[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / asmr / dempart / marx / shota / strek / vg / vichan ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 83rd Attention-Hungry Games
/strek/ - Remove Hasperat

May 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Verification *
File *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

Ya'll need Mises.

File: c3ff81cb1d12477⋯.png (414.08 KB, 715x663, 55:51, ClipboardImage.png)


What did they mean by this?

10 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 3109d029245be3c⋯.png (128.17 KB, 300x300, 1:1, ClipboardImage.png)


>The USSR's economy growing at a slightly slower rate then predicted is not much of a concern




Reminder that the USSR's highest reported GDP was in the year that it fell.


They are already outsourcing the industry on china to countries like Etiopia, they might be forced to stop encoraging exports with shrewd monetary politics.



Though the USSR's did slow and stagnate through the 80's thinking that was the sole cause of its collapse and not the massive sabotage that took place under Gorbachev (Dissolving of CMEA / WP / dismantaling DotP / Pulling out of Afghanistan / National-Question) is ridiculous

Yuri Andropov's reforms during his brief tenure as Soviet leader saw a decent decrease to the economic stagnation


See my above reply


A crisis occurring within a socialist state's economy does not mean it has "Failed" as a reform or other methods of fixing a problem is always possible

This would pretty much be like me saying capitalism can never bounce back from a crisis because the Market and the goverment can't recalibrate themselves to solve it



>Pulling out of Afghanistan was a massive sabotage which aided the collapse of the USSR

>Ending a costly foreign entanglement destabilized the state via economic damage

How could that possibly be true?

File: b66065f2368f5a9⋯.jpg (74.06 KB, 500x351, 500:351, dogg very afreed.jpg)



City of Ahlen had a family that wouldn't pay their taxes. So they went to their house, took the dog, and sold him on eBay. I fucking shit you not. They sold their fucking dog on eBay over a tax debt.

21 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Exodus and Leviticus are old jew books, are they not? The big J man said that Christians are people of the new, spiritual, law, not the old, jewish, law.


File: 333c151c91fa213⋯.webm (758.27 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, makes_me_vomit.webm)



File: 6137e171fbbb584⋯.jpg (114.44 KB, 1100x914, 550:457, 22eaf3b19c6c716fd54855f421….jpg)


Matthew 5:17

>Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.



Yes, yes, you think you're very amusing. What about Galatians 3:23-25?

>Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

What about Ephesians 2:15? What about Romans 10:4? I'm having a hard time finding the exact line where Jesus himself said Christians are men of the "new, spiritual law" because I can't recall the exact phrasing, but that the old Jew laws are irrelevant is undeniable by anyone being remotely honest. Even your own passage can easily be seen to mean "It's not that there are no laws, it's that this is the logical continuation of those laws." Go ahead and be a shitty Christian though, it makes it a lot easier to ignore everything you're saying since even the things you profess to believe are obviously things you don't actually believe.




>Using ceremonial law verses

>not knowing about the diference between the ceremonial law and the moral law

by that logic, you must also respect other hebrew customs like resting in the sabath and not eating pork.

File: 6ac8a423fdbdb5c⋯.png (4.36 KB, 225x225, 1:1, thinking.png)


If someone is a psychopath and they believe in stealing, what makes your opinion better than theirs? Inb4 'I'll just shoot them'. No one cares. I want to know the answer to the question above.

22 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>To people like you

You're not in position to look down on something, authoritarian filth.


>And you cannot give me such an example. In fact, you refuse to give me one.

Not really, this was my first post directed at you. But ok, a person who doesn't play in your moralistic games will always be more logically consistent.

>I neatly laid down my premises

Nah, if anything, you simply mutilated what was already ugly second class scientific fields and turned them into a moral system.

>if you think having an expensive car and snorting cocaine is the pinnacle of happiness

Strawman, though i guess this is indeed better than the happiness of being watched by people with genetic resemblance of yourself when dying.

>They aren't. Have you ever looked into this topic?

They are, have you? Their relationships are meaningful as they lead them to the outcomes they desire. But try to redefine the meaning of meaningfulness once again, commie.

>LOL Aristotle was dumm dumm xDDD

And this comes from someone whose argument wasn't appeal to authority, by his words.

>Like, unironically read a book.

Here >>>/leftypol/ , there's an active club of readers for the likes of you.

You don't even have to go on full retard, I'm not even hating you, we've already had a nice talk a while ago, just lighten up on autism next time you post instead of acting like a rabid protestant anti-evolutionist.


File: 146ba3a5e795ce5⋯.jpg (48.23 KB, 480x270, 16:9, BY5ptFI.jpg)


Forgot pic


File: 179a76bf96aa7fe⋯.png (360.88 KB, 778x645, 778:645, (You).png)


I guess i need to clarify. My intention was to poke at you cause since your return you've been acting like a complete leftist retard. I understand that long containment within christian circles does affect one's brain cells in the most harmful ways but that's not a reason to turn every reply into a blatant circlejerk while simultaneously autofellating your own sense of pride, purity, accomplishment and superiority. If you cannot, go back and read your previous posts, the ones before you left and chill the fuck out.



This kills the christcuck.




>active club of readers

They never even read what they suggest. For example, in Das Kapital, Marx both supports the Iron Law of Wages in one section and counters it in the next.

File: 5df25e0d5fe7647⋯.png (4 MB, 1608x2858, 804:1429, 1441770537257.png)


>students for liberty

have you been at their events? how was it? what do you think about this organisation? inb4 cucked sjws


> students for liberty

what's this?


What's the difference between it and YAL? I've only had experience with the latter; the chapter at my uni was filled mostly with Gary Johnson types rather than Ron Paul types so I stopped participating.


File: 7e19c1ea861e2b3⋯.jpg (13.56 KB, 291x267, 97:89, 7e19c1ea861e2b31efffdd706e….jpg)


Yes. I worked with them for a few years as a Campus Coordinator. Their goal is to basically be a "big tent" organization. They almost ruined my life in a couple ways, but I won't get into that. Their organization has gone down the shitter due to not following through with members, internal politics during the election years, internal corruption, and the fact that their DC offices really don't fucking understand what life is like anywhere west of Kentucky or south of North Carolina. They partner up with Young Americans for Liberty where they get about 70% of their domestic members that show up for the International Students For Liberty Conference every year, which is one of the few redeemable parts of SFL still around (at least it was until they brought the fucking leftist Pussy Riot band to the conference in protest of a few of their ISFL members getting told to fuck off/eat shit in Eastern Europe). They were heavily allied with the Alliance For The Libertarian Left until the C4SS child molestation incidents (you can see this in any of their chapter websites where everyone's raising their fists), and they threw Texas under the bus effectively losing the entire fucking state from their sphere of influence because they didn't like the guy (girl?) who was in charge at the time. The Texans had a 700% increase in membership in the course of two years, but he (she? can't remember this was a few years ago) was busy doing shit in Texas/telling the DC offices to fuck off and let him do his shit, so they fired him and the Texas branch took 90% of their membership with them while telling SFL to eat shit. The women were pretty slutty and would usually sleep around with other Campus Coordinators at any event they happened to be a part of (which is a huge breech of trust/business ethics I might add), and the DC leadership had no qualms with handing 21+ drink tickets to minors at their gatherings to the point where the DEA was actually called on them during the ISFL conference one year. Alexander McCobin is totally bro-tier and he used to have an AnCap flag in his office (not sure if he does any more after getting married). Igor Sampaio is a fucking bro to drink with, and I miss Monica Lucas since she was one of the few executive board members who was really chill/understood how thPost too long. Click here to view the full text.



Oh right, before I forget, the INTERNATIONAL branch of the group is actually doing a really good job. Their International efforts have been pretty good in South America (one of their founders in Brazil got elected to State Parliament) and Africa. They're one of the active forces in organizing protests in Venezuela, etc. It's the Domestic US and European branches of SFL that are complete and utter garbage.

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.


Redpill me on the mouse utopia.

7 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



Get fucked, Christcuck. You're one of the reasons we're in this position in the first place.


File: 85cdd8774cb411e⋯.gif (458.18 KB, 256x256, 1:1, GigaThonk.gif)


>Christianity caused overpopulation and urbanization

I mean, thanks, I guess. I finally get to hear an argument against Christianity that is not stolen directly from Voltaire.



If the fact that something was said by someone else a long time ago invalidates an idea, I think you've created a serious problem for yourself.



>If the fact that something was said by someone else a long time ago invalidates an idea

You're right, it doesn't. The problem is that the same arguments are repeated since the time of Voltaire, yet few people give him credit for it, and most pretend that their particular argument is totally new and exciting. It really isn't.

The fundamental difference between Christianity and atheism in this regard is that Christianity is traditional, but atheism strives rather for the opposite. This mirrors how libertarianism compares to socialism. Socialists regularly declare all their theories from more than twenty years ago null and void. They excuse all shortcomings in these theories with the fact that socialism has moved on, yet they don't learn anything from the criticisms of said theories. They basically retcon everything that has ever been said against them in debates, every idea of theirs that was refuted or disproven. Libertarians are different, we still believe, after almost a hundred years, that von Mises has disproven socialism for good, and we still treat Rothbard as the prime authority on anarchocapitalism.

This is one of the primary reasons why libertarians and socialists do not get along and tend to talk past each other. Socialists happily make arguments that, to them, sound new and exciting, while libertarians will be annoyed that they are hearing arguments that have been disproven for a hundred years. The flipside is that libertarians would be in serious trouble if von Mises or Rothbard were refuted, while socialists can - and do - laugh off even the most devastating criticisms of Marx, Engels, or Bebel. To them, these guys are old and overhauled.

Christians are more like libertarians in this regard. If you refuted one of our primary apologists, we would be alarmed, not to mention if you refuted the Holy Scripture. Meanwhile, atheists laugh you off when you tell them that Epicur, Celsus, Diderot or Voltaire were wrong, because, after all, these guys were old, their ideas are old, and surely, science has moved on since their days. Meanwhile, Christians are frustrated that they don't hePost too long. Click here to view the full text.



>appealing to traditionalism

Saying "we Christians are good, moral traditionalists", and "you atheists are just degenerates who chase after everything that looks cool and new" is exactly like hearing the arguments communists in socialist/ex-socialist shitholes make about how socialism is moral, tradtional, and it's part of your history and culture, and everyone who isn't a socialist is just some edgy young motherfucker who hates his own country and people.

The Bible, just like leftist movements and ideologies, is purposefully ambiguous to allow for many interpretations and many different sects with their own independent functions. So even though Christianity is also another version of utopian pseudo-socialism, it is like a hydra with many head, you get some churches placing a greater emphasis on spreading the religion at all costs, some putting an emphasis on harvesting wealth and cultivating the loyalty of what followers they have, and others on a having their own cool niches for you to conveniently choose from and say "everything else is not real Christianity".

File: 988d2a7c0d02f28⋯.jpg (454.03 KB, 721x1257, 721:1257, Screenshot_20190305-130546.jpg)



>As early as next month, porn sites will be required to get proof of ID from UK residents before showing any X-rated clips.

10 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



i got the news from /pol/. everyone one calling the UK based



I'm still not sure how they determine what a "porn site" is. Are UK ISPs expected to block any site featuring adult content, or does this only apply to large porn sites?



>porn is a nasty addiction

So is eating anything, driving a car, watching television, listening to radio, reading books, or skydiving. Would you approve a BLANKET BAN on any of these activities? Is it ok to shoot people who put food in their mouths, because some people are fat?

Not all people who watch porn are fucking addicted to it moron.



/pol/ really shit the bed



Never mentioned anything about a ban. Simply said it was a nasty addiction. Go visit >>>/nofap/, I would wager they would agree on that. Stop trying to be an edgy blowhard.

File: f85493dc3b0f8dc⋯.png (342.44 KB, 499x662, 499:662, ClipboardImage.png)



>guns are legal

>self defence is legal

>everyone owns guns

<no one uses them


>guns are illegal

>self defence is illegal

>rascism is illegal

<pic related

1 post and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


The US should just crush brazil, kill every roach there and expand.






Why are you here? There is no more libertarian principle than the non aggression principle.



Dude, Brazil is shitting on libertarian principles. Nuke them before they grow enough to nuke you, because they will.



shut up neocon

File: 9edfcd26ccf2fed⋯.jpg (16.29 KB, 443x361, 443:361, mises_0.JPG)


What are the things still debated within the Austrian school? What are the controversies and gaps in the theory people are trying to solve?

I remember there was an article on Mises.org about how Joseph Salerno and Rothbard failed to solve some difficulty in monetary theory or something.

8 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



Literally no-one within the Austrian school (or any school of economics, for that matter) is having that debate.

Fractional reserve banking may be a risky practice, but opposition to it on moral grounds comes entirely from from polacks whinging about muh joos commiting usury and marxists who can't into economics.


HookTube embed. Click on thumbnail to play.


>Literally no-one within the Austrian school (or any school of economics, for that matter) is having that debate.

"The truth is that fractional-reserve banking amounts to violating the nature of the law of property rights."

~Thorsten Polleit


>Literally no-one within the Austrian school

"Banking is fraudulent whenever bankers sell uncovered or only partially covered money substitutes that they present as fully covered titles for money."


>Literally no-one


"This would leave the commercial banks still in a state of fractional reserve, and, in the past, I have advocated going straight to 100 percent, nonfraudulent banking by raising the gold price enough to constitute 100 percent of bank demand liabilities."



(in fact, Rothbard mentioned this many times)


"We stipulate, arguendo, that fractional-

reserve-demand deposit banking is per se fraudulent"

~Walter Block and William Barnett II


Are you seriously saying that Selgin is arguing with himself on this matter?



I'm kind of getting sick of "muh" being used as a way to dismiss arguments without actually dismissing them.

It makes me want to reply, "muh MUH argument."


Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.


>Literally no-one within the Austrian school (or any school of economics, for that matter) is having that debate.

Wow, I guess the Mises Institute and Bob Murphy aren't parts of the Austrian school then.




I stand corrected. Many Austrian School economists do, in fact, oppose fractional reserve banking.

Still, I think the arguments against FRB are pretty terrible. FRB is fundmentally just a low risk, low return collective investment where any one investor can pull out at any time. Obviously there are risks involved but to claim it is intrinsically fraudulent is silly since the implications of keeping money in a FR bank account are understood by anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together. If you think it's terrible and eveil, go ahead and keep your money in a gold-reserve bank.

File: a3bff5e4326a917⋯.webm (5.96 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, 1442353205399595793.webm)


european here

can are there any borders between states in the usa? if no, does it mean that people travel with guns from states with very liberal gun laws to states with very strict gun laws?


mod delete this dupliate please



No this is the real thread the other one is a duplicate. Delete that one.



Fuck off Ancom nigger.

File: a3bff5e4326a917⋯.webm (5.96 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, 1442353205399595793.webm)


european here

can are there any borders between states in the usa? if no, does it mean that people travel with guns from states with very liberal gun laws to states with very strict gun laws?

2 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


There are borders but the free movement between them is constitutionally guaranteed.


They can but there's no need, as far as acquiring the gun the registration papers are almost identical everywhere



Not really. Most thugs who acquire guns for the purpose of crime do so illegally anyways, since they don't want anything to trace the sale back to them. Even if it's legal for them to own a gun, most thugs will buy one in a back alley with the serial number filed off.



There are "borders" in the sense of a "welcome to ____" sign. Having a border checkpoint is literally illegal on multiple levels, though.

And yes. God help you if you get caught with it, but you can physically just go to another state and grab a half-pound of weed and a gun that's illegal in your home state.




…you might be interested in this.



>trace the sale back to them


they can just take gun with them

File: 40f1df9ff23d35a⋯.jpg (9.74 KB, 225x225, 1:1, 4180349836e2b59459224eb3c2….jpg)


What's the most effective way to kill statism, bros?

Governments have been rapidly evolving, they have almost perfected the art of farming entire human societies and keeping the population docile and desensitized, while also putting up a show of simulated international politics that keeps the politically active part of the population distracted. It feels like if we don't do anything within the next 50-100 years, we will lose whatever power and freedom we have and then spend whatever time our mutted species has on this gay earth in a pseudo-socialist dark age run by an evil artificial intelligence created in the Judeo-Asian state's own image before completely destroying the environment and the planet and everything on it.

We don't even have a fucking plan, our movement whole movement consists of wise guys and redditors mentally jerking each-other off on niche forums and niche events, showing off how much smarter they are than everyone else, while not actually doing anything and only hoping that things will eventually get better. I hate it, but I hate us even more for being so powerless.

File: 7cc339e488bb082⋯.gif (2.94 MB, 320x180, 16:9, 1464969938576092719.gif)


few days ago i was listening to podcast-lecture about freedom from university

and professor said that on haiti when slaves were freed then they found out it was not easy to live free

and they wanted to become slaves again but ex-slave-owners did not want to have slaves any more because of morality of enlightment age

and finally ex-slaves got angry and killed their ex-owers

is it true? im european so i dont know much about caribbean history (nevertheless i was on haiti for vacation) and i cant find confirmation for these claims i heard from that lecture

help me verify these claims

19 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



how do we make westerners stop throwing money at africa?



yes im sure

the lecture was not in english so i will not link it



For regular people? You give them something more emotionally fulfilling to throw their money at. That is all. A lot of it is corporate driven anyhow, tax write-offs, and also "philanthropists" who do all kinds of things for bad reasons, whether it be public image or outright laundering.



is this how they justify negros genociding whites in Haiti in the 1800s? I can't believe this shit.


Of course it's just a massacre according to (((wikipedia)))



let's redpill wikipedia

File: f2750bd3dbeee03⋯.png (464.02 KB, 932x550, 466:275, ClipboardImage.png)


Is it legitimate to go to war to destroy the value of competitors to comparatively raise the value of your services on the market?

1 post omitted. Click reply to view.



But the reason America and European growth is stalling is due to socialism, social stagnation, increase in number of laws, and a growing welfare class. All of these are fixable problems and fixing them costs less than invading China.



Fixing these give funds to invade China anyways


Illegitimate, as in conforming to international law, maybe, if they have casus belli. Should they? No, because war destroys wealth and lowers overall market value.


It's not legitimate, but it's Aldi not practical. War is near always a net loss for both parties involved—it is only when the one who instigates war is not the one who bears the costs of it that it becomes common, as is the case in democracy.


File: b01ebacccfc0e0b⋯.gif (142.4 KB, 322x395, 322:395, OY VEY.gif)

The answer to all questions of this nature is "Yes, absolutely…if you can get away with it.". Think of war like any tool of trade or politics, and you'll understand how and why nations go to war. It's not the most honorable thing, but it's more or less how it goes.

Hell, the West intentionally destabilized the entire middle east just to preserve the value of the petrodollar(something extremely important for trade and a corner-stone of the USA's hegemony over the globe)


This, this and precisely this. Also, nuking China would tank the US's market so until the US can flip around to being a primary exporter again it's probably not ideal to outright nuke China. That said, it gives the US massive power when it comes to embargoes and sanctions.


>subtle Israel reference

Oy vey!

File: 708961731aede80⋯.jpg (482.79 KB, 1053x1499, 1053:1499, Screenshot_20190217-220420.jpg)

File: 7c29e2c828d65e9⋯.jpg (64.42 KB, 280x280, 1:1, 1550456937021.jpg)


Is UBI (universal basic income) as bad as everyone makes it out to be?

Studies show it would grow the US economy by 2.5 trillion

It would do that in many ways. Corporations just keep lots of money sitting around. If that wealth could be taxed or distributed to people who weren't as rich like the working class. When the working class or the middle class get the money they would actually spend the money creating economic growth. They spend money in lots of sectors creating jobs, put more money into circulation, etc. UBI would also increase the overall happiness of the country.

So how would UBI be bad if it was distributed to the working and middle classes?

69 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



That sounds cool, got anymore advice/books/guides on profiting from the economic collapse?



>This leaves us back at Bob ceasing all economic activity and voluntarily starving to death,

No, because Bob can transact with non-thieves.

>Only because anonwhatthefuckevernumber hasn't tested the "I've never sold anything to you!" magic spell blinged out and flashing large sums in a back alley in the bad part of town.

Why is anon in that back alley that is well known for muggings? It is not like anon can do business in the market where transactions are more transparent. If he is willing to venture there, he could insure his swag, hire protection, arm himself, etc.



You're the same as niggers who support the AWB because it means their investments (machine guns) are more valuable. Please die.



what is AWB?


File: 62694069e5cb704⋯.jpg (20.61 KB, 280x280, 1:1, 7c29e2c828d65e9ae0c0b9ebf3….jpg)


File: 562563275bc654e⋯.jpg (150.23 KB, 650x975, 2:3, web-idiocracy.jpg)

File: e61cb916c99e634⋯.jpg (283.07 KB, 612x380, 153:95, idiocracy_0.jpg)

File: 266ba1210776fd5⋯.jpg (428.1 KB, 810x1941, 270:647, Screenshot_20190122-134146.jpg)


how do you prevent idiocracy from happening due to free market capitalism?

social media and desensitizing media will make the population dumber

53 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Well, yeah. There's an implicit difference between infants and children.



If it's young enough that it has to rely on me for food/shelter/education/job experience/etc. it's too young for you to sleep with, pedo.



>What are you trying to say? It seems like you're attempting to equate consent with the ability to assent or dissent.

With just a little modification, it's a tautology. Hunger is a physical sensation, not an emotion, btw (and one which is often not consented to, along with other forms of pain and discomfort).



Correct. Idiots will still persist, but they're at least more likely to be productive idiots.



Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / asmr / dempart / marx / shota / strek / vg / vichan ]