Welcome to /liberty/!
Welcome to /liberty/, your board for the discussion of politics, society, news, and the human condition without authoritarianism (fascism, full-on communism, etc). The board's philosophy is simple - welcome all discussion from non-authoritarian viewpoints, light moderation, and most importantly of all fun.
We've seen SJWs, we've seen the far right, and we've seen the far left and we've said no, stop this madness - the moralizing authoritarians who seek to control society and shape it to their whims and test out their vague theories would enslave us just to feel that society was better. At /liberty/ we believe we would be best served by sticking to the path we've been on for so long, that of personal liberty.
See the image - if you make the cut, you'll be right at home on /liberty/. Even if you are an authoritarian (far left or far right), you're welcome to join us - just don't expect to be taken seriously.
1. Global Rules uber alles.
2. Spamming can result in a short ban. In the event of raids, discussion threads will be stickied to weather the storm.
3. Rules are lame, don't make me make more and don't whine for more moderation unless it is absolutely necessary.
4. This board has an actual topic and it's not fetish porn. Content that is clearly beyond the pale of the board's topic (fetish porn, clop, gore, etc) will be removed. If you need these things, they are a mere three clicks away; you can even get there one-handed.
Board Policy Vis-a-vis…
There is no such thing as shitposting. It's a vague and subjective concept that boils down to "irreverent posts or things I don't like," and therefore makes a bad yardstick for moderation. If you want discussion without fun, may I suggest another board?
While shills may exist, the intense paranoia and schizophrenic moderation and community policing of /pol/ shows how fear of these legendary creatures can completely disrupt a community. If someone is posting something that you disagree with, even if they're paid to do it, you still have the mental faculties to decide if their argument is a good one or not, or to double check their sources. Calling another person a mythical shillicorn does not automatically defeat their argument. As far as moderation policy goes, shills do not exist, even if they're real in your mind.
If you're a fledgling fascist or bunker-loving communist, you're welcome to stick around - you cannot be banned for your opinions on this board. Just don't expect to be taken seriously - the reason this board exists is because we already know we don't like authoritarianism, and want to discuss things without authoritarians sticking their noses into everything as they are wont to do.
4. "I Called You X, I Win"
Simply calling someone a fascist/communist/authoritarian/statist/shill/Jew/Nazi/etc. does not "defeat" them. Git gud.
That takes care of the important stuff. This sticky is subject to be updated anytime!
Resources for LibertyHelp to compile a list of resources (preferably free) about non-authoritarian political thought. If you want to see something added, make a thread to discuss adding things to this list and I'll edit it in here if it's good.
czechia is one of the most uncucked european countries
Count Dankula found guilty of Hate Speech
Genetically Engineered Catgirls For Domestic Ownership
It's fun to meme about engineering a waifu, and certainly in ancap without all those pesky restrictions it would be easy to make one, but what about the ethical implications? Since ownership of a sapient creature violates their NAP, how do you plan to get around this? The only things I can think are
1) Making them not actually sapient which isnt so fun
2) Not actually owning them and having to engineer them and then woo them which sounds like trouble
Hello, /liberty/! I'd ask you about some economics stuff, cus it seems like the best place for it. So, the question is: a decentralized cryptocurrency, which price is tied to the computing speeds, which can be mined by giving them to the network, and spent on, by buying them back. therefore, if noone is buying, then the amount of acquired currency is low determied by how much the system itself requires to be managed, and is higher, the more computing power is being used/bought. The amount of computing power bought is also dependent on the available resources. Can such a currency exist, be effectively used? The overall amount of currency is irrelevant, as it is not fiat, and therefore is less dependent on amount of users, as far as i understand. If i got it all wrong and fucked up, can there be some alternatives, improvements etc. made? Is the concept of being able to convert cryptocurrency back to computing speed technically/economically impossible?
Libertarian candidate wants to arm homeless
Why does the Libertarian party continue to be one embarrassment after another?
This is the thread for people that want to prove that praxeology is magic or that the historical school did nothing wrong.
Picrel is an early post of mine. I remember some anon wrote a very good, constructive critique of it where he talked about Hayek, but sadly, I didn't save that.
Everything you are is 100% genetic
There is a lot of confusion because some people believe that Free Will is denied if you accept everything you are is 100% genetic. That is false. Free Will is a concept for philosophy to struggle with. I am here to show you that the choices you make are all derived from a set of desires all of which are genetic. How well you go through with your choices and how well you peform in various actions trying to get to your goals; all genetic. Your beliefs even are genetic. The brains of humans follow geographical patterns like everything else. The behavior typical of a German is going to be more common in Bavaria than in Peloponnese. Some Nations of people are more impulsive, others are more methodical. Every axis and type of trait is based on genes and is more or less common along with related types of behaviors in specific groups of people. When immigrants come, some can pretend to believe what the natives believe, but as the immigration rate rises, the true beliefs of even the old immigrants become more overt. They do not think like the natives. They do not feel like the natives. They do not dream like the natives. This is because the brain structure and function is genetic. And so many of their genes are different.
How similar are you to the average chimp? (over 98.8% of average human DNA is similar to the average chimp)
How about a mouse? (~92% of average human DNA is similar to a mouse)
You have the senses you have of the world because of your genes; Eyes, ears, etc.
Your genes determine how receptive you are to ideas from other people, or how well you mimick behavior, or whether you are introspective instead of impulsive.
An african brought into Germany will never be a German. If all of Rothschilds money was spent to educate one family of Africans to make them as Germany as possible, their kids would still not be German. So long as they married other Africans, they would not become German, ever.
Whether or not particular thoughts seem more acceptable to you is based on your brain structure and the learned ideas you've accumulated. You've accumulated learned ideas based on your experiences. You could not have visual experiences if you have never seen. You could not have abstract thoughts if you can not understand them. The human brain is complex. An organism without that human brain capacity could not have human thoughts and understandings. Could you imagine a bat or Suncus etruscus to have philosophical theories?
Regulation of Gene expression normally happens in all of an organisms tissues on a continuous basis. This means that the environment is always a factor in how genes are expressed. Why does regulation happen? Because the organism contains mechanisms that sense various parameters. How does an organism regulate the genetic expression? Turning genes on, partially on, or off (simplified). That cells respond to the environment and adjust genetic expression is not proof that something or anything is not 100% genetic. Those mechanisms of sensing, responding, adjusting, and readjusting are genetic as well. A cell can not have a receptor that was not coded in the genome. A tissue can not have a function it lacks the mechanisms to do.
A country that does not represent any particular nation or nation(s) will be in turmoil until it is destroyed or remade. The struggle between groups of people exists even in apparent times of peace.
Dow falls 450 points from strong performance
What's going on with the market /liberty/?
Dow falls 450 points as interest rates shoot higher, stocks head for worst week in 2 years
>The major indexes were on track for their worst weekly performance in two years.
>The benchmark 10-year yield rose to 2.85 percent.
>The U.S. economy added 200,000 jobs in January. Economists polled by Reuters expected growth of 180,000.
>U.S. stocks fell sharply on Friday after a stronger-than-expected jobs report sent interest rates higher.
>The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 450 points, with Exxon Mobil sliding 5.4 percent. The 30-stock index also fell below 26,000 and hit its lowest level since Jan. 16.
>The S&P 500 fell 1.4 percent, with energy as the worst-performing sector. The Nasdaq composite declined 1.2 percent as a decline in Apple and Alphabet offset a strong gain in Amazon shares.
>"The key for the market today is rising interest rates," said Mike Baele, managing director at U.S. Bank Wealth Management. "The old adage is: 'Bull markets don't die of old age, they are killed by higher interest rates.' That looms large."
>The U.S. economy added 200,000 jobs in January, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economists polled by Reuters expected growth of 180,000. Wages, meanwhile, rose 2.9 percent on an annualized basis.
>The report sent interest rates higher. The benchmark 10-year yield rose to 2.85 percent on the back of the report, hitting a four-year high. Investors have been jittery about the recent rise in interest rates, worrying they may be rising too fast.
>On Friday, the 30-year yield rose its highest level since March.
>"The reaction in the bond market is due to the rise in average hourly earnings," said James Ragan, director of individual investor group research at D.A. Davidson. "I think the market is now thinking of the possibility that the Fed could raise rates four times this year rather than three."
>The Federal Reserve has forecast three rate hikes for 2018.
>Bank stocks fell the yield curve widened. The SPDR S&P Bank exchange-traded fund, which tracks bank stocks, slipped 0.7 percent. Banks typically benefit from higher interest rates.
>This has been a volatile week for U.S. stocks. The Cboe Volatility index, widely considered the best fear gauge in the market, rose from 11.08 this week to 15.25.
>The Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq were on pace to snap four-week winning streaks. The indexes were also on track for their worst weekly performance in two years.
>Wall Street also looked to the release of key corporate earnings. Exxon Mobil reported weaker-than-expected earnings on Friday, sending its stock lower.
>Tech giant Apple reported better-than-expected quarterly results. But the stock fell 3.4 percent after the company said it expects profit margins of 38 percent to 38.5 percent, tighter than the expected 38.9 percent. Apple also reported lighter-than-expected iPhone sales for its previous quarter.
>Google-parent Alphabet also reported quarterly results, with earnings per share missing expectations. The company's stock dropped 5.3 percent on the back of the report.
>Amazon, meanwhile, surged to an all-time high on the back of its earnings report. The e-commerce giant said its Amazon Web Services sales — a key component for the company — hit $5.11 billion. Analysts polled by FactSet expected AWS revenue of $4.97 billion.
>About halfway through the earnings season, most companies have posted upside surprises. of the S&P 500 companies that have reported as of Friday morning, 78 percent have beaten bottom-line expectations, while 80 percent have surpassed sales estimates, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.
After Ghouta is liberated, Idlib is next.
The resistance is fierce because the terrorists have had years to dig in and entrench themselves, eastern Ghouta is basically Stalingrad. It's also similar to the Mosul battle in Iraq because the terrorists use civilians as hostages and refuse to let them go. The SAA, NDF and Tiger Forces making slow but steady progress.
Meanwhile the western propaganda machine spins the whole story as:
>Syrian army dropping bombs on poor innocent people
>"International community" save us!
But nobody falls for these lies and manipulation any more. Syria will not turn into another Libya, especially with Hezbollah and Russian help.
In Idlib, terrorist in-fighting continues between HTS (formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra aka the official Al-Qaeda branch in Syria) and JTS (moderate head choppers as opposed to extremist head choppers.
Turkey invaded Afrin and is killing lots of Kurds. Of course, Turkey and the U.S. are in Syria illegally.
>Some good sources for recent updates on the Syrian conflict
LiveLeak (if you ignore the blatantly obvious shills like 'seerc')
What causes the business cycle?
Why do we take growth for granted, yet for many, the recession comes as a surprise? Why do recessions often occur during periods of rapid growth?
What begins a recession? What initiates a crisis?
Can government intervene to end a crisis? Will government intervention cause or prolong a crisis?
I just wanted to post this because I still see people arguing that Mises' point was that "The calculation is too complex to do!" For the last time, if you think that's the point of Mises' Calculation Problem, then you don't understand the problem.
Tell me about your ideal small country.
Please, only constructive, informed or intuitive opinions and criticism. Emotional intelligence is a virtue.
You are more likely to be listened if you post your own ideal utopian society.
See if this takes us anywhere.
>Cities and city life salvaged and abandoned. Only villages now.
>No central gov, no feds, no cia/fbi or police. People must take it upon themselves to live in these humble conditions and can leave whenever.
>Every commune must be at least partially-self sufficient, making pacts to share abundances with other communes. Non-sustainable consumerism has trade offs.
>Any form of authority must respect peaceful individual decisions, by country law.
>Anything without consent is a crime. Starvation, plague, natural disasters, etc is the whole country problem.
>Public internet access, database capable of teaching modern science and technology, free communication in all country.
>A central hub for gatherings to present new inventions, coordinate production, ensuring well-being and country matters. Also having fun.
>This is where motivated people get a chance to advertise their skills, and see if they are needed at all. They work for the people, not the people for them.
>Economy based on non-mainstream and/or sustainable science.
-Mushrooms, 'green' energy, algae/crop biodiesel, f*g Nikola Tesla, cold fusion, zero-point energy, hydroxy and etc.
-Perpetual motion is stupid and a waste of time.
>All individual money gained globally should be disclosed publicly to rather gain some fame, or given to your commune, but not obligatory.
>There is no currency. Renown, trading, skill, knowledge, connections/friends and etc. are how you can gain the upper hand.
>Communes can operate independently, but must respect the country law.
>True free speech. Willfulness to communicate and other virtues are valued.
>For country law, bill or whatever to pass, it must have compelling reasons and a majority vote.
>Every commune has a 'longhouse' for guest housing and caring. Also once a week food and drinks are served for all who participate, but cannot take food out.
>All capital gained from commune export belongs to the commune, who decide how to share it by themselves and to import stuff.
>As not everyone are capable of being individuals at first, an exceptional position is assigned to gurus, shamans, yogi whatever who teach humans in body and soul, not literature.
>They are not allowed to form any unity, they must be independent individuals who resigned their life work in favor of expressing human potential.
>Cults and religion not allowed. Bye bye culture, time for a new start. Schools and etc are commune matters.
>Only a father is allowed to have guns, for as longs as he belongs in the family.
>Father power is amplified by giving authority to call for military actions.
>Military training is provided in a centralized location with a capable structure.
>Their duty is to ensure the land is secure from external and internal violence and illegal immigration.
>Also enforcing the ethical rights of each citizen.
>Military does not train dumbs who can only follow orders, but willpower and guerilla warfare.
>Lazy lifestyle is allowed, but there are no payouts, you either life off the land or find a way to participate in some way.
>Children are cared by their family until 18 years old, no more. Plenty of time to experiment in what they want, school is opt in, opt out.
>Doing land work duties is the easiest way not to get booted out for being useless, also a form of punishment for petty crimes.
>Murder, rape, trafficking, pointless massive destruction and etc are capital crimes, every citizen is responsible for ensuring /liberty/.
>Capital punishment decided only in central court with evidence, public participation and guru help.
>Worst punishment is branding and exile, there are no prisons.
>Natural resources must be absolutely treasured. Waste utilization/recycling and water purification are valued research.
Hey losers, leftypol here, just came to your shit board to tell you that you are all fucking idiots. Talking all day about free markets, competition, property rights, etc… Jesus Christ, what's the point? Why can't you just print money?
South Africa superpower 2020!
Separatism and Liberty
Separatism is the single most liberating step any group or individual can take. Would you support the right of the white inhabitants of Africa to declare their independence from black domination?
fringe/ancap spiritual community
Im making a fringe/spiritual ancap community. Because I have already made a thread on fringe.
I will mostly reply to questions from there.
You dont need to pay to join, you only need to send me a application form. Most questions have already been answered on fringe.
Also could somebody photoshop a anarcho spiritual flag, like ancap flag but with the flower of life in the middle, because thats explains what my community is basically.
is it possible to implement the elements of anarcho-capitalist thinking into day-to-day life? or would it involve escaping to the woods and claiming a patch of land as your sovereign territory along with a declaration of secession from your former country?
Sargon of Akkad and Yaron Brook livestream
18:30 UTC March the 5th
It's an event at King's College, London and they're apparently going to have "Safe Space monitors" there and the event will probably be stopped if they say something "non-safe" (Courtesy of King's college). Protestors are a given.
It's about free markets and objectivism (separate and related).
SoA and Yaron Brook's previous videos:
00:39-00:52 for more info
Government Gun Grabbin'
Well, they officially started doing it in cucked cities, anons.
>While touted as a necessary tool for police, an ERPO removes due process as the person who is accused of being mentally unstable does not have to be present and gets no chance of facing their accuser.
>Last week in Seattle, a man was petitioned for an ERPO and his case is proving everything wrong with the law. The man has yet to be identified, however, he has become the first public victim of the removal of due process and a police raid to initiate gun confiscation.
>According to police, the ERPO stemmed from a neighbor reporting the man for “staring” at them through a window. The man was also “accused” of open-carrying a holstered pistol.
>Staring is most certainly not illegal. Also, it is entirely legal to open carry a pistol in Belltown. This man had not made any threats to anyone. However, his entirely legal behavior was considered a threat—so police confiscated his guns.
>“We attempted multiple times to get the individual to fulfill that order of turning over their firearms,” Pisconski said. “And he refused multiple times. We were forced, at that point, to take the next step in the ERPO law which is petitioning for a search warrant to go in and enter their home and remove the firearms from them.”
>Had this man resisted with force, rest assured that he would’ve been killed. His life would’ve been taken by police and he never committed a crime.
>Anyone, any time, now has the ability to claim someone else is a threat and have police take their guns. One does not need to delve into the multiple ‘what if’ scenarios to see what sort of ominous implications arise from such a practice. What’s more, police now have the power to deem you a threat at any time and legally disarm you—due process be damned.
Flippy the robot is here
KEK! So much for that minimum wage!
me 2 u
When will stop getting yourself mired in needless vitriol? Is repeating the same topics, subjects, and posts still an entertaining idea for you? There is no practical reason to continue if the above is not cutting it for you. If so, suit yourself. I don't exactly find repeating the same subjects, posts, and 'jokes' to be anything more interesting beyond a single month. Damn near all of the jokes on here are tired and deserve their own retirement long before this point of time.
why are libertarians philosophically and economically illiterate?
no philosopher takes libertardianism seriously, only edgy teenagers read ayn rand and rothbard/mises
(((austrian))) economics hasnt been relevant in what, just under a century? you retards dont even understand economics 101, fiscal/monetary policy, how debt and inflation work, and flat out deny market failure
I bet you retards don't even know picrelated lmao brainlets
Although I consider myself to be firmly anarcho-capitalist, I disagree with ~90% of the anarcho-capitalists I've met regarding property rights (in particular, on land claims).
The position I typically hear is that property rights are determined by the transformative work someone puts into an unowned piece of material, and the property rights act as an absolute defining line for who has control over it. I think this view is misguided, and is incubated by living with a state enforcer of property rights for many decades. Effectively, a monopolistic police force allows for end-all-be-all consensuses on property claims to be made, which is not how a set of competing DRO's would act.
Instead, I believe that property rights in Ancapistan will work much the same way as prices. I.e. they are ultimately subjective, and while people can easily come to an agreement about what is a ridiculous price, they can not easily come to a consensus on what is an optimal price. This is a _feature_, and not a bug of free market economics, because it allows for human desire to self-regulate human desire.
The issue with imagining an individual's property claim as objective is analogous to imagining the price a merchant sets for a good as objective. While you can objectively survey what people think a particular price should be and survey who they think should own an object, that does not make the claim itself any less subjective. (In fact, that would be the reason one falls-back to a survey in the first place.)
For example, what exactly defines "transformative work"? What if others consider themselves to have put more work in the material than you? What if others consider the work you put into the material to have made it worse? How is the conversion ratio between different kinds of work calculated?
No matter what rationalizations are used or how many steps towards property rights are inserted, subjectivity is still there. And that should be expected, because property rights themselves exist _exclusively_ within the minds of conscious beings, not as an exact physical phenomenon. Do not think I'm implying this means property rights are useless, because that would be as ridiculous as claiming food prices serve no useful purpose.
So if property rights are subjective, then how can anybody be certain that they "own" an object enough to use it? In my view, the first line of defense is common sense, but that's true with or without anarcho-capitalism. However, for more complex and higher-stakes claims, I believe there would be companies computing some sort of "ownership index" over the property, similar to how stocks are priced. This conceivably could be DRO's themselves, or a pool of arbitrators trying to efficiently come to a consensus when conflicts arise.
Chinese Election 2018
The Chinese Communist Party is about to confirm their leadership for the next five years in a two week process starting Monday. They're likely going to replace their management specialists with retards picked by Xi Jinping (who's father was a Maoist Red Guard). Their economy will come to a head some time after.
Make your bets gentlemen.
Regulation to kill 8chan
ADMIN: NEW BILL WILL AFFECT 8CHAN IF PASSED
>The House of Representatives is about to vote on a bill that would force online platforms to censor their users. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA, H.R. 1865) might sound noble, but it would do nothing to stop sex traffickers. What it would do is force online platforms to police their users’ speech more forcefully than ever before, silencing legitimate voices in the process.
>The House Rules Committee is about to approve a new version of FOSTA [.pdf] that incorporates most of the dangerous components of SESTA. This new Frankenstein’s Monster of a bill would be a disaster for Internet intermediaries, marginalized communities, and even trafficking victims themselves.
>The bill changes section 230 of the CDA, the law that protects website owners from liability for what their users post, to carve out an exception for instances of human trafficking. Site owners can be held liable and subject to a criminal fine or imprisonment for not more than 20 years.
WHAT THIS MEANS IN PRACTICE IS THAT ALL IT WOULD TAKE FOR A WEBSITE TO BE SHUT DOWN AND ITS OWNER ARRESTED IS A FALSE FLAG OPERATION OF SPOOKS ENGAGING IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING. ALL U.S. SITES WOULD BECOME FORCED TO IMPOSE EXTREMELY HEAVY-HANDED MODERATION AND CENSORSHIP OR SHUT DOWN ENTIRELY, 8CHAN INCLUDED.
THIS BILL HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND WILL LIKELY PASS UNLESS HEAVY RESISTANCE CAN BE ORGANIZED QUICKLY AND ON A LARGE SCALE.
Voting on the House Floor is scheduled for THIS TUESDAY. Start spreading this information on as many websites as you can before it's too late. If you know anyone with a large audience try and get them to spread the word.
If this bill becomes law then it's GAME OVER for free speech on the internet.
Stolen from /n/
3DPD Kills Aniki In Assassination- Covered Up As "Traffic Accident"
>Multiple people in his circle claiming him to have past away.
>This is very sad news.
>For those of you that don't know, Billy was a gay porn actor that became a big meme in Japan on Nico Nico Douga. He embraced being a meme and took on the name "Aniki" thanks to his fame.
>Most people probably won't care that much, but gachimuchi was a big meme back in the mid-late 2000's when it was at its peak, so this is very, very sad news. Billy was a classic, a legend. He will be missed greatly, and we hope the internet sends him off with plenty of top tier videos/memes, surely the way he would have wanted it.
>Aniki is reported as having been survived by his mother, wife, and two children
You can pay your respects for this great man at >>>/a/800930
>A cornerstone of /jp/ culture, a man, and a hero. Billy Herrington has passed away today in a traffic accident. Was part of many /a/ collages and will be missed by all.
SLEEP TIGHT, ANIKI!
The Sea: S.S. /liberty/
We now have the technology to have a completely self-sustaining naval vessel, could we purchase one and make it an an-cap paradise?
>The Ocean Empire Life Support Vessel is a 44m Solar Hybrid LSV with 2 Hydroponic farms and fishing facilities to harvest the sea. Her Solar Powered Propulsion Systems as well as all of the hotel amenities of a luxury global voyager are supplied by harnessing 3 major sources of Sustainable Energy.
Can someone explain to me what's up with the surge of lefties? Did /leftypol/ get busted and now they're here shitting the place up as a wicked sign of affection, or did scientists try to teach monkeys how to write?
Also, when are we gonna make a collage of them? This stupidity needs to be archived.
Q CLOWN FAG SHIT BAG EXPOSED
QANON COMPROMISED, DON'T TRUST SESSIONS
Published on Jan 22, 2018
QANON is compromised - stop contradicting me until you watch this video. Sorry, people. It's a total sham: when someone promotes a fake Podesta email as real, they lose all of my respect. Focus on what we really have- the WikiLeaks emails, the forthcoming memo. Give the egomaniac on 8chan a rest already. I don't care. And I believe the earlier Q on 4chan may have been legit, as the posts led to specific events right afterward. New Q is a Yoda wannabe wasting our time: no trust in him or her left! Time to arrest Podesta! No more puzzles or riddles! Where is SESSIONS? I don't trust him any more - not at all. Everyone is still free, FBI is totally rigged, so much time for the Clintons and Podestas to cover their tracks!
Use of force against pro-immigration advocates is morally acceptable
Objectivism states that it is morally wrong for one person to initiate force against another.
Murders committed (USA, 2016)
Whites: 4,192/(0.769 * 323,127,513) * 100,000 = 1.69 per 100,000 persons
Blacks: 4,935/(0.133 * 323,127,513) * 100,000 = 11.48 per 100,000 persons
Thus blacks are 6.79 times as likely to commit homicide as whites
Welfare use (USA, 2016)
Whites: 11,405,000/(0.769 * 323,127,513) * 100,000 = 4,590 per 100,000 persons
Blacks: 26,884,000/(0.133 * 323,127,513) * 100,000 = 62,556 per 100,000 persons
Thus blacks are 13.63 times as likely to receive welfare as whites
Use of force against persons who advance multiculturalism and immigration of non-whites into white countries is morally acceptable because it is an application of force in defense of your life and property.
Star Wars Thread
Lets face it:
>Dont be an altruistic cuck
>Fight against an invasive "democratic" empire
>use the force to make the world better
>dont bow down to the "will" of the force but use it like a tool
>dont be basically a leftist jedi living in a commune
the sith were the good guys
Blockchain and PIVX
If you value freedom… why have you not bought some PIVX yet? Why do you not accept payment with PIVX yet? Why have you not spread the good news that you can be your own private bank with PIVX, Private Instant Verified Transaction. PIVX is the Libertarian and Ancap wet dream. The Real Purple Revolution.
hello friends lets go rape and murder some people I sure do like freedom and also capitalism is pretty cool if I do say so myself. But the reason I come to you today is that I do quite enjoy roads myself, and would like to inquire about to who will go about the constructing of such roads.
A /pol/ user who was banned created a new board, >>>/zenpol/ for those disappointed with the direction /pol/ went and for freer discussion of opposing ideologies. He wants little moderation involvement with the users and hopes he can recreate the feeling of old/pol/. It's climbing fast, too. I hope some of you check it out. You can delete this if you don't want it clogging up your board
I Fucked Up
Well, /liberty/, I fucked up. Was pressing terminals at work today and the circuitboard got caught on the press. Wasn't paying attention and went to pull the circuitboard off the press without properly raising the handle into the locked position, and the weight of the press slammed it down on my middle finger had to be my favorite finger… Pretty sure I'm gonna lose the nail since it's turned about a quarter of my fingernail black, but think the finger itself is fine other than some bruising. Since I work for a small business we don't really have incident reports- your choices are go to the emergency room within 48 hours of an injury and work-accident insurance will cover it, or you're on your own. The CEO and I think it'll be fine other than the missing nail and that's whatever, been applying neosporin/keeping the wound compressed and shit to it all day, finally got around to taking some ibuprofen to bring the swelling down after waking up from an early-evening nap. Does it look particularly bad? I mean it's blacker/more bruised compared to when I took that picture around 6PM (it's 11PM now), but I can feel that pulse tingling feeling, so clearly I'm getting bloodflow through it.
The NAP is a redundant principle
I find NAP (Non-Aggression Principle) to be a bit redundant. It states that it's wrong to initiate force on to someone, more specifically to force someone into doing something. However, isn't this a violation of property rights, that being doesn't everyone own themselves? Which makes you your own property?
Commies take note
Party members lived a life of opulence compared to their worker comrades.
it is embarrassing but deep in my heart i fear that in ancap 99% of ppl will chose not to protect insects and amphibians and reptiles and many of them will go extinct outside private wildlife sanctuaries funded by wildlife enthusiasts like me
normies do not care about frogs or bugs or lizards yet i value these superficially irrelevant animals
i hope in ancap we will have many private wildlife sanctuaries but in order to achieve it wildlife enthusiasts would have to convince normies to give money into wildlife protection but normies are interested only in exploatation of wildlife- hunting, fishing, buying pets
Human Action Q&A
I just finished Human Action and I have some points that aren't super clear and I thought some helpful anons could help answer some of my questions. I didn't write what I was confused about so my questions won't be super specific. Sorry for being brainlet.
>Profit and Entrepreneurial Profit
Not really totally sure how they're different. I know Mises differentiated between economic and psychic profit, is this a similar sort of thing in that there is general profit and then there is strictly the entrepreneurial profit of business that is collected by the entrepreneur and distributed to himself and the shareholders?
>Monopolies do not earn profits.
I remember reading something like this and it seemed strange, am I mistaken or is this the case because that monopolies don't serve the traditional entrepreneurial role or for some other reason?
How does credit expansion affect the interest rates as opposed to inflationary and deflationary policies? Credit expansion seems to lower the rate of interest but deflation seems to raise it which seems strange to me because if deflation increased the value of money I would think that it would also lower interest rates.
>Non-neutrality of money
Mises describes how inflation affects prices unevenly but I am still a little unclear exactly how it does this.
>Consumption of capital goods
I just don't get this like in general, how do you consume capital goods? By just letting them deteriorate or something?
>The role of theory and empirical evidence
Mises critiques the mathematical economist and econometric for their reliance on empirical data that can only describe economic history but I was wondering if that Mises considered empirical evidence useful for proving or demonstrating economic theories. He doesn't seem to oppose it completely but I was wondering to what extent can historical or empirical data be used in economics according to Mises.
If a country embarks on credit expansion by issuing money substitutes or credit money (or something) then the gold reserves of the nation will flow out of the country leaving only the worthless bank notes. I remember this being brought up but the specifics were lost on me. I am also shaky about the differences between fiduciary media, money substitutes, bank notes, and commodity money and how they effect the market economy.
>be in ancap paradise
>be fucking my child slaves
>neighboors formed a pretty armed militia, raiders can fuck off
>live is good
>raiders invading again
>this time it's different
>they better armed than us
>and more experienced than us
>we get massacred
>they rape all our women
>enslave our children
>kill all of my friends
>such is life before civilization/in anarco-captalism
AnCom vs AnCap Debate with Actual Philosophers and Intellectuals
Would anyone like to see an actual debate between Anarchist philosophers. Most of the debates I have seen between AnComs and AnCaps have been between "amateurs" to say the least. It seems like kind of a shame because there are really influential thinkers on both sides and it would be an interesting watch.
The topics could include the ethics of capitalism, tactics for achieving a stateless society, economic calculation problem, problems with democratic unions, etc.
I can think of a team made up of Hans Herman Hoppe, Jeffrey Tucker, and David Friedman vs Noam Chomsky, Slavoj Zizek, and one other influential left anarchist if leftypol wants to make a suggestion.You could also use more intermediate thinkers like Tom Woods or Lew Rockwell for the AnCap side with whoever the left wants to add.
For real fun you could have a celebrity match up with the likes of Alan Moore and Dan Harmon vs Glenn Jacobs and Penn Jillette or something. Thoughts?
>natsoc economy is flawless
i want to end this lie can we share information about Natsoc germany economic policies and their consequences?
so why exactly is stirner popular amongst leftists? he is so far away from their collectivist cuckoldry that his argument against property is based on individual defense of it. his whole schtick is antileftist. their equality shit is an easily definable spook since it is based on an obsession about others. are leftists just retarded?
ITT: Road to Your Ideology
Story time about how you came to be where you are now ideologically.
>fancied myself a democratic socialist/libertarian socialist, didn't actually really understand these terms
>subscribed to a lot of people on youtube in the "skeptic community" and that opened my eyes on a lot of the social issues of the time (feminism mostly, theism before that)
>never really got any of my views questioned before this
>did subscribe to more right-wing channels, though they tended to talk about a lot of the same stuff as the more center-left people
>not a fan of hillary, not a fan of trump, though i didn't think he was the big bad liberals made him out to be
>grew to like trump but only because i believed he was an outsider
>bernie shows up
>becomes huge bernie fan, people i was subscribed to reinforced this
>sometime around here, started watching videos from more libertarian-minded people
>bernie gets fucked, say fuck it and climb onto the trump train
>starts getting more and more redpilled about economics over time
>100% certain trump would win and make america great again
>election cycle a few months from ending, leaning heavily towards libertarianism, but not full ancap yet
>trump wins, although not as avid of a trump supporter anymore, really happy it was trump over hillary
>time goes on, still giggling at the salty lefties
>starts becoming more and more ancap, but has some faith in trump
>ive got no more excuses
>goes full ancap
I know it wasn't very exciting at all but I thought I'd share. Feel free to share your own stories.
I have a genuine question occasioned by the recent shooting and the relation of its consequences with politics.
Liberals, the left, want gun ban in general (some talk about "gun control" but that would lead to a ban),
while conservatives and the right don't claiming thats it's a mental health issue and not weapon control.
Given the fact that your constitution gives you the right to have weapons to resist a fascist gonverment, surely it would be the far right that would support a supposed coup (and lack of defence for the people) and the communist rebels would need weapons to resist.But…..it is reversed.
The right doesn't want refugees in the USA because they are terrorists, while the left does. When a terrorist attack happens the left says that it was mental problems and not religion, while the right opposes that argument. Here liberals use the same argument as the conservatives in the previous point.
I would appreciate if someone could tell how you end up with so tangled politics?
Disclaimer: I abstain from political games, I am just curious. I will post this in /pol , /leftypol and /polk.
Why RUSSIA SPECIFICALLY?
They were the GO-BETWEEN FOR NUKES TO NK…the longer they keep this narrative, the more time they have to strengthen their military….YES…."Their Military"….Hussein and all the rest of them!!
THIS WAS THE INSURANCE POLICY!!!
Keeping the COLLUSION "front and center" puts POTUS a "CATCH 22" situation in terms of PR ….
IF he goes to Russia…he's guilty…. and that's what they'll scream at the top of their lungs….
These people are really stupid….
They did it the absolute madman
Debunking austrian "economics"
austrian economics debunked (redpill overdose)
TRIGGER WARNING: FACTS AHEAD!!
>gold standard is unstable and not a viable currency, susceptible to fraud and dependent upon mining
>they are openly anti-scientific, rely on "praxeology", they are philosopher at best
>dumb ideology funded by koch brothers think tanks (CATO) to convince ignorant armchair economists
>every prediction they had is proven wrong
>they business cycle theory is wrong
>they don't use scientific method, no maths, no statistics, nothing, just speculation
>only used as political rhetoric by ron paul to rile up his gadsen-flag hillbilly voterbase
>all of peter schiff's predictions are wrong, he has been preaching doomsday for decades
>mainstream economics agrees with less than half of their policy
>literally no respects austrian economists today, abandoned as early as 1950's
>only good thing to come out of it was Hayek, who wasn't even Austrian since he rejects praxeology. He contributed to price theory, and added to the socialist calculation problem. Also his philosophy is superior and way more nuanced compared to mises/rothbard.
how do you retards explain the failures of thatcher and reagan?
free markets are the cause of world hunger poverty starvation and disease,
also a danger to democracy
Economic idiot here, conventional economists call deflation the devil, but what are the real reasons why it wouldn't be workable? The argument is that money won't be spent if it grows in spending power over time but that seems to ignore that the average person wants to spend money on goods and services regardless. The core of the idea would affect investment but couldn't lenders just set up negative interest rates such that the borrower never pays more than the original amount of the loan, which would eliminate usury, and the payback for the risk of lending is to split the profit of the investment?
I live in the EU, aka bureaucracy hell.
Every time my business go well, the EU comes up with some new shitty regulation. One day there will be so many regulations that we will be de fact a communist union, and only big, state funded, sharia-compatible corporations will exist.
Therefore I'm thinking that I should start doing politics and destroy the system from within.
My plan is the following:
>join a political party
>found a classical liberal political association to gather members who sees me as a leader
>get a degree in some meme thing that gets you a comfy government job, like economics or political science
>produce content in mass full of free market propaganda, especially in the military
>get a comfy government job
>always put my people in position of power
>get elected in the parliament but never as prime minister
>maybe even get a position in the senate
>die without having accomplished anything but with the account full of stolen taxpayers money, having wasted my life doing politics instead of producing valuable things as I'm doing today
How shitty is my plan from 0 to shiggity?
ps. went classical liberal and not full ancap because society isn't ready for it. They'll never know my true identity
MY NAME IS MISES AND I GOTTA SAY
IF YOURE A COMMIE, STAY THE HELL AWAY
THESE RHYMES ARE PURPOSEFUL, LIKE HUMAN ACTION
MY BEAT'S A LOWERED INTEREST RATE; YOUR REP'S THE MARKET REACTION
MY A PRIORI ASSERTIONS AND METHODOLOGICAL DUALISM
CREATE CONCISE PROOFS THAT DUNK ON YOUR STATISM
MY RADICAL SUBJECTIVISM REJECTS NUMERICAL STATISTICS
PROOFS, EXPLANATIONS: MY METHODOLOGY IS PURE PRAX, HETERODOX LOGISTICS
THINK MY CALCULATION PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED WITH A "SUPERCOMPUTER"?
I THINK OF YOU AS HIGHLY AS AYN RAND THINKS OF A LOOTER
YOU'RE SO FUCKED YOU MIGHT AS WELL HAVE ASKED A FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANK FOR A LOAN
EVERYBODY OWNS THEMSELVES, BUT YOUR BEATS ARE JUST A SELF OWN
MY TIME PREFERENCE IS SO LOW GETTING OWNED BY ME IS A CIVILIZING PROCESS
THAT CAPITAL ACCUMULATION IS THE BASIS OF HUMAN PROGRESS
YOUR RHYMES REMIND ME OF GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE IN A RECESSION
A CONTINUED DISASTER AS MALINVESTMENT ONLY CREATES THE NEXT DEPRESSION
YOU SAY THE LOGIC OF CAPITAL HINGES ON THE STATE'S DEFENSE OF THE MARKETPLACE
I SAY GOVERNMENT AINT SOME SUPERSTRUCTURE CONTINGENT ON ITS ECONOMIC BASE
GOVERNMENT INTERFERES WITH THE MARKET, EVERY REGULATION IS AN INEVITABLE DISTORTION
CLEAR PRICE-COORDINATION THROWN OFF TRACK BY THIS CORPORATIST CONTORTION
BUT THE ANTI CAPITALISTIC MENTALITY CONTINUES TO SEETHE IN ITS ENVY
THE PRICE OF POLITICAL IGNORANCE IS A VERY REAL ECONOMIC FEE
MORALIZING RHETORICANS AND ORTHODOX ECONOMISTS SHAKE THEIR FISTS
ALL I GOTTA SAY IS: YOURE ALL A BUNCH OF SOCIALISTS
I thought I'd never have cause to bring up /cow/ related stuff on this board, but apparently this guy scammed Steve "Minsky rules Neoclassicals drool" Keen out of his web domain. Now that the dust has begun to settle from the YouTube Skeptic™ implosion, I invite you all to join us in laughing at both of these faggots.
>sign a contract, which can be changed randomely by the goverment, as it was historically
>prenub parts in the future might just be ignored, when some future goverment will just change marriage again, prenubs already are pretty worthless
>allow your wife to live independent of you, but still dependent on your money, if she leaves you, which is a complete reversal of the natural order
>no fault divorce means that she can break the contract by for example cheating on you, but it doesn't count legally
>the law about martial rape that if she wants to, she can accuse you of rape and the fact that she is your wife will not be considered for the accusation
>you automatically are the father for every kid she births and you need her consent for a parternity test
>if she leaves you, she not only gets to continue to live dependent on you, but she also gets half of your stuff, even if she didn't have anything to do with it
>the definition of marriage has changed so much that it's purely a legal construct and doesn't represent the most ancient social institution at all anymore
>this all doesn't even take into account any children you might have had with the women and how the courts and goverments favour the mother in most case
And left wing faggots have the NERVE to talk about how our culture is "shifting". That monogamy is unrealistic, because apes have orgies all the time. And women are SO independent and free now and marriage was basically just a tool to oppress them.
Incentives trump culture. Or else obviously we wouldn't be in so much of a mess.
So even if you find that traditional woman, you marry in her early 20s or younger it will still not make marriage a good idea.
Her just witnessing the break up or divorce of one of her friend's couples will significantly increase the likelyhood of you divorcing.
So, do you see now why marriage is not a good idea? Do not get married. No, not even a prenup. It's not worth it.
Call it marriage if you want, but don't get legally married.
You are consenting to a contract, which can randomely get changed without your consent and gives heavy incentives for the woman to immideatly move on the moment she stops loving you completly.
Operation Information Liberation
Operation Information Liberation *CROSSPOST*
>Hey guys, starting a new project on pol, looking for any and all relevant content to this project. I'll be going through to catalog, but anything from your personal archives or resources off site that wouldn't be here, and I would be mucho appreciadado!
The online digital age has rendered institutionalized education obsolete and has left them exposed as the detriments to society that they have become.
Colleges no longer exist to educate, but to indoctrinate. And to add insult to injury, we're paying through the nose for the right to have our youth
brainwashed against us by these narcissistic ingrates.
This is a project that, in time, will be cross-posted across numerous boards, platforms & media, taking participation from numerous communities with Truth
being our guiding light and uniting purpose.
This project is designed to provide and highlight alternatives to mainstream universities, or at least offer an inoculation against the Marxist intellectual
contagion perpetuated by these Institutions of Higher Indoctrination.
For the fields that can't just be done online, and require some sort of hard infrastructure, like a chemistry lab, we may want to consider utilizing, or
copying the Maker Space route of community educational facilities.
We will need to find alternatives to acreditation.
This project will also need an accompanying meme campaign to get Normans, especially in the hiring class to associate a traditional college degree with risk.
Risk that the person will be some sort of entitled SJW. Risk that they may file false sexual harrasment claims (Humungus). Risk that they may be incompetent
at their job.
The Class of 2018 graduates in May. I imagine high-schools will be having college days, fliers, trips, speakers, recruiters, field days, etc throughout March
and April. When that begins, I'd like to see this project ready enough to print out business cards with the links and downloads for all the resources and
content we'll be compiling.
Below is a compendium of resources I put together thus far.
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=R3Ovrhrf9BQ - Jack Otto - Forbidden Knowledge
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=j800SVeiS5I - In Shadow - A Modern Oddesey
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=PRdcZSuCpNo - 7 Days of DeepMind A.I.
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=cRuKmxQSPSw - Dutch Banker Ronald Bernard - Interview
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=sD33byzG2jc - Behold a Pale Horse - AudioBook
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=VL_7nAIa0Cg - Bloodlines of Illuminate - AudioBook
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=fj-10lIrboM - Tool - Right In Two
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=icAjo9VXKZU - Protocol Of The Elders Of Zion
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=e0C_qG5U7pE - Black Ops, Cody Snodgres, Operator Comes Forward And Tells All
https://www.hooktube.com/user/MrTeslonian - Mr Teslonian - Alternative Energy & Technology
https://www.hooktube.com/user/crashcourse - Crash Course - Normie Friendly Education Channel (Only For Tech and Sci)
https://www.hooktube.com/channel/UCG-fzkzsubdFQLvco0w5w_A - "- Timaeus -" - Wide Ranging History Channel
https://www.hooktube.com/user/BrightAgrotechLLC - Bright Agrotech Aquaponics - Alt-Ag Tech
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=dpENi0T3Zeo&list=PLAPahqrfGZZmUNzrQV0ZwKjUrmqq-Stqh - Aquaponics Academy Playlist
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=KxTfQpv8xGA - Polyface Farms - Sustainable & Organic Agriculture
https://www.hooktube.com/channel/UCbYFhcKSE2mWYB0yD_Qr_8A - Urban Gardener - Subsistence Alt-Ag For Cities
https://www.hooktube.com/user/radmycology/videos - Radical Mycology - Fungi, Mushrooms and Mycelium
https://www.hooktube.com/user/seasteading - Voluntary Seasteading Communities
http://www.virology.ws/course - Vincent Racaniello
HRH's /monarchy/ embassy
Hello, diplomat from /monarchy/ here.
I've been noticing an increasing cross-pollination between /liberty/ and /monarchy/ posters recently, and thought it might be worthwhile to bring up threads or posts that might be to /liberty/'s interest. If I see any ancap, consitutionalism, capitalism/economics, or any other threads that you say you might be interested in (fwiw, please mention your interests) that are posted in /monarchy/, then I'll be sure to post them here. Also, if there are any issues or comments about /monarchy/ posters on /liberty/ or /liberty/ posters on /monarchy/, this might be a decent place to note that here. If a poster from /liberty/ wants to do the same sort of thread in /monarchy/, I'm sure it would be appreciated.
An initial list of threads that might be interesting:
The pair of threads that prompted making this post:
This is an exchange regarding anarchism and monarchism. The syncretic ancap-monarchism position and Hoppe got mentioned briefly:
An exchange regarding the guild system. The economics of it got discussed only briefly. It might be interesting for a /liberty/ poster to mention more fully.
Likewise for mercantilism:
Can we make Somalia into Ancapistan? They've established the NAP on a fief level.
>After years of being split into fiefdoms, the main Somali warlords established an agreement to appoint a new president in 2004. However, this plan failed when Islamist insurgents, including the radical youth militia al-Shabaab who had links to Al-Qaeda, gained control over much of southern Somalia from 2006 to 2008. With the assistance of international peace keeping offensives and the Kenyan army, the Islamist insurgents were forced to withdraw in 2012. In the same year, the first formal parliament in over 20 years was appointed in Somalia. The newly formed parliament chose Hassan Sheikh Mohamud as the new president in September 2012. With international assistance, the Somali government has been able to rebuild itself and the country has been relatively more stable recently. Since 2013, Somalia has retained a polity score of five and is listed as an open anocracy.
If capitalism is a good thing, why is it universally hated in Eastern Europe? I am from Ukraine, a country where to the vast majority of people, capitalism is a synonym for poverty, homelessness, and war.
I personally don't know a single person who believes anything positive came out of the restoration of capitalism. I also don't know anyone who wouldn't want socialism back.
How do you reconcile this with your ideology? It's not just Ukraine, but almost every Eastern European country, with the exception of Poland. And it's not just 55%, or 60% who miss socialism. It's 80%, 70%, and other overwhelming majorities.
Ancaps and Libertarians believe in the supreme power of the free market to make everything work out, but how can that happen when buying on credit breaks supply and demand?
When people can freely take out a loan at basically any time, they're basically just being enabled to buy things that they can't afford. These things are more likely than not to be luxury items like nice new cars or big houses, because people who can't afford basic necessities generally can't get approved for a credit card or loan. So when lots of people are getting loans to buy these luxury items, it skews the market toward expensive, high-end luxury items and away from basic necessities. This causes the price of those necessities to increase, which means that everyone in all of society has to pay an increased amount to support themselves.
Additionally, because these loans are almost always ill-advised (the relatively few people who shrewdly take maximum advantage of credit card bonus points and loan interest rates lower than investment return rates are effectively being subsidized by other people making poor choices), the entire industry is basically built to exploit market inefficiency without actually contributing anything. And on top of that, because fractional reserve lending causes inflation that's focused at first in specific markets before radiating out, it's a prime factor contributing to economic bubbles, an existential threat to the free market. Together, this means that the most effective method of lending is a pump-and-dump: create imaginary money by making a larger pie, use that money to buy physical assets (belonging to a separate pie that isn't increased by lending), and laugh at the filthy plebeians when the bubble pops and they're left with worthless paper and you have valuable land and products.
How do you propose to protect ancapistan from the specter of usury? Certainly, the lack of a central government to enforce property rights will help, since it will discourage people from making exorbitant and/or conspicuous purchases and presumably reduce the scale of businesses and making lending riskier, but there is no mechanism by which it's possible to place limits on the ability of banks to fuck everything up without so much as a vestigial state.
Money is just a way for people to vote on everything, all the time: should more bread be produced, or apples, or cars? What do you do when people would vote against prosperity and freedom, given the opportunity?
How do you chaps feel about this particular individual?
>hates the government
>hates democracy and modern civilization
>hates capitalism and socialism
>hates liberals and the alt-right
>advocates for people to live in tribal communities of around 100 individuals, using only sustainable technology
I think you could best describe him as an anarcho-tribalist.
Personally I think he makes a more compelling argument than the teenagers at /pol/ do, I never imagined his videos would make so much sense from a libertarian perspective.
Political parties ultimately contribute to what's wrong with democracy, but they are good for garnering publicity. Since the Libertarian Party recently cucked itself into oblivion, what would you name your new party, if you had one? If you say soy party I'll fucking kill you
The /pol/acks want to start their colonies around the world, why don't we plan for our own promised land?
If an initial amount of 100 of us got together, how and where could we make Ancapistan exist and what would encourage you, personally, to leave the life you have and move over there? Surely a place to live, work and do business without any interference from the state would be attractive enough already to a lot of people, so I'm not sure if it's necessary to shill for it, but it's not really an economy until we get about 10 000 people living there.
I had an epiphany on why reverse harems are shit that doesn't rely on the age old key and lock example, /liberty/, a social reason that ties into biology but more importantly is social-based regarding independence and how we rely on one another. See, men don't rely on each other when distributing a task as a team, we rely on each man or unit to accomplish his individual task like a simple machine to accomplish the complex machine's purpose. Similarly, the real difference between a harem and reverse harem is whether you are being, relied on or relying on everyone else. This is the true reason that a reverse harem is shit, and goes far deeper than biological sex. It's not power of sex (though that certainly takes some value in the equation), but power of independence and the desire to accomplish one's own goals that drive man to work together and to the desire a harem at a subconscious level. Man wants to be relied on to fulfill with his own power, not to rely on others in co-dependence whether it's relationships or work teams! This is what separates the plebian man child from the true man!
Get a load of this thread
Back to the whole super computer myth again. Anon thinks computers trading stocks can plan the economy. Top kek!
So we all agree here that liberty and freedom are desirable, that's what we want. So let me start from there.
Basically my argument is that the only thing that can guarantee your freedom, is force/might/violence. Your freedom is not guaranteed by any moth eaten scrolls, or rotting statesmen, or anything in this life. Judges can basically rape you for a parking ticket, cops can murder you, banks can take over everything you owned 1 second ago and it doesnt even matter where you live because at least one of those happened there.
Whether you drown or swim across the ocean depends on your own force, the universe doesnt take any other currency. Whether a hungry bear eats you alive or you apply enough stopping power to stop it, depends only on the amount of force you have. Whether you are a criminal or not, depends only on the force of the state to catch you, because getting caught is the only thing all sentenced criminals share, not murder or theft or even innocence because there is at least 1 example of them getting away or being wrongly sentenced. Getting caught is the only crime. Taxation is theft, and yet the state gets away with it because of its force, meaning everything is legal as long as you can enforce it, only crime is not having enough force.
Force is the fundamental unit of justice, and military, and economy, and diplomacy, and politics, and philosophy, and morality, because if you are "right" but cant enforce your rightness, how the fuck are you even right, or what is the difference between being right or wrong when you dont have the force to enforce one over the other?
If you love/want personal liberty,
you must obtain force, that is your purpose, just obtaining force.
And if joining communism/antifa/police force/nazis/nationalists/whatever, you should do it.
The Presumption of Liberty
David Boaz writes in The Libertarian Mind, "Libertarians believe in the presumption of liberty. That is, libertarians believe people ought to be free to live as they choose unless advocates of coercion can make a compelling case. It's the exercise of power, not the exercise of freedom, that requires justification." Why is this so hard for authoritarians to understand?
Investing in Hasbro
Hi fellow 8channers,
I contacted my local rabbi, Ghost from True Capitalist Radio, to open up a new stock trading account after the crash.
From listening to his broadcast, I chose to invest in Hasbro/My Little Pony stocks.
Every time a weaboo purchases a My Little Pony toy from Target, it puts a little extra cash in your boy Atlantic's wallet.
INVEST IN ITS EVERYDAY HASBRO NAO!! MAKE LOADSAPONE!!!
problems of liberty
Does it bother anyone else that freedom is normally popular only as a slogan and only rarely as a real existing condition of human organization?
That is, people often pass up the opportunity for meaningful freedom simply because it lacks the immediate short-term benefits of another system even though such benefits could be attained relatively easily if not for the paradoxical lack of supporters. A concrete example being the seeming acceptance for online platforms and discussion boards controlled by hotpockets and rulefags which, despite their inability to stop users from leaving, seem to continue existing by sheer inertia and because "that's where all the traffic is."
If the majority of humanity finds itself in a natural state of submission to authority, why support liberty and freedom? Why not seek power for oneself or at least a benevolent form of dictatorship?
/pol/ boards either collude with Cuban Communist Party or MLB companies
Everytime I attempt to post an explanation on why Fidel Castro clearly faked his death to become a professional baseball player and how the media is pushing their lies about his "death" because it suits their agenda, I get banned from the board. This has happened on both 4chan's /pol/ board and 8chan's /pol/ board.
What the fuck is even going on? Are the boards secretly owned by members of the Cuban Communist Party or MLB companies that wish to suppress the truth?
KANSAS CITY PRIVATIZES SIDEWALKS
Trump memo on Russia investigation released, showing complete conflict of interest within the FBI and its basis on unverified hearsay.
What's /liberty/'s opinion?
Where does /liberty/ keep its money? I've got a Roth IRA for long-term interests, mostly in international emerging markets, but I'm looking to grab something a little more high-yield once the inevitable stock market correction comes along. Bitcoin's high price seems attractive at first but is almost certainly an inflated meme. Any advice?
During the inevitable upcoming U.S. civil war, how should we treat captured commies and nazis?
Helicopter memes aside, we capitalists, libertarians and conservatives are the last voice of reason. If we fall, America as we know it ceases to exist.
What should the militia's policy be regarding PoWs?
>chieftain says he has ownership over this land and a right to tribute because of his ancestors and any resistance is immoral; this is considered theft and aggression by ancaps
>the king says he has ownership over this land and a right to taxes because God or the gods and any resistance is immoral; this is considered theft and aggression by ancaps
>the medieval warlord says he has ownership over this land and a rights to taxes because he conquered it and any resistance is immoral; this is considered theft and aggression by ancaps
>the liberal democratic state says it has ownership over this land and a right to taxes because of elections and the social contract and any resistance is immoral; this is considered theft and aggression by ancaps
>the landlord says he has ownership over this land and a right to rent because he or someone he inherited or bought it from first fenced it in (or some other type of labor) and any resistance is immoral; this is considered legitimate and any resistance is in fact considered immoral by ancaps
See, "an"caps and actual anarchists have a lot in common, we just maintain consistency and a genuine desire for freedom by thinking the last one is also theft and aggression, and that you can't just change the arbitrary justification for property in order to legitimize it.
These are all spooks and mean nothing. An ideology consisting of Blood & Soil featuring Cyberpunk is the only rational conclusion that can be drawn from looking at the current state of affairs.
I got a simple question for you:
As which ideology do you identify?
Which name would you give your political ideology?
I myself identify as an individualist ultraminarchist, little less anarchist than ancap but completely focused on the individual.
Oh, and another question:
What's your view on the age of consent?
I myself think it should be abolished and instead every single questionable case should be checked by a psychologist whether they knew what they were doing and if it was consensual.
I think consensual intercourse should always be legal, regardless of age.
>what if the child consents tho?
Testing our economic theories
Are there any games, with a decent in-game economy, with which to test out our theories? Perhaps even to be on the same server with a few cats from /leftypol? This article on Minecraft made me wonder about this.
Beta test of political chat - taking suggestions also
Need liberty-oriented audience for political-pairing
Copypasta from /pol/ and /leftypol/:
How it works:
All 14 positions are currently divided into 4 camps hostile to each other to the point a discussion can be had. I would recommend LARPing for a start if your queue is more than a minute since potential disbalance could occur. Once you get into a chat, it's pretty similar to omegle. 2 escapes to cancel a chat, 3 to return to "home". What the "A" button does I will let you figure out for yourself (see second webm).
This part is for /tech/:
If you generally like it, I will make a simle app that optimizes the website for android and put it out there to reach more mainstream political positions. If it ever gets popular to the point where it could sustain itself, I'll get a dedicated server for it and introduce websockets which would introduce "the other user is typing" and instant responses (overall, smoother experience). I will also add the news sections, elaborations on positions etc. If you have any questions, do ask.
Researchers teach monkeys how to use money
When taught to use money, a group of capuchin monkeys responded quite rationally to simple incentives; responded irrationally to risky gambles; failed to save; stole when they could; used money for food and, on occasion, sex.
It took several months of rudimentary repetition to teach the monkeys that these tokens were valuable as a means of exchange for a treat and would be similarly valuable the next day. Having gained that understanding, a capuchin would then be presented with 12 tokens on a tray and have to decide how many to surrender for, say, Jell-O cubes versus grapes. This first step allowed each capuchin to reveal its preferences and to grasp the concept of budgeting.
Then Chen introduced price shocks and wealth shocks. If, for instance, the price of Jell-O fell (two cubes instead of one per token), would the capuchin buy more Jell-O and fewer grapes? The capuchins responded rationally to tests like this – that is, they responded the way most readers of The Times would respond. In economist-speak, the capuchins adhered to the rules of utility maximization and price theory: when the price of something falls, people tend to buy more of it.
Perhaps the most distinguishing characteristic of money, after all, is its fungibility, the fact that it can be used to buy not just food but anything. During the chaos in the monkey cage, Chen saw something out of the corner of his eye that he would later try to play down but in his heart of hearts he knew to be true. What he witnessed was probably the first observed exchange of money for sex in the history of monkeykind. (Further proof that the monkeys truly understood money: the monkey who was paid for sex immediately traded the token in for a grape.)
Surely nobody here likes using Horseshoe theory, right? You're not mentally challenged, are you?
I've raised a objection to this but I never get a reply so I'll repost it as a whole thread as last resort.
>Horseshoe is just a means of focusing on things that are important to you
>Communists would use horseshoe theory to focus on how Libertarians and Fascists are not interested in fixing the wealth disparities caused by Capitalism
>Left Libertarians would note how they actually reduce the rules of society whereas authoritarians don't and Right Libertarians only are against authoritarianism as long as its agaisnt the government, but don't care about rules imposed by the owner of property, so someone that owns a road can order you to do anything while you are in it.
I didn't even think too hard about it, joke theory.
>Right libertarians, I think you know how you feel about left and right authoritarianism
(Why is there no anarcho-transhumanist flag?)
It seems to me that technology is the only way to achieve true anarchism. I know a lot of anarcho-transhumanists/antechs are leftist, but honestly technology could lead to the means of production becoming robots that are cryptographically verified as belonging to you, so private property would be able to defend itself. Capitalism is an economic technology itself. I think in the future, we could all be capitalists and design shit and then use our personal robot workers to make stuff to sell to each other, in a totally mutual capitalist economy, and there would also be a lot of things people could make with 3D printers/additive manufacturing machines once they get really advanced. Sounds absurd now, but with how fast companies in China are automating shit, it's the long term trend and it seems like it's not super far off now. Some statists are starting to use this to argue for ubi or even communism, but I think the end of direct work will actually involve widespread advancement into everyone being capitalistic. Even now a lot of people work from their computers, a means of production they own.
Another thing is that with full automation welfare wouldn't be needed, because charity would become exponential (sort of, it would be limited by resources and land obviously), since as soon as you can get a human level robot and a super-advanced 3D printer, you get free income from the capital you own, and can then use that to gather resources and energy to build more robots, so everyone's living standards would shoot way up, and things would get pretty comfy.
The primary sticking block to anarcho-capitalism is that most people are too weak for it, but with technology that could change, because things would be a lot cheaper, and there would be high levels of automation, but potentially down the line due to transhumanism meaning that rugged individualism doesn't involve a massive culling of people who aren't rugged enough for it. That's the only way I can see the majority of the public eventually coming round to anarcho-capitalism and slowly abandoning statism, because most people want to be free, they are just too weak and frightened to be anything but slaves to politicians.
Obviously, wealth inequality would increase massively with transhumanism, but none of that shit matters if living standards as a whole rise massively, and the incapable are able to gain new capabilities through technology.
So, I think we'll have to wait a while until an anarchist society is likely, but in the meantime we should probably make sure that we at least push back against centralized militaristic government so that we don't get some kind of skynet scenario due to the military industrial complex. Statism would make AI more dangerous because it would centralize it and put in control of more things, leaving no counterbalancing intelligence. The libertarian party should probably promote upcoming technologies as solutions to the government problem. If you think about it, cryptocurrencies and existing (if shitty) 3D printers are just the start of that movement. That's going to be the successful way of getting libertarianism to be popular, in preparation for future technologies that make take us to anarchy.
We definitely shouldn't let commies monopolize the full automation meme, otherwise they'll be positioned politically to take over later in this Century.
/liberty/'s own website
Also for The Book of /liberty/
Instead of waiting for months for a new book, now we have a website. Although I'm not the anon who originally had this idea, I'd still like to read the articles.
If you have a github account, open a pull request. If you just want your article published, post it ITT, I'll upload it. You can also message me at github or create a new paste at gist.github.com .
My git page : https://github.com/checkyourpremises
Because we're writing everything in markdown, I can generate a pdf out of this and host it on github. The website is hosted for free.
If someone can post the pdf of the ollllder books, that'd be great.
Markdown is the format in which you write documents. The site generator automatically converts them to webpages. Markdown is exactly like comment formatting here.
I don't care if it's a half-assed article, just post something. Everything can be sorted into categories first and the final articles can be pruned from the huge list.
What I am NOT going to do is put up links for pirated content on the website, or post copyrighted articles. I object to it morally, and it's get our website kicked for violating the terms of service. ALso, I'm not very comfortable with the idea of the website being used as a source for piracy. If you want to share links, do it on /liberty/ and not on the website.
>"I'll post some Loli here, that'll show them!"
>"Haha, if I post a tenth of my porn folder, then the board looks degenerate! Joke's on them!"
>"Wait, he's making me aware of performance failure in argumentation… that's dishonest!"
Meanwhile, most of us stayed extremely polite throughout (for imageboard standards), posted books and articles, and defined our terms.
Someone just explain this mentality to me, preferably the statists and socialists themselves. It looks like they're trying to troll, but at the same time, they seem to be on some kind of mission. Back when I was a little shit trying to do that - when I was sixteen -, I was more goal oriented than that. I even reverted to trying to argue in good faith, but I don't see any of that in our visitors.
Be that as it may, in two weeks, they'll all be gone, we will go back to having good discussions again, and will only remember this as another instance of statistst acting extremely antisocial in their defense of not being antisocial.
Nebraska senator proposes sovereignty to boost businesses
>Nebraska State Senator Paul Schumacher [R-22] [(402) 471-2715] has proposed an amendment to the state constitution that would create 36-square-mile regions in the state where corporations would enjoy up to 99 years of sovereignty, with "no city or state taxes and no local or state regulations."
>These states-within-a-state would be confined to sparsely populated regions with fewer than 10 people per square mile.
>This presents an opportunity, he said, to essentially "have your own state."
Are you ready?
Feeling depressed, anybody wanna subscribe to my youtube channel and watch me inject Dr. pepper into my hand?
Because that's what I'm about to do right now. I'm going to inject Dr. Pepper in my hand.
Anyway, check out my video while I get this picture taken.
Questions For /liberty/
Is Ancapistan compatible with white identity and a white ethno state? I only ask as most Ancaps/Libertarians are either open borders proponents or only believe in private property lines. To me at least it would make sense for Ancaps and Libertarians be for white identity, as almost every Ancap and Libertarian is white. Whether or not this because of IQ differences, enviroment, or both it doesn't matter. How can Ancapistan be kept white with a small government or none at all? While it's true our governments are in charge of immigration policy and border security, and they're doing a terrible job at it. However, this would be ignoring corporations interest in flooding the labor market and depressing wages.
Also if Communism is against human nature, wouldn't Anarchism be against human nature? According to Aristotle, man is a political animal and it's not hard to see why. Since the dawn of cavemen, there have been leaders and followers. How can thousands of years of governments be thrown away, when men desire to rule and be ruled?
Let's have a thread about democracy. If a group of patriotic libertarians somehow overthrows the dictator of their country in a coup and gives their people liberties, but the people were all rulecucks who voted for rules, then what's the point of giving them democracy? What's the point of giving people the freedom to vote if your country is full of communists, fascists and radical centrists who will vote against freedom? Isn't it better to force liberty onto them?
I know that this is a great heresy, but how else can we high IQ patricians expect the low IQ rabble to choose what's good for themselves if not by resorting to a libertarian God-Emperor to force them to be free? It's like expecting children to know what's good for the family and asking them to make all the important decisions in place of their parents.
Monopoly of Force
Someone mentioned the monopoly of force in another thread. He was just shitposting, yet this topic is important enough to warrant a response. So, I decided to make a thread about this.
The argument linked to the monopoly of force goes like this: If you don't have an entity with a monopoly of force - the state -, then it will be a war of all against all. And that's about it, the argument didn't get better since Hobbes made it. In fact, Hobbes made it better than most. He actually came up with premises to support his conclusion. Most people just jump straight to the conclusion, which makes it hard to really criticize them, unlike Hobbes, who clearly oversaw a few flaws in his idea. Mainly, if they require to enter a social contract before they're able to cooperate, then how do they enter said social contract without the ability to cooperate? The ability to cooperate is necessary to enter and uphold the social contract, so the social contract cannot be a requirement for cooperation.
This brings me to the fact that the monopoly of force is a legal fiction. It does not describe the actual status quo. It is evident, for one, that everyone is still physically capable of using force, including in ways that are prohibited by the state. How well armed everoyne is compared to the state does not change that. We can still push each other off stairs, beat old people, steal from stores, and so on. To believe that the government took away this ability is delusional.
There are two ways in which the government can interfere, of course, if we do it anyway: With preventive or retributive force. However, the government doesn't have enough resources to prevent every possible aggression, so there must be something else preventing them. Clearly, people are peaceful by default, at least in our current society. Most of them don't think about aggression, even when no enforcers are in sight, because most of the time, no enforcers are in sight. It would do good to remember that for every theft detected by the government, a good ten aren't. I'm not talking about Africa here, but about Western Europe. Most crimes are not detected at all, and when they are, it's because private citizens are giving witness to them. And lest somebody say that the citizens only do that because the government is on their side: The right of self defense is still a thing. People actually do defend themselves and their property with force, and the government knows it. In the US, guns are used in self defense between a half and three million times a year:
As for retribution, like I said, most crimes are not detected at all. When they are, they seldom get punished. Even with homicides, the number is surprisingly low. The purpose of punishment is not so much to eliminate criminals as it is to demonstrate that the law is still valid. Clearly, then, what it requires is that there is a law, that people accept it enough to see punishment inflicted for its sake as legitimate, and that it is applied for punishment. That the state is required for any of these is not evident, and that it is required for the first condition is what I refuted above.
I do not doubt that you can intersect a new reason for why a government is absolutely, positively needed to have a peaceful society. What I do doubt is that these reasons will be more than ad hoc justifications, to be forgotten as soon as this thread is on page 3.
Libertarians and ancaps sucking big corps cocks are pretty pathetic
I am in favor of monopolies if they are market born. I am also in favor of people accumulating as much capital as they can. And I am against regulations of all kind.
But I can bare the libertarians that defend big corps when the State comes up with some bill or some new regulation that supposedly will hurt the big corps.
The reason is simple: 99.9999999999% of the time is all a show. The big corps are the ones that are pushing for the regulation. I mean, I don't see amazon, google, fb, etc lining up to sustain libertarianism or less regulations. In fact I often see them doing things to hurt people who fight the State. I see big corps giving money to statist politicians and they are often in the giving "advices" to lawmakers on how to build regulations.
And the reason is obvious: when you get big, you want rules. You want rules because they keep competition out. When you are big you can pay an army of lawyers, bribe officials when needed, and regulations will hardly affect your big corp. And even if it has some cost, it's nothing compared to the fact that you can keep out the competition that can't pay for the lawyers, the bribes and so on.
This is how all industries worked in human history: there is freedom, than big corps arrive and use the State to close the market. And while I understand if a socialist or a commie fall for it, I can't believe there are so many libertarians and ancaps that still fall for this trick.
I mean, I like the products that the corps put out on the market, but I can also see how they support big government, statist politicians, etc
So, I really wish liberty-minded people would stop sucking the cock of corporations.
Iceland Fucks Up
>On Jan. 1, Iceland became the first country in the world to make it illegal to pay men more than women for doing the same job
So how do you explain Scandinavia with its social democracy and high taxes? Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark… all of these countries are highly successful with good living standards no matter how you cut it despite having heavy regulations. And keep in mind it's still capitalism, so no screeching about "socialism" (ironically you would concede that socialism does work if you call it that) because the government has some stake in it, private property is still a thing.
>hurr durr sweden refugees
Yes yes, and now what about the rest of scandinavia? What about the system without the refugees in the equation?
Did Crypto save Fiat?
>US GDP 2016 18.624 trillion
>US GNP 2016 18.357 trillion
>267 billion worth of inflated currency from central banking policy
>crypto market capitalization 2018 571 billion USD
>571 billion withdrawn from circulation (USD and other fiat)
>stock market is growing
Abortion in an Anarcho-Capitalist Society
This is not a 'gotcha!' thread, but I am legitimately curious as to what other Ancaps think. I call myself an Ancap, and I believe in abortion in limited circumstances. I believe that Abortion would be killing another person, and therefore, in violation of the NAP. Do other Ancaps agree or do you think that Abortion should be allowed because of personal freedom?
How long can /leftypol/ stay in denial over Venezuela?
It just keeps getting worse over there.
If you are white and you are an ancap, you are literally a race cuck or fucking retarded.
The same goes for spics, arabs and pajeets.
Take one look at the flag, dumbasses. The black stands for africans and the yellow stands for asians, you'd have to be completely retarded to support ancrap if you're not either of these races.
ITT: A rational analysis of the implications of an AnCap system
Let's cut to the chase: an AnCap system would look exactly like Mexico - with cartels and militias forming and constantly fighting over land and access to markets and resources. The average people will be herded into the privately held lands these groups are able to seize and hold. The NAP is only as good as one's ability to defend oneself against a threat. If I'm homesteading with a small group of people, I can't defend myself from heli attacks and a small army, let alone a larger, more powerful corporation that could develop drone swarms and agress my ass off the map. Is this the world you want?
The Big Short
U U U U
Exactly how full of shit is this movie /liberty/? I sat down to watch it once at the urging of one of my normie friends, apparently this shit is like the gospel to them. Seemed real low effort to me, tbh. I liked the part where the narrator drones on about all the ebil businessman that use complicated words to confuse and distract you from the truth, then do the exact same thing with celebrities.
Wouldn't AnCap be mostly Oligopolistic in nature because newly privatized industries like defense and forensics companies would still have barriers to entry like paying for expensive equipment or employing highly trained people. I feel like for a group that loves to berate the left for "being economically illiterate", hardly ever talks about real economic concepts such as this. Many Libertarians and AnCaps have this view that everything under Anarcho-Capitalism would just be perfect competition where anybody could enter any industry at any time and start a business. There is also the fact that oligopolies exist in unregulated markets like video games with a few firms like EA, Ubisoft, and Activision. Who, own their own, can do enough damage to cause the industry to crash. I could picture a scenario where a DRO might end up in conflict with a forensics company over rights over a crime scene or evidence in a terrorist attack kind of how video game developers and publishers will often squabble over various game project rights and deadlines.
Could he be the next /ourguy/? I enjoyed his interview in Reason, and he mentions that in his heart he is an ancap but for reality's sake he is a minarchist. I get that. It would be hard, currently, to sell the Libertarian party to a greater number of people if you are going full ancap. He also scores some extra brownie points for enjoying the works of Ayn Rand, Hayek, and "loving" Bastiat's The Law.
Social Incentives - Do you recongize them?
Hello, since I presume that everyone here is familiar with how incentives in reference to the economy and the goverment's involvement in the economy works, especially the unintended incentives it creates. You guys know how strong those incentives can be. How it can change society over time.
I was wondering, if you also recongize that also incentives in the social sphere (not purely economical) have exactly the same deep effects on society?
Like how first, second, third wave feminism fundamentally changed the West. Creating the Incentive that a wife can live seperate from her husband by leaving him, but still dependent on his money. Mass-Immigration of foreign non-european cultures into european cultures which significantly lowered the social trust in the West. How it breeds criminality, creates parallel societies, gated communities.
I was just wondering, if you recongize that and if the goverment should reverse some of those things or maybe create better incentives. This is my own personal opinion or definition, but to be a truly right-wing, western goverment, that isn't just "conservative", whatever that means, the goverment should be deeply aware of the nature of incentives and how destructive, but also benefical they can be to society.
That's all, stay fresh. Yo! This was L. to the I. to the T. GermanAnon for you.
NSDAP 1932 Economic Plan
So what do you think of this? They provide here an outline of their economic program and refutations of objections from free market supporters. I'm particularly interested how do /pol/lacks and fascists on this board that meme helicopters and champion capitalism reconcile their idol's statism.
Also for any history buffs here, how many of the mentioned points were actually implemented and for how long?
A few examples of what they tackle in here:
F. Commercial and financial measures
1. Foreign trade
>Reducing imports will reduce German exports, and thus result in increased unemployment.
Response: German exports will not be reduced by a decrease in German imports, since we will primarily reduce imports from those countries from which we imported more than we exported, those with which we had a negative balance of payments. According to the official Reich Statistical Office, Germany had a negative balance of payments of about 270 million marks within countries outside Europe during the first quarter of 1932.
>Protecting domestic production will lead to a general increase in prices.
Response: That will not happen, since to the extent German production increases, welfare payments will decline. Public expenses will therefore be lower, and distributed to a larger range of productive activity. There will, therefore, be no new burdens on the economy, but rather a lesser burden.
4. Currency Reform (check this one for their take on the gold standard)
>Giving up the gold standard means inflation, according to the bourgeois-Marxist press.lol "bourgeois-Marxist"
Response: England gave up the gold standard on 21 September 1931. The pound’s rate of exchange fell by 70%, but the domestic purchasing power of the pound remained unchanged. According to Nr. 4, Part A, page 16 of the semi-official Vierteljahrshefte für Konjunkturforschung (volume for 1931/32):
“There were only slight increases in prices. Up to November, wholesale prices increased by about 8%, then declined as a result of developments on the world market. Thus, after a temporary increase, prices fell again. The increase in wholesale prices was largely due to adjustments resulting from prices determined abroad to the revaluation of the pound. Domestic prices were either not affected at all, rose only slightly, or even declined.”
H. Administrative and tax measures
1. Price controls
>This is a harmful intervention by the state.
Response: If prices are reasonable, state intervention is unnecessary. And the freedom of creative economic activity must not be confused with the freedom to ruthlessly exploit others.
2. Nationalization and state supervision
>Any state intervention is harmful.
Response: State intervention, on the contrary, is necessary to protect the economy from the worst damage by the interests of finance capital. State intervention has gotten a bad reputation only because the Marxist parties always intervened in the wrong places. Although the state can administer monopolies much better than private industry, the Marxists gave them over to finance capital (the Dawes and Young Plans gave away the former German Railroad, the match monopoly was given to the big capitalist swindler Kreuger by the Social Democratic Minister of Finance Hilferding), whereas countless unnecessary government concerns were maintained that only competed with craftsmen and manufacturers, producing goods much more expensive and of lower quality than those of private industry.
Condensed Soup And Why The Market Won't Improve It?
It's flu season and someone at work gave me their flu bug just in time for the weekend so let's discuss soup, /liberty/. With most soups, the longer you let it sit, the netter it tastes, hence why green chilli and Borsch taste better the day after you cook then.
So why does condensed soup taste like shit when it's been all sitting together for months or years?
Milton Friedman predicted cryptocurrencies
Saw this on ZeroHedge. I wonder what he would think about the situation now if he was still alive.
Liberty to Statism
I remember quite a long time ago, there use to be a time in which their was a fairly sizable libertarian population on /pol/. However, as time went on, many of these people either left due draconian moderation or they themselves went full NatSoc. Throughout my time on /pol/, I have encountered many who claimed to be former libertarians and even An Caps who turned to statism. I just have to ask, what turns people who were at one point lover's of freedom to authoritarians? Is there anything that can be done to convince those that statism isn't the answer to the problems they are looking for?
Prop 64 vs Mexican Cartels
With the passage of proposition 64 in California, along with the other states where use is decriminalized or legalized, what kind of effects will this have on Mexican cartels? I would assume that they would have to get out of the marijuana business, as they would not be able to compete with higher quality legal weed. If we see less revenue crossing the border, most likely they would have to increase their reliance upon harder drugs like meth and fentanyl. If this is the case, then legalization of marijuana should show once and for all that the drug war doesn't work, and that further legalizations need to be done to combat the cartels.
Cycle of Ideologies
WE'RE NEXT BOYOS!
<french revolution 1792
<industrial revolution 1820s
<jacksonian democracy 1820s-1830s
>start of communism 1848
<US Civil War 1861
>start of nationalism 1871
<world war I 1914
>communist revolution 1917
>nationalist revolution 1933
<world war II 1939
>modern democratic era 1945
<vietnam war 1965
>communist elections 1968
<economic crisis 1970s
<start of information era 1980s
>democratic revolution (v. communism) 1990
>crony capitalist elections 1990s-2000s
>ron paul libertarianism 2008
>communist movement 2009
>nationalist movement 2016
>?more communists (corbyn? 2017?)
>?more nationalists (austria? italy? 2018? 2019?)
>?more crony capitalists (US Congress 2018? 2020?)
>libertarian movement ???
I suppose we all have anecdotes to tell of the affluent socialist, who never had a worry in his life, went to a good school, and had his tuition paid for by his rich dad. He becomes vegan because that's the "diet of the future", spends his breaks at Star Bucks, and complains about the fact that his parents don't pay him as much as they ought to by the law, and when he's done with that, he tells you about how capitalism turns our lifes into shit. I could go on about this stereotype, but you all know what I mean.
Historically, most of the great revolutionaries fit the stereotype perfectly. How many of us have the chance to go to a university in Paris? Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh and several others from their cadre did. Castro's dad was a great philanthropist, and Castro himself studied at a university. Che Guevara not only studied medicine, he also traveled extensively in his youth. This pattern continues throughout all the "workers" revolutions. Very few revolutionaries were workers, and it's the same with the pure ideologues. They were as affluent as it gets, and only ever had the outsider perspective on poverty.
Unsure about my Libertarianism/Anarcho-Capitalism
Can I even call myself an Ancap anymore? I don't think so, but I I used to call myself an Ancap.
A Libertarian? Probably still, yeah, but also there I am no longer pure about my beliefs and don't just repeat libertarian ideology as the answer to every single question.
I made a thread like this already. I would describe myself as LIT - libertarian, identitarian and traditional. I think that best describes what I believe in.
I just don't think the answer to complex questions should simply be to establish libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism. I always thought it wasn't practical, but now I come to believe that some libertarian policies are also no longer desireable. Like completly privatized healthcare. I don't think I will strive to go full privatized in my country in my lifetime and it inevitably led me into question, if that is even desireable, because that was always the last social policy I would ever want to abolish.
I am going to leave that moral debate to future generations.
What I am not going to leave to future generations and which I believe is the most important moral debate of this century and probably for our entire civilization (for quite a while to come) is the multicultral question.
I think everyone who is alive to read this, is going to be part of the generation struggle to answer this question, which at its conclusion will mean the return of racially homogenous socities in Europe.
I also think that there is room to solve some other questions, like the feminism question. Or the pension question and a few other libertarian-lite things, but that doesn't mean that we will see a big european country adopt anarcho-capitalism.
I just don't see that happening and honestly?
At this point I don't see it as desireable anymore. I simply don't. Maybe as the endpoint of a very long, intergenerational transitionary period, but certainly not in my lifetime and I am not sure about that.
If you are curious, my ideal system (realistic and achieveable in my lifetime) is a limited democracy, which only allows finanically independent people to vote, who pledge to be drafted to defend the country. Also in addition to that it should have an additonal option for citizens to pledge themselves to become represenatives/watchers in the parliament. I am not sure, if that should be a requirement for the vote or simply an additonal option, but I like the idea of this active particapation in the goverment, especially to prevent politicans, whose only job it is to be politicans.
Also because I am from Germany and I like the american idea of jury duty as a concept of some average citizens to serve their society that way, but we don't have that here. Maybe it will just be the city's parliament, not the national parliament.
I don't believe in voting rights for women anymore.
Anyway it literally happened today, when I thought about my ideal system and how I would limit voting rights to only financially independent people (whatever that means) and people who pledge to defend the country.
I already knew that barely any women, would qualify for being financially independent and I admit that It didn't bother me. But then I realized that whether your country still has the draft or not, it would immideatly be re-implemented for all men, if a war ever broke out and necessitated it.
I don't think a civil war against muslims is likely, but I can already see how women collectively would ask the men to fight and die for them to win against the muslims.
I am for equal rights for equal responsibility, but how can women get equal voting rights, if they collectively will never have the same duty as men to fight and die for their country?
PS: This thread was removed and I got banned instantly on /leftypol/.
Basic Economics and others
Does anyone have a .pdf of Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics" in its latest release (I think 5th edition)? It, in general, a place to get access libertarian/capitalist lit easily?
I know that the Mises Institute has a great repository of tons of works, so I'm going to link it here to get it out of the way for this thread: https://mises.org/library/books
If you have a link to any resources outside of the typical "check the Mises Inst.", especially Basic Economics (which I'm specifically looking for right now the), then your contribution to this thread is especially valued.
Government Services Yes!
Global Warming and Affluence
>According to American Meteorological Society (AMS) data, 89% of AMS meteorologists believe global warming is happening, but only a minority (30%) is very worried about global warming.
>This sharp contrast between the large majority of meteorologists who believe global warming is happening and the modest minority who are nevertheless very worried about it is consistent with other scientist surveys. This contrast exposes global warming alarmists who assert that 97% of the world’s scientists agree humans are causing a global warming crisis simply because these scientists believe global warming is occurring. However, as this and other scientist surveys show, believing that some warming is occurring is not the same as believing humans are causing a worrisome crisis.
>Other questions solidified the meteorologists’ skepticism about humans creating a global warming crisis. For example, among those meteorologists who believe global warming is happening, only a modest majority (59%) believe humans are the primary cause. More importantly, only 38% of respondents who believe global warming is occurring say it will be very harmful during the next 100 years.
>Overall, the survey of AMS scientists paints a very different picture than the official AMS Information Statement on Climate Change. Drafted by the AMS bureaucracy, the Information Statement leaves readers with the impression that AMS meteorologists have few doubts about humans creating a global warming crisis. The Information Statement indicates quite strongly that humans are the primary driver of global temperatures and the consequences are and will continue to be quite severe. Compare the bureaucracy’s Information Statement with the survey results of the AMS scientists themselves.
>'97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong
>Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis
Funny. About a hundred years ago, the hope of the socialists was that central economic planning would create a far more productive society. Look at the claims of the socialists of that era, the visions of unprecedented wealth that they had. These hopes were extinguished when the USSR and all the other red governments failed to deliver on their promises. Now the cry of the interventionists, many of whom no doubt would've been socialists some decades ago, is again for meddling with the market, because it is… too productive?
Pic related is some propaganda I had handy. Notice how the interest of governments in using climate change as a pretext for controlling the economy and the population is conveniently omitted, while the myth that 90% of all scientists believe in manmade climate change is perpetuated.
I'm shocked /liberty/, many still on this board still do not understand the difference between private and personal property.
Private property is property wherein the owner is not the user or utiliser of the resource- rather, he extracts rent from the owner and utiliser of the resource. This extraction of rent doesn't increase society's capacity for production; it's simply a way of widening the inequalities in society and creating a vampiric and lazy upper class
Totalitarianism is anti-white.
"Alt-rights" (lmao) never get this, but a prosperous civilization is always, always, ALWAYS supported by the pillars of rule of law, horizontal government and independent institutions. When some strong hero faggot shows up and decides to do away with all these "obstacles" for some "greater good", the nation begins to decline, this has been true since the very first civilizations. The Greeks and Romans who invented European civilization even had a word for it - barbarism.
All these "great heroes" in history - Hitler, Napoleon, Cesar, etc… all had one thing in common, they killed the goose that laid golden eggs for a short-term success at the expense of their people's future and long-term prosperity.
It is obvious that the institutions we have right now are working against us, they have been pozzed by a small group of people: Jews, who have their own interests and agenda and are even trying to corrupt the most basic institution which is the family but as tempting as it is, it is NOT a good idea to throw the baby away with the bath water by completely rejecting the concept of institutions in favour of a single-party state and a stronk leader who would gloriously ride in on a white horse and unfuck all our shit up and neither is it a "cuck" thing to be a libertarian and support the existence of independent institutions since nepotism, oligarchies and monopolies (read: shit Jews do) are not meritocratic and a form of corruption.
Women Do Not Deserve Human Rights
The most basic prerequisite to deserving human rights is for the subject to demonstrate that it has sufficient overlap with a human being in some metric or ability to warrant it respectful safety and benefits. It is obvious to anyone but the most cranially deformed individuals that women do not have any of these attributes.
Physically speaking, women have 50% lower muscoloskeletal performance, 10% reduced cranial capacity, and are widely found to have as much as 20 average IQ points less than averages. Any physician would tell you that deviations in these would be sufficient to be diagnosed as having a degenerative disease, microcephaly and debilitating learning disabilities. These aren't even physical variations like appearance and height, they are functional metrics of human ability. Can something with such distinct morphology still be considered human?
But one could argue that women's contributions to humanity entitle them to some moral compensation. And yet it has been proven time and again that women are a net deficit to society. Taxation amount is an indicator of income, and thereby contribution in useful production to society, has shown that in every stage of life, men pay up to twice as much taxes than women. Furthermore, women abuse the state for personal gain, and have been found to be a negative fiscal impact on society throughout they're entire existence. In summary, women contribute nothing to society, and even actively drain and destroy human resources. How can one justify giving an active hindrance and detriment to society so many privileges, when many sentient creatures and machines that offer so much more have no such benefit?
You might make the ethical argument, that like the disabled and leeches of society, they still feel pain and can suffer. But is there any evidence of this? Sure a woman may cry, or shiver, or communicate suffering, but is she really suffering, or just making gestures and reactions in response to negative stimuli? There is zero empirical evidence, that when a woman is beaten or raped, that any of her responses demonstrate a true suffering, instead of a mere noxious response. There is zero empirical evidence that women can even consciously perceive the world. Furthermore, how are we to know she is not merely imitating male emotion for a situational advantage? I could build a machine that cries when it's beaten or raped, and makes similar responses and comments, but can the machine truly feel and perceive those feelings? Is the machine anymore human than a woman?
There is literally no argument for the continued rights of women. Nothing. And none of you can make a case against that.
Ancap defense force
Sup, /liberty/. First, let me apologize in advance if this ends up sounding like one of those /leftypol/ 'gotcha' posts; I don't mean to give that impression.
Let's have a chat about defense. I find most economic arguments rather persuasive; I'm pretty well convinced that state involvement not only hinders the equity-improving effects of the private sector but actively works against it. The one aspect I can't quite swallow is that of military defense.
I know most of the arguments for private defense: Same as rights enforcement, insurance companies can fill the role government once did; in the event of invasion the efforts of defense would benefit "free riders" too, but paying customers would get preferential benefits. A region with no centralized authority to surrender, with a heavily armed populace is extremely difficult to capture and hold. These arguments make sense to me, but there's one sticking point about the whole thing. Historically, mercenaries are massive cowards. Once the tide starts turning against them, they'll desert and flee, assuming they don't get hired by the invading force. So you can't rely on your insurance company's mercs to protect you unless the odds are already heavily in favor of your town/city anyways.
Now, there are a couple arguments you can make against this. You can point out that a) private, volunteer (?) militias can take up the slack, and have a strong personal investment in protecting their communities, or b) because of how difficult and expensive it would be to take and hold an ancap region there's no incentive to try
Light infantry are an excellent fighting force. A well-trained and disciplined group, that knows the local terrain and can live off the land can fend off a wide variety and number of invaders, even those equipped with armor and the like. But they can't do everything; combined arms counts for a lot. What if the nearby nation gets taken over by a commie fuck, who decides to lob a cruise missile at Ancapistan, in some demonstration to his subjects about what happens when you go against big daddy government? What about an air force? Even taking out the extreme price inflation from Lockheed's bribes and general incompetence, modern fighters cost billions apiece and millions to maintain. And you will have to maintain them even out of conflict for exercises and drills.
>no incentive to take over
Governments, with their fiat currency and monopoly on force, are quite good at delaying the negative incentives of their retarded actions until the next head of state comes into office, which decreases the incentive to act rationally. Also take into account that most democratic leaders are sociopaths and pathological liars (traits best suited to winning elections), meaning they're even less likely to make the rational choice.
Just my two cents. If there's some market aspect I haven't looked at please enlighten me.
Starting today in Italy you have to buy a bag every time you shop
This is an example of what happens when you have cronies and no tools for effective physical removal. Starting today:
>by law you can't bring a bag from home to put your groceries in, you are forced to buy one in the supermarket when you pay
>also each bag for fruits must be purchased each time separately (because they need to weight what you buy)
>supermarket owners can't give away bags for free (but we know that nothing is free)
>the company that lobbied for this law has 80% of the market and owners and managers are friends with Renzi and the Partito Democratico. Estimated earning for this operation 400 millions euro per year
I hate this country.
If we have a country that don't have a massive debt, Would you even care about politics as like you are today? For instance, if all your expenses such as your tax, mortgage, healthcare or things you would like to buy are reasonably cheap, I doubt anyone of you would even care about left and right politics. Assuming your living standard wasn't so shit, you can always find away to mitigate real life problem with the wealth you have. The irony is neither leftist or natsocks fully understand who's their real enemy is. In reality, It doesn't matter who runs the government. The fact that the central bank and its system is there, it's gonna bring your living standard down no matter what.
you know what should be free? ENERGY! it can be if everyone operates on their own independent solar panels without external interference. anyways, if you have opinions on fossil fuel and/or renewable energy (not nuclear, that is a middle of the road solution, we're speaking of extreeeemeeez) then respond to my survey. I also don't want to fail out of school, so please respond. here is the link:
As libertarians, we agree that rights only exist in a negative context. However, most definitions of negative right seem to be inaccurate.
Like for example on Wiki article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights#Criticisms
>Negative and positive rights are rights that respectively oblige either action (positive rights) or inaction (negative rights). These obligations may be of either a legal or moral character.
>Presumably, if a person has positive rights it implies that other people have positive duties (to take certain actions); whereas negative rights imply that others have negative duties (to avoid certain other actions).
What the hell is a "negative duty", negative implies absence by definition. How can you have an absent obligation, that's no different than just saying "you have an non-existent obligation". Which makes no sense.
Furthermore, duties are positive acts by definition. You can't have a "negative action", that doesn't exist. "Negative duty" is an oxymoron
This is how I would define Negative Rights: "the ability to do an act, insofar as it doesn't pose an obligation to someone else"
Negative Rights are nothing more than claims of personal autonomy, they're inactive and impose nothing on anyone. You're not obligated to respect my negative rights, however, if you do violate them it's unjustified. By that I mean, I would claim that you were never in your jurisdiction to cross such a line to begin with. Obligation implies possibility [Check out side note], specifically the possibility to disobey such an authority. Like, you wouldn't tell an apple it has the obligation to be a fruit, or tell a human they have the obligation to grow hair out of his head. The fact being no one has the "right" to violate my negative rights, because they had no authority to do so. When I talk about negative rights, im not describing a obligation, but a lack of authority.
[Side note] Obligation implies Ought, Ought implies Can, and Can implies possibility.
Maury Kekmas from Atlantic
Muary Kekmas and to all a good White Night. Enjoy with your family a brand new video from Atlantic that teaches special children and trannies the true meaning of Kekmas, to spent welfare money on endo, chronic, and some hash then snort, smoke, or inject it with your homies!
MCDONALDS THEN REBRAND MY SHIT, WHILE WATCHING IT TOO
World War III will be over Africa
Trump has already deployed American troops to Niger in order to advance France's control of Mali (and its oil wealth). Taking out Muammar Gaddafi was instrumental to the future plan of attack: Amerikkka and other western imperialist powers want control of the Sahel region - from Mauritania/Senegambia to Somalia - in order to secure its vast untapped resources. Mali, Niger, and Chad, in particular, are full of oil and minerals as is Sudan plus they play a huge strategic role in securing the rest of the African continent. Take into account China's involvement in Africa. Once Amerikkka and Europe start installing permanent presence in the region they will be on China's doorstep.
The only end result will be all-out war.
Mises Appreciation Thread
Can we have one? I think Mises is the single best economist there is. Not just for coming up with his theories - he codified a lot that others before him found out, after all - but also for his precise and clear writing style, and for the fact that he kept the tradition of a priori economics around when the whole world was against it. He fled his country to escape the Nazis; his entire library was burned down by them, and he never held another tenure in his life. He couldn't even speak English when he arrived in America. Still, he managed to get back up and turned America into the stronghold of Austrian Economics that it is today.
Donating to charity
Especially at Christmas time, many talk about and do donate to charity. Do you think it's good to donate to non-profit NGO's? How useful would they be in a stateless society?
I see the need for food banks, homeless shelters and the like greatly diminishing with more people getting jobs, but what about charitable hospitals (ie, a freak accident happens upon you and you don't have the money to cover the medical bills)? Is disaster relief a good idea? etc? I know that an organization that will feed you because you don't have a job is just as bad as state welfare, but what about voluntarily funded safety nets for absolute worst case scenarios? Should that just be left to the family of the unfortunate? What if they are all dirt poor too, or dead?
If you think it's a good idea to donate to such organizations, which do you think are good ones?
It seems like so many big ones are corrupt/have good intentions but end up making things worse (Red Cross; African aid in general).
F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms
So /liberty/, what are we gonna do about it?
Does a Bear Shitting In The Woods Violate The NAP?
If you shit in the woods and they're privately owned, but the private owner has banned restrooms, then is it an NAP violation? Assume the woods are fenced in and that either the animals or something the single shit doesn't effect is the reason for the privatization.
Better question for deeper noggin' turning. If the NAP is violated and no one knows/will find out, was the NAP violated? What if no one cares?
Government without theft
Assuming, for the purposes of this thread, that taxation is indeed theft, is there a way for a government to receive money without stealing it? What if we were to decide that the land belongs to everyone, and land "owners" are merely renting it from the public and expected to pay a yearly fee for its use or else face eviction. Would that constitute theft, given that it's a voluntary exchange of money for land rights with no threat of force beyond protecting property from squatters?
What if the only tax was a tax on businesses, and if they refused to pay, they would have their business license revoked and be banned from selling goods or services? There's still a threat of force there, but it's the difference between choosing to break the law because your boss told you to, and having the IRS demand gibs or they'll shoot your dog.
"Intellectual property" breaks markets and ruins capitalism.
Free market resource production is supposed to tend toward a commodity equilibrium where everyone is putting rutabagas onto the market and competing on price results in efficient rutabaga pricing. Instead, you have twelve million different retards trying to sell Maxturbago Brand POWER RUTABAGA cups with Vitamin C compatible with the Maxturbago Juice Fuzion Juice System and it just results in mass retardation and confusion.
Do you think there's any chance of a major centrist movement happening in response to the rift that's formed the past couple of years? at this point i don't give a fuck anymore if Argument2Moderation ends up being shoved down my throat, Just any group of people that won't unironically lynch you for being 1 opinion out of line.
howdy partners, i am conducting a survey about the logistics of increasing renewable energy use as compared to fossil fuel energy. would you help a child out and respond to the survey? it's for a school research project. here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeTCgXK20O9XzS2ltzcQjrBhHJiU7w442Cg3a4XP0lvVhtNXQ/viewform?usp=sf_link
Goodbye Dollar, Hello 'Petro': Venezuela's Maduro Announces New Digital Currency
YouTube Censors Polish Government’s Video Exposing Catastrophic Migrant Invasion
To Christian Libertarians
Secular libertarians are probably going to reply to this thread as if the thread subject wasn't there– Whatever.
How do you justify Libertarianism when the bible seems to be against Libertarian-style free speech? For example, one of the holding tenets of freedom is that "what other people do can't harm you, its unrelated to you". Yet the bible says:
Leviticus 19:29 Do not profane your daughter by making her a harlot, so that the land will not fall to harlotry and the land become full of lewdness
It seems to clearly state that sins other people do also do come and affect you, and most people do fall.
There are other things I should note too.
Matthew 6:22 The eye is the lamp of the body. If your vision is clear, your whole body will be full of light.
(Note: Apocrypha) Ecclesiasticus 9:8 “Turn away thine eye from a beautiful woman, and look not upon another's beauty; for many have been deceived by the beauty of a woman; for herewith love is kindled as a fire.”
I wish I could have found less quotes about lewdness specifically and more about general sins but they're the ones that came to mind when I was making this thread
Have I found the board for me?
Yes Iv'e looked at the guide to see if I should be here but I wanna make sure.
>Went to 4 chan's /pol/
> People Shilling and being ironically anti-Semitic/actually anti-Semitic spooked me away
>Went to /leftypol/, communists and Antifa sympathizers made me nope out of there faster than you can say OY VEY!
>Found this board
Is this the board for me?
hello, i am conducting a survey on the logistics of increasing renewable energy use in the united states. please help by responding!
Regulations vs Market Progress
List some of the things you wish had less government regulations. Don't just say "everything." For me I wish there were less regulations on the development of Thorium for energy production. The US almost had a chance to be energy independent and now we are like sloths while India and China begin moving into this field.
I lean much more towards libertarianism than the average /pol/ack. And I miss when there used to be decent debate on the board. But explain this, faggots:
>non-whites dindu nuffin
>gays need more gibs
>illegal aliens deserve citizenship
>attention whore Snowden is a patriot
Statism is idolatry. Prove me wrong.
All the elements of an organized religion are there. There is a blind faith that nothing is impossible to the state, an expectation that the state take care of all our problems, and we even have people coming together by the thousands to chant weird slogans. During the last presidential election, you had the losers crying like their mother just died and the "winners" (there were no winners) treating Trump like he was the Second Coming.
If you can find an english translation of it, I recommend Mit Brennender Sorge. Pius XI warned the Germans in 1937 that they were worshipping a surrogate God.
What is it about autocracy that you can't not admire, /liberty/?
Is it their ruthless efficiency? Their lightning-quick responsiveness in military conflict? The incredible admirable qualities of their alpha male leaders? The fact that you are all a bunch of collectivist anti-individualist betas who could never build a society that exhibits these things?
Towing a car vs stealing a car
I was walking back from work today, when I saw a moving van get towed down the street. I'd assume that the towing company would claim that they have a legal right to charge money for the van's return. However, there was also probably stuff inside the van, belonging to people unaffiliated with the moving company (except as clients). This got me thinking:
Can somebody explain what differentiates stealing a car and holding it ransom vs towing a car and charging for its return? Is it the fact that the car was on private property without permission? If so, what stops people from claiming "towing rights" over anything on their property? Can I hold someone's shoes for $100 because they walked on my carpet without wiping their feet? Can I lock people in my basement until their family gives me $10,000 because they trespassed on my property? How would property rights be enforced with regards to towing in an minarchist society? Would you imagine it being different in an ancap society?
Henlo, friends of liberty.
I consider myself to be a neoliberal, but not the Merkel-tyre internet restrictions.
Generally, neoliberals use the force of the state to accomplish goals, and those goals
are based in market action and forces. I feel this is contradictory, which is present and
obvious. So, in what manner can neoliberalism be applied that it does not impact
Thanks, have a meme for you