/liberty/ - Liberty

>>96617

>to WE WUZing about Rome and Mediterraneans being "not real whites",

I always thought people said Italians aren't white as a joke

>to the neo-paganism

Pretty much have Varg to blame for that

<if you have brown hair ur not white

<ur ancestors were Pagan

<my ancestors are my god's

>and haven't read a word of Rothbard unless it was some out-of-context quote in an image macro

The problem with the alt right now is that everyone just dismisses Rothbard. When you quote him in an argument they immediately say

<(((rothbard)))

the next problem is that on places like 4/pol/ everyone just shills for evola and no one will read authors that aren't evola, Mosley, and Kevin MacDonald

Personally I don't even know if there's a libertarian to facist pipeline with the nu-right. It's just straight to fascism

>curious 15 year old wonders on to /pol/ for edgy humor

>sees some "redpills"

>wants to be edgy, contrarian, and have the perception of having knowledge no one else does

>they absorb "redpill" as the truth

>skip libertarianism, immediately go to fascism

The rise of economic illiterates like Tucker don't help either.

>>96617

>>96623

For the record: We were - in fact - Romans and shit.

Folk religions are religions (and therefore spooky) but in terms of religious belief they are every bit as valid and good as other beliefs, if not superior (as I'd argue they are).

Being "Mediterranean" doesn't make you white, have you seen those people?

>>96640

Not one single person who wants liberty has left the "liberty movement". If they are a "former" advocate of freedom and prosperity, they never were to begin with. You don't go from "Freedom is the only way, yeah!" to "Please steal my freedom away, my surrogate father of The State! Hurt me more!!!". It simply isn't done.

>Any non-explicitly right wing movement ALWAYS becomes left-wing.

You meme-rotted troglodyte. What is right wing? What is an explicit movement? What is left wing? Where is this historical inevitability defined and from what does it spring? Stop being a subhuman, exercise those brain cells.

What you're seeing is memes, nothing more and nothing less. It's a meant to help more normalcattle into pens so they're more useful to the state.

>>96614

Kind of but not really.

If you actually do subscribe to an idea under the umbrella of 'Classical Liberalism' then no, you wont become alt-right because alt right is diametrically opposed to the Liberal way of thinking.

If you are some edgy kid who got into the sort of meme libertarian movement, and did so only for a desire to be shocking and edgy, then yeah, you probably will gravitate towards the alt right. People into Hoppe, Pinochet, ect. sort of stuff.

>>96652

I used to be alt right. I still like Hoppe but I don't see myself becoming alt right again. Also I believe the Pinochet praise is ironic.

If you accept freedom and individualism, it sets you against communism, and for meritocracy.

If you're for meritocracy, you stand back. And see white people succeeding despite hardships more and being more emphatic. While dark races failing despite handouts and acting like sociopaths.

This isn't racist, it's observation of reality occurring. If you're even halfway honest with yourself, you can say that White people are more EVOLUTIONARILY FIT to living in large, organized groups. Now they might suck in other environments, but that's a different story.

Even completely objective Artificial Intelligence, when created to predict crime, "targeted" blacks a lot more.

>>96664

>Also I believe the Pinochet praise is ironic.

It comes across as some 4D layered meme to me. I think its mostly people liking a dictator out of edgyness and trolling commies on the internet with helicopter memes, but I do think there is a sizable amount of people who will take those memes seriously and try to shill for the Pinochet regime. I dont think people actually realize how fucking brutal he was, or realize that Chile was under a perpetual state of emergency under his rule, which meant the military could arrest you for no reason

>>96680

It's just another example that goes to show you fascism doesn't work. But the helicopter memes are funny as shit and make commies butthurt so I'm all for it.

>>96675

Meritocracy is the essence of statism. And it's a cultural trap set by the State's cronies to further their agenda.

Merit is something that comes from individual judgement and it costs nothing.

The State always justify its actions with "meritocracy". People who work for the State deserved that place because it was so judged by the bureaucrats. People who get the license from the State to perform a certain job to the exclusion of others, deserve it because they got a State degree or passed a State exam.

If you really are for meritocracy, you are in favor of the State and centralized power.

Instead markets are about value. When you are in the market you need to exchange value. You can't just judge someone and assign him a role, a job, an advantage. You need to personally use your money and the other parts must perform the job. Your judgment about someone only has an impact limited to your personal life and singular action, not everybody.

>>96614

>>96617

I swear to god these two posts were copy-pasted from last year. But yeah, basically it's a bunch of fags who got drawn to Big L libertarianism, realized they actually have to justify being a violent shit head, and then decided they didn't have the mental fortitude so they call themselves "Alt-Right" instead to justify wanting to be violent towards other people.

>>96617

Good post, CSA.

>>96675

AI made mostly by whites.

>>96730

When were Libertarians more violent than the alt-right?

>>96695

>Instead markets are about value.

Merit is a form of value, you said so yourself.

>Merit is something that comes from individual judgement

There many markets that uses merit as a form of value. The sports industry is one of the biggest.

>>96730

The userbase of this board is a small core of regular posters plus a revolving door of NEETSocs and commie NPCs whose rhetoric is so similar they may as well be the same person. There's bound to be some repeated or almost-repeated posts in there somewhere.

>>96757

Gonna try to explain myself better, since English is not my first language.

Merit is a judgement people make.

I can judge a product A to be better than product B, but I'll still buy B because I only have the resources to buy B. That's why meritocracy has nothing to do with the free market.

Meritocracy is statism because meritocracy is about judgement and not about renouncing to resources to buy something.

For example when the government's bureaucrats choose who to hire, they choose based on meritocracy because they hire based on who they think has merit. They don't have to renounce to their resources since they have unlimited money stolen from someone. This always happens no matter what they choose. Even when there is corruption, it's still a meritocracy because the person who decides to hire is making a choice based on his judgement and not on the need to allocate resources.

> sports industry is one of the biggest.

There is no industry based on merit. Industries are based on individuals allocating resources. You are fooling yourself in thinking athletes deserve their place because they win games. But they don't always win and often lose, and yet they get a place in a team or play anyway. They have a place in the market because someone is willingly to transfer resources to them, but it's not a meritocracy.

The point is that the meritocracy, being based on a personal judgement, doesn't give space to having other people make choices that we don't like. In meritocracy a person can intervene in a voluntary transaction to impose is will. In the free market instead you have to respect choices other people make that you may find disgusting and bad.