to run the state apperatus, which just provides for your security nation wise, while you can still take care of that on your own in private. Dont fuck up trade between people and dont hand out welfare.
Liberties arent thinable without something like a state. Take away the state or the lower levels of organized social live and your freetime becomes defending yourself all the time from maniacs.

File: BigGun.jpg (101KB, 556x470px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 556x470px

>>137460088
>defending your front yard with a shotgun won't work
That's where you're wrong, kiddo.

>>137473137
The government normally set age of consent biased on local morality.

In an ancap society you cant do that because someone elses morality may not be another and any force of said morality on them would be in violation of the NAP.

This right here to me is the weak brick in the ancap utopia which would end up bringing it all down.

>>137473573
>Ayn Rand
>anarcho capitalist
Hahaha, what.

>>137472680
Given that all contractual relation have to be voluntary, and that people cannot know in advance what they will desire, it would be fraudulent to say "I pledge that I shall always want to act as your property in the future". One may have a contract which includes penalty for breach, but one cannot pledge in advance what his will is going to be, and thus cannot guarantee is perpetual voluntary cooperation. In the libertarian order, employment is supposed to be at will.

(But even I suspect there may be holes in this position. If we accept the idea that one cannot know his will in advance and thus pledge it, then what are we to make of penalties for breach of contract? Presumably, the person could also not have the will to pay the penalty. It would be a second breach of contract, but one for which there would be no penalty. At present, such penalties are enforced by the state.

Still, I'm systematically biased in favor of liberty in the form of property ownership, always.)

File: 1502211357262.jpg (179KB, 500x650px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 500x650px

>>137472940
>I AM a libertarian. Except when it comes to law. And defense. And the market. Then I just throw my principles and philosophy into the fire. Because I'm a sensible person, you see. Not because I'm lazy or conformist. No. Because I'm SENSIBLE.

>>137457539
Way ahead of you, senpai

>>137458206
4pbp

File: 1501228476167.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

>>137473771

>>137472181

.... because the rich man pays them? Do you really not get how this works? They want his money, they are a for-profit business. You don't fuck over your whales.

How could poor people even afford to go to court? What does poor even mean to you? I'm talking about subsistence farming here, as you presumably won't have a welfare state. They would just turn into gangs because lead is cheaper than McJustice.

>why would poor people want to have their case tried there.

Again missing ALL the points
>they can't in the first place because it is unaffordable
I'm seriously just waiting for the "everyone will be wealthy enough to afford it" bit so I can just call you a filthy commie in earnest and be done with this. For now I think you are just an idealistic dupe who fell for some jewish tricks.

>2) theyll make more money from rich people :DD

no fucking shit, sherlock.
>they lack any options, all courts are private

>>137461810
>achieved full employment

Literally every government ever can achieve that with the amount of War-Economy and debt hoarding that was going on in Germany.

Have fun propagating a system that literally has to go to war to sustain itself.

>>137473871

Having fun with your straw man there?

File: 1500734328760.gif (2MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x225px

>>137473871
oh shit i posted the wrong one lmao

>>137473974
Nice NAP enforcers.

>>137473573
>Ron Paul
>AnCap
Wrong. Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist. AnCaps defend borders because there is literally no such thing as public property. The "border" is literally the backyard fence of somebody or a road through said backyard, and believe me it is well defended.

>>137457539
I'm member of a libertarian party. Best feeling ever.

>>137474157
If you believe in a state for defense/law or market regulation, I did not straw man. You believe in the NAP up until whichever one of those you deem a state necessary. Which means your philosophy is inconsistent.

File: 51.jpg (82KB, 840x440px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 840x440px

>>137473974
You are like a little babby. Watch pic related.

>>137473974
>Half your guns are commie weapons.
Irony

>>137474481
>implying firearms are political statements and not tools of defence
Helicopter. Now.

>>137473782
There are several possibilities. For instance, it may be that a community of trade is formed such that only members (parents) who respect a certain age of consent system are allowed to be part of that community. We could also suppose that parents somehow own their children (but this is no better, for we then have to know the age at which they stop owning them) and then consider how many of them would be tempted to sell THEIR OWN KID in sex slavery. The libertarian order does not negate nature herself, in which parents naturally care for the welfare of their children. (I certainly do not believe that most children aren't raped by their parents because the state forbids it.) We could also imagine court systems in which it was legal for a minor to sue an adult for improper conduct, exposing any adult to a potential lawsuit for sexual assault. The courts could set what the proper age would be for such cases.

I'm operating under the hypothesis that most people aren't child rapist and are interested in having it not happen, even in a private law society.

>>137474481
I don't own those. That's a fucking picture I got because someone posted it on 4chan. Look at the images name.

File: image.jpg (21KB, 200x281px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 200x281px

THE WEST MUST BE SAVED!

RESTORE YOUR PRIDE, RESTORE YOUR CULTURE!!

STATES RIGHTS!! https://youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4 [Open]

CUT EPA!!


CUT DEP OF ED!!


MAGA

THE WEST MUST BE SAVED!

RESTORE YOUR PRIDE, RESTORE YOUR CULTURE!!

STATES RIGHTS!! https://youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4 [Open]

CUT EPA!!


CUT DEP OF ED!!


MAGA

>>137474442
No. State. Ever.
>defense/law
Private military contractors, private police, private courts with a private executioner too. The jury is still your peers though, they're obligated contractually to respond when summoned.
>market regulation
kys. If I want a nuke, I can have a fucking nuke.

>>137474691
You sound more Libertarian than Ancap desu.

Much like being a white nationalist, being ok with child fuckers representing you and thriving off your philosophies make you just as much of a child fucker.

>>137473838
>Given that all contractual relation have to be voluntary, and that people cannot know in advance what they will desire, it would be fraudulent to say "I pledge that I shall always want to act as your property in the future"
>You consent to contracts
And what if you can't consent. Let's say they come in with their Recreational(C) Personal(R) Army(TM) and simply force you to become their sex slave? What then?

>>137473137
>No, I think access to information is of paramount performance and we shouldn't just cross our fingers and hope some church supplies such a powerful accommodation free of censorship.

Your response

>REEE THE STATE IS CENSORING ME RIGHT NOW REEEEEEEEEEEEE

I was not suggesting that censorship does not exist, but that it does.... everywhere. while it most likely won't work out, a state is the best way to provide "free" access to information *with recourse* for potential censorship

Are all libertarians illiterate? I clearly agreed that private companies should be allowed to censor, but im sick of fucking talking about censorship because it is wholly irrelevant.

>people can make books without the state dummy!
>why not just pay for the books?

You really, really aren't getting this, are you? You are just the poster child for why I support information centers rather than public schools.


Now, without talking about censorship, lets address the importance of access to information in society and why private corporations would provide it for free to all nationwide.

Acceptable answers include variations of:

>access to information is not important because [x]
>this service would be provided universally for free by private corporations because [x]

>>137474442

Whatever.

>>137473838
What i mean is that. Contracts have no fucking power because no one could enforce them if there is no government to do so.

>>137474030
>.... because the rich man pays them? Do you really not get how this works?

Which ignores my point: how come the market is currently providing MANY services to the poor given that the rich can allegedly buy off all goods and services provider always? The fact that the poor receives his "share" of the economic production without being systematically screwed by "the rich" indicates to me that it is possible for goods to be privately produced without fraud being systematically perpetrated against the poorer segment of the population. If this is true in retail, there's a presumption that it could be true in law.

Moreover, if the rich guy can simply buy anything, then there's no reason to believe he can't buy government, and hence under this hypothesis justice is no more secure under the state than it is under a private law society, and thus it is at worst neutral.

>they lack any options,

The state only provides one option. A system of free entry in law may provide several courts.

File: 1477908694509.png (127KB, 637x592px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 637x592px

>>137457539
>grown men dedicate their lives to a political philosophy that can be obliterated with two words: NO ROADS

File: ancap2.png (70KB, 994x1044px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 994x1044px

>>137474691
These are decent arguments, but the best answer to moral relativism arguments is to default back to the free market. If you believe the age of consent should be 18, you're not going to subject yourself voluntarily to legal systems with a lower age of consent. The problem sorts itself out with multiple legal systems catering to the most efficient distribution of ages of consent relative to the cost of forming additional legal systems.
Diminishing marginal returns, baby.

>>137457539
Libertarian economics is pure cancer.

>>137473390
>pay such an unreliable security company rather than any of the other offerings on the market?


Millionth time; THEY CAN NOT EVEN AFFORD THE CHEAPEST SERVICE. THEY ARE POOR AS FUCK SUBSISTENCE FARMERS. HOW DO THEY GET JUSTICE?

your solutions
>just spend more money
>just spend less money
>just shoot them yourselves

endless retributive killing is not conducive to society building. We put people in prison not to rehabilitate but to protect them, sequester them, and simulate retribution, all with the goal of reducing crime overall.

If you just admit you want to live in a MadMax gangland we can just part ways, my problem is hardline libertarians pretending they can build a functional society. You are little better than commies as you share their general attitude:

>it will just work because its a nice way to do things, stop asking questions.

>>137475248
You know I'm right. Your terse nothing of a response proves it.

>>137475224
>information should be provided for free

Nigga what?

>>137475061
Who's the libertarian big shot who fucked child?

>>137475073
Isn't that a risk in all societies?

>>137457539
because I acctually use my brain

>>137475533
>roads
pleb, you don't need roads when you own a private jet.

>>137473871

>my principles and ideas are more important than the results they produce

Whatever you say, comrade.

>>137475061
>child fuckers
You know the age of consent in Germany is around 14, right? The only people who diddle kiddies are jews and mudshits, and they were already incompatible with AnCap from the beginning. Are you a jew and/or mudshit?

>>137475073
>force
Violates NAP and probably a few laws on the books regarding prohibited business practices, prostitution, and extortion. We're AnCap, not savages.

>>137475290
Contracts become enforceable because of the court system requiring payment of damages if you breach. If you fail to make payment, it's off to debtor's jail for you. Why would people agree to such conditions? Because the ability to form binding contracts is useful for business ventures.

>>137475533
This fucking roads meme again. Look asshole, the biggest interstate freeway in the united states has a fucking toll road. That's how it works. You build a road, and people pay you to maintain it. Just like how the government does it, except now it isn't hidden in the gasoline price and it doesn't go towards building bridges to nowhere in Alaska.

>>137476063
Isn't that a risk in all societies?
I'm sure it is not, since no one is incentivized to sell off human beings when it is forbidden by law, and breaking such a law will set you back (not kill you, unfortunately)

>>137476015

No shit.

We're an imperfect species in an imperfect world, and I don't have the answer for the best functioning society.

>>137476423
One is incentivised in a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist society, since they can "own" those people, and do with their "property" as they will.

>>137475501
>how come the market is currently providing MANY services to the poor given that the rich can allegedly buy off all goods and services provider always?

What services are for-profit businesses providing for free?

>If this is true in retail, there's a presumption that it could be true in law.

fucking. wow. I'm done, you have won yet another argument with your flawless logic. congratulations.

>>137475501

addendum: of those free services, which one's do not have a tax incentive (as I safely assume you don't want taxes)

>>137476423
>I'm sure it is not, since no one is incentivized to sell off human beings when it is forbidden by law, and breaking such a law will set you back (not kill you, unfortunately)

Then how do you explain that there is human trafficking right now? Or that people break ANY law for that matter? The mere presence of the law does not obliterate the behavior it proscribes.

But my point is that under a variety of STATE regime some form or another of slavery was imposed on the people in such a way that it does correspond to your hypothetical scenario. Taxes are a very soft form of forced labor, i.e. to the extent that you work you HAVE to work some of that time for the state. The communist regimes are also an easy example of a forced labor system. A draft likewise consists of a group of armed men (the state) forcing you to work for them in deadly situations. Recently, the idea was floated in America to force people to do two years of some sort of national service in order to foster patriotism and unity, while more recently still an article in the Guardian (UK) suggested that student should be force to work the land in order to develop their environmental conscience.

>>137457539
I am. I just side with fascists for a few reasons.

>>137476014
I'm gonna jump in here if you >>137473390 don't mind.
>cannot afford even the cheapest service
Class action and pro bono cases are often taken with the client paying nothing and legal counsel expecting to win the case and negotiating for some % of the damages. If the farmer has a slam-dunk winning case, he will keep the majority of his damages because any law firm would take the case as it's an easy win.

>fuck the poor over without consequence
Firstly, there's an independent media. Brand matters even more in AnCap societies, and fucking over poor people tarnishes the brand.
Secondly, there's less incentive to fuck over the poor. They don't have much you can take.
Thirdly, you're assuming everyone behaves as they do now. If the government didn't take 40% of your labor-time as taxes, I'm sure you'd (or at least society would) be a little more willing to contribute to charities of their choice or do pro bono work.

>>137476643
>What services are for-profit businesses providing for free?
>these services must be "free"

The point was not to know whether or not these services were free or not but whether they defrauded them or not, since you assume they systematically would be so defrauded under a system of private law.

>>137476014
>HOW DO THEY GET JUSTICE?
I already said how. Self-defense, private charity, or negotiations with security agencies. They are also covered in part by being free riders on the services consumed by the people around them.

Your whining about how people with nothing to offer will get protection services is no different from Bernie supporters complaining that the poorest in the country can't afford medical insurance and as such should be covered by the state. Nobody is entitled to anything from anyone. If an interaction is not voluntary, it is by definition coerced. In order to provide a service, someone else has to do the provision. If that person is unwilling to provide, any attempts to make him do so is violent aggression. This is the same whether it is medical care, security services, consumer goods, or even food.

>>137476643
>services for-profit businesses run for free
The ability to google things. The ability to have a facebook account. The ability to post on 4chinz (assuming 4chinz is privately owned, I'm a newfag). Pro bono legal service. Class action lawsuits. Etc. Just because the person being serviced isn't paying, doesn't mean provision of the service doesn't make money.

I believe I have sufficiently answered your query thus far, friend.

>>137477541
>Nobody is entitled to anything from anyone. If an interaction is not voluntary, it is by definition coerced. In order to provide a service, someone else has to do the provision. If that person is unwilling to provide, any attempts to make him do so is violent aggression
This is the rationale on the theoretical level. You're also distorting the market through coercing the provider and thus not at the most economically efficient production schema. It's a sad reality, but humans have infinite wants and finite resources.

>>137457539
>use your brains
>become a libertarian

Sides: Gone.

>>137477065
>The mere presence of the law does not obliterate the behavior it proscribes.
It's the enforcement and method of doing it that counts.
I say we give kiddy-diddlers and kid-pimps the death sentence.

>Taxes are a very soft form of forced labor, i.e. to the extent that you work you HAVE to work some of that time for the state.
Yes because if the government has no money, then how will it operate.
Libraries don't get much money, so it's gov funded to allow easy access to education should one opt to seek it. You don't HAVE to work for the gov, but you are incentivized to work so that 1. you can support the society you are a part of, and 2. you get out of the basement, you fucking neet.

>suggested that student should be force to work the land in order to develop their environmental conscience.
I love gardening :^)

I'm not saying that criminals won't do immoral things, i'm just saying that the presence of the law makes it far less likely that it will happen.

>>137476289
>Violates NAP
Who's giong to enforce these laws, the Gov?
I've never run into a pro-gov anarchist before. I've also never run into a walking contradiction before...

>Because the ability to form binding contracts is useful for business ventures.
now when it cramps income you dolt.
>>>Remember kids: Morality is inversely proportional to income.

>>137478745
>death sentences for kiddie diddlers
Sure, but you're never going to catch kiddie diddlers in your jurisdiction because they'll just leave to where it's easier. You need to adopt the mentality that if they're not bothering you, they're not your problem.
>libraries
The best libraries are privately owned and still made available to the public.
>taxes
>support the society you are a part of
I support the society I am part of by offering a valuable service at market rate.
>get out of the basement
No I like being warm and comfy next to my bitcoin miners.
>gardening
Hell yes. And every family would probably actively maintain a few acres because growing and cooking your own food is more economical and ensures a healthier food supply than the market, even in AnCap societies.
>presence of law
AnCaps have law. We just don't have a sovereign enforcement mechanism. It's enforced by the people who committed to following said law voluntarily.

File: ancapbird.jpg (60KB, 607x608px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 607x608px

>>137479311
>government enforcement of law
No. There is no sovereign entity enforcing the laws. Rather, extend the idea of Rousseau's social contract into an actual binding contract between the individual citizen and his fellow citizens, and use this contract as the basis for creating the system of laws which bind each individual citizen. If any individual feels the law has gone too far, they are free to "unsubscribe", but in doing so also forfeit the legal protections guaranteed by their subscription. This is fundamentally different from the sovereign government, which you are born into and absent extraordinary effort can never leave or opt out of.
>binding contracts aren't useful
Wrong. Typically people like to talk about "societal trust levels". In AnCap, this is solved by using binding legal contracts instead. Binding contracts are immensely useful - suppose you are a corn farmer, but you don't know how much corn will sell for when the crop comes due. Instead of being forced to take that risk, a binding contract allows you to off-load the risk onto another party, in exchange for sacrificing the gains you may have gotten in the favorable outcome. This is called a "futures contract".

File: cowgirltiddies.jpg (211KB, 911x1280px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 911x1280px

Posting tiddies for (you)s.

>>137479624
>You need to adopt the mentality that if they're not bothering you, they're not your problem.
sounds like pedo reasoning to me...


>The best libraries are privately owned and still made available to the public.
fair point. I'm fine with private ownership so long as it doesn't go too far.

>I support the society I am part of by offering a valuable service at market rate.
Yes, but how about those road works anon?
The road does not repair itself, and road repairmen are not going to do it for free. That is where plenty of taxes go (at least in Canada)
You get to keep the majority of your work effort anyways. Only a % of your total yearly income is taken, so it's fair (in my eyes)

>No I like being warm and comfy next to my bitcoin miners.
)^:<

>Hell yes. And every family would probably actively maintain a few acres because growing and cooking your own food is more economical
Couldn't agree with you more rn.
>and ensures a healthier food supply than the market, even in AnCap societies.
Yes. Such yes.
I beleive that every society should have an element of economic independence from the global market. And that independence should come from the bottom line (food). If the gov executed a shared-land farming system in a sustainable way, that would be positive for the entire community and the society as a whole.
btw, what did you mean by "healthier food supply"?

>AnCaps have law. We just don't have a sovereign enforcement mechanism. It's enforced by the people who committed to following said law voluntarily.
And those who do not commit to it will refuse to have it enforced on them. If such people do better financially, what's to say the original law-binders won't abandon their promise to uphold said law?

>>137457539
Never use the glorious Byzantine flag for your Jewish movenent. Fuck off.

File: 5acre.png (2MB, 1565x987px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1565x987px

>>137481681
>pedo reasoning
Well, pedos can just go to Germany or Saudi Arabia now. I don't see the difference.
>roads
Private tollways. You pay for the road based on your usage of the road.
>economic independence from global market
>healthier food supply
Fresh vegetables and eggs have way more vitamins and still have the beneficial enzymes bio-active. Also, the family that grows its own food tends to care more about the quality of the food than the farmer growing for mass consumption. It's also much more economical to grow the food near the point of consumption than to grow it 100 miles away and truck it in, and reducing carbon monoxide and the urban heat island reduces asthma incidence and deaths from heat stroke. Pic very related.

>Those who do not commit are forced
Nope. You're just stuck in MadMax if you can't find a suitable legal regime for yourself.
>The MadMaxers start getting richer than the lawful folks
Well I guess we know how humans were meant to live then.
>the madmaxers will attack the lawful folks
Unlikely. The amount of effort and risk taken to attack a decently armed private militia is probably not going to be worth the payoff compared to pillaging meth houses and grow ops.

File: aquaponic-system-detail-diagram-1.jpg (428KB, 1271x1118px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 1271x1118px

>>137481681
Because you are fellow farmer anon, also check out aquaponics.

>>137481216
Ass is better but (you) for the thought is what counts.

>>137460454
Just ordered this book, it's getting here Wednesday. Can't wait.

File: St_Thomas_Aquinas.jpg (41KB, 387x544px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 387x544px

>>137480312
>No. There is no sovereign entity enforcing the laws. Rather, extend the idea of Rousseau's social contract into an actual binding contract between the individual citizen and his fellow citizens, and use this contract as the basis for creating the system of laws which bind each individual citizen. If any individual feels the law has gone too far, they are free to "unsubscribe", but in doing so also forfeit the legal protections guaranteed by their subscription. This is fundamentally different from the sovereign government, which you are born into and absent extraordinary effort can never leave or opt out of.
It sounds like the social contract would work in concept, and perhaps it works to a degree in practice. But in the past the social contract was to uphold moral principles and societal values, not anything to do with the market. The social contract also tends to morph into bureaucracy and eventually, government.

>This is fundamentally different from the sovereign government, which you are born into and absent extraordinary effort can never leave or opt out of.
Let's say generation X upholds that trees are virtuous, and then the Gov upholds that principle since it is from generation X that the government is contrived, if generation Y holds that fire is virtuous and wants to burn down the forest and the town, then is generation Y to be heeded, or should the sovreign government continue to uphold the values of Gen X even though they contradict Gen Y?

Being born into a system is not a bad thing, by necessity it is good that a sovreign government upholds the virtues of its former generation to act as a shield to the society's culture. Should you choose to be against said principles, it would be wise to move to another gov that provides principles you agree with more. If i remember there exists an AnCap nation out there somewhere. Consider moving.

Continued-->

File: 1487224971289.png (80KB, 211x244px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 211x244px

>>137458206
t. retard who doesn't know what a libertarian is

>>137480312
>>137483498
-->Continued
>Binding contracts are immensely useful - suppose you are a corn farmer, but you don't know how much corn will sell for when the crop comes due. Instead of being forced to take that risk, a binding contract allows you to off-load the risk onto another party, in exchange for sacrificing the gains you may have gotten in the favorable outcome. This is called a "futures contract".
This kind of contract is agreeable.

>>137483854
> my libertarian-ism is perfect and has never been tried before

really made me think

File: 1502243194049.jpg (273KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 640x640px

>>137483498
>social contract will morph into government
Probably unless AnCaps remain skeptical of collectivized control mechanisms

>gen X vs gen Y
Supposing gen Y had whatever requisite % of people favor fire, fire it is. The check/balance is that gen X gets to say what % of people would be required to change from trees to fire.

>Consider moving
Bleh. This is the most annoying argument, and I suppose the best theoretical response is that AnCap systems are more likely to reduce the associated cost of moving and provide better matchmaking in terms of citizens' wants::subscribed law. The real truth is until an AnCap "state" actually becomes more than a meme / Sealand, we'll never really know.

File: idontwanttoliveonthisplanetanymore.gif (831KB, 240x228px) Image search: [Google]

831KB, 240x228px

>>137483289
Wrong and degenerate. A cultured man prefers the soft pillowy caress of tiddies compared to a fucking rectum.

>>137483033
>Private tollways. You pay for the road based on your usage of the road.
you implying we have a toll booth every couple of KM's?
I think a better less tedious method would be to simply tax according to # of KM driven.

>Fresh vegetables and eggs have way more vitamins and still have the beneficial enzymes bio-active. Also, the family that grows its own food tends to care more about the quality of the food than the farmer growing for mass consumption. It's also much more economical to grow the food near the point of consumption than to grow it 100 miles away and truck it in, and reducing carbon monoxide and the urban heat island reduces asthma incidence and deaths from heat stroke. Pic very related.
It's thinks like this that make me want to take up that African offer of free land. I think it should be a citizen right that every family may own 5-10 acres if they are a trusted and helpful citizen (fought wars, pay taxes, pay off debts, demonstrate moral upstanding, etc). I would also be fine with communal farm operations as long as there is a percentile quota instead of a volume quota. You looked into land you could buy anon? I already found a nice 5.01 acre plot of land worth 13,000 $CAN.

>>Those who do not commit are forced
>Nope. You're just stuck in MadMax if you can't find a suitable legal regime for yourself.
>>The MadMaxers start getting richer than the lawful folks
>Well I guess we know how humans were meant to live then.
>>the madmaxers will attack the lawful folks
>Unlikely. The amount of effort and risk taken to attack a decently armed private militia is probably not going to be worth the payoff compared to pillaging meth houses and grow ops.
Who is this responding to?

>>137483156
Already looked at it. It would be a good investment if you were operating an Aquacultural/Agricultural hybrid farm. Problem with the system is waste buildup, and having to feed the fish.

File: 1502662343819.jpg (136KB, 750x901px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 750x901px

>>137457539
pic related except national capitalism etc.

>>137457539
I can agree with Libertarians on things like more states' rights and less federal bureaucracy like getting rid of affirmative action and abolish the federal reserve and IRS and a flat tax. But even then I think the flat tax should apply to all forms of income and all loopholes and deductions abolished.
Just have it at 15% but vary the threshold for taxation for each category, like for personal income have it as $30000 and $20000 for capital gains and $50000 for corporate income, etc.
They want it the same for all categories. I think Social Security should be saved not privatized by fixing the tax code and cutting most other spending, Social Security and defense should be the only big federal expenses, everything left up to the states. I can't agree to marijuana legalization. I also think employers should be penalized for hiring illegals.

>>137484942
>Probably unless AnCaps remain skeptical of collectivized control mechanisms
Skepticism isn't a stance though, and does not cross generational boundaries. I would suggest implementing a check and balance if you want it to remain [oh wait, that requires a government :^) ]

>Supposing gen Y had whatever requisite % of people favor fire, fire it is. The check/balance is that gen X gets to say what % of people would be required to change from trees to fire.
So you're saying an democracy?
But anon, that requires a sovreign government to work...

>The real truth is until an AnCap "state" actually becomes more than a meme / Sealand, we'll never really know.
I'm pretty sure it has already been tried before. Do some research, i dare you.

>>137464426
The final red pill is pretty much any political party is a non starter unless it is funded by the ruling elites.

The national socialists in Germany were funded in order to set up a totalitarian bulwark against the spread of communism. Before that they were an irrelevant fringe movement just like the alt right is now.

File: karen_blonde.jpg (113KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1920x1080px

>>137486361
>toll booth
RFID eztag bro. It's too bad you're not American or you would know the true splendor of what a tollway can be.

>African offer of free land
>every family gets 5-10 acres
mmmmmmmm... every family that can afford 5 acres is allowed to buy 5 acres. Let's not hop on the gib train just because we found a decent cause mate.

>communal farming
Absolutely not. No man should eat what another man has sown.

>land acquisition
I got my eye on a nice 8 acre property about 10 miles outside Austin, TX. Just waiting for the real estate bubble to pop so I can pick it up for cheap.

>aquaponic waste buildup
Keep an aquatic bed with hyacinths or guavas. Not only do they suck up excess nutrients but also heavy metals.
>having to feed the fish
Bro, consider vermiculture and black soldier fly composting. Easy fish food AND you can recycle meat and dairy waste for soldier flies, and in the case of vermiculture you have on-demand fertilizer of the highest quality.

>>137457539

underrated post

bümp

>>137487489
>checks and balances require gubmint
Not on my watch. I'll just make it require 90% of the population to amend the contract :P

>democracy requires government
This guy is clearly a nocoiner. The blockchain makes operating democracy extremely smooth over a digital network with 0% voter fraud.

>AnCap has been tried before
At the risk of sounding like a gommie, this time AnCap is different. To back it up, I submit that previous AnCap experiments tend to be leftie-driven single-issue endeavors that never have sufficient mass to create a self-perpetuating society.

File: shivastatue.jpg (148KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 960x640px

>>137487489
Before the thread archives, I just wanted to let you know that you've been talking to a fucking dirty shitskin pagan pajeet hindu. Hopefully your opinion of my race has improved slightly.

>>137488264
>It's too bad you're not American or you would know the true splendor of what a tollway can be.
Explain.

>every family that can afford 5 acres is allowed to buy 5 acres. Let's not hop on the gib train just because we found a decent cause mate.
I suppose a maritocratic way of earning land would be better than simply giving it. I still hold the sentiment that they should be a blessing to their community and not a blight.

>Absolutely not. No man should eat what another man has sown.
I'm just shooting in the dark here. I really want some land, free land in my eyes is good.
This is probably why AnCap won't work: humans are innately greedy, we want free shit.

>I got my eye on a nice 8 acre property about 10 miles outside Austin, TX. Just waiting for the real estate bubble to pop so I can pick it up for cheap.
Fair enough. Invest when the price is low, sell when the price is high.
God speed you glorious southern hick :^)

>Keep an aquatic bed with hyacinths or guavas. Not only do they suck up excess nutrients but also heavy metals.
Where are you getting this info from? I still can't figure out what that bean-like plant in my garden is, how the fuck do you know this about crops?

>Bro, consider vermiculture and black soldier fly composting. Easy fish food AND you can recycle meat and dairy waste for soldier flies, and in the case of vermiculture you have on-demand fertilizer of the highest quality.
I'm already practicing it in my garden by leaving piles of pine needles just laying about, already got some dark brown compost out of it. (couple of beetles too for any hobbyist bug-catchers).
Speaking of bugs, ever considered bug-farming too? I hear you can make flour alternatives from Chitinous Carapaces.

>>137484157
>my libertarian-ism is perfect and has never been tried before
Where the fuck did I say that?

Why can't you use your brains and realize libertarianism and nationalism/racism are mutually exclusive?

>>137488869
>Not on my watch. I'll just make it require 90% of the population to amend the contract :P
And who will enforce that?

>>democracy requires government
This guy is clearly a nocoiner. The blockchain makes operating democracy extremely smooth over a digital network with 0% voter fraud.
>Digital voting has no problems, really!

>To back it up, I submit that previous AnCap experiments tend to be leftie-driven single-issue endeavors that never have sufficient mass to create a self-perpetuating society.
Well if you want your "real AnCap" to happen, consider what you would be required to do to instigate such a system without any hiccups. If you can do it without any problems then consider actually trying to set up such a system (perhaps Jones-town style minus the cool-aid, aka within your local municipality) and see how it goes. Start the experiment small, if it works then it will naturally expand as more and more regions recognize it as a legit form of pol-philosophy)

>>137489417
I don't judge by colour, i judge by merit. (but lets all agree to hate fucking niggers, yes :^) ?).