/liberty/ - Liberty

>>102757

Ok, here's me trying harder

The murders of the Inquisition, the murders of the counter Reformation, and the murders of native foreigners in early Catholic colonialism are antithetical to the Bible's foundational moral code in the decalogue, "thou shalt not kill".

These actions were justified by the Roman church because it was corrupted, especially in the realm of statism.

Christianity is best defined by what the Bible says, since it is the source document. The Bible is opposed to the behaviors we talked about.

Therefore:

Catholics are not Christian

>>102762

"Catholic colonialism"

most of the early settlers were Puritans, i.e., Protestants.

>>102726

people can gravitate towards muh ego dik

>>102765

I know, and they were supremely moral compared to Catholic colonizers in Latin America and elsewhere. Pennsylvania was explicitly purchased because those Protestants has a clear conception of land rights.

>>102771

Catholics did feudalism, sure, but Prots did ethnic cleansing.

>>102716

One thing that really annoys me about this game is that everyone on all sides of the political landscape praise it for being so prophetic, yet they are all guilty of doing the exact thing the game was warning against (especially left wingers)

No one hardly ever challanges their ideas, they just take up some contrived political take as a replacement for a personality and huddle around like minded people in their own bubbles and just keep blowing smoke up each others asses which only makes them worse and worse. To be a truly healthy person, you need to play devils advocate and realize you dont really know shit and realize you can learn different things from different people. Or in other words, just be open minded, which is something every jackass says but very few practice, again, mostly leftist.

>>102803

Challenge your perception of capitalism then

>>102811

/liberty/ is already /leftypol/'s shitposting toilet.

>>102811

I do. I dont worship capitalism as some god. people who view economic systems as such are stupid.

>>102646

>what are Monopsonies and Natural Monopolies?

Unproven hypothetical scenarios used to justify government interventionism and irrelevant to the discussion unless you're literally glued to a spot in the ground.

>what is determinism and the free will impossibility?

Also irrelevant to the discussion.

>>102629

>The electorate gains by land reform and the expansion of the dole.

>But you mentioned earlier that the enfranchised will not vote for the dilution of their power. So what is it?

You answered your own question. The electorate voted for land reform and the grain dole, not the expansion of the franchise.

In fact, the younger Gracchus got murdered by a rabid mob (the electorate) when he expanded the franchise.

The electorate fought to keep the franchise limited. You can't get elected by an electorate that can't vote.

>Slavery is an inefficient system because slaves lack the monetary incentives of free labor.

Tell that to the millionaire plantation owners of the antebellum south. Slavery is inefficient overall, but very profitable to the slaveowners.

I mean why do you think it existed for so bloody long as an institution?

>Probably nothing, but I am also against monarchy.

I said

<The only governments which have effectively kept the state from growing are republics where the franchise is restricted to property owners, which makes sense in terms of incentives.

<I'm not saying it's not degenerate (all states are) , I'm just saying it's better than giving one random cunt all the power and hoping he isn't a Machiavelli.

I would rather have no state at all, but out of all the states that have existed in history, I believe the ones wherPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>102761

>have proven to provide

have provided

I'm too tired for this shit

>>102619

Let me tell you where I'm coming from so we can stop talking about minutiae and look at the bigger picture.

I believe the defining characteristic which determines how free a society is has nothing to do with voting itself, but rather with the relationship between producers and consumers of a single good:

Rights enforcement.

The monopolisation of the production of this good, most commonly done by the state, will inevitably result in tyranny. The larger the state (both in physical terms such as land or population, and in terms of the presence of statist thinking in the minds of the members of the society), the more complete its monopoly and the faster the tyranny will progress. Therefore, in choosing which kind of state is the least predisposed to tyranny, I ask myself two questions:

1) Does the structure of belief which allows the state to justify its own existence lead to totalitarian modes of thinking?

2) Is the production of rights enforcement solely the purview of the state in this society?

The first question is fundamentally about ideology; the second is fundamentally about economics. Since I am not a Marxist and therefore not retarded, I know that economics follows from belief and physical circumstance. Since we cannot control the physical circumstances of the world, it is safe to ignore them for the purposes of this discussion. We can therefore pare down these two questions down into a more fundamental one:

Who do the people believe produces the enforcement of rights?

In a citizen-soldier republic the people believe they are the producers of their own rights, and the state is relegated to the position of a coordinator.

The popular militia, in this frameworPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

> The electorate voted for land reform and the grain dole, not the expansion of the franchise.

The electorate essentially voted for both by voting for the officials that did both.

> the younger Gracchus got murdered by a rabid mob (the electorate)

He committed suicide, and he was not chased by a mob but by Opimius’ men.

> Slavery is inefficient overall, but very profitable to the slaveowners.

Plantations were profitable (not really that profitable in antebellum South since Washington and Jefferson had to rely on rents to sustain their income) due to legislation favoring slavery. It was the large land grants from the state that made them profitable, not slaves. Tobacco crops required large landholdings to counteract nutrient depreciation.

>>102792

I forgot your (You): >>102792

>>102792

I forgot your (You): >>102761

>>102167

Hitler was right about what?

>>102717

Racialism, I guess. Funny thing is, the new right wing regimes are looking to be about as interventionist as the left wing ones.

>>102723

he thought jews are untermenschen

it is the opposite way

>>102685

>liberalize the Indian economy

Remember that time they demonetised low denomination currency in order to "curtail illegal activity"?

Maybe Africa will be the next global superpower.

>>102724

i dont

t. another anon

>>102724

>Maybe Africa will be the next global superpower.

They probably will.

>>102724

Isn't it the other way around? The psjeets stopped circulating high denomination bills because muh drug dealers laundering money.

>>102745

I think you're right; I misremembered and erroneously assumed that a 500 rupee bill worth 7 USD would be a low denomination.

Fabianism is remarkably effective. My evidence will be the replies to this thread that all purport wildly different causes (the Civil War, the FED, the income tax, the military-industrial complex, etc., etc.).

>>102667

>Why was the US unable to resist central government?

Because it had a central governmental at all. Minarchist states will never say that way for long, because it is in the nature of every government to grow.

>>102702

This

>>102569

I was referring as Chile taking the same place of gommie Cuba in the libertarian movement, as the big example of how to destroy the statist elite and build and strongarm a country towards an Ancap society and Pinochet being less than a meme and more of Goldcoated Fidel Castro.

But yeah, that's how I also imagine Cuba if weren't turned into the Jail-island is now.

>>102569

it was a singapore

>>102589

>singapore

>libertarian

>>102626

singapore is based

>>102566

KEK

>>102556

/k/ here was coopted by NEETsocs, a shadow of his former glory.

>>102571

The NEETSocs are an inescapable presence, but they're far from all-encompassing on 8/k/. The real menace is noguns Europoors. But despite the presence of both, every time I glance at half/k/ out of morbid curiosity, I'm reminded that as shit as our /k/ is every alternative is far worse.

>>102571

NEETsocs are the furries of imageboards. Let a few in and soon you'll have a horde scream about fursecution teh jeeews.

>>>/leftypol/

I'm not sure getting Paul-kun (jr) into office would've changed anything. The President doesn't actually hold that much power.

>pic related would be the US president now

doubt.jpg

The donor class preferred Jeb, Rubio and Cruz in pretty much that order. Cankles had a sumpremely well funded and incompetent team but the question remains whether Paul could've flipped the states he needed to flip for a win.

> doesn't actually hold that much power

He hold plenty but needs loyal personnel to act on it.

Which Trump fucked up badly by letting Rinsed Penis do most of the staffing causing the admin to be filled with NeverTrump cuckservatives and Obama holdovers.

>>102572

He isn't attractive to the boomercon bulk of the party, so it's doubtful he could've won the primaries.

That said, he has the most cross-party appeal and firm values so he'd do well in a presidential race.

Missed opportunity imo.

>>102572

I highly doubt that.

Wrong

>>102558

Where do you live?

>>102555

Because you live in a first world country where they receive gibs. Look at pictures of countries where libertarianism is implicitly tied to women's rights, and the number of libertarian women skyrockets.

>>102555

I know it isn't much but there's Mackenzie who's an ancap cosplayer. She's surprisingly based though she is engaged. https://twitter.com/_Kenziepuff

>>102547

Too old, sage

>>102359

based and redpilled

>>102422

obviously

>disgraced

You mean based?

>>102490

He is but that's not the general consensus of normies. I do think he is based but I tend to keep that in the low

I hate the Frankfurt school except where they actually critique consumerism, but I digress. It's fun to use their theories against them, especially on sociological matters. Like I think the reason why pedophiles are most gay is because they got their ass beat growing up for being gay so they find someone who can't fight back. For the small percentage that are straight, it's because of essential gender roles of women taking it and men giving it. Human beings, human doings and all that jazz, younger women are actually more fertile and it used to be practiced until the advent of femikikery in the public eye. Also you can't make kids with poopdick. William Reich used against himself

Tl; dr?

If I were to grab an SK and foolhardly tried to save Assange, where am I w.r.t. NAP?

>>102445

why do you still believe in that? everyone is in this world for themselves. most capitalists would say "you're not trying hard enough to be successful"

>>102421

no he was an anarchist

>>102476

If we all descend into Barbarism the world will be rendered uninhabitable. The idea is create a society which values liberty so that it can turn its guns outwards and prevent that from happening.

>>102542

>and prevent that from happening.

Prevent a descent into barbarism. I see now that my post could read "prevent valuing liberty from happening".

>>102312

is wanting modest, honest, virtuous wife a pathological attitude toward sex?

>>102357

I'd go broader and say that it's for bottom-caste males in general. Being a nerd is still bad but nerd interests are cool so they can't use that and just saying virgin was starting to get dated so now the new hotness is 'incel' for insulting males at the bottom of the social hierarchy.

>>102379

>>102425

Stop playing into the Communists hands. It is a term forged in the fires of faggotry. It is a meaningless term meant simply to fling at your enemies. Do not ascribe it meaning, do not use it, simply mock its use with derision.

>>102423

>>102425

>>102439

>>102379

>>102357

>5 answers

>each completely different

I think we can safely say the word might as well be meaningless

>>102350

>incels

The very fact that you use this term tells me you are from reddit. Go back. Robots are not incels.