/liberty/ - Liberty

Eliminate the welfare state and the problem is solved. I don't give a shit about ancap race communities because there are idiots in every race. I live in a rural all white area and we have our fill of low-life losers. Give me the best and brightest, I won't care what they look like.

>>74989

The older I get the closer I get to that position. Sure by law of averages more whites are going to be better than Blacks or Hispanics, but it'd be asinine to believe all whites are Eisensteins and all blacks are crack gibs me dat monkeys. Hell I'll take one black Ancap over a million white Liberals any day of the week,

>>74992

>Implying Boomers know about 8chan.

>Implying Boomers would bother posting on 8chan.

Wew lad.

>>74993

8chan is owned by a boomer you fuck knuckle

>>74995

It's also frequented predominantly by millennials, but that doesn't make it a tumblr clone.

>>74988

>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?

We don't object to people living within society and following its rules, we just believe that these rules shouldn't be violently enforced, except for property rights. Leaders and hierarchies will exist, yes, and that's all good and natural, but no one should be forced to follow a very particular leader and leaders shouldn't be allowed to use violence against their subjects unless they agreed to it.

You can't have liberty without the liberty to be a degenerate.

>>75020

But without state intervention, like welfare and discrimination law, being degenerate suddenly has a lot more real-world consequences too. At the minimum, you're going to have to keep your faggotry cooped up in the closet out of sight, from fear of losing your employability and social status.

>>75022

Why do you make bullshit up just to pander to authoritarian retards?

Obviously there will be less consequences as there won't be state power to abuse you. The vast majority of humanity doesn't care about their warped views of degeneracy and will in fact cause an outrage and tons of negative PR if you try to discriminate people because they are gay, "race-mixers" or whatever. It's pretty clear that the opposite will happen than what you just made up to appeal to blood-thirst statists. Liberty is about living and letting to live, and not about telling other people what they have to do.

>>75024

I'm not "pandering" to anyone. And no, I'm not under the impression that in a free market, any and all gays will be fired on the spot, it's not in the employer's best interest to terminate productive labor that doesn't really make a fuss. However, there are a few instances where it would be beneficial. Maybe as an employer you're fine with your employees drinking, smoking, sodomizing, in private on their own time, but there's that one faggot. He has the obnoxious lisp, his social network page has links to swinger clubs and videos of him at drag shows, and in general he's a very public degenerate. Even if he's professional at work, you decide you don't want your company associated with him, and you fire the guy. You can't do that nowadays because you'd get sued for discrimination. Nowadays, if an employer has to fire a black employee for legitimate reasons, in more than a few cases they need to set up a bunch of legal frameworks to make sure the employee can't try to file a discrimination suit, because there are a lot of fucks that will attempt that whether there's reason to or not. That overhead cost represents worse market efficiency. Removing discrimination laws eliminates this.

>Is Ancapistan compatible with white identity and a white ethno state?

Anarchy is almost inevitably ethno-nationalistic. When given the freedom to associate with whoever they want, people almost always choose to associate with those like them. And by a long shot, even if it means economic disadvantages. Look at all of those totally not racist white liberals who choose a more expensive living arrangement and a two hour commute to work over living in a black neighborhood.

>most Ancaps/Libertarians are either open borders proponents or only believe in private property lines

All borders are private borders. Public property is the private property of the net taxpayers, like a joint stock company where the amount of stock owned by each taxpayer is proportional to the amount of money they pay down. That the government doesn't allow an individual any say in the management of their property, or to sell their share of it is of secondary concern. If a hobo moves into your house while you're on vacation to Florida, and then refuses to leave and threatens to shank you if you don't, does the house automatically become his by right of conquest? No, it is still your property and you'd be right to call the local police department or your local McWarlord private defence company if you're in Detroit lol https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/11/how-bad-are-things-detroit-even-police-protection-getting-privatized/ to get that fucker removed.

People who believe in open borders are not libertarian or ancap, however the fuck they choose to call themselves. The cournerstone of this ideology is property rights, and the concept of open borders violates it.

>To me at least it would make sense for Ancaps and Libertarians be for white identity, as almost every Ancap and Libertarian is white.

Well gee, sure looks like the only people who like private property and consistent application of law are whites, innit?

>How can Ancapistan be kept white with a small government or none at all?

Allow people to associate freely, and whites will band together naturally. Social normalcy will be restored within a generation and the entire diversity/anti-racism narrative will go the way of the dodo. Mass imigration will be seen as a foreign invasion, with a predictable responce.

>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.

Part of the reason it's cheaper to import migrant workers is government regulation driving up the prices of native workers' labor.

Also, >Mass imigration will be seen as a foreign invasion

What is Hebe Inc. in the region for?

Human capital and labor? Then why would they import long term workers? Get the spic brigades in, build your shit and ship them out. Cheaper than building accomodation for them, and you can't release them "into the wild" when everything is privatized and everyone is banded together.

Natural resources? Literally a foreign invasion then – circle the wagons and grab your rifles.

A market? "Would YOU give business to the Godless megacorp that seeks to destroy our homes by importing thugs into our land?"

>Also if Communism is against human nature, wouldn't Anarchism be against human nature?

Commie definition of anarchism, i.e. no hierarchies? Yeah, that shit won't work unless you lobotomize everyone and take care of them externally.

>How can thousands of years of governments be thrown away, when men desire to rule and be ruled?

Instititutes of social organization have existed since the dawn of time. The conception of the state as a monopoly on ultimate decision making isn't. You had the oriental empires, you had Rome, but in Europe the ball only started rolling in the early medieval, IIRC. And it didn't ramp up to a full shitshow until post-WWI. Nobody here is against law and order, or the concept of governance. It's just that the moment you delegate the first order of decision making to something or someone, (((they)))'ll inevitably snowball it into what you see around yourself today. Don't give them the chance.

>and exclude degenerates from your […] markets.

Have fun starving to death, retard

>>74995

And? It doesn't mean 8chan is a boomer hangout.

>>75005

How would we remove nationalists and Jews without the state? I'm assuming private military, cops, or militias. Also why remove the Jews when Rand, Friedman, Rothbard, and Mises were all Jews?

> tribes of about 250 people

Since when did you browse /liberty/, Jack Donovan? :^)

>>75006

How are National Socialists and Marxists the same? Both are authoritarians, but at least National Socialists believe in private property and wouldn't kill all of us because we're white middle class or higher males. White identity is the idea that whites have the right to exist and have their own countries. If you take the ethno route too far, you'll have Blacks and Muslims claiming to be German or French. There's a difference between racial and political ethno identity.

>>75013

I could agree with that, but I do think even a small government should do more than enforce contracts and property rights. Honestly America had it right before the Left started to abuse the welfare clause, but that's another thread.

>>75019

Jesus Christ. I thought the other Anon was just busting my balls.

>>75020

As long as I have the liberty to lynch you then sure.

>>75046

Is that you, Morrakiu? Did you ever release the parody song album? All seriousness you and the other anons made some great arguments. I never thought /liberty/ would be so based. I always thought you guys would either be degenerates who only cared about condomless polyamory and smoking weed or John Galt LARPers.

My last question is how can turn the meme of Ancapistan into reality? I think you guys have a better shot than the Alt Right and /pol/. However, the Libertarian Party is a joke and both Pauls never won their presidential bids.

>>75053

Vidrelated.

Generally, support and push for secession and delegation of powers further and further down the chain.

If you can empower a federal state over a supernational state ala EU, do so. If you can empower a regional state over a federal state (without risking empowering a supernational state), do that. And so forth.

That's the general idea. In practice, step one is keep fighting for closed borders.

There are two demographics in the US don't breed below replacement rate: first generation immigrants and white right winger, the further right – the more offspring.

With Gen Z coming up to vote in the next decade, I expect the 1968 mass immigration ploy to go down the shitter, and the welfare state to be cut back. A couple generations on the US will return to its ~90% white homeostasis.

Avoid paying taxes to the best of your ability. Convert as much of your cash into other assets when it's time to once again bribe Uncle Sam so he doesn't shoot your dog and take your shit.

Propagate ideas that challenge authority and credibility of politicians and governmental workers. Considering what most of them are, it shouldn't be too hard to do.

Place emphasis on building ties within your community, family, and church. These are social organisations that aren't the government, and therefore are competing with the government.

Avoid debt, stay in shape, etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>75053

>My last question is how can turn the meme of Ancapistan into reality?

Someone, somewhere, is going to have to grow the balls to secede, whether by force or legal battle The latter is pretty much impossible. Doesn't have to be a big area, or even a major one. But once you set that first precedent, the floodgates have opened. Companies will star moving their headquarters to this area because of zero regulations and zero taxes. Hell, companies themselves will start seceding from the union. I figure this will only happen if public opinion has shifted enough in the private property direction that it won't be seen as all that controversial. In this scenario, whatever state claims ownership over the territory has become extremely weak and ineffectual, this also being the reason anti-state sentiment has flourished. Alternatively, you could see ancapistan appear in seceding from a stronger government, as a result of one or several large companies banding together and choosing to secede, bringing their employees along with them. I find the latter highly unlikely because corporations tend to be first in line at the government trough.

>>74988

This may help

https://mises.org/blog/libertarian-view-nationalism-secession-and-ethnic-enclaves

>>75051

robots?

look for the term "covenant community" as you browse this board

in case you are lazy I will go over the basic princeples anyway

if you truly own your land with no one above you, you can exclude anyone you want from it for any reason, including their parentage or the color of their skin if you care about such a thing

if you can convince your neighbors to exclude on the same basis as you, perhaps by contract, then you have formed a covenant community that excludes whatever group or on the more extreme end only includes a certain group.

this is all hunkey dorey with the NAP which is the closest thing to a "rule" there is in a theoretical ancap society, no aggression has been committed

>>74995

Brennan is 24

Why would anyone want to adopt the 'White Identity'? If it was natural for the so-called white people to organize themselves to the exclusion of other races then there would be no need for compulsion, it would arise naturally. However, by the very desire for an ethnostate is evidence of the fact that white identity is an alien and unnatural concept. I would explode it further but I've done this over and over only for the proponents of a white identity to plug their ears and ignore reason.

Also, who cares about what Aristotle said? Why should I disregard my beliefs because it contradicts what some Hellen wrote? What a pathetic way to bolster your unstable argument.

>>75069

I thought he sold the site?

>>75006

>>75074

This. There may be a white race, but there is no white identity. If you think Americans, Germans, Dutch, French and Brits will actually ever form a common identity, then you're mistaken.. Hoppe acknowledged as much, too.

>>75117

>no white identity

then what's the point of racially-segregated countries?

>>75120

I don't really give a shit about that. I'd rather live in a brown, libertarian, christian nation than a white totalitarian democracy. Thankfully, I'm not presented with that choice, as most racial foreigners are also cultural and religious foreigners.

>>75120

White multiculturalism is still multiculturalism. Countries like USA are better than nigger countries because Americans are still white, but the whites there are still disconnected from their roots.

>>75120

Protectionist policy to prevent competition.

>>81923

When's the next Burzum album coming out, Varg?

>>81952

I hope he gets off his high horse and makes more music. Varg is a LARPer who is full of shit on so many things but I still like the guy.

>>82069

Varg is like a more mature version of your average /pol/ack. It's what /pol/ might have been like if they weren't statist cucks and if they weren't gullible enough to believe everything that comes out of the mouth of a politician.

>>82095

>surprisingly accurate

Why surprisingly? I wasn't joking or anything. It's pretty much expected that only the libertarian-right would be mature enough to produce leaders, as well as make all the necessary achievements for the rest of the right. The authoritarian-right are incapable of anything else other than electing the next politician to promises them whatever they want.

>>82099

I say surprisingly because I'm used to most discussion about Varg to be filled with memes. Take nothing from it Anon.

>The authoritarian-right are incapable of anything else other than electing the next politician to promises them whatever they want.

This.

>>82101

Nobody's come to my door. Nothing's illegal if you don't get caught.

>>82101

Just because you're morally justified in a shootout with the feds doesn't mean it's the ideal outcome or the best way to promote liberty.

Frankly, every person who says "White identity" or "Black identity" or etc. is a collectivist moron. The achievements of people who look like you are not your own achievements. Its typical leech behavior, except instead of money, it's for respect.

>>82126

Anyone that does not defect under the tragedy of the commons is a moron. You are not the group. Fish the ocean unrestrained. If you don't defect the oceans wont survive because of your decision you being a small fly.

>>74988

>Is Ancapistan compatible with white identity and a white ethno state?

If you want to have your own ethnocommune, you can found one. If Hoppe is to be believed, those will even naturally form. If you want an ethnostate, no. You can't have that. If you do have a state, then if Hoppe is to be believed, you can severely restrict immigration. Basically: Ancapistan beats ethnostate, ethnostate beats state. In the same vain, anarchocapitalism beats monarchy beats democracy.

Me, I dislike ethnonationalism. Racial theories are easy and flexible to apply, but their explanatory power is not that big compared to theories based on culture and religion. They also have this nasty tendency to let culture and religion take a backseat in the mind of well-meaning conservatives, which kills the conservative in the long-term. I consider myself a religious chauvinist first, then a cultural chauvinist, and then, at a distant third, a race realist.

>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?

Well, Aristotle was raised in the political system of his time. It is hard to overstate his importance as a philosopher, but his knowledge was not divine. Sometimes, he got things wrong. What you mention is an instance of him being mostly right.

It is true that man is a social animal. He must live in a community, he will generally be happiest if he has a family, he will act as if he's communicating ideas even when he isn't communicating them to anyone (as when a lone man is writing in a diary), and so on. No one would deny that. Furthermore, I believe it's true that many people want to belong to a hierarchy of some sort. What people can do without is coercive rule, however. When they're part of a family, have a workplace, and go to church, what else do they need? Will they really feel more fulfilled if they share the role of "citizen" with millions of other people they have nothing to do with? Will it make them more content if a fat, rich guy in Washington who never held anything but a public sector job in his whole life can tax them and regulate their drinking behavior? I don't think so. Neither would Aristotle. In his time, the state was small, and citizens were raised in it. The polis really was the center of human life, and the playground of all social action. The same cannot be said of the modern state, or of any larger empire.

>>82155

I'm just following the logic of rejecting collectivism

>>82146

>If you don't defect the oceans wont survive because of your decision you being a small fly.

There must be some deep philosophy in there, but I do not understand it.

>>82200

Voting for example. If I do vote it wont change the election result. If I don't vote it wont change the election result. I am not America, I am one citizen of it.

Only when done by many many people do things like this make a difference. But if many many people are doing something, if you decide to say fuck it and dont do it, then the many many people will be unchanged.

cringe, go back to reddit with your pinochet memes you underage faggot

>>82227

Kicking people off your own property / contracting with them before they enter your property is not fascism.

>>75006

I'd wager that the greater the similarity, the higher the chance and quality of co-existing. Take the US-Irish are one island away from the Anglos, yes they were culturally different and WASPS didn't like them but integration has been essentially totally successful. Why is there often a more generalized Asian region in a city that can be subdivided into Korean, Chinese etc. neighborhoods? Because they're similar enough.

> Is Ancapistan compatible with white identity and a white ethno state?

Ancapistan is compatible with any group of people who don't infringe upon the (negative) human rights of others in ancapistan. If this group happens to be white nationalists, so be it.

> Also if Communism is against human nature, wouldn't Anarchism be against human nature?

This is a decent question on the face of it, but I think there are quite serious differences that make communism unworkable.

Ancapistan requires a genuine respect for individual rights (including not stealing via taxation or infantilizing via tons of laws), which would indeed require some psychological evolution on the parts of the participants to achieve and hold together.

Communism on the other hand requires people to freely give the majority of the proceeds of their work to people they don't even know, and runs afoul of the economic calculation problem in any case. (The max size of a workable commune-type community IRL is about 250 as someone else mentioned, and even then they only seem to survive over time if they are highly religious). Also worth noting is the fact that communism has an abysmal track record of oppression and democide, while those countries moving closest to ancap principles (universal respect for human rights) have better than competing countries over time.

In other words, ancapistan requires a plausible future degree of social evolution, whereas communism requires people to be both geniuses (economic calculation) and saints (freely and effectively working for strangers) at the same time.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Economic_calculation_problem

> 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.

People can still act politically inside their freely-joined groups, and lobby others outside of their groups for voluntary adoption of their groups and views (animal rights, religious association, etc.) If they want to follow the teachings of some leader in some area or another, ancapistan would allow this as long as their right to self-determination was respected should they later see fit to leave, whereas communism would not come anywhere close to respecting peoples freedom of association.