/pnd/ - Politics, News, Debate

I would have some kind of law that if big corporations have a monopoly on something and small companies can't feasibly compete (e.g. ISPs), then the big companies are more beholden to the first amendment. If they want to exclude icky people from their platform, they must first support small companies in the same field until there is no longer a monopoly by the big corporations.

The first amendment is of course a more specific hardline version of the one US has, specifically defining freedom of expression through art and imagery, and anything that attempts to contradict it as high treason. Also the freedom to own and share media related to events, for example Tarrant shooting video. Maybe the freedom to adjust/refuse service to anyone for any reason (except for the monopoly rule).

I don't think democracy is a bad idea, it's just a bad idea when done naively assuming that it's infallible. Anything with a dictator or something can easily be taken over by a group of kikes given enough time, and good luck salvaging that without a hostile takeover against the army.

First and foremost, only people of age 20+ who have legally lived in the country since birth, never committed serious crimes, and haven't lived on welfare for significant portion of their life are allowed to vote. For every 20 extra years you've lived in the country, your vote will count for another. I'd add an IQ test on top of that but I feel like that could be abused (e.g. if you use real math instead of common core backwards shittery then your IQ score is lowered).

Secondly everything that the government does, everything they decide, all the discussions they have must be public, all discussions livestreamed publicly unless they pertain to war planning or something that an "enemy" would gain an advantage knowing. Anyone who has any kind of legislative power must be either voted into that place by the people, or be underlings of someone that people voted for, and they cannot be "promoted" unless people vote for it. People are allowed to start polls at any time to vote any government official out of the government, though it requires a very significant vote. If a person who was voted for wants to do something contrary to what they said during the election, they must resign and start over with a new election.

>Include how you intend to make your nation prosperous and virtuous.

You do that by making people love the country, but accomplishing that seems very difficult in a world where internet kikes can paint you as the devil and people are manipulated by degenerate entertainment that gives them hourly dopamine injections.

>>106749

You basically just want to go back to the Founding Father's ideal of America. What ideology do you follow or what would you label yourself? It doesn't sound like natsoc

>>106840

How would you achieve all of that without some authoritarianism? And how can free markets be compatible with Christianity if it puts profits above all else?

Great thread by the way. I might talk about my ideal society later

>>106853

In what capacity does Christianity put profit above all else? The Founders achieved a white ethnostate where only men voted using only constitutional constraints. Why do you think it’s impossible?

>>106855

You misunderstood me. Free markets/capitalism places profits above everything else. How will his Christian state survive when free markets seek profits above morals and religion?

>>106857

Same way they survived before the jewish takeover of economics. Is that hard to understand? All we have to do is make usury punishable by death and the rest of society self-polices economic behavior. No more Keynesianism, no more fiat currency, no more MMT, no more keeping up with the joneses or materialism or consumerism. All of this is jewish.

>>106749

Why wouldn't you just nationalize a monopoly? Honestly the effort a lot of you go to in order to outline anything that isn't actually National Socialism is amusing.

>>106882

Once you understand they aren't arguing in good faith and are just trying to maintain their system of rent-taking, they make a lot more sense.

>>106875

>No more Keynesianism, no more fiat currency, no more MMT

The NSDAP rebuilt Germany in 6 years using proto-MMT. It works. People like you don't want regular citizens to understand how easy it is to design and administer an economic system that works more for their benefit.

>>106882

> These surely can’t fix themselves solely by killing usurers.

Those are fixed by executing CEOs.

>>106882

>companies whose executives will be killed for supporting fags will still support fags

Really, anon?

>be regulated

A society that is ethnically homogenous doesn’t need global surveillance systems, anon. How the fuck is this not readily apparent to you?

>>106893

>oy vey goyim the not zees we’re COMMUNISTS!

>oy vey PEOPLE LIKE YOU don’t want whites to be communist therefore PEOPLE LIKE YOU are bad

Zero effort spam, kike. Your outgrouping propaganda is pathetic.

>>106920

Unfortunately for you, you've already lost the debate in the real world. It would have been great if you didn't launch a 70 year attack on working class Whites with mass third world immigration before this all came to a head, but you did and no amount of you pretending to be a White nationalist or a "true" National Socialist is going to work.

MMT works. It's not magic, but it works.

>>106924

>you’re a jew because you refuse to support literal fucking communism

>oy vey I called it a different name therefore it’s not communism anymore

>ignore that only jews support it

>ignore that all jews around the world are actively promoting it

>ignore that every single aspect of the ZOG is shilling for it

>oy vey it’s what Hitler would have wanted

Zero effort spam, kike. Confirmed for MMT shill.

>>106950

MMT is as gentile as it gets.

>>106970

You know when someone tells a commie about all the horrible things communism did and they say it wasn't real communism?

I hope you can see that's exactly the same thing you do when you defend the free market.

Just like the ideal of communism will never exist in the real world, when you attempt to implement free markets on the real world all you'll ever get is people who make a lot of money bribing governments, monopolies developing through backroom deals, and pretty much every kind of abuse, corruption and nastiness you can imagine.

This is real free market.

You're not wowing anyone with your stupid lolbertarian antics.

>>106951

>communism wasn’t created by jews

The balls on this yid.

>>107047

To add to the idea of a founding document, from now I will call it the Order for simplicitys sake. It would focus on keeping demographics from changing negativly, moral obligations and enviornmental laws. All laws on it are punishable by death and citizens are allowed to play judge, jury, executioner no matter what the gov says. However, they still need damning evidence. So if a man opperates a strip club or a wife cheats on her spouse anyone with evidence can straight up KILL them and present evidence to a judge. This also applies to negative demographic shifts so if the gov ships in foreigners in mass* then people can assemble and deport or even kill them if necessary. If the gov tries to arrest them than it has commited high treason and a rebellion is demanded.

Thoughts? I'm curious what anons think.

>>106732

I would utilize the same US Constitution but with some legal reforms, mostly when it comes to politics and government (as it has become so corrupted). All laws since 1913 would be de-facto abolished. I think some reforms that need to be made would be mandatory term limits for all politicians. Outlawing any corporate lobbying of politicians and governmental personnel, with a minimum sentence of 50 years for anyone caught in the act of bribery or contribution of any kind to a politician or govt employee. Any laws that pass into law must be re-addressed every 12 years by Congress and must be re-passed into law. This would hold government and their enforcement of laws more accountable over the years as it would force debate and more transparency for every law passed. Another reform would be abolishing dual citizenship. You could not hold citizenship in another country if you were to become a citizen of the US. There would also be strict limits on immigration: all immigrants would be vetted and have to learn English courses, as well as learn about the laws and Constitution, and only if they have worked and paid taxes for at least 20 years they could request a voter ID. Which brings me to the next reform: mandatory voter ID nationwide to reduce mass voter fraud (as is so rampant today). Another reform would be arms: any kind of firearm LE & Army troops use would be legally available to law-abiding citizens to buy too (that includes full auto, RPGs, flash grenades, etc). BIGGEST REFORM: no central banking system could ever be adopted as it would be considered de-facto treason. No centralized control over currency. States could adopt their own currencies or bartering systems, so could local counties within the States. Currencies could be backed by whatever those communities choose to back them with. The economy of the US would go back to being very decentralized in many ways, with much wider opportunities for average people to compete in the markets (which would be real markets of tangible wealth, not junk debt IOUs).

>>107050

Would anything be more fascist in your nation?

Like for me, there would only be two parties in my state, The libertarian Right party and the Authoritarian Right party, Agreeing on right wing economical policies, BUT, sometimes things happen, You get infiltrated by the jew, the authoritarian party steps in, fixes the problem, then leans back when the problem is averted.

The only arguments i want to hear come out of a congress is "Does government need to be in control of that…. right now?"

Yes? ok how long? sure, fix it,

no? Then fuck off and let the free market handle it.

>>106732

I would bring the USA and Canada together into one federated state, dividing the Canadian provinces into states but keeping the provincial government as well, and in the US I would put organize the states into provinces while keeping the state governments as well. Most of the functions currently held by the two federal governments will be instead delegated to the provinces, such as industry regulation and social programs like social security and government healthcare. Each province would get to decide for themselves how they legislate these particulars.

Citizenship in a province would be optional, if you list yourself as a provincial citizen then you agree to pay the listed provincial taxes and obey the listed provincial regulations in exchange for the benefits that your province is offering. So you could opt out of the shared healthcare and related taxes by not being a provincial citizen, only a state and federal one. State boundaries would also be re-negotiated, with California being remade into a province divided into several states, and possibly including the mexican state of baja, and the northern californian state of jefferson would probably vote to join the Cascadian province. Similar swaps would occur all over the country where cultural boundaries have shifted since the 1870's. Quebec would likely secede rather than federate further, and I have no problem with that, an independent and cordial Quebec (enlarged by native canadian tribes who would likely leave with them) would be a net positive for the new federation to have as a neighbor. Certainly better than attempting to hold them to a federation against their will. The US and Canadian armed forces would remain separate to preserve military honor and to guard against political capture of the young federation by leaving the military establishment mostly unchanged. Over time, I assume the canadians would end up handling most special forces and the americans would end up supplying the equipment and most of the grunts.

We should create a political party in the United States called the Nationalsozialistische Demokratische Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP) that's designed to steal votes from the Republican party so that they become uncompetitive and our party will replace the republicans or the overtun window will shift to the "left" causing the centrist Democrat party to become the closest thing to the "right" party and a "far left" party will occupy the position the Democrats once had. Either way we must destroy the republicans.

>>107081

He might as well be. He was mentored by the jew Rothbard, is a Senior Fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, which is of course named after the jew von Mises, etc. He's no different than one of the token communist goyim on the other side of the shekel.

All forms of degeneracy must be banned too the point of death or through social shaming. Women cannot under any circumstances have political power at all. A new state requires a religion to mold its power into the hearts of the populace therefore a reformed version of Christianity must be made without the tenets of social Marxism and liberalism see Christian Identity or Positive Christianity for more details aka its an ethnoreligion. All Jews must be subjected to a point of outright treatment like a virus and we must cleanse them out and even going into other countries and rid them of the Semitic plague. The 1st amendment must be enforced too the point where social media companies have to accept it and can’t censor it unless it’s pedoshit. Also a person cannot be fired for rightwing political views. Women cannot have access to social media. Social media should also be limited, too much technology detaches people from nature and from their local community. Social media should mainly be used to help educate the populace. Only independent and state media should be allowed any form of corporate media has been shown to be an utter failure as seen in the USA in trying to mold people into bugmen for Jews to control easier. Some form of eugenics should be enforced such as no downies. Only white men over the age of 30 who own property and have kids and have high IQs and are social(not a libshit/cuckservative/commie) should vote. Boys must be taught to be men and girls should be taught to be women. We must enforce natural law. The leader can either be a monarch or a dictator figure that has gained their post through a meritocratic process and through ascending a higher order such as the SS, Spartans, and the Greco-Roman and Germanic philosophers. Nonwhites cannot live or own property or have any influence in politics, business, media, education, and especially finance in the country. Colonization of space must also be a priority for the nation.

think this is waht you are loking for

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zew65U1ghhc

test

>>107048

I would still want the trial before execution, Even with solid evidence, just to let the terror build up.

It also gives everyone a chance to make peace with whatever god they choose before they meet their end.

>>107478

That would be the ideal norm, yes. But if the gov refuses to punish people for the crimes then it would allow citizens to do so instead.

>>107090

actually, let me ask you another question,

Why would free markets be so bad if you could keep the Jew out forever? White christian, or white heathen nation, no jew ever again steps foot inside, free markets are still bad because?

>>107812

Evil always will exist. An ideal system is difficult to breach. Permanently.

>>107812

In a free markets what would stop companies from outsourcing all their labor needs to third world shit holes where they can pay a cent per day to slaves and deprive your own nation of manufacturing and jobs while stake holders rake in all the profit by paying nothing to workers and selling the final product for the inflated price of a first world economy?

>>107681

>Can a jew be right about something?

Not when he is promoting quintessentially Jewish ideas. Other than that, once in a while yes, but they rarely add anything new, just copy the ideas of some whites.

>there where many jews in hitlers SS

They were not Jews, just Germans with some Jewish ancestry. Not enough to turn them into kikes. Having 0.001% of kike ancestry automatically turning you into one of (((them))) is a modern meme used by the inner circle of the mafia to surround itself with some buffer and get what are essentially shabbos goyim support them without even truly considering them as their own.

>>107852

>Who cares if they do? with a deregulated market, thre is nothing stopping Joe Blow from picking up where these asshole left off.

lmao of course there is

There are huge barriers to entry imposed by the market itself especially when someone has the competitive advantage of slave labor.

>>106732

Dear OP clearly you did not understand your own OP.

>Democracy Broken

>All forms of Government infiltrated

Government is a semitic institution.

Government is the death of the European people.

There is no 'good government' only bad and genocidal governments.

>>106749

>>106749

>For every 20 extra years you've lived in the country, your vote will count for another.

This is utterly fucking retarded mate. You should be embarrassed, but I'll outline my own stupid ideas.

>105+ IQ and basic political knowledge required to vote, verified with unique tests

>higher corporate taxes

>unmarried women banned from voting

These are just things I constantly pine about

>>108431

Unmarried men without children should be banned also. Otherwise your government will be infested with faggots.

For me, if people have no ‘skin in the game’ they don’t get ANY say in the future or politics of the nation. Our nations are an unbroken chain from our remotest ancestors to our most distant future descendants. No descendants? NO DECISION MAKING ABILITY.

>>108458

Why the fuck would you want to live in a corporate state? Why do retards such as yourself have such an obsession over companies?

Gee, I can't wait until policy is determined by representatives from McDonald's and Walmart. I'm sure that won't be soulless at all.

>>107852

>corporatism

Lol, wrong choice of words, boomer. The word you're looking for is "corporatocracy". Corporatism realtea to a Hobbesian perception of the state as an organic body (corpora) with each part acting as an organ would, in full cooperation with the others. Corporatism is a government based on natural law and interclass cooperation. Corporatism is ultimately what we seek.

>>107852

>corporatism

Lol, wrong choice of words, boomer. The word you're looking for is "corporatocracy". Corporatism realtea to a Hobbesian perception of the state as an organic body (corpora) with each part acting as an organ would, in full cooperation with the others. Corporatism is a government based on natural law and interclass cooperation. Corporatism is ultimately what we seek.

>>108461

As opposed to the eternal ratfucks in the Senate that never term out? Nah, replace that whole chamber with the Chamber of Fasci and Corporations, I don't give a fuck.

>>108461

Not McDonald's and Walmart. Vertical unions representing food service and retail respectively.

>>108409

How can you support natsoc and be completely for free markets? Or are you just not a natsoc?

>>107047

How can you have free speech and then ban leftist garbage and debates on moral "rights"? What would be "reactionary" in a state where no dissident views are allowed? Why would you have people's referendums for a leader who is selected for life?

>>106732

> Low effort post

There should be a monarch and a priestly aristocratic class that focuses on spiritual good.

Free markets are permitted but anything harmful to the public is banned (no cigs, drugs, alcohol, fast food, gambling, pornography).

Scientific discovery is permissible but must not be harmful to the people or to religion.

Academic debate and discussion is allowed but must not be promoted politically.

Women must be mothers and wives, she can only get out of this to either follow a spiritual life or if she has outstanding intelligence and can contribute meaningfully in another area.

Marriage must be arranged by families but marrying cousins or close family members is against the law.

European culture must be front and center of propaganda, school leavers should know the illiad, the odyssey, the republic, the havarmal, the baghavad gita through education, television and movies.

Boys should be physically fit and poetically literate.

The empire should be at mono ethnic and large areas of forest should be completely wild.

Factory farming, zoos, vivisection and animal exploitation should be banned.

>>108677

You didn’t address homosexuals, pedophilia, jews or niggers.

>>108679

any form of sexual degeneracy is harmful to the people so those who commit homosexual acts and pedophiles would be executed. Men with homosexual feelings would do well to follow a spiritual path.

Culture is mono ethnic so there would be no other groups.

>>108672

Simple. We forcefully educate people about how bad things got, and why we cant go there again. Communism does this but as a left wing, they see their "revolution" against the capitalists as ongoing, my system is just a right wing version where we are constatly in "revolution" against the left.

As for the leader and referedums: The leader isn't a king, he has more power than a president though. Ultimatly referedums would be rare but over important topics that surface and are currently unforseen and not covered in the new constitution (tech related debates), or to remove said leader.

>>107812

Traditional societies typically have a caste system, whether permeable or not. The priest/philosopher at the top, the warrior/King below that, the farmer/artisan below that, and the merchant last.

Free markets still elevate the merchant over everyone else. It still turns the highest ideals of the society into making money, rather than nobler pursuits. Even if a society doesn't start out that way, those who make the most money will be those most intently focused on profits over everything else, so they will promote views that will help make profits. Degeneracy is profitable; DINKs are high spenders while traditional families are not, you get twice the work out of them etc. Divorced families require twice the houses, twice the vehicles. Immigrant labor is cheaper because they'll accept worse conditions and worse pay, and will have no qualms about leeching off public benefits that citizens would rightly leave alone.

Jews may have been the worst of the bunch because they were doing it the longest and have codified fraud into their religion, but it's not like they're the only ones that do it. Many of the gilded age monopolists were gentiles that were promoting the crap I mentioned above, from funding the birth control pill research to funding Kinsey's "studies" to creating Tavistock and worse. Maybe the worst of all was their creation of the public school system, which replaced a very effective private school system to one where they could dictate what their future consumers would want and how their future workers would behave. All of this was done under the most laissez faire system the world had ever known, and led directly to the system we have now, where the bankers control our money entirely and thus have complete control over our society.

To truly have a sustainable system, we need to have a system that puts the needs of the nation above everything else. The priest/philosopher caste can't be ruled by money. (Science, esp social science, falls under that category in the modern day. Law does too.) If they need to fight on the market to survive, they'll be paid to betray their nation or be replaced by those that do. Warriors/kings will become mere mercenaries, like our police force and politicians have become, rather than patriots like Andrew Jackson who fought the banks. Usury will have to be outlawed as a form of fraud (one sided open ended contract), and in the initial years money would have to be a sovereign free floating currency at least until the international criminals have been deprived of their gold. Gottfried Feders system seemed to work pretty well.

>>108752

I decided to elaborate on the 4 castes idea a little more. Castes were not restricted to India, Japan and feudal Europe had an almost identical system, and often it was not based just on birth but on natural proclivities.

1. Priest caste is anyone determining the proper way to live. They have the most influence because they determine the values everyone else holds. In the modern day they would include priests, social scientists, philosophers, abstract sciences, higher law courts, teachers, media and entertainers.

2. Warrior/King class is the enactment/enforcement of the values set by 1. They include the military, politicians, police, lower courts (criminal), tax agencies, intelligence agencies, government bureaucracy, etc.

3. Farmer/Artisan class is the broad economic base upon which everyone else relies. Includes any kind of extractive/productive enterprise, farming, mining, manufacturing, etc. It would also include artists, architects, engineers, IT, applied science. To the extent that a caste is less set, this is the group from which the higher castes recruit.

4. Merchants, banks, advertising, etc. Also includes entertainment to the extent it's not included in 1. This group largely fills in the gaps left by the other groups. It was largely looked down upon though because the line between living on a thin margin and actually clipping corners is very thin. The line between pushy advertising and false claims is very thin. And lastly all sorts of criminal activity can be masked as merchant activity, and traders form natural intelligence networks as they determine who has what and who wants what.

>>108681

Sounds like you have a plan.

>>108752

More (((government)))? Wow, that has never been done before anon. With all of the new things and technology at our fingertips we should probably return to something the jews invented that failed repeatedly in the past.

this take is so laughably bad, it wouldn't be a modern government in any sense of the word. You are talking about bureaucratic teams that only deal in resource management and GDP. Ancient civilizations were not invented by jews, jews have never had a real, meaningful blood and soil civilization that is why jews are the way that they are.

As long as this nation is a homogenous society the best way to go is for the government to set basic rules and let the free market work. The bigger the form of government and intervention the bigger will be the crashing weight on the economy and on businesses. Now what does a set of basic rules include may you ask ? To me at least it would be a police force and system and a military force and system, one must be able to protect his boarders interests both inside and outside, along with that a basic form of government. As for currency i wouldn't use currency, i would use money. Through the butchery of the word money it came to be synonymous to currency nowadays. Central banks should be considered criminal organizations and the Keynesian kikes running them should be burnt at the stake. That fucking paper back should be immediately exchangable to gold or silver, that's the meaning of real money, and that something must be sound ( Aka 1$ will always be immidiately exchangable to 1oz of gold not 0.99 oz not 1.01 oz but 1 oz if you set it to 1oz. That doesn't necessarily need a paperback even. It can be done electronically as well. ).

Now once sound money is established the way the free market works is through something called market price discovery. Basically it will settle on a price that's just right. If the price on something let's say bread is too big more people will see an opportunity and join on the production of said bread to make more money. That will cause an overabundance of goods and through the competition the price of it will drop to something reasonable. The companies that went under will either be bought by competitors or reformed into something more efficient and bounce back on the competition. If the price of bread is too small there is going to be deficits on the supply of bread and less people will be inclined to make bread which of course forces the price to rise. And both of those will happen untill a set price balances out. A very simple supply and demand equation.

As Romans proved and of course as America proved by the founding of the Federal Reserve the more you devalue your currency and meddle with the free market and you don't let it short itself out the more bubbles you create and the bigger and worse the depressions your country goes through are. When the prices aren't organic and your currency has no value, which is the point we have reached now you can expect for things to take a huge downward swing ( deflation ) before hyperinflation. That downward spiral continues till the empire completely crumbles ( see how both Nixon and Diocletian tried the same thing and predictably failed, Nixon with the Nixon Shock and Diocletian with the Edict of Maximum prices ). Of course Rome didn't collapse in Diocletian's time and neither did America in Nixon's time and both of these were later repealed but they set an ugly precedent on an already ugly stage, not to mention that business owners just couldn't run businesses anymore cause they basically weren't profitable.

The nature of politicians is to deficit spend on their time as president to deliver on their "promises" along with continuing the cycle of giving benefits to their lobbies, and kick the can later down the road. Let the next guy take the fall, that's what they are all thinking. That means appease the kikes on the outside by sending em care packages, bail out the kikes on the inside so they can buyback their corporate stock and inflate it for a nice bonus on their CEO. And they do that by the federal reserve printing more currency into existence. In return they get bumps from the same kikes for being good goys for their campaigns. That causes a wealth transfer cause the value of said currency is taken away from the middle class US citizen that pays his taxes and given to them that have it fresh and ready to go since the value of that currency is on who spends it first. You can always print more currency into existence but you can never print more value. It's the worst of both crony capitalism and socialism what we are going through, it's a double dip untill we reach a cashless moneyless society that is completely controlled by the kikes and their cronies along with every single aspect of our lives.

Tragic isn't it? We are heading towards the final act. Once the trust on the prices is lost completely the fed will send more and more stimulus checks but nobody will be spending, that will cause a deflation, everyone will save. Some till 1 mil some till 5 mil some till 10 mil. Just like on Weimar Germany the crashing wave of spending that will come right after will cause the dollar to hyperinflate as it did the mark back there. The dollar will become a hot potato noone will want to hold. Hyperinflation before it hits looks like a slight economic recovery that's the trap everyone falls in. Of course history doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes rather interestingly. I wonder what will happen this time after the collapse.

>>108773

>homogeneous society

There are a lot of disgusting homos in our nations but I don't know where you are getting the idea that this nation is a homogeneous society

>>108773

This is like reading something Sean Hannity would write.

>>108774

I didn't say it was, i said as long as it is, and it isn't

>>108763

You call that an argument? That was pathetic.

>>108778

You call this a response. This is pathetic.

>>108763

> The (((government)))

Since governments inevitably hold a monopoly on the use of violence within a given area, all such organizations loose the incentive to perform - they become unaccountable to others. As such, governments become a breeding-ground for parasites - they have access to resources, but are not accountable for the correct/efficient/best use of those resources. And since (((the kikes))) are genetically and culturally adapted to inhabit a parasitic ecological niche, all governments will eventually become infested with kikes, inevitably transforming into (((governments))).

Wherever evil flourishes, kikes can be found controlling it. Wherever parasitism flourishes, kikes can be found profiting from it.

>>108773

> Very well written words on the necessity of cultural homogeneity, sound money, open/free/de-regulated/un-kiked markets, politicians, kikes, Cantillon effects, kiked society, and the hyperinflationary end.

Very good. A little more time spent on discussion of the Untermenschen problem, and you're one copy-edit away from perfection.

>>108777

> Lucky trips

He's right, and trips confirm it.

> America is not a homogeneous society

It's not, but isolated Eurofags often think it is.

>>108775

> Sean Hannity

Show me the segment where Hannity denounces (((the problem))) and I will eat my socks. Also, niggers, mudslimes, and assorted shitskins.

>>108792

You're just a libertarian that doesn't like jews, your whole political philosophy is based around resources and taxes.

"Letting the free market work" is the same sort of rubbish that you hear from virtually everyone on Fox News.

Your whole society is just going to be a "shopping and fucking" civilization but with some jew hate sprinkled on top.

Good job keeping any merchant class or degeneracy out with aggressive free market principles.

Sean Hannity probably doesn't even like jews if you asked him in private most conservative politicians know the deal but most of them are too short sighted to see the obvious failings in a consumer driven society.

>>108797

I know this isn't my response to give but you seem a litle lost lad. Let me help out. We have reached to this point nowadays ( proven by your post ) that people are afraid of freedom. Well guess what the free market takes care of the "merchant classes" "usury" and even the sex industry as a whole. Because the sex industry isn't as competitive kikes aren't allowed to grow their roots on something that has worked at the Golden Ages of most nations in history. The reason the sex industry and the shopping and fucking is so prevalent nowadays is excactly because these hard regulations give desperate people desperate solutions which causes degeneration of body mind and soul. Degeneration of the media they read , degeneration of their habbits and degeneration of their very being. All this is because they don't have enough so competitively they search for solutions even if those solutions are suboptimal. Why would someone after all become a worker in the sex industry if doing an honest job like brewing wine or having skills like an electrician pays more ? Why would someone become a worker in the sex industry if the media they read becomes competitively better because their profit is based on it and there is no kickback for the government or bailouts ? It's a laughable concept to entertain. Kikes cannot thrive in a free market and neither can degeneracy or untermensch. It's their natural enemy.

>>108797

> Just a libtardarian who hates kikes

No, I hate niggers too. Also mudslimes, chinks, SEAniggers, poos, etc. I also don't have a philosophy "based around resources and taxes". My philosophy is based on family.

> Free markets are rubbish

Free markets are made by free men, exercising their right to make agreements with each other. Provided things remain that way, there is nothing wrong with it. That is, freedom is incompatible with kikes.

> Shopping and fucking civilization

Given that previous such free civilizations were the creators of the greatest art and science, I'd say you're simply wrong. The world's current preoccupation with "shopping and fucking" is a result of kike (((regulation and subsidy))) of markets - it's because (((they))) run the schools, the media, the banks, the universities, the oil companies, the auto companies, the computer companies, fucking everything is in (((their))) control. Degeneracy is the result of (((control))), not freedom.

> Keeping the (((merchant class))) out

Yeah, I admit this is a problem. But it's not a problem that's unique to freedom - all (((governments))), for thousands of years, have been infiltrated and parasitized by kikes. The kikes flourish wherever (((they))) are permitted to escape the consequences of (((their))) actions. But in a free system, the kikes wouldn't be able to get away with it. (((They))) would be exposed and forced to pay for what (((they))) have done. But only under a free system, not a (((regulated))) one, will the kikes be held accountable.

Keeping out the kikes is a problem everyone faces, but only free people are able to solve.

> Even newscasters and politicians who hate jews are too shortsighted and incompetent to understand.

Yes, but why is that? Why do people who hate kikes keep supporting the (((institutions))) who feed and protect the kikes? How come every (((socialist government))) which has ever existed was controlled by kikes, for the furtherance of kike goals? Why do people who hate kikes advocate for "moar socialism", even though only kikes will benefit? Are the people advocating for (((socialism and government-intervention))) confused by kike tricks?

>>108800

> Digits

> Kikes cannot thrive in a free market, and neither can the other Untermenschen.

Yes, this. All of (((their))) power derives from (((regulation))) and (((taxation))). Without the coercive power of the government, kikes cannot survive. In a society where people are responsible for themselves, where people pay for the consequences of their actions, and where everyone is held to the same standards, the kikes and niggers will starve to death.

>>108800

The biggest proponents of libertarianism have almost always been exclusively jews; Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Von Mises, Hayek, David Friedman, the list goes on. They promote libertarianism because it is merchant ideology for merchant people, it is a philosophy centered around exchange and nothing more.

Friedman even argues in Capitalism and Freedom that the free market benefits “the jew and the negro” because there is no ethnic or racial principles attached to free trade. Nobody cares who made your television set or who picked your coffee beans as long as you can buy it. I don’t personally care about people living in other countries producing things for me to use but a libertarian society is focused only around consumption and a nebulous idea of freedom.

> People are afraid of freedom

What exactly do you think freedom is? Do you think a society of obese people addicted to netflixs and valium is a free society? Why on earth do you think being a sex worker is going to pay any less than being an electrician and why would it matter to someone who reduces everything to prices and the market.

>because these hard regulations give desperate people desperate solutions

What hard regulations are you even talking about? pornography is everywhere, an entire generation of women make money selling their pussy online do you think it’s because it’s the lack of a minimum wage or corporate tax rates that makes them do this or huge financial incentives by demoralized and socially isolated men?

>>108811

I think you completely missed reading what my post said, i suggest rereading it. As in what i think freedom is. Freedom is for me to open a business without being axed with an unbearable overinflated tax that goes on welfare and foodstamps for niggers and jews. Freedom is for me to be able to have a family and for family to be much more valuable and healthy to competition than being a degenerate who gets his anus drilled harder than Saudi Arabia. Freedom is for me to be able to say what the fuck i want, to call a nigger a nigger a kike a kike and a shitskin and shitskin, but most importantly to be able to be proud of my heritage. Freedom is what drives a market and what drives civilizations to greatness because freedom doesn't allow for the atrocities that we face today and neither does mother nature.

The vile kikes twist nature and truth and lead to those designs i believe i described very well. Kikes and niggers can't survive in a free market, they starve, they aren't competitive, so they turn to crime to try and survive. Which is when the hand of the law can reach and expunge the filth. You'd say the kikes will bribe em but the police will be making more than a decent living in such a market so bribes will fall on deaf ears. And if there is any instances of corruption they become non competitive and by nature they are rutted out because it's more profitable to be honest. That's the beauty of free markets lad. It's more profitable to have a good family and being an honest man with honest work. It's more profitable for the wife to stay at home and raise the children rather than have both parents working to fulfill a debt. It's not profitable to be a welfare queen, a scammer, a kike, a nigger and have any of their assorted regular behavioral patterns. It's more profitable to be white, and that's why i fucking like it.

>>108810

>Given that previous such free civilizations were the creators of the greatest art and science.

The greatest art and science was created by civilizations that had a spiritual and moral foundation. The current seven wonders of the world and are almost all religiously based apart from the Great Wall which was built to keep the mongols out.

I really wonder how you equate government subsidies with women whoring themselves online and people gorging themselves on fat and sugar.

I have long understood that a truly libertarian society would mean freedom of association and businesses would be free to exclude whomever they wished but how long does this last when the financial incentives to not do so would become ever more obvious.

>>108811

> Decent dubs

> Jews are the biggest proponents of libertarianism

Could be. But "libertarianism" is not a system of free markets. It's a system of "minimal" interference in markets. It's unsurprising that kikes would attempt to subvert the idea of freedom with "just a little" (((regulation))).

Also, none of the jews you named actually agree with one another. Only one, Rothbard, actually argues against (((government)); and Rothbard called himself an "Anarco-Capitalist", not a "libertarian" even though he was buddies with Friedmand and the others, and helped setup the Libertarian Party - ostensibly as a stalking horse for AnCap concepts, and Rothbard also renounced kikedom and joined the Catholic church. Could just be shilling probably, but who knows or cares? If a kike goes 'a shilling, and tells too much of the truth, is it somehow "not true" because a kike uttered it?

Regardless, libertarianism is not synonymous with free markets, even though libertarians tend to advocate for more-free markets than (((socialists))) do.

> Is a society of degenerates a free one?

If a society were free, degeneracy would not develop. The only reason people are sitting around, eating corn-heroin and watching kike-tube, is because they are not free.

> Degeneracy is everywhere

Yes, and it is (((subsidized))) by the (((government))). Welfare pays women to become sluts and whores, government subsidy and regulation create a safe space for pornographers to operate. The degeneracy is not the result of freedom, it's a consequence of empowering evil through (((government regulation, subsidy and taxation))).

>>108813

> Freedom is: leave me alone, you kikes and niggers and faggots.

Yep, this.

> Free markets make it profitable to behave oneself

Yes, this. The twisted incentives of (((capitalism))), which is a form of (((socialism))) and not to be confused with freedom, are what incentivizes bad behavior. It's not freedom that is to fault, it's kikery that caused our problems.

>>108815

> Civilizations that had a spiritual and moral foundation were the ones that created all the art and science.

Yes, of course. But that spiritual and moral foundation was only able to flourish because of freedom. Without freedom, those attributes never bear fruit.

> Government subsidies have no relation to people misbehaving

Why are people able to sit around and gorge on fat and sugar? Who gives them the food stamps to acquire the food? Who provides them with Section-8 housing? Who gives them "free" whored-out television and internet? Who puts children through twelve years of brainwashing and whore-training?

All this shit comes from government subsidy and regulation.

> A free market would incentivize people to do business with Untermenschen, thus betraying their own people.

Except, that's not what happens. Before the kikes intervened with the government, the niggers were rightfully kept out of most fields of business. Nobody wanted to do business with niggers, because niggers don't pay their bills, niggers can't be trusted to deliver the agreed product, niggers don't show up to work on time, niggers do slovenly work, niggers are prone to violence, niggers are expensive to deal with. Some people are still aware of these facts, but such knowledge was once ubiquitous, and the niggers knew their place. Then daddy government came along, and forced everyone to hire niggers, because a free people would otherwise choose to do the right thing - keep the niggers away.

The same thing was once true with kikes, but daddy government forced the elites to include kikes, and you know the end of that story.

>>108816

I actually agree that society is not free and there should be more freedom but I don't ground that in economic liberalism but rather in a state where people were free from abuse. Within that society people would be far freer than they are now and yes without the welfare state a lot of the degeneracy would come to an end because women would have to behave properly to guarantee resources for themselves although I think with the advent of the internet this becomes increasingly more difficult.

The argument I am making is that a state in whichever form it takes should be focused on spiritual transcendence and what is healthy and good for people, I actually think we don't disagree on that.

I have objections to any moral philosophy that either A) puts the wants of man at it's front and center and B) views freedom in terms of exchange and trade.

>>108792

>Since governments inevitably hold a monopoly on the use of violence within a given area

This is true… Emphasis on inevitable. Maybe excepting Iceland or Norse Greenland, isolated settlements founded by a homogenous high trust high IQ population that valued freedom over most other things. Eventually it got invaded by the formerly free market USA and turned into a naval base, where it now has to accept rabbis, genital mutilation, and rapefugees like everyone else.

Technology has made ancap/libertarian politics obsolete. It made sense in the day of black powder muskets, where a yeoman farmer militia could hold off professional soldiers if they had enough men. But once you get up to WWI, if you don't have a large professional military with an industrial empire to back it up, you're screwed. What would we have, a part time air force? Insurance companies equipped with artillery companies? It's ridiculous. Armies do terribly in the field when they're under split command, almost regardless of size or armament, and reverting to a patchwork of private mercenaries and militias would be going back to feudal organization in the face of modern conscription or tax based armies. Unorganized territories get conquered by organized territories.

As for the people living under a tyranny, they've got 3 options: let it collapse of its own accord, undermine/overthrow it, or have an outside power take it over in hopes of better masters. Usually it's not one but some combination of the 3. But the eventual victors are not going to want to give up power, not when there's still supporters of the old order alive, and even then new tyrants can always come along. There will always be a government, for so long as humans are intraspecies predators, and the best you can hope for is to have one composed not of psychopaths but of decent people who have your interests in mind.

The only feasible way to have a peaceful minarchist or anarchist society is to find an isolated land and settle it with high IQ high trust population. Perhaps Ceres, or Titan, or one of the Lagrange points at least, but not on Earth. Otherwise parasites will inevitably show up again, usually operating in teams, families, or clans, and you're back to square one again.

>>108816

Neither me neither i think the other guy advocate for abolishment of government. As i said and probably highlighted the government is needed for the basics. A strong leadership and direction along with a military and police force in order to enforce the boarders and the law, that's it in a nutshell. I think indeed we have a synapsis in our beliefs and probably say the same thing a different way.

>>108843

>>108837

Quoted the wrong guy.

>>108837

Also i kind of disagree that things are hopeless 100%. The upset is going to be great for sure and the immediate consequences dire for many years to come but i do believe something new and pure will emerge like a phoenix through the ashes. But first like our ASSHOLES AND ELBOWS guy says there needs to be ashes and there is probably going to be in the very near future with the track things have taken.

>>108872

I'm not saying it's hopeless at all, just that libertarian dogma is a pipe dream, just like communism is. Both rely on human nature being different than what it is, or more accurately on everyone being like what only a small set of people are. Eventually our chains will slacken, because just like with Rome the internal contradictions are too great. But the enemy can't be allowed to return. We need an entire nation that will say their honor can't be bought for any price, no matter how much gold the Rothschilds wave in their face. And we need organized counter intelligence to root out the fifth column that should have been rooted out a century ago.

>>108810

>only free people are able to solve.

Or you could just advocate for killing them…that would ‘solve’ the problem.

>>109187

>subversive ‘liberty’

You mean subversive to jewish hegemony, right?

How could ‘liberty’ be subversive to European peoples interests…

>>109187

Libertarianism was invented by jews. Your image shows classical liberals. They have nothing to do with libertarianism and denounced it completely. Fucking kill yourself.

>>109156

I am not a libertarian. Supporting a free market does not make me a libertarian and i agree with you. I am actually very cautious to associate myself with any kind of political ideology and i rather form my own conclusions, political and economical, through the lenses of history and research. I find subscribing to ideologies to be short sighted. That being said, i feel very strongly against kikes, niggers, and other assorted degenerates and animals. I do believe though in this world we live in the change must be economical. The central banks must lose their hold, their lies must be exposed, and the free market should sort things out, and it's something that we can do without firing a single shot. It's the way of nature, of competition. What every one of these degenerates really is afraid of. The only bullets i'll need to fire is when they try to invade my property or to illegally break into my country, which will raise the problem higher into public perception as well. Ill fight, but bullets and bombs today won't get me as far as bars of gold, ink, paper and real estate. It won't get me as far as creating more competitive jobs while at the same time abolishing a welfare state which i won't even need to, things are about to implode just like the hyperinflationary end that is coming soon(TM) for many. Working my way up a political and technocratical ladder while everything explodes around me is going to be much more effective, and that's what i believe everyone should do that actually wants to make a difference. To be more frank and direct, the best investment you can make in these troubling times is your financial education, that's your best weapon more effective than any rifle. That's how you get rid of these parasites you shatter their fragile illusions, you beat em in their own game. It's a hard game i am not gonna lie, many of the systems are rigged against us. But substantial change can only come this way. They'll try and kill me as they'll try and kill you and they already are trying to do that by trying to replace the population, but this game nowadays is a game of power. Who are they gonna hear ? Me as a simple employee and part of the middle class or me as a high profile official with property, influence, fortune and proven success ? Which kind of me is going to cause a more substantial change ? i believe the second one. That's what people are going to pay attention to. We should all strive to get there and those kikes will be out our countries and into the bottom of the sea before you know it and that's if enough of us make it.

>>109340

>Libertarianism was invented by jews. Your image shows classical liberals. They have nothing to do with libertarianism and denounced it completely.

Well that's just stupid. Most of them died before the word had even been coined. It's dishonest not to count them in the same vein. Nearly all of them are published with praise on Mises.org

>>109336

I hate that picture. That logic brought us Trump.

>>109362

We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. That is the single measure by which I judge everything. Free markets are a nice luxury, but they can only come after the hard work has been done. With the amount of money the Rothschilds and their many agents have, they can crush any gold standard by cornering the market. Silver even more so, and it's already been done. Henry Ford thought he had "fuck you money" until he wrote "The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem" and suddenly found himself going broke. One of the richest men in American history (who even owned his own newspaper) was silenced by primarily financial pressure. Money is good to have, all else being equal, and it can certainly grease some wheels when the time comes, but it can't solve the foremost problem.

National socialism was a system for putting the nation first, but it didn't destroy free enterprise. People could open their own businesses, especially in productive fields, and even during the war they had myriad small and large firms competing for contracts to produce different weapons. Gun laws were relaxed for German citizens in 1933 (and made more strict for aliens) because they cared about the dignity of Germans. But when they came to power they had no gold, huge debts, massive unemployment, and a worldwide boycott. Yet they still managed to turn their economy around in just a few short years to the point where it was the envy of the world. All this without bloodshed.

>>109499

What do you propose? Can you get more in depth?

>>109354

> Rothbard quote

Didn't Rothbard write more about Hitler and NatSoc? I'd love some sauce.

>>109362

> Supporting freedom does not necessarily make one a libtardarian

Yes, this. I'm not a Libertarian either. I went to one of their meetings, once, and I found the assembled people to be leftist degenerates. I find that "classical" liberals, like Lysander Spooner, seem to have their shit together; but modern capital-L (((Libertarians))) are just shilling for degeneracy.

>>109499

> Dubs

> The pseudo-logic of "always do the opposite of what jews say"

Yes, and I believe the written content of my post indicated that "always" doing the opposite of what kikes direct is not a good idea. As for Trump(((?))), he's better than the alternative; and no, there is not a "third choice" beyond abstention from "Democracy". It is still important to remember that kikes are deceptive, and the possibility of kike-manipulation must be incorporated into our decision-making process.

>>109504

> What else is being proposed?

Not sure. Monarchy has issues, but Democracy is a failure. Really, most -isms have issues. What I found salient is that people need to have authority over their own lives, and likewise bear responsibility for their own decisions. This Weltanschauung was once a given within Western cultures, but has been eroded by the (((daddy-government nanny-state))).

tl;dr - Our present issues are not systemic, so much as they are cultural.

>>109564

It's hard to see how you square libertarian or economically liberal ideas without environmental destruction,mass immigration or cultural malaise when you push individualist philosophy.

>>109499

>it’s dishonest if you refuse to associate whites with a jewish ideology in which they didn’t believe

Just die, please. You’re not fooling anyone.

>>109574

This

>>109595

>An individual with liberty will almost certainly choose to surrender large portions of their freedom in order to join a larger group

You have no idea how egoistic some people can be. You're just as naive as a commie or an anarchist. Not every individual is as "enlightened" as you

>>109595

In practical terms, putting your faith in the free market means putting your faith in the courts instead of the bureaucracy. Someone has to handle disputes between 2 self interested parties, and that falls to the courts. But both the courts and the bureaucracy are pozzed. You have to take and keep control of the levers of power or people without your interests will do it instead.

>>109504

I propose a modified version of the 25 point program of the NSDAP. Obviously we don't need to repeal Versailles, because it doesn't apply to us. But limiting citizenship to white Americans (obviously excluding Jews) would be the American translation of it and fully in line with the policies of our founding fathers anyways.

The economic system would be a modified version of Gottfried Feder's manifesto for abolishing interest slavery. I'd start first by auditing the Fed and openly publishing everything that's found, then abolishing fractional reserve banking, then abolishing usury. 2 books that cover this well would be The Sumerian Swindle (history of usury and why it's bad) and Goodson's The History of Central Banking (he covers both central banking used for evil as well as successful cases of fiat currencies used to repair broken economies).

Educationally we would need to use the public school system to reverse the damage caused by decades of mal-education. If we just privatize everything the private schools will simply hire all the fired Marxist teachers. Instead we would need to train a new generation of teachers and then, once that's finished, cut the bloat and either revert to the old one room schoolhouse model or an e-learning model where students take online lectures but in-class work.

Eventually America would need to decentralize, but there's too much damage to reverse first. Perhaps a good analogy would be a Roman consul, elected to be dictator in times of emergency but to retire once the crisis has passed. Since the destruction has been both genetic and educational, it requires at least one generation raised the correct way and a lasting eugenic program. I'd propose an IQ test to determine childcare benefits, where below a certain threshold (90? 95?) you may have 1 child and then must get spayed/neutered in order to receive any benefits, and above a certain threshold you would have positive incentives to have children.

The last thing that is a vital part is to revamp the space program with an eye towards colonization. This sets a grand goal for everyone to work for, a peaceful outlet for military competition and technological growth, a place for political freedom away from the risks of earth, a potential source of vital raw materials without recourse to foreign nations, and a way to safeguard humanity against any existential threats like mega asteroids or gamma ray bursts. Werner Von Braun and Gerard K O'Neill proposed practical plans that could be accomplished with '60s era technology and could be self-reproducing within a decade of start.

>>109579

>>109579

I am a big fan of Hoppe, I've read his essays on democracy but haven't been able to read D:TGTF. My issue with libertarianism in the context you speak of is that it is explicitly materialist. Do you oppose the state having a standing army and do you think private companies should be responsible for borders? I don't see how you don't get invaded in an ancap system.

> We’re not bugmen evolved to live in a hive.

Nations are significantly large groups of people, we only truly function in very large groups of people. Even Hoppe acknowledges this, the reason why people are attracted to cities or populous areas is because the outcomes in terms of resources are generally more beneficial than otherwise. Of course we have our own minds and desires but some sort of state is first and foremost for any serious political opinion.

Civilizations do not come into fruition from individuals volunteering to organize with each other, they are product of bloodshed and compromise between smaller groups, there isn’t a country on earth that wasn’t formed through violence and the connection between groups is ethnic and linguistic.

> economics is the study of human interactions

Economics is the study of choice in conditions of scarcity, it isn’t science because you can’t perform experiments, there are situations with countries which would likely yield the same results as an experiment but it isn’t science. If you think socialism is jewry, would argue that national socialism was jewry? Are any forms of state ownership or welfare legitimate or is all controlled by kikes?

> You'll find that private property is better maintained, with a broader ecology, than government property.

That’s almost certainly true but you are talking about a very small picture, almost all of the large scale environmental problems we face; depleting fresh water, forest destruction, ocean dead zones are all a direct result of both unrelenting migration and animal agriculture.

Both of these issues are directly tied to aggressive economic liberalism, otherwise how do you prevent millions of people coming to your country or people destroying the planet without government intervention?

>>109883

It is not explicitly materialist, why do you say that?

I argue for a night watchman state which involves borders and security, bit the ancap solution is a covenant which functions the same way just by consent.

>>109885

it doesn't have any moral imperatives, it puts the desires of individuals at the front and center. Which is fine if you're a decent human being but also admits having to put up with the individual desires of degenerates.

>>109888

It is entirely devised on the single most absolute moral imperative of the NAP

You're seeing a false dichotomy

>>109892

I've never bought into the NAP, it seems to be this sort of ethereal belief that people are all going to naturally understand but there are so many things that people can't agree on with regard to it.

>>109896

You're using a double standard. It's not that libertarians expect everyone affirms the nap the same way or that everyone will always abide by it, it's a moral position from which the political theory is devised. You are doing the same thing when you assume (correctly) that we ought to prioritize security from invasive foreigners.

In short, libertarian does not mean libertine

>>109654

Interesting approach but there are some pretty big holes. In a vacuum and given the right circumstances this would be great but first of all it requires a transition. I am not shitfting the goalposts here but i rather question the practicality of your plan rather than the benefits of it which are obvious. Also there are a couple of glaring holes. To be 100% specific i am going to format the questions below:

>With the current situation and data available how could we transition to this model ?

>What precautions would you take for this model to not be used in a tyrannical manner ?

>How would you find someone worthy and capable to implement all the above while keeping the country from running amok and even balkanizing itself state via state?

>"Times of emergency" is a very loose definition that can be taken advantage of, what do you propose as a time of emergency?

>Can you get more in depth on your "modified" version of the economic system you would want to impose ? ( I am all about abolishing fractional reserve banking and the fed as well as usury as they are criminal to any healthy economic model, however i don't know about your economic system which is why i am asking this question (since there is "modifications") )

>>109884

Implying a free market does not mean "unrelenting migration". It's one of the basic rules that the government has to enforce.

>Are any forms of state ownership or welfare legitimate?

This here is a very interesting question and important question.

Personally i don't think there should be zero, i don't think anyone sane does. For a government to enforce a set of basic rules there must first be a government after all. Governments and of course armies to protect boarders and give your country military presence most certainly aren't free. Which means your people have to pay a certain amount of their earnings as a tax in order to upkeep that ( basic setting of an RTS ). Of course these same people require barracks, watchtowers, equipment, health insurance, monetary compensation and of course a retirement fund. The government also has costs. Another thing is roads, if roads are privately owned it would be a hell to go to your work every day.

Just so i don't go on a tangent because there is a couple of things, having your government own the basic things that your country needs to function as a country with laws and boarders does not imply socialism. Socialism kicks in when the balance of state ownership and intervention becomes disproportionate to the population with the excuse of loosely defined "free shit" such as "free healthcare", "free education", "free houses" etc. and always for "the good of the state". Of course none of that is free and it does imply murderous taxation and death of any private run business ( and probably of any individual that questions anything that's going on) . And yes as things are ran now you can call America a socialist state.

>>109564

>Our present issues are not systemic so much as they are cultural

Yes and no. While they do have heavy underlying cultural causes imho they are systemic as well as the current system (which was bred from said cultural problems and (((parasites))) ) is also an issue and a pretty big one at that. But yes it does heavily stem from the cultural. We have the Frankfurt school to thank for that.

>>110180

yes, you're a libertarian, you support individualism which inevitably leads to hedonism and degeneracy.

Your whole argument is based on resources and economics,, how does any of this stop environmental ruin and mass immigration? It doesn't matter if you have the state fund watch towers when capitalists will just keep importing immigrants and moving their factories to China.

>>110565

"Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victims, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same."

Alain De Benoist.

> creating human behavior in a lab

Not sure about that one big guy, economics is only regarded as a social science please don't tell me faggots on this board now believe in (((social sciences)))

> Natsoc was jewish

Yes, so much so they threw jews into concentration camps, shut down their businesses and murdered them.

> Depletion of water, forest destruction is because of government regulations

Leading cause of all these things is a result of animal agriculture and mass immigration both aspects of capitalism.

Ocean dead zones form from all the effluent that comes out of factory farms and runs into sea water not primarily from over fishing. Communist governments have done a lot of environmental destruction too but this is because they follow the same materialistic ideals that you do.

>>110607

No i'm not a libertarian though and as much as you screech i am not one, you are not going to dodge my arguments by trying to group me with something that is more easy for you to target. Address the core arguments that i make.

>You support individualism which inevitably leads to hedonism and degeneracy

I support a balanced system of free markets that has as less government intervention as possible by giving governments the bare minimum to run a country.

>How does this stop enviromental ruin and mass immigration ?

As far as i am concerned the government should be tasked with enforcing basic laws and boarders. Enviromental ruin and mass immigration are both part of something that a country needs to address as a basic rule to be able to run. They are threats that need to be dealt with and not allowed.

>What will you do if criminals import other criminals

Reach with the hand of the law and use it to crush them.

>Is this model incorruptible and eternal ?

No it has strengths and weaknesses. It has points of exploitation, namely that if wealthy business owners marry the government it can shift to a different and much more poisonous system, leading to government acquiring too much power by robbing the people of their freedom litle by litle if it's exploited like this. However this can happen with any model. All models if degenerated enough it ends up with one party having too much power over the other, which leads to ruin. A good system runs with balance not with swings.

The reason i advocate for this is because it gives as much freedom as possible to an individual to run a system with sound money while still keeping a certain basic order to things so that a country can still run as a country.

As an example we can do the following thought experiment if you will. You can give me a political system, any system of your liking and you can modify it as much as you like. I will tell you how the kikes and someone as malicious as them can exploit it, twist it and turn it. Because that's the truth of things as much as fullproof as we try to make something there always is holes and the ones that suffer always are us, "the people". White middle class people in particular.

Of course that doesn't mean there isn't good systems and bad systems out there, but in my oppinion this is the most optimal we can get calculating human factor, if you think you can propose something that works better for the people of the country and the country you are free to propose it, as long as you also have a plan on how to put it in action. Hell my one isn't easy to put in action let alone keep it from the grubby hands of money hungry kikes without completely wiping them out, and as much as i want to wipe them out it's not something i can just snap my fingers and do ( i wish i could ). I need a practical way to address them and there is no other way than causing widespread societal collapse and massive discomfort for people to go off their opiates and see behind the curtain. And yes as things currently are this that i propose cannot work as much as i would love it to. It works when a civilization is basically going through it's "Golden Age" and we are far away from that, we first need a way to get there.

Giving more power to the state right now would be terrible and giving more power to the individual would also be terrible as our enemies are in the top of the private and the public sector and basically amalgamed them into a terrible monstrosity. To make things worse we also have (((foreign intervention))) to worry about. We need more practical solutions to a very difficult problem and yes what i was arguing about as a system is the endgame that i propose after we are done with em, and one of those measures i believe is doing a comparison of that endgame system with what is going on today to show people the vultures behind the curtain. We need to give people a certain vision to move towards.

>>110617

>I support a balanced system of free markets that has as less government intervention as possible by giving governments the bare minimum to run a country.

Cool, you're basically Ben Shapiro. You support individualism and capitalism. Try stopping mass immigration with this system. Try stopping drag queen story hour or Ru Paul's Drag Race.

> muh illegal immigrants

It's not about illegal immigrants, 100's of 1000s are coming in legally, they are destroying the fabric of our countries even if you stop illegal entry.

All you're proposing is conservative liberalism as if this some hot take this what we've been doing for the last 60 years.

>>110624

>You're basically Ben Shapiro

What's with you and trying to lump me with this kike or libertarians ? Are you really that weak at arguing ? You aren't even reading my posts or addressing my arguments. And i think i addressed as to how i'd deal with illegal immigrants. I'd actually treat em more as illegal invaders and execute them.

>>110622

I see your point here but wouldn't the complete destruction of anything public or public entity and not having at least a basic governmental structure lead to anarchy ? How would you uphold a boarder structure and a law system like this ?

>>110622

immigration is a modern concept, "historical immigration" was just invasion, immigration is always invasion, communities simply take over areas of land and adapt it to their cultures.

I never said that economics was a psuedo science I said it couldn't be considered real science because you can't conduct experiments at the scale you need to see results that will make any sense. This is even acknowledged by Hoppe this is where the term praxeology comes from.

I don't buy this argument that Natsoc Germany was some Jewish plot because George Soros was involved with them. The Nazis made a number of plans to remove European Jewry and they did kill large numbers of Jews even if alot of the holocaust stuff is lies.

You're just making neocon talking points and then throwing in "kikes" and the triple parentheses to make it look like you're arguing for something based.

>>110626

I don't see what you are arguing for that is any different from what conservatives push for today. "Limited government" "free markets" and "individual freedoms" that is what every host on The Daily Wire or Fox News argues for.

You haven't addressed how you stop environmental destruction, mass immigration and degeneracy with this system.

I'll repeat again how do you stop mass legal immigration with economic liberalism? Capitalists will just import workers for cheaper wages and move high paying tech jobs overseas.

>>110629

>You haven't addressed how to stop environment destruction, mass immigration

Except i did literally IN THE POST YOU DIDN'T READ

>I don't see what you are arguing for that is any different from what conservatives push for today

Really ? An unkiked free market ? Illegal immigrants to be executed as illegal invaders ? Jews to be exterminated ? That's what the Daily Wire argues for now ? Didn't know they became that good.

As for degeneracy that's a more cultural change than a governmental change. You can't enforce people to change upon a mindset but you can create healthy competitive advantages against that. As far as i am aware degeneracy and degenerate actions in general aren't something competitive that someone would hire you for if they weren't forced by strict regulation.

>how do you stop mass legal immigration

I thought you were talking about illegal immigration but i digress, maybe i got confused. See for legal immigration to be legal there has to be laws that make it legal. I didn't say i supported said immigration laws and that they aren't subject to change making those "legal" immigrants "illegal". Simple enough.

>>110626

> But no government would be anarchy!

Not quite, and also "who cares". I don't need a ruler, an archon, to control my life. People like me would fine living without, an, rulers, archos. A civilization without rulers is not a civilization without rules, nor would an anarchy necessarily equate to chaos.

The myth of the "public" sector is a kike meme, intended to subvert your rights.

>>110627

> There is no such thing as immigration, just different forms of invasion.

Yeah, I'd say I agree with you on that. But with one proviso - certain forms of "invasion" manifest when the "invaders" join with the people they are "invading", for the mutual benefit of both. This was the case, for a short period, when German people from Europe "invaded" North America to join their German cousins. But I'm guessing you'd instead see that as a single stream of Germanic invaders, taking North America from the indigenous shitskins.

> Economics is a pseudo science because it doesn't allow for big, controlled experiments.

Oh yeah, does cosmology? How about geology? Stellar astronomy? I guess none of those are sciences either, since we're not able to perform large-scale experiments with planets, stars, and galaxies.

> Natsoc was a kike plot

I don't think I'm arguing that it was a "plot" by the kikes to ruin Europe, even if that's what happened but I wouldn't put it past (((them))). No, I'm trying to say that kikery is inevitable wherever lazy/worthless/immoral/manipulative/traitorous men are allowed to rule others. It's not that NatSoc was a kike shill, it's just that kikes were already making inroads within the NatSoc government. It's inevitable.

> Neocon talking points

Huh? I thought the whole neocon thing was just window dressing for degeneracy and war-for-Israel. Where are you seeing (((Neocon))) talking points within my posts?

>>110629

> He's pushing for the same "limited government" that all mainstream conservatives support

Yeah, it's sad. I'm all for "conserving" the things from our past which were useful, correct, and beneficial. But that's not the same as "conserving" degeneracy and cuckoldry.

> How to stop mass legal immigration and the socialist fraud of (((capitalism))), using government systems.

Reframe the question - how do we deal with the (((organizations))) that legitimize invasions and felony racketeering? Since all such (((organizations))) derive their power from a singular source, governments, you have found your target.

> But (((capitalists))) will enforce labor regulations that make industry unproductive in certain areas, then (((they))) will utilize slave labor that (((they))) legalized via government regulations, and then (((they))) will prevent anyone from competing by enforcing MOAR regulations.

Free economic competition naturally drives-out the subhumans - they're not able to compete in an open marketplace, and their present largess derives from (((government regulations))). Remove support from the government, and natural selection will work against the subhuman population.

>>110633

can I just ask if you're a woman or under the age of 18? Because I won't bother replying anymore if either of these are true.

"limited government" "free markets" and "individual freedoms" are what I am talking about with regards to The Daily Wire.

> degenerate actions aren't something competitive that someone would hire you for.

Are you being serious? Have you heard of the porn industry, only fans, strip clubs? Virtually all of modern society? Do you think porn exists because of government regulation? I thought it was because of the first amendment and free speech.

>>110636

First i am over 18 and i am a man.

Sexual degeneracy has being a thing through time and through increased regulation it has been pushed along with the sex industry by yids. Business owners back in the day didn't hire people involved in such things. Yes public perception has being a subject to change since the Frankfurt school and and the only way to change that would be through setting a different kind of public perception. Regulating it forcefully would be disastrous imho and wouldn't do a substantial change to people.

And yes of course i have heard of the porn industry, and the only reason it flourishes is because people have debased their bodies and themselves in a desperate attempt for fame and money that is monopolized against them. Because it is seen as a competitive viable option by them and is pushed as such to the public perception for endless decades now. Because as a business owner i wouldn't be able to "discriminate against hiring that person" if they wanted to change a job due to regulation. It doesn't give the same social stigma it gave back in the day and it will require decades of unkiking to fix that. But regulating would make it 10 times worse. Sure it would make it illegal and open it up to law enforcement to deal with but it would also create a black market for the demand and supply that was forcefully interrupted. You can't just fix some things by banning them, some you can but imho that is not one of them.

>>110635

How would you keep a boarder and a legal system running though ? How would you create military response in times of need ? What would stop other countries to invade and impose over you in that case ?

>>110654

Mediators ? Who would be up for that task and what gives them the authority ? How does this in a sense regulating mediating authoritative figure hold people accountable for their wrongdoings ? Actually interested in that i haven't heard of this concept before.

Still wouldn't a regular army be much more effective than this kind of army ? What holds all this together other than a sense of good will ?

>>110679

A very interesting case you are proposing that requires further study. I am going to definitely look deeper into this. If i am to approve, deny or take and modify this concept after all first i need to see the whole point and put it under scrutiny. Thanks for the material.

Right of the bat though i agree to the following:

>we are living at the apex of a terminally ill empire, and we are all acculturated into thinking that the present system is "normal". Our culture is sick, not "normal".

Couple more questions to boot though while i am at it.

>Wouldn't that make mediation a more competitive manner?

>Wouldn't mediation then be more inclined to side with the one that provides a bigger profit rather than the one that has being wronged in the altercation?

>Wouldn't mediation also be more inclined to serve public perception rather than rightful rulings to unpopular opinions (say John killed his wife in the public eye, and it's overtly believed in the public eye that John is a scumbag that should be hanged and that he did kill his wife, however there isn't enough evidence to convict John on the charge, how would John be vindicated if he is innocent and would the court be inclined to side with John despite the public outcry ? Wouldn't that damage the mediation brand competitively due to damaged public perception giving a competitive rise to one that adheres more to the social sensibilities rather than bringing criminals to justice ? )

>Wouldn't a mediation holding overwhelming power over other mediators make it an authoritative and more centralized figure in this manner?

>How would unrightful rulings be dealt with in such a system and how would they be exposed ? Who would hold them accountable in such manner in case of corruption after establishment of the brand ?

>>106749

>all discussions livestreamed publicly

So do you want absolute scrutiny by the public? While seniority will prevent mobocracy, the issue is that certain discussions have to take place without an audience. For example, the Supreme Court allowed transcripts but disallowed video recording, instead preferring drawings because the way how live video works is that it forces government officials to act or present. The Court is not the place to act, it is the place to scrutinize and make sound decisions.

>>110599

i know all about Bugsy Seigel, but from my information he was 1/2 Italian and 1/2 Jew, and responsible for the biggest city of degeneracy known to mankind.

Look at that face… doesn't he have the kind of face you would love to gas?

>>106857

I too would also like to buy a house every time I wanted to check out a new area of my country before settling down. Those rent seeking bastards! Can you believe people don't buy vacation homes every time they go on vacation!

One of the worst things is people actually want to be rewarded for lending money to small business owners! Fuck small businesses. If your parents aren't rich go get a job. No lending!

>>116659

Perhaps instead of private banks, the central bank should also be the people's bank and give out loans for free. No need for usury whatsoever.

It's basically cutting out the middleman.

>>106895

This, my friends is the absolute combination of everything about a person and their political views that is frowned upon on 8kun.

>>106749

When the concept of corporations was first entered into American law, they were never intended to be permanent; they were organizations of common wealth, coops basically for specific projects, like building a private canal or turnpike. They idea that a corporation is some permanent creature with a life of it's own, "a person" as Mutt Rumnuts characterized them is insane.

>>108461

its not the same definition of the word corporate, means something entirely different in this context

we need to create a shadow government

with ministers for every objective we have

minister of health

minister of defense

etcetera

>>106882

>How will multinational corporations be prevented from pandering to homos and other degens

The only reason they do this is to ensure they have a consistent consumer base since both groups along with none-whites are seen as the new "normal" or new majority.

>>135059

And they are able to do this because of capitalism/liberalism. In a natsoc/third positionist country, corporations will not be dictated by the profit motive and therefore will not pander to degenerate consumers.