/liberty/ - Liberty

This will be mandatory in my private community.

Will they be shaken a bit so they cannot comprehend their situation?

>>103970

You know excess testosterone in the body just gets turned into estrogen, right?

>>104112

The content of the post already suggests he(she?) knows nothing about this.

>>104030

Depends entirely on how much healthcare/bad choices are subsidized by the state, but I'll give you that one in the context of a free market.

>You know, I'm getting rather annoyed with the "Hoppe is a Nahtzee" shpiel of leftists and mainstream-style libertarians. However, I think it can mostly be attributed to the whole "physical removal of leftists and gays" thing.

Somewhat, OP - but his "degenerate art" rants were flat-out copypasta'd, so….

>>104032

No argument huh? Better luck next time I guess.

>>104034

I'm talking about poor whites

>>104035

Obviously

>>104051

Art is subjective. I do power electronics and listen to loads of different music. It's not even up for argument. If libertarians were consistent, you don't like feminist trash art? Don't buy it, don't watch, don't give it clicks or money. Freedom of choice.

>>104087

>Art is subjective

Art quality is very much objective and measured against objective standards. Only enjoyment of it is subjective.

>If libertarians were consistent, you don't like feminist trash art? Don't buy it, don't watch, don't give it clicks or money. Freedom of choice.

Point to where a libertarian said he wanted to ban "feminist trash art."

>>103971

Success breeds jealousy

>>103974

He is an anglokike. Anglos are hated by everyone, even by themselves.

>>104006

The picture is funny because Hitler was a completely delusional teaboo who never understood geopolitics.

>>103946

Georgism and Distributism don't exist. It's just socialist astroturfing. I know all of one IRL honest-to-god Georgist, and he even agrees that every single time he hears people discussing Georgism they turn out to be god damn commies.

>>103947

How can you prove that?

>>103968

Yeah, giving props to her by proving Ancap right

>>103723

It was a criticism and not a refutation:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/hilferding/1904/criticism/ch01.htm

>>103779

It's actually more of an in-joke. We have Cockshott threads with usually the same videos and same arguments so many times here.

>>103948

Or, to use a more contemporary example: anime is the direct result of Japs being influenced by American Disney cartoons post-WWII. The stylistic connection between the two is obvious. Yet no one will say that anime is American, or that it's not Japanese.

>>101810

>Why is it that Americans never really developed a unique culture

What is Blue Grass, Blues, and Funk music culture? Blue-jean wearing panhandlers? Cajun culture?

>>103954

Americans don't have A culture.

They have a lot of them.

>>103944

I have a hard time pointing to a Japanese figure whose art, prose, poetry, politics, inventions, etc. did not draw mainly on Chinese heritage.

>>103905

You're never going to not be polarize in a mass democracy. The more power the state has the more inevitable polarization becomes, as the federal government becomes that much more bigger a prize to win.

>Absolute capitalism with no regulations just leads to monopolies and less freedom

That's objectively wrong, but this isn't the thread to have that argument. Most of the catalog is filled with elaborations as to why it's wrong.

>State run companies within the free market

That's what we have now and it's a shithole.

>and a choice on what you pay your taxes towards, therefore allowing the people to control the budget.

First, it's wishful thinking to believe that "the people" ever have power in a democracy. They are vote and tax cattle, and the incentives of democracy are such that this is all they will ever be. Second, if you really want "the people" to choose how they spend their money, you'd take out the coercive and highly inefficient middleman of the state and allow them to spend their own money directly. You can know, by choosing what products to buy and what not to buy. If you don't believe they're capable of doing it this, then you don't actually want "the people" to have control over the their own lives. If you don't actually value "the people" spending their own money how they see fit, then the whole premise behind allowing them to decide on line items in the budget is rendered irrelevant.

>>103908

>First, it's wishful thinking to believe that "the people" ever have power in a democracy.

You make a good point, I'mma go sit in the corner and think for a bit.

>>103908

>that much more bigger

My apologies for typing like a retard.

>>103850

That was exactly the idea. IRS insurance would be so lucrative and powerful. Plus DEA and ATF insurance. Plus, since it's peer-funded, it's basically an investment account outside of the government's reach. It could form a financial backbone fit a whole new services market. Provide ways for insurers to hire liability limitation professionals, and eventually people can hire private security forces to protect themselves from the state, though that won't come for a while.

>>103822

>The lesson I take from this is to never be so arrogant as to think you can be the one to handle power. Power corrupts all.

I take it as those who seek power tend to be already be corrupt rather than those who take power become corrupt.

>>103907

>a phd in anarcho capitalism

Is that real?

>>103909

If it is that's just retarded and self-defeating.

>>103909

Figure of speech.

>>103904

The sad part is in the trades there's plenty of normalfags who hold fringe political beliefs, but getting them to talk about them is a whole different ballgame. And when your opinions are more fringe than them, basically as you said.

>>103934

You could partially circumvent this by finding online communities centered around locales. I don't know to what degree this is possible with Austrian Econ and liberty, but it works very well in the firearm community. Almost every state has a message board dedicated to firearm owners residing in that state. Ancap might be a bit too fringe for this, but I'm not sure.

They'll say the same thing whether they are notice cause and effect or not. Whining about inequality is a tool to raise taxes and grab power, not to fix any sort of problems. Not that I mean to imply that inequality is any kind of genuine problem, of course.

It works that way in Nationstates, but one graph doesn’t suffice to prove works that way in real life. Instead of notice-bitching, learn to construct speculative causal constructs. Where but Nationstates would you even notice this? The defenders of the gold standard never mentioned egalitarianism when they were allowed for a time to pretend integrity mattered in governance. So if you did get this from Nationstates, notice, if you’re going to be obedient to one random simulator for your egalitarian policy guidance, you can still do better than nakedly asserting the correlation.

I have this one in the uncertainty bucket because I haven’t come up with a speculative causal construct for it.

>>103842

Without a concern for inequality how the blazes can someone be libertarian? Flat power distribution is the ultimate guarantor of rights. That’s a big part of why we support gun rights! Chunk egalitarianism out of libertarianism and you’ll eventually lose your guns.

>>103353

>then why has violence fallen dramatically over the last 300 years? has society becomes more societal?

I am very skeptical. The 20th century was one of the most violent in the history of mankind.

Other than that, yes, people have become more societal overall, we are taught how to get along with each other more than we used to, and in fact more than is good for us. Unironically, people these days are too complacent. Just a few weeks ago, I was told by a social worker that I have no right to self-defense, that is how complacent people are. The very idea that sometimes, violence might be a solution, is appalling to many.

>>103348

>There will be no police to enforce laws that protect you from niggers, commies, fascists, etc

The laws don't protect you, the police does (currently, more on that soon). South Africa, Honduras, Germany and Sweden have esentially the same legal protection against homicide, yet their homicide rates a very different. The reason is partially culture, partially that the police in Germany and Sweden actually does its job (kinda). There are many factors that influence crime rates, the law isn't one. To act like "the law" mysteriously protects you as soon as the police enforce it is to get things exactly backwards, it's the police that protects you by enforcing the laws, not the law protecting you by being enforced by the police. You got me? To say otherwise is essentially allegorical. There is nothing wrong with it 90% of the time, but this discussion is the rest of the 10%.

Now, after we've hopefully settled the semantics, let me point out that ancaps are big fans of personal armament precisely because it enables you to defend yourself from niggers and commies, and that we have always maintained that a private police works. There are several historical examples, from the railway police to some startup firm in America that was set up by cops who got sick of how inefficient the police force was. Throughout thePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>103378

You're assuming they'd have a monopoly on violence. If they start demanding too much, you can leave them and join another company. If you can't, then that still doesn't suggest they'll be untouchable. You *might* end up with a mafia, but that can be the case even now. Mexico has a mafia and it's not lacking in government, and the Chicago Police Department has acted like a mafia in the past (probably still does). The police department in my town of birth has bossed my family around more than any mafia in the area.

>>103362

Its track record when it comes to protecting my family is also abysmal. My family was once asked by the DA to take care of the store of a neighbor who was put in custody for selling drugs. So we did, but that meant selling much of his inventory. We talked about this with his lawyer, and he gave it his okay. We assumed the lawyer knew what he was talking about.

A rather short time later, our neighbor got out. He threatened us at least three times, and each time, the police took way too long to respond. First time, they didn't come at all when I called them, just laughed in my face and pretty much told me I deserved it for hanging out with drug dealers (at the request of the DA?). My mother had to call them, they arrived an hour after the guy was gone. Second time, two cops came, they seemed like two genuinely nice guys, but they couldn't do anything, apparently. Third time, my mother had to tell them the history we have with the neighbor including the deal we had with the DA, our family history, her blood group and the history of Constantinople in the 4th century before they would come.

Last time I called the cops was on a different matter. This time, they charged me for protecting myself, and their police reports were worthless. They didn't even know what the area looked like. It was clear they didn't want to work on the case, and yet they did.

So, the next time anyone gets in my face, I will not bother to call the cops. Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>103397

>My family was once asked by the DA to take care of the store of a neighbor

Why was your family obligated (or forced?) to manage your neighbor's business?

>>103423

We weren't obligated. We could've denied the request, but back then, we didn't think it was that much of a big deal, and we certainly didn't expect such a big shitstorm from developing out of it. Most importantly, we didn't think the DA would fuck us over so badly. You'd think if you responded to their request, they'd actually care a little bit about your wellbeing, but no. Nothing. There is very little loyalty in the public sector.

>>103348

kike tier double-post. reported