/liberty/ - Liberty

Gold, property rights, and physical removal

Winner of the JulayWorld Attention-Hungry Games™, Week 5

/retro/ - 1990s ans[sic] 2000s nostalgia

Nominations for week 6 coming soon.

Report your front-end woes 2: Electric Boogaloo

What is the Imageboard Federation?

JulayWorld onion service: bhlnasxdkbaoxf4gtpbhavref7l2j3bwooes77hqcacxztkindztzrad.onion

Max message length: 32768

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB


(used to delete files and postings)

Good ideas don't require force. If you don't agree, we have helicopters.

FAQ and QTDDTOT HHHPinochet Board owner 11/27/2019 (Wed) 11:32:59 ID: 261585 No.926
COVENANT COMMUNITIES A lot of posters seem to be ignorant on what a covenant community is and what its implications are. A covenant community is a small, homogeneous, gated community with strict controls on who can and cannot enter, who can and cannot gain residency, and what conduct must be observed within the community. In other words, it is a privatized micro-ethnostate. The idea was popularized by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, attached are some select quotes from Hoppe explaining the covenant community in his own words: >there would be little or no “tolerance” and “openmindedness” so dear to left-libertarians. Instead, one would be on the right path toward restoring the freedom of association and exclusion implied in the institution of private property. <but what if leftist filth moves into the covenant community under false pretenses, resists all the social ostracization, and acts like a complete nuisance without violating any property rights, so you can't shoot him for trespassing? There exists a legal principle known as estoppel, which says those who do not value or abide by a certain norm are not entitled to appeal to that norm in their own defense. Commies don't believe in property rights, so they have estopped themselves from appealing to property rights in their own defense. Therefore, there is no need for a covenant community to wait until the commie commits a trespass before physically removing it. I'M 12 AND WHAT IS THIS? If you're a NigSoc, commie, or any other dissident who thinks he has a TOTES BASTE AND REDPILLED take that DESTROYS private property norms with LOGIC and REASON, please see this link first (just ignore the one on immigrants and immigration, it's retarded): https://archive.is/bbtHt If you would like clarification on one of these points or have a "gotcha" question not covered by the list above, please post it in this thread.
Edited last time by HHHPinochet on 01/03/2020 (Fri) 19:13:18.
give me the rundown on MMT
>>1295 It's Keynesianism but with the added assumption that it's physically impossible for the government to go bankrupt because you can always print your way out of debt. It's not a particularly modern idea, it deals more with fiscal policy rather than monetary, and it's not very theoretical.
>>1300 >It's Keynesianism but with the added assumption that it's physically impossible for the government to go bankrupt because you can always print your way out of debt Wouldn't that devaluate the economy?
>>1319 Yes. MMTers don't think inflation is real, or that it isn't connected to the money supply. This is because MMTers have grown up under the petrodollar, i.e. the only time in history when there's a delay between monetary expansion and price inflation. Because of this they've decided that printing money won't cause inflation anymore. Yes, it's retarded.
>>1322 Elaborate more on the petrodollar and why there is no inflation now
>>1337 It's not that there's "no inflation," it just happens slower. Because nearly all oil transactions are denoted in dollars (even if the US is neither the buyer nor the seller), and because USD is the world reserve currency, there's a large amount of foreign demand for USD--any country which wishes to buy or sell oil needs to have a supply on hand. This high foreign demand in acts like a vacuum cleaner on all of the new money that's circulated into existence, keeping it out of the domestic economy. Because such a large portion of new money immediately goes overseas, the level of domestic inflation is much smaller than what you would expect from the amount of money-printing happening. This lets the federal government finance all kinds of retarded shit with moneyprinting without getting hit with hyperinflation. Being able to do that is very appealing, but it requires a supermajority of the world to be wiling to absorb that inflation on the US's behalf. If a country ever goes off threatens to go off the petrodollar, it gets hit with sanctions and (((humanitarian interventions))) until the regime decides to play ball again. This in fact explains almost all of the US's foreign policy in recent history--it's either securing Israel's territorial ambitions, maintaining the petrodollar, or both, in the case of Iran and Syria.
if you admit that it's so easy to poke holes into your ideology, how can you still believe in it?
>>1390 You can't poke holes in ideologies, you can poke holes in leftists and democrats.
>>1365 Thanks. It's incredible how leftists don't understand this and just blame this vague thing called capitalism. Can you elaborate and explain why this system causes the US economy to stagnate and for living standards for workers in the USA to decline(like peter schiff says)? I know our "GDP" and "productivity" has been "increasing" but I highly doubt this is actually accurate. Our manufacturing base has been destroyed and we just have a consumer economy with no savings and lots of debt.
>>1394 >Can you elaborate and explain why this system causes the US economy to stagnate and for living standards for workers in the USA There are more causes to that beyond just the petrodollar, quite a few actually. But the petrodollar-related effects are due to the Cantillon Effect of inflation. Inflation doesn't affect an economy evenly, the places where new money enters the economy are hurt the least by inflation. This is because they get the benefit of more dollars in their pocket before prices in the economy adjust upwards to there being more dollars in the system--the new money isn't circulating yet, most people in the economy haven't seen it yet, meaning prices are still at pre-inflation levels. That newly-created money enters the economy through the banking and real-estate sectors, meaning that inflation effectively transfers purchasing power from normie Americans into the hands of banks. There are other factors at play too, like I said before, but many of them are at least indirectly tied to inflation and the petrodollar. >I know our "GDP" and "productivity" has been "increasing" but I highly doubt this is actually accurate. GDP is for all practical purposes a lagging indicator of inflation. It treats consumption spending, savings, and government spending as equal, making it less than useless for measuring prosperity. An increase in wages by $10000 is treated the same as the government spending $10000 on abortions for sheboons.
>>1395 And socialists blame capitalism for this problem. The federal reserve has created a massive amount of socialists.
>>1398 That's by design fren, it's standard MO for democratic leftists. >do thing that creates problem >blame problem on not doing thing enough >do thing some more >repeat until everyone starves
>>1408 do you have a book on this? I want to learn more on why living standards have stagnated in America so I can refute leftists that blame capitalism on the problem why don't more people know about this? Why don't right wingers know about this and use it to counter leftist arguments?
>>1413 Tom Woods has some free e-books meant to systematically counter basic bitch leftist arguments, I think this is his most current one: https://aociswrong.com/ mises.org has a few articles on the subject, too, if you want something a bit quicker: https://mises.org/wire/wages-unemployment-and-inflation https://mises.org/library/credit-expansion-economic-inequality-and-stagnant-wages Semi-related, on the petrodollar: https://mises.org/power-market/how-us-wages-war-prop-dollar >Why don't right wingers know about this and use it to counter leftist arguments? A lot of them do, and some try. Thing is, logical arguments don't work on 99% of people. That's not how people tick, they need emotionally appealing, visceral arguments to be convinced.
>>1413 >arguing with a leftist They choose leftist ideology based on (engineered) peer pressure and group think. Dont even bother overcoming this with any appeal to reason, because their goal was never to be reasonable but to wear the same feathers as the flock that appears to be the most well off, and to distance themselves from the flock that is (actually) being oppressed.
If my local government is proposing rain water collection tax, should I not vote against that? -- rhetorical, I know but, should I not wield the sword of the state against itself whenever possible? t.newb
>>1471 How would allowing you the state to tax rainwater be using the state against itself?
>>1472 Using the voting process to deny the state. They want to tax rainwater collection and I vote no, fuck you; that's private property.
>>1473 You are not really denying the state anything. If it really wants it will push this over and over and over again until it passes. The often heard argument about using the state as your own sword relates to the very power to actually initiate this process and have the means to force it through, not you monkeywrenching a particular instance this time.
>>1473 Yeah, there's no real reason not to do that. If you want to be really successful in manipulating the state you have to do a bit more than vote (getting involved in city or state-level politics is easier than you might think due to low participation levels), but if the opportunity costs of doing that are too high, and voting is the only method you have of influencing the political process, you may as well do it. The benefits are marginal, but the costs are practically nonexistent.
Open file (113.65 KB 995x876 DOOP.jpg)
>>1476 It is nice to hear another say that. I say that ... I mean ... I got fucking blasted by ideologues back in 2008-2012 because I'm not pure but every ounce of my being is screaming to chip away at every opportunity. I'm probably doing a bad job of describing it but, it's like, fuck, yeah NAP ... but there is this whole massive population brainwashed into stealing your shit. So... fuck, I don't know, man. I'm sorry, I know this makes no sense; I'm pissed off and I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. Not w/out some societal collapse. Even then, fuck, nobody reads Paine, Hobbes, Hayek etc ... What you said... You're right; get involved locally and shut stupidity down at the source.
Apparently, Pheonix from Demolition Man is an ancap protagonist: https://www.bitchute.com/video/da2JU6Vun3YN/
https://mises.org/wire/forget-electoral-democracy-%E2%80%94-give-demarchy-chance What does /liberty/ think of demarchy in general? What does /liberty/ think of demarchy in comparison to representative democracy? What does /liberty/ think of the following method to achieve piecemeal demarchy: run as a demarchic candidate that will simply choose citizens from the respective district's voter pool to say yes/no/abstain to votes in the Congress.
>>1536 Seems like a meme. Even assuming the system wouldn't immediately be gamed and rigged--who pulls the lever on the random number generator?--it seems like at best a lateral transition from the cancer that is democracy, instead of promising any real improvement. The time horizon of someone who gets chosen completely at random is even shorter than someone who's elected, meaning the rando rulers will be even more high time preference than the elected ones. Other things equal, higher time-preference will mean more wasteful pyramid-building, more redistributive policies, and thus more destruction of productivity. The singular advantage that this system might have is that the rando ruler isn't as likely to be corrupt as the sociopathic elected rulers who lie, scheme, and plunder their way into the hearts of voters. But the flip side of this naïveté is that random normies would be even easier for outside forces to manipulate and control. Because the "official" rulers are even higher time-preference than the elected ones, the deep state that you see rise out of democracies would only be even more powerful and even deeper rooted in a demarchy, because there are effectively no forces whatsoever keeping them in check. I don't see a lot of utility in expending large amounts of time and effort campaigning for an unpopular system that's not a whole lot different from what we have now, and doesn't get me any closer to my desired goals. Allodial feudalism or even some kind of transitional autocracy are both more in line with my preferences as well as easier to implement.
>>1536 Demarchy is more efficient at democracy than democracy is. That's exactly why it's shit.
Hello /liberty/. I come to you with a question. I considered myself paleolibertarian for quite a while now but I am thinking about if that's the right thing to consider myself. I believe in these "covenant communities" but I also believe that government must exist as well, but must be small. However, I do believe in the death penalty for people who violate the covenants of these communities severely. What do you guys think?
>>1544 >I also believe that government must exist as well How do you define government, and why do you think it must exist? >I do believe in the death penalty for people who violate the covenants of these communities severely The decisions in those sorts of cases would vary widely from covenant to covenant, but ideally punishments would be restitution in the case of aggressions, or ostracism or exclusion for degenerate but otherwise nonaggressive behavior. In any case, I think you're fine considering yourself a libertarian, although it does depend on the extent to which you think government does exist, and what you think it has legitimacy in doing.
>>1545 I believe in government purely as a night-watchman state and to protect the rights of the covenants. I appreciate your answer, anon.
How do you prevent covenant communities from becoming draconian like HOA's? I know HOA's have a reputation for being draconian and I would like to prevent covenant communities from turning into that.
>>1549 Draconian in what way? As long as they don't prevent people from leaving the covenant community, it should all be fine.
>>1562 Maybe it would get different if there was a shitton of HOAs, but he does have a point, most HOAs are really, REALLY prissy about almost every goddam thing. Huge documents detailing when you can park your car in your driveway, processes to obtain permits and which contractors are permitted to put up something as mundane as a retaining wall. C.f., the Avignon HOA in Kansas City for a nightmare HOA. I guess a response would be that a lot of governments are that overbearing, but...you know, I doubt it. Some HOAs are really, really anal, petty, and Draconian.
>>1562 I mean stuff like not being allowed to hang a gasden flag and stuff like >>1565 said. It took me months to get approval to install a ceiling fan for a room in my condo.
>>1549 >>1570 Much of what HOAs do right now is allowed because property rights aren't explicitly upheld by law, meaning they have control over things inside your home which a covenant community would not. It's also not possible to use contracts to ceaselessly bend others to your will. Rothbardian contract theory dictates that the only clauses of a contract that are enforceable are those whose violation would result in theft: https://mises.org/library/property-rights-and-theory-contracts Since HOA authority would be based on contract, and contracts in covenant communities would not be nearly as all-encompassing as they are when enforced by the state, the number of "draconian" HOAs would be far lower.
>remove imports tax >people flock to chinese products since they're cheap >local industry dies So much for liberty
>>1574 Disprove comparative advantage or fuck off.
>>1575 Tell me more about comparative advantage
Open file (350.35 KB 860x740 Study.png)
>>1578 >someone post the /leftypol/ BO sucking dick lel, why are you asking for that? Are you some kind of homo?
Open file (1.90 MB 480x360 pig.mp4)
>>1578 >mUh InEqUaLiTy lmao, Imagine trying to craft an entire worldview out of envy and pettiness. Equality is a false god.
>>1578 This is what gets me about these inequality articles every goddam time. They show some data of things getting worse, and then they show some data of rising inequality; but they never connect the dots. They either don't explicitly say, "Things are getting worse because of rising inequality," and in the rare cases they do, they never explain why. It's always, "Inequality bad." This article is prime among them. They stated two disparate polls, one about more people getting income from inherited trusts, and another about people becoming more pessimistic (I feel like I should stress this, they never said that things were actually getting worse, they just stated that people think it's going to get worse), AND THEN THEY JUST LEFT IT. That's one thing, another thing and something that also gets me about UBI is...am I the only person in the goddam world that gets depressed when I'm unemployed? I feel like I'm worthless for land's sake. Some people work hard so they can have a sense of meaning in this godforsaken (probably literally) world. /rant >>1581 You know, I wonder, the people who make a huge fuss about inequality, is that really it? Is all the inequality talk just envy?
>>1582 >You know, I wonder, the people who make a huge fuss about inequality, is that really it? Is all the inequality talk just envy? Yes. Anyone caterwauling about inequality is either A) a parasite who wishes to plunder other men's wealth for himself or B) an amoral demagogue who cares not himself about inequality, but knows he can get an angry mob on his side by pointing to rich men and exploiting the feelings of avarice in their hearts. Other men having wealth does not preclude you from gaining wealth, as the market is not a zero-sum game. The poorest man in Burgerstan is richer than the wealthiest kings ever were; in many ways his quality of life is higher than that of Rockefeller in his prime. Because other men having wealth doesn't stop anyone from increasing his own, there can be no other motivation for lusting after the wealth of other man than greed.
Can someone give me the rundown about debt and why some think that it's necessary for an economy to work? >>1579 No I just want to think these are the people spreading that message.
>>1591 Assuming you mean national debt, the necessity of such is largely perpetuated by Keynesians who proclaim that massive government spending, even if it means incurring vast amounts of debt, is necessary to "stimulate" the economy during recessions. The idiocy of this logic is self-evident to most people, but Keynesians are trained for years to spout self-contradictory pilpul while appearing smart on the surface.
>>1595 But to who are nations indebting themselves to? Even the IMF seems to have a limit
Open file (50.50 KB 623x416 ClipboardImage.png)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_economic_freedom Why are so many countries that have nationalized their healthcare systems so high up in this list? Isn't nationalizing an industry that makes up a tenth to a quarter of an economy the opposite of economic freedom?
>>1651 delete your QTDNTIOT, replying here. Home ownership doesn't mean financial liberty and asset liquidity. Most rich people live rent free, are portable, and don't live in a fixed place. Most own multiple properties around the world and rotate rooms of hotels, vacation homes and apartments they rent. Remember, it's about making people pay for your stay, not pay to own.
>>1652 Was this reply meant for someone else or did the rest of the post get cut off? What's the argument here?
>>1650 Because the rest of their economy is usually very liberalized. They have lower corporate taxes, far less extraneous licensure requirements, much higher scores on the ease of doing business index, and so forth. Most of the Euro countries which nationalized their healthcare system only did so after an extensive period of very laissez-faire economic policy, which allowed them to build up a surplus of wealth, which they are now draining away through socialist policies.
>>1655 Time is money. Did you click the sources of your wikipedia article, or do you not know how to calculate an answer to your question via math?
>>1653 Most people aren't rich though. In a country with increased living standards, shouldn't poor people own their own homes instead of being rental slaves their whole lives? Opposition to landlords is one of the primary leftist arguments, if we could demolish that, it would go a long way towards converting people.
>>1656 Thanks for answering the question. I guess the heart of what I'm asking then is how the hell can you even measure how 'free' an economy is? There's a lot of different bs regulations in the U.S., but on the flipside the healthcare system isn't nationalized like Canada's. It feels like an apples to oranges comparison that needs to be made to say which one is better. >>1657 I'm sorry, I don't understand you.
>>1658 You're in /liberty/, we believe in ownership. The trick is to let people pay you for everything, which includes land ownership. If you own a lot, and let businesses and hotels set up shop, by taxing them you're effectively achieving financial freedom. >>1665 What you cited defined what "economic freedom" is, and it boils down to: the ability to freely trade without restrictions. If I sell you a scam, I win while you lose: government can't interfere because I'm free to scam you, and you have to live with the consequences of the scam. The reverse is also true, and a true economic free country, the law of the jungle runs free. The more restrictions you apply the harder it is to trade and move that capital around. Thus, mathematically, if you nationalize your literal health among others, you can achieve more trade and enrich yourself. Remember treasures are ability, not spoils. If you can get people to use your fiat currency, you win. Force is implied.
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/01/what-libertarianism-has-become-and-will-become-state-capacity-libertarianism.html Dear Cowen, Why don't you just go ahead and disavow the title of libertarian already? Just title the essay, "Why I am no longer a libertarian."
>>1672 Okay but how does renting benefit renters? Wouldn't renters benefit more of they simply seized the rental units and owned them themselves? We need a solid argument for this to defend against socialists.
>>1720 I personally think you should eventually own where you live but renters can defere quite a couple tasks to the owner such as modernizing the units or maintining them. It's not too unlike insurance in the sense that a group of renters give up a portion of their money and ultimate ownership of the property in exchange for the owner to take care of things like covering a damaged boiler or plumbing as well as administrativ tasks like a basic house order or taking care the the trash gets removed. >We need a solid argument for this to defend against socialists. The short argument is that they are retarded when they go off on landlords because anyone who has so much as been in the position of maybe inheriting grannys property and halfheatedly gone through what it would take to get it up to snuff and keep it there knows that having property you can rent away isn't a money printing machine.
Open file (47.40 KB 300x422 Karlstallman.gif)
As an ancap, is it hypocritical if I use GNU/Linux as my main OS?
Open file (171.08 KB 750x310 GNULINUXPasta.png)
>>1748 Stefan Kinsella makes a good case that copyright and patent law is bullshit and would be bullshit in ancapistan. GNU/Linux and libre software is entirely consistent with this. If anything I would argue it's hypocritical if you ARE NOT using GNU/Linux.
>>1748 I also use a Linux distro. Like the other guy says, as far as Austrian property rights theory is concerned IP laws are fake and gay, so opposing copyright isn't hypocritical for an ancap, quite the opposite in fact. Stallman's obsession with EvErYtHiNg MuSt Be OpEn SoUrCe is needlessly autistic and retarded, though.
>>1748 Securing user freedom as in individual freedom is a must in libre software or else, how could you even have transparancy in the software that you use?. If you look back all the IP laws that have been originated from, its all started by the help of big goverment. Also this >>1750
>>1750 >>1753 >>1755 Ancap GNU/Linux distro when?
How long until 4chan starts up an operation to fake up a dossier saying that Bernie is a Chinese asset, the media runs with it, and then we end up with Trump 2.0?
>>1763 What? >then we end up with Trump 2.0? Sanders has all the charisma of a wet blanket. He doesn't have any of the Chad energy that Trump does, which means it isn't possible for him to build up remotely the same kind of cult of personality.
>>1750 >>1753 >>1755 Okay, but doesn't the GPL's requirement of including source code with binaries require a state? Honestly, TempleOS is probably the only acceptable OS for ancaps since it's in the public domain.
>>1786 >GPL's requirement of including source code with binaries Only source code, binaries are optional for user who don't have time to compile. >require a state? wut?
>>1789 Require a state to enforce.
>>1790 Law, especially contract law, does not require a State to enforce.
How does a covenant community handle aggression from jews? Economic blockades, flooding shitskins into the surrounding area to smother you, etc. And how do we get there, in reality?
Also is libertarianism against racemixing yet? I don't want to be ethnically replaced, so that has been pushing me away from the ideas for the past few years. It's one thing to say that you don't want to control how others live their lives. It's another when how they live their lives controls how you live yours. Latin America is a hellhole and it always will be. A racemixed population is the death of liberty, forever. Especially since liberty is mostly the realm of European man. I just don't understand how we can have liberty when we are outnumbered by shitskins who will always want gibs.
Open file (552.90 KB 470x1600 based berg.png)
Another one is homosexuality. How can there be liberty to be gay, when gays reproduce by molesting children? It's how they are made. So homosexuality itself is just an infinite cycle of aggressing undeveloped boys who can't meaningfully consent, are easily manipulated, and can't understand the future repercussions. Pic unrelated.
Open file (646.47 KB 960x540 1574907873232.png)
>>1780 The best part about this image is that it's something good ol' Doctor Franklin would have said openly and without any shame back in the day. >>1797 Jews are only after the highest profit margin. They tend to either blend into covenant communities and keep their mouths shut, become part of the Home Owner's Association, or seek greener pastures. If a jew has managed to infect your covenant community to the extent of this alleged "Jewish Aggression" you already failed as a covenant community a couple generations prior. Otherwise just lynch the faggot. >>1798 Libertarianism doesn't give a rat's ass about race and never will unless it's convenient to do so. That being said, most "race mixing" is encouraged by government agencies and government programs in the first place. Miscegenation is largely a government-inspired cultural phenomena enforced through government-funded medical procedures. In a free society you would be allowed to fuck whoever you damn well please (with their consent) and make as many children as you damn well please (with their consent to a slightly lesser degree). Coalburners won't be able to rely on the government when their sugar daddy gets thrown in prison so most realistically you'll end up with one generation of mutts who basically set the example of "burn the coal, pay the toll" and who in an effort to not repeat their parents mistakes will blend back into society within a few generations both culturally and ethnically. >Latin America If niggers have taught me anything, it's that when you don't give him gibs, don't throw him in prison for stupid bullshit, give him a cheap form of self defense, and hold him accountable for his actions, he becomes a fine, upstanding member of society in short order. This can be seen in the growing black middle class in the 70s/80s before the welfare state tore apart black families. Unless you're implying Latin Americans are stupider and more violent than niggers, it can reasonably be assumed that they can get their shit together fairly quickly within about two generations. Most of the reasons Mexicans flee to America are government-related or cartel-related (and the cartel was created by government policy). It's the same reason bugmen (at least "American" bugmen) are generally seen in moderate lighting in America, because in the 1800s without a welfare state, they had to carve out their own society and generally learned to blend in or live and let live. >>1799 I don't care if you're heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, waifusexual, asexual, recreationalmcnukesexual or whatever. Not all fruits are made from being molested as children. Much like trannies, the homosexual problem is a self-correcting problem when they're already at a high risk of killing themselves, dying of AIDs, etc. Taxpayer dollars are paying for gays to butt fuck each other and spread diseases, they're paying for tranny surgeries (in some areas), etc. No taxes? That shit comes out of pocket. That shit comes out of pocket? Even if we assume your story is 100% accurate and there's nothing else going on in human psychology which neither you nor I understand, the damage a gay can do is very strictly limited by instinctual self-preservation. The absolutely worst case scenario where shit doesn't backfire horribly for the gay is that the faggot grooms a single child (maybe a couple) instead of diddling a handful of them both to prevent getting shot by the kids' parents when word gets out, and in order to keep himself from getting some sexually transmitted virus that will destroy him when he can't afford his meds. The worst case scenario I can reasonably think of in a free society is a functional member of society who diddles one or two kids and probably raises them as life partners while doing so. Is it wrong? No questions about it, but the damage is significantly mitigated since the homo doesn't have access to government retrovirals or government power to do as he pleases.
>>1800 >Coalburners won't be able to rely on the government when their sugar daddy gets thrown in prison so most realistically you'll end up with one generation of mutts But how do we get a free society when most people in our society are shitskins who don't want freedom >Not all fruits are made from being molested as children. No, just the vast majority. It's not a self-correcting problem, it's an ongoing problem. It sounds like you are living in head canon here
>>1807 By expelling the shitskins and living far away from them, you tard. People naturally self-segregate when doing so isn't illegal and they aren't gaslit to hate themselves in public school. >It's not a self-correcting problem It really is. You kick the gays out, bar them from entry into your covenant community, and within five years the queer is dead from AIDS. The proof that faggotry is a self-correcting problem can be seen by taking a quick glance at history. Without direct subsidization of their behavior, fags weren't an overwhelming concern for everyone. So long as it was culturally verboten, and so long as people were able to express their preferences through discrimination, fags could do no meaningful harm. They either practiced their degeneracy deep underground where it only harmed other queers, or they learned to pray the gay away and do their best to live a facsimile of a normal life. There weren't any right wing death squads kicking down doors to police homos, communities and churches self regulated that behavior all on their own. If you seriously think moral behavior is only possible by a bureaucratic state pushing it on you top-down, it may be because you're a failure of a NEET who assumes success comes from outside structures because you've never been capable of doing anything for yourself.
>>1811 White flight doesn't expel shitskins. You have to physically remove them from your continent. Having a few small covenant communities is not going to help you when you are completely surrounded by shitskins and foreign states coming down on you. You talk about naturally self-segregating when it isn't illegal. Well, it is, that is reality. You can't just skirt around the problem of getting from point A to point B. >If you seriously think moral behavior is only possible by a bureaucratic state pushing it on you top-down Sounds like you are arguing against someone else in your head here, maybe you ran into someone else and are projecting them onto me. I have been ancap for almost a decade. I just kept running into the problem of libertarians who were OK with racemixing, OK with faggots, and not willing to defend us against our genocide in real terms, not imaginary ones. What you say about kicking fags out being a self-correcting problem yes, it is in that theoretical setup within small covenant communities. But that is not the reality we live in and I see no vector to get there as fragmented individuals against the machine of a global media-government complex. You have to understand, your attitude of being anti-gay and anti-shitskin is absolutely not common among people who have remained libertarians. 95% of the movement that is left is completely pozzed to hell. We are against the wall here.
I will give you a real example. Ancaps already tried self segregating with projects like the free state project. What happened was that a bunch of "tolerant" libertarians moved there and made it a welcoming environment for shitskins, started ostracizing anyone who spoke out against it, and even threatening their livelihood by trying to get them fired or starting cancel culture smear campaigns. They hired Mexicans to do their roofing to save money. They did food drives for Somalians. They move up with their asian wives and mixed hispanic children. They shouted down anyone who is against our genocide as "race baiting". Is that not aggressing against me, when I cannot raise a white family and secure a legacy for my people and culture because tolerant libertarians are undermining the very fabric of society. We are being genocided, man. And libertarianism has no practical solutions. Just this constant idea of moving away into small voluntary communities, ever dwinding, ever more remote, until we end up in a HOA in Brazil, but in North America.
There is another huge problem which is that if you are outnumbered you just lose. 100 pure ancaps in a small white ethno community will absolutely be destroyed by attrition when they are blockaded and surrounded on all sides by brown gibs rats and aggressive foreign governments. Just ripe for invasion at the slightest moment of weakness.
>>1812 > You have to physically remove them from your continent. Don't tell me you unironically believe NigSoc LARP fantasies. Shitskins need to be removed from the locale of governance which they are able to influence, at which point they cease being an issue. Insofar as one is living in burgerstan shitskins, their votes, and their criminality should obviously be kept out of burgerstan, this goes without saying. But in a covenant community the locale of governance is far more immediate, and the degree of necessary separation far smaller. >Well, it is, that is reality So are you talking about the politically expedient solutions of the here and now, or the sustainability of covenant communities? You're responding to two very different scenarios as if they're interchangeable. Don't be a disingenuous Jew, specify what it is you mean properly. The person to whom you were responding was speaking to the theoretical paradigm, and responding to a question asked about the theoretical paradigm. His answer would obviously be different when speaking to the most expedient solution in CURRENT YEAR+5. >>1813 Yeah, the FSP is fake, gay, and Marxist. That's what happens when you discourage segregation and encourage immigration.
Edited last time by HHHPinochet on 02/07/2020 (Fri) 18:46:52.
>>1817 How is a covenant community sustainable when it's surrounded on all sides by shitskins and meddling foreign governments? A town or small state cannot stand against the tide for very long. I'm not talking politically expedient solutions, since I don't believe there is a political solution. Our only chance as I see it is a massive race war to purge the shitskins, and even that will only happen once the bread and circuses stop. Libertarian philosophies are the dominion of European man, no matter how much a few based talented tenthers might try to convince us otherwise. Once we are a small enough minority to move in for the final kill, they will. And it's very close to that point in North America and Europe. So I don't see how we can talk about sustainability when we are already a minority and dwindling fast. Once the boomers are dead the demographic dropoff will be like a cliff, and the end game will ramp up for us. Liberty dead forever, just a global network of mongrel banana republics. If you want a glimpse of the future look at small "white" communities in Brazil who are losing through attrition every day, both in numbers and genetic purity which pushes them toward a regression to the mean of mestizo levels of civilizational capability.
Anyways even though I'm annoyed at the state of the liberty movement, I didn't really come here to argue. I just wanted to see if libertarians had any practical and immediate solutions to our genocide yet. You guys are way different than almost all libertarians. If I mentioned around most libertarians our genocide, or how faggots molest, they would throw a shitfit. So I imagine even you guys are shunned by most libertarians anyways. If there are practical solutions to our genocide I am all ears. Otherwise I am going to check out for a couple more years and come back again to see if anything has changed. Things are so bad that the system is becoming an implementation detail. Since we have no tools against our genocide, any system that can actually deal with the problem is what I would have to support. I don't see much point in being ancap if it means I am ethnically replaced.
>>1818 >since I don't believe there is a political solution. Our only chance as I see it is a massive race war to purge the shitskins, Fedposting is for niggers. Bye.
>>1807 >But how do we get a free society when most people in our society are shitskins who don't want freedom See my point on Latin America. Also see >>1811 If they want your shit they have to learn to aim first. They also have to learn how to have a functional society (at which point dealing with them probably isn't that bad anyways). >>1812 >I just kept running into the problem of libertarians who were OK with racemixing, OK with faggots, and not willing to defend us against our genocide in real terms, not imaginary ones. I'm indifferent to race mixing (though I don't think women will live a happy life marrying someone too genetically distant), indifferent to faggots (because they're a non-threat when you take away their state funding/give people the right to shoot them if they are diddling kids), and why would I bother fighting in an ethnic war that ultimately doesn't matter to me when anything short of sickly pale is considered "not white enough" by /pol/ standards? It don't matter. None of this matters. Perhaps it's because I'm White and grew up around Spics/Niggers/Kikes (not suburban white but actually surrounded by other races white), but most of them are decent enough people that are predictable enough when given guns and jobs. You fags bitching about minorities all the time remind me of that Russian living in Mexico who managed to piss off his entire town until they firebombed his house (covenant communities lol). Niggers gonna nig, Spics gonna rape, if you aren't married with children it's none of your business and if you are married with children, just form good relations with your childrens' friends' parents and know which households it's safe to leave them unsupervised in. >But that is not the reality we live in and I see no vector to get there as fragmented individuals against the machine of a global media-government complex. Just give Corona-chan a few months or wait for the next major war. I know waiting is a bitch, but as it stands the global power players are collapsing and the remaining members on their teams are paper tigers who can't do shit to maintain order. I legitimately don't see this as an issue (and even if it is, the black market will choke the state). >>1814 >There is another huge problem which is that if you are outnumbered you just lose. The ATF, CIA, and NSA seem to be doing fine despite this fact. So are the Chechens, the Assyrians, etc. Probably your biggest boogeyman (Jews) are the best example of how this is blatantly false. It's survival of the fitest, not survival of the strongest/most populace. Finding a niche is the key to survival anywhere, really. There is a reason the government has practiced assassination instead of incarceration for the last 30 years when a violent group appears in the USA. >Rest of your tripe Why do you fags always assume everyone and their dead grandmother is out to kill you? If they aren't already, they aren't going to mysteriously do so because you formed a community with funny shirts that say "no step."
>>1818 >How is a covenant community sustainable when it's surrounded on all sides by shitskins and meddling foreign governments? By being less shit than everyone around them. Meddling foreign governments are something we can have an entire thread on, but "shitskins" will work for the highest bidder so forming a large networked black market economy would be fairly easy. >A town or small state cannot stand against the tide for very long. Parts of China were essentially AnCap for centuries because they didn't have a central leadership. Turns out a lack of central leadership makes it extremely difficult to violently take over or subvert a people. >If you want a glimpse of the future look at small "white" communities in Brazil who are losing through attrition every day, both in numbers and genetic purity which pushes them toward a regression to the mean of mestizo levels of civilizational capability. They were always confined to their handful of communities (where they thrive), and most of them are either moving to other South American countries, or they were dissatisfied with their home country so they expatriated.
Thoughts on the 2009 MIAC Report?
>>1829 >it's another "Right wingers are racist white nationalist Nazi domestic terrorists" report Seems like business as usual these days, what's so special about it?
>>1829 It's a decade ago, but serves as an interesting historical document that the State has used in legitimizing censoring conservatives.
Open file (80.83 KB 640x640 1581333159478.jpg)
Does anybody have the HAM radio starter guide image or link with the inexpensive hand held china crap radio and links to learning resources handy?
Open file (695.52 KB HAM.pdf)
>>1910 Here's the HAM radio guide. No link to the radio, but the one you want is the Baofeng UV-5R Ⅲ. There should be a fair number of sellers offering them on Ebay and Amazon.
>>1911 Thanks anon, I haven't seen that PDF before but it's saved now. That was exactly the radio I was after and now it's on the way from Ebay shipped for like $28. Much appreciated.
Open file (14.49 KB 416x416 1537063064186.gif)
How does one pay restitution for a life? An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind, but can an AnCap society truly place value in a human life? Are we doomed to either assign a numerical figure to life based on potential/net worth, or to have a retributive and thus inefficient justice system? How does one value the soul? The most obvious two answers (with one's own life, or at the value of one's net worth) both leave a bitter taste in my mouth as they seem to open up an entire can of worms for all sorts of atrocities in the fields of medicine and science that may or may not be justified, but at the same time most other answers seem arbitrarily defined/enforced.
>>1914 >but can an AnCap society truly place value in a human life? Valuation is subjective, not objective. Therefore, no commodity or service, human lives or otherwise, would have any sort of value baked into it. "Ancap society" would not place any kind of damage value on a human life. If there were ever a situation in which a murderer is made to pay restitution to his victim's family, the nature and quantity of restitution would be determined by the judge, whom the victim and perpetrator have both hired to be their agent. However, I find the situation as described above implausible. In most cases, a private property society would likely sentence murderers with banishment and blacklisting (under threat of death if the banishment is violated), not a restitution of damages. >thus inefficient justice system Considering all restitutional justice is implicitly punitive, why do you consider these two to be wholly separate things? Moreover, why is retribution inefficient? The justice system is a service provider, and the service it provides is the resolution of conflict over scarce resources. If that services is provided at a satisfying price, it is efficient. Banishment, which would be the likely sentence to many trespasses in Ancapistan in addition to restitution, would in many cases be the most satisfying outcome to a given conflict, so it's efficient despite being punitive. >but at the same time most other answers seem arbitrarily defined/enforced. That's always going to be true whenever you try to assign value to any commodity through any mechanism other than the price system. Valuation is fundamentally subjective, operating outside of that framework will lead to arbitrary and nonsensical answers.
Open file (230.02 KB 726x720 1570122845219.png)
>>1914 How about; don't start shit and you won't get hit.
>>1914 There is no ancap society so I wouldn't worry about it too much
>Coronavirus is probably much larger than China is letting on. >Disease like this are much more effective in densely populated areas. >Respiratory diseases like this are much more effective in places where air quality is poor. >Liberals tend to congregate in urban environments that are very densely populated with poor air quality. >No brain, don't go down that road, where did that optimism over the power of the libertarian message go that we ca-- >START UP THE ROTORS >Brain. No. Stop-- >PACK THE LEFTIST SCUM >Libertarians live in cities too, in fact, it is perfectly consistent that they-- >DROP THEM IN THE OCEAN >You're happy about death and disease?! >LEAVE NO ONE ALIVE
>>1922 Did you have a question to ask?
>>1923 Yeah. You know any other libertarian forums that are better than this one to post on?
>>1925 Going by >>1922 reddit is probably for you
>>1928 That place sucks more than this place.
Is there a biological basis behind certain people being unable to be libertarian? If, for the sake of argument, it was determined that people of certain identifiable characteristics (IQ, say) would never have the cognitive capacity to be libertarian, what would a libertarian society do with these 'people?'
>>1944 Wouldn't that apply to most people of color though? Where are you going with this
>>1944 They would be physically removed, so to speak. By virtue of estoppel those who do not respect a certain principle are not entitled to appeal to said principle in their own defense. Those who do not recognize property rights will be treated as outlaws were in America's Old West--banished from centers of civilization and shot on sight if they return. If certain characteristics, such as IQ, are found to be correlated with criminal behavior, the eggheads at the insurance companies would take this into account when assigning risk. If someone is judged to be a significant chimpout risk, they'd probably be barred from entry into most establishments, and forced to live in a slum with other high-risk niggers sufficiently far away from all the wypipo.
Open file (9.72 MB 500x350 niggerfuneral.gif)
>>1944 >Is there a biological basis behind certain people being unable to be libertarian? There is a biological basis, but it doesn't prove that certain people can't become libertarians, it only proves that they're likely to become libertarians for different reasons and respond to different rhetoric. It has to do with Jung's cognitive functions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_cognitive_functions Cognitive functions also play a role in your IQ, and you might even say it's a more accurate measure for intelligence. High IQ doesn't stop people from becoming anti-capitalists though, in fact, a high IQ makes it more likely for you to be a commie just as much as an ancap. >If, for the sake of argument, it was determined that people of certain identifiable characteristics (IQ, say) would never have the cognitive capacity to be libertarian, what would a libertarian society do with these 'people?' What >>1949 says. The despotic market-consciousness will sort them out. On the other hand, if low IQs are just harmless weirdos and aren't a net-negative to their society, they will not achieve market superiority but they might live peacefully in their own isolated corner of the market.
>>1945 If anything, wouldn't it apply to the sexes? After all: 1 - Jonathon Haidt has noted significant differences in libertarians regarding the emotionless, rational nature of their positions ( https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042366&type=printable ). 2 - Testosterone appears to regulate political beliefs ( https://www.cep.ucsb.edu/papers/2013Petersen_Ancestral_Logic_Politics_w_SI.pdf ). 3 - Male brain development receives a flood of testosterone that significantly redistributes their brain towards the development of the prefrontal cortex over more hyperemotional centers of their brain ( https://www.babycenter.com/0_brain-development-is-the-difference-between-boys-and-girls-a_10310673.bc?PageSpeed=noscript ). It also explains the large male:female disparity in libertarianism. I think there's a case you could make that most female brains are simply incapable of processing libertarianism.
>>1960 True although white women are still smarter than black men
Open file (64.76 KB 803x854 ancapfeels.jpg)
Open file (93.59 KB 959x1219 threat level.png)
>libertarians moderate threat level >muslims low threat
>>1969 I think "homegrown violent extremist" is a politically correct way of saying "mudslimes unaffiliated with any terrorist groups."
>>1968 This is a slightly different argument though. Because it could be the case that women have high IQ, its just something in their hysterionic, hyperemotional brain that causes them to make it untenable to "hold on" to libertarian argumentation. >>1949 If it were women as a class that could not respect certain principles, what then? If you physically removed some 80-90% of women...it doesn't seem like such a society could last unless you had people having 20 kids each with (as the meme goes) genetically engineered catgirls or something. More generally, what do you think is behind the fact that women are much less likely to hold onto libertarian ideas than men?
>>1973 >If it were women as a class that could not respect certain principles, what then? Degrade and punish them, like men did for most of history.
>>1969 What are they basing that off of? The number of threats the FBI has received and had to investigate?
>>1975 The ones standing in the way of jewish hegemony over a permanent mixed race underclass
>>1975 Considering most of the first three are glowniggers, I doubt it. There's no rhyme or reason to this list besides pearl-clutching. For God's sake, they put "sovereign citizen extremists," i.e. spergs who think they don't need a license to driven, in the second-highest category.
Can anyone suggest some new or better places to get my news from ( a libertarian perspective)? I am kind of getting sick of Zerohedge.
>>1986 mises wire on RSS works fine
>>1986 A real libertarian makes his own news, and reports factually what what was observed. Time to compete.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)

no cookies?