/pnd/ - Politics, News, Debate

>>184022

Libertarianism is judaism and is definitionally not right-wing.

>>184046

>oy vey goyim there's no evidence because I say so

>oy vey goyim jews hate the ideology they created

>oy vey goyim every single point of human existence must be contextualized as an economic transaction

>OY VEY JEWS WOULD NEEEEEEEVER THINK THAT WAY

sage

>>184165

>jews don’t exist

Sage.

>>184169

>Not reading the message and taking one sentence out of context

You will never be a woman.

>>184172

>you didn’t read because I say so

Sage.

>things jews want are not what jews want because i say so

Sage.

>voluntarism is good

>oops i guess people voluntarily wanted to be communist

>so we can’t stop them ha ha NAP

>lol white genocide happened i don’t care it was voluntary

Sage. Libertarianism is jewish. Always has been. Always will be. You’re brain damaged, spamming lies only jews have ever said, and you don’t deserve to have the slightest actual conversation anymore.

>>184174

>Sage

>Sage

Okay nigger

>Voluntarism is good.

Indeed it is

>Oops I guess people voluntarily wanted to be communist.

Communism is involuntary by definition, as non-compliance is punished by force, thus any compliance is made under threat of force, aka duress. Consent given due to direct duress cannot be distinguished from consent given despite it, and thus, no admissable consent can be given under direct duress.

Voluntary communism is impossible. The closest thing you can get is people voluntarily sharing things, which is not communism but kindness, which is indeed the OPPOSITE of communism.

>We can't stop them hahah NAP

The NAP doesn't mean you can't ostracize degenerates.

>Lol white genocide happened I don't care it was voluntary

Genocide is literally the ultimate NAP violation, you fucking retard.

>Libertarianism is Jewish

Wrong.

>Always has been, always will be

Wrong.

>You're brain damaged

I'm not your mom

>Spamming lies only Jews have ever said

Wrong again, most libertarians are in fact NON-Jewish.

>And you don't deserve to have the slightest actual conversation anymore

Okay nigger.

>>184174

>Libertarianism is jewish. Always has been

Proof or fuck off kike

>>184176

>Indeed it is

It isn’t. You’re literally admitting to supporting anything jews want as long as people are brainwashed into agreeing. You’re fucking brain damaged.

>Communism is involuntary by definition

lol, you’re literally admitting that you think you get to dictate what people do and do not “genuinely” feel, making you authoritarian/totalitarian and violating the NAP.

>non-compliance is punished by force

What if they comply of their own will? There’s no force then. Therefore it’s voluntary. And as you’ve admitted that your system will not compel anything and cannot force anything, it instantly collapses in the face of anyone forcing anything upon it, meaning it’s exactly what jews want for whites. Which is why jews invented it in the first place.

>The NAP doesn't mean you can't ostracize degenerates.

It does, yeah, because you would have to forcibly do this, and your ideology doesn’t let you do that, therefore they can continue to do whatever they want within your society and you refuse to fight back because of your hidebound system of ✡morality✡.

>Genocide is literally the ultimate NAP violation, you fucking retard.

Congrats on not knowing what genocide even is. People choosing not to have children (because they were brainwashed into doing so, because economic conditions made it impossible for them to have children, because the degenerates destroying society are unable to be removed because the voluntarist government refuses to act in any capacity, etc.) is not only voluntary, it’s also genocide. You have no fucking idea what the definition of the word is, you goddamn simpleton.

>Wrong.

Thanks for admitting libertarianism is jewish and was created by jews. Literally anyone doing any amount of research sees the names and their backgrounds. You can’t even try to hide it.

>most libertarians are in fact NON-Jewish.

WOW THE IDEOLOGY THAT JEWS CREATED TO BRAINWASH WHITES IS MOSTLY BELIEVED BY WHITES? HOLY SHIT, WHO WOULD HAVE EVER THOUGHT? OH RIGHT, ANYONE PAYING ANY AMOUNT OF ATTENTION!

>Okay nigger.

Sage.

>>184177

A white person would be intelligent enough to look up the ethnicities of the people responsible for creating the ideology. You’re clearly not.

>>184177

based

>>184179

If by Jewish you mean ethnicity, then every single political position in history would have to be denounced, because every last one was supported by at least 1 Jew. I'm sure many anti-semitic Jews would like a word.

>>184181

>openly admits that he’s perfectly fine with jews brainwashing people, because that somehow doesn’t violate the NAP

Sage.

>>184182

No, you simply can’t read at all.

When you start to think nobody could be more religiously dogmatic and abstract than commies but then lolbertarians appear.

Holy shit, imagine being even more potentially damaging than commies.

>>184230

Again, I could be a lot more specific if you were. Example of Jewish brainwashing?

>>184231

Not an argument

>>184240

Religiously dogmatic? Abstract? For crying out loud, look at what I'm being given to work with!

But I guess it is par for the course for you ilk to cry out in pain as they stab me. Pathetic.

>>184251

Libertarians have never fought for racists or traditionalists. Endorsement would be nice, but it isn’t necessary or even necessarily desirable. Traditionalists fight to be heard. Libertarians offer platforms only to other libertarians and to progressives with whom they sympathize. Any platform they offer to those who are conservative, traditionalist, or fascist is grudging at best–tacitly condemned and stifled at worst. They offer endorsement to progressives, whether demanded by them or not. Libertarians as a group have already chosen their side–they merely pretend not to have by promoting false equivalencies and pretending to stand for the rights of everyone. “Everyone’s right to express themselves is equal,” they say. But just like the progressives with whom they sympathize, some are “more equal” than others. They have favored sons. That is hardly a sin, but when their entire stance is the refusal to favor any son, it is a hypocrisy. And they refuse to acknowledge or admit it.

Libertarians say this is not a particular problem. But it is. It is a very deep and concerning problem, because we fight enemies who will use our freedoms and rights as weapons against us. Agitators will come to meetings and shout us down, crying “free speech!” when they are ejected. Our enemies will form mobs to cause havoc and destruction when we assemble to discuss issues or share information, and cry “freedom to assemble!” when they are dispersed. Our opponents will slander us in the press with blatant distortions and outright lies, and when challenged or called out will hide behind freedom of the press. Oswald Mosley met this problem when he attempted to stop the United Kingdom from starting the Second World War. Communist agitators are masters of using the rights and freedoms of a nation to get their way. They will cut you with a knife, proclaim it “their right to do so,” and cry foul when you push them away or strike back in kind.

This is why libertarian hypocrisy cannot be borne. Communists, socialists, Bolsheviks, and jews will forever and always use our freedoms and rights against us as poisoned daggers. The only way to stop it is to employ similar, if tempered, tactics. Older libertarians admit this. They finally admit, after decades of exposure of their ideology to the realities of the world, that a true libertarian society can only come about if all communists, hippies, marxist sympathizers, and welfare leeches are expelled and cast away. Note the dates as their beliefs changed to reflect reality.

>“If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion.” ~ Friederich Hayek; The Constitution of Liberty; 1960

> “A dictatorship may be a necessary system for a transitional period. At times it is necessary for a country to have, for a time, some form or other of dictatorial power.” ~ Friederich Hayek; El Mercurio; 1981

>“Libertarianism holds that the only proper role of violence is to defend person and property against violence, that any use of violence that goes beyond such just defense is itself aggressive, unjust, and criminal.” ~ ✡Murray Rothbard✡; 1927

> “Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment. Unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? Hopefully, they will disappear, that is, move from the ranks of the petted and cosseted bum class to the ranks of the productive members of society.” ~ ✡Murray Rothbard✡; Liberalism; 1980

> “You have to live your values, reject violence in your own life, your families, your relationships. Live all the joy and happiness that comes out of that, and then we can lead people by example, which is really the only way to build a bridge to the future.” ~ Stefan Molyneux; 2006

> “I no longer believe that there’s a patriarchy or rape culture. I no longer believe in ethnic egalitarianism or white racism. You gotta grow up. I have to grow up. When a person is a child, they play with childish things. When you grow to be a man you must put your childish things away. I no longer believe these lies, manipulations, falsehoods, and narratives that are undoing the very heart, soul, and mind of Western civilization.” ~ Stefan Molyneux; 2017

>>184287

As for the matter of how this is to be done, they speak not one word. They see the problem, yes. Much like the handwringing progressives of Europe–who see the foreign invaders as a problem, but say it is “impossible to deport them”–libertarians offer not even the faintest hint of a solution. There is a solution. There is a solution to getting rid of cultural marxism, just as there is a solution to sending the invaders back. Like the progressives with whom they sympathize, libertarians pretend that what stands plainly before them is not really there. If they admit to seeing it, they deny and refuse it. They say, “There must be some other way!” as though this situation can be solved without violence or compromising their libertarian mores and morality. They are wrong. This will never be solved peacefully. The enemy will not permit it. The enemies of the West are fanatics who believe they are “saving the world from itself.” They will die for what they believe, running the streets red with blood before they go. If you are not prepared to do the same to stop them–let alone to begin reversing the tide of what they have done–it is tantamount to conceding defeat right now. There are no lengths to which a rabid dog will not go to bite a man. It must be put down.

Let’s look at immigration. Western talking heads refuse to admit that the invaders could easily be rebuffed. They came here under their own power, and by the will of the governments importing them. They can also leave under their own power. If, for example, Europeans started executing every Muslim they saw, the problem would sort itself out in under a year. Any who were not killed would willingly self-deport, being made to fear what lay before them more than what they fled. The same solution exists for cultural marxism–all the flavors of socialism and communism–and the quisling opportunists that push it. To fight them by abiding by their own rules is to propose the raising up of an entire nation within a nation. It would mean a second America (or second European state) preaching the truth to counter their lies, a second media machine, a second governmental process, a second source of mass information. This is categorically impossible to accomplish. Even if it weren’t, those in power would not permit its existence. The leviathan of the state would not stand idly by as you erected a behemoth to fight it from within. Libertarians admit that the threat must be removed, but they choose to ignore that it will never go willingly, and that it will fight to the death to fulfill its purpose and nature. Force is the one and only solution. Libertarians think this is foul, disgusting, altogether too barbaric, downright “fascist,” and–worst of all–that most wicked of libertarian sins: authoritarian. So the libertarian will never act with force. He will “plead the Fifth” on the matter even as he is being lowered into his own grave.

Even if libertarians had fought for my right to speak the truth, that means next to nothing. Am I to overlook a man stabbing me in the back with a knife because he once passed me the salt or held open a door for me? The forces arrayed against us use the rights we value to kill us and everything we hold dear. Under the guise of “freedoms” like the right to assembly and the right to free speech, the actual rights of free speech and freedom to assemble are being unmade through naked terrorism disguised as “the will of the people.” The only positions libertarians can take on this matter are as follows:

* Stand aside and permit those who are willing to do what must be done

* Join us and fight back

* Stand by their principles as hypocritically as they do now, but show them towards us instead

The libertarian masses choose none of these. Thus, they are part of the problem, not the solution. These are just the problems with libertarianism that appear when confronted with the single issue of cultural marxism. They go far deeper than this. Libertarianism promotes the individual over all other concerns, and as such libertarianism is the suicide of culture and nation both. Libertarianism would not enforce changes necessary to fix a nation’s ills, because the concentration of the power to do so is condemned for its own sake, merely for existing. They promote free trade, which breaks the back of any economy that exploits it. Free trade is only viable if all concerned trade partners engage in equal trade, and they never will. Thus, it is a policy of being taken advantage of and will always ultimately lead to jobs and labor being outsourced to foreign bidders and wealth flowing out of the nation and into the pockets of international corporate interests.

>>184289

Libertarians claim that progressiveness is only a problem when it is imposed on people by their government. They fail to realize that the government will always be biased towards a political ideology. Not only that, it should be. Joseph McCarthy’s bias for American traditionalism–and against communism–is what protected America from communism. But for the grace of God that he could have gotten all of them instead of merely a handful, we would not have many of the problems that we do today.

The government will always force the ideals of those who hold office upon the people. Thus, the government will always be vulnerable to subversion by intrusive and malicious alien elements. It is not a self-correcting system. It must be corrected. Communism and socialism did not form in a vacuum. Just like how women have been granted equal rights many times before in the history of human civilization–only to have those civilizations collapse soon after–it is a symptom of a greater scourge of the entropy of civilization and the decay of society. “Sexual liberation,” female equality, and communist policies will always be harbingers of the end for a society. Libertarians attempt to embrace this volatile and poisonous progressive culture, insisting that it can be preserved and is even, somehow, inherently good. This betrays their naked ignorance and naïveté on the subject. It was progressive culture that caused these problems. It is liberalism that brought us to this point, it is egalitarianism that allowed this to happen, and it is individualism, before all, that permitted it to foment. To preserve modern culture–insisting on conservative law and fiscal policy–is to replace a rotten fruit with a fresh one, but scoop out the festering heart of the rotten and transplant it into the healthy. It is painting over rust instead of sanding it away. The culture dictates everything, because it controls the wills and wants of the people. This is why cultural marxism has been so effective. A nation is held aloft from the very bottommost rung, and that bottom rung is the family–the smallest microcosm of civilization. A family is a group of related people who share space, genetics, and ideas. A group of families is a locality, a group of localities is a city or region, a group of cities or regions is a state, and a state either stands on its own, or itself comprises a group of states that form a nation. Thus, all of civilization is supported by the family.

This is why the single most successful communist psychological operation ever executed was the feminist one–i.e. the one that attacked the family unit itself. This is no accident. This was by design. This was a poison dart crafted specifically to bring the Western world to its knees and ultimately destroy it, and it is a poison that has outlived the assassins that cast it and will be the death of us yet if we cannot stop it. To refuse to take a stand against the degeneration of society and culture–to try to “stay above it”–is to be complicit with its blatant and overt destruction. The man who stands by and watches as the gates are lifted and the barbarians let loose upon the city is complicit in the act of the gate raiser.

Libertarians would stuff their ears with cotton and gibber of cycles of “left” and “right,” completely ignoring that even the right-wing of today would be viewed as buffoons, imbeciles, and utter madmen by the conservatives of as little as 50 years ago. A libertarian is someone who sees the spinning wheel of the left vs. right dichotomy and says, “This is a natural cycle of the rotation of ideas,” blind to the cart to which the wheel is attached which is rolling down a hill and off of a cliff. They say to a man who would halt the spinning wheel, “You have no right to do that; the spinning of the wheel is natural.” To a man who would dare to reverse it, they hurl their most dire insults–“authoritarian” and “fascist.” But the progressive ideology is the most authoritarian of all.Libertarians often cite the Founding Fathers of America as their inspiration. The Founding Fathers of the United States were unashamedly national socialists.

>>184290

>“Where was there ever a confederacy of republics united as these states are, or in which the people were so drawn together by religion, blood, language, manners, and customs?” ~ John Dickinson; Fabius Letters, #8

> “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.” ~ John Jay; The Federalist Papers, #2

> “Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” ~ Thomas Jefferson; letter to George Washington on the physical removal of Africans from the United States; January 4, 1786

> “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts or evidence.” ~ John Adams; defense for the British soldiers of the Boston Massacre; December 1770

> “To be consistent with existing and probably unalterable prejudices in the US, freed blacks ought to be permanently removed beyond the region occupied or allotted to a white population.” ~ James Madison; letter to Robert J. Evans; June 15, 1819

> “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities.” ~ Alexander Hamilton; The Examination, #8

> “It is by a thorough knowledge of the whole subject that people are enabled to judge correctly of the past and to give a proper direction to the future.” ~ James Monroe; Second Inaugural Address; March 5, 1821

> “Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence–I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens–the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” ~ George Washington; Farewell Address; September 1793

> “The number of purely white people in the world is proportionally very small. I should wish their numbers were increased. But perhaps I am partial to the complexion of my country, for such kind of partiality is natural to mankind.” ~ Benjamin Franklin; Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc.

They were national socialists before such a term even existed. They were, it could be argued, the pioneers of the concept in modern times. They espoused the erasure of prior identity to be subsumed into the newly-created joint effort of the United States. The ideals they represented were those of Classical Rome, which they had long studied and admired. Out of the whole of Roman works, they opposed only the coronation of an Emperor, and only then on principle alone. Much like Saint Thomas Aquinas, not one of them considered Africans “human” when they spoke of “universal human rights” in the Constitution. They never imagined that Europeans–specifically white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants–would ever become a minority in their own nation. They never believed Christendom would be dismantled by the very rules they put in place to protect it. They fled Britain precisely to escape the tyranny of a centralized private bank and oppressive, totalitarian government. They felt that such a thing as a love of one’s own people and a desire to protect and further the cause of your nation and your blood was so absurdly obvious and so deeply fundamental that it did not even deserve a comment. When they spoke of the “brotherhood of man,” it was of embracing a man from a city over as a friend, not inviting into your home a swarthy savage from an alien continent.

>>184292

If they did ever suspect that such things might take place, they counted on the intelligence and perception of the Americans alive in such times to strike back against it. Libertarians refuse to do so. They fail the Founding Fathers in ways that a national socialist never would. An American national socialist would at least stand for America–his people–first, and himself second. At least he would be willing to fight back. At least he would be intelligent enough to understand that one should not be bound by any law meant for civilized society when uncivil men subvert such rules into daggers and razors to be brandished with malicious intent.

Hiding behind feigned neutrality to avoid having to take a stand as a real patriot–as a real man–should, makes libertarians more detestable than an overt traitor. They are worse than traitors. They shame the righteous, finger wag the resistance, tut tut those with the heart to fight back, and talk down as though to a fool any assemblage of patriots who refuse to see a nation subverted and degenerated before their eyes. Naked treachery is preferable to the smug and lukewarm condescension of the “just.”

Even Satan himself stood for something in the face of the Almighty God. Libertarians cannot even manage that.

>>184402

>Our stance is absolutely not egalitarian

The other guy explicitly said otherwise. You seem to be a realist-libertarian, whereas he’s an idealist-libertarian. You, a man who recognizes that your ideology (in its purest form) cannot exist in the world, and he, a man who claims that what jews say about libertarianism is totally legit, goyim, just believe us. I have no qualms with your line of thinking, except insofar as you believe it can be achieved without a global race war between now and then.

>you have a right to non-aggression which holds true UNLESS you initiate aggression…

How, then, does a libertarian define aggression? Here’s where we run into the parody (but it really isn’t) of the anarcho-capitalist memes and their reductionism (but it really isn’t) of the ideological standing. What counts as an “aggression” that revokes one’s right to an NAP?

>none of those 6 quotes conflict with each other

The dates are the important part. As libertarians grow up, they move from their delusional idealism into the same realism which defines national socialism, founding American traditionalism, and other historic ideologies in the ‘heroic’ sense. The statements (within names, but across time) absolutely conflict with each other. It’s because they grew up.

>read Reece’s

I’ll have to check it out; please summarize here.

>Strawman after strawman.

List one.

>The FF's were very obviously not nigsocs btw.

Quotes say otherwise. Actions say otherwise.

>They wanted to limit the power of government

And the only form of national socialism is one with an authoritarian government? Who said that? Jews? American national socialism could equally be described as national voluntarism–and the Founders wanted a government to provide a system of education whereby people would be knowledgeable enough to know that giving, of their own will, to benefit the whole would benefit themselves.

>KEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEK

So no argument.

>We do stand for something, much more tangible than whatever you stand for. It's freedom, nigger.

We stand for objective truth, which is apparently too difficult for your devolved, depraved, debauched, degenerate mind to comprehend.Truth is more important than freedom.

You want to know the truth about the “hatred” of libertarianism by traditionalists? The truth is we don’t hate it. We wanted it. We believed in the good of humanity, in live and let live, in leaving others alone as long as they left us alone. You know what happened? They didn’t leave us alone. They came after us and attacked us. They destroyed our hobbies, they besmirched the names of our ancestors, they ridiculed us for our beliefs, and they lied about our bodies to ‘belittle’ us. That is the truth. Your author used to be a libertarian. That’s why I want to reach out to help them. Libertarians don’t see the whole picture. They see that banks work against us. They see that an interventionist foreign policy works against us. They see that the government as a whole works against us. They simply haven’t yet asked the one critical question: ✡Who✡ is behind it all?

For so long we ignored it. You did, too, reader. Freedom is more precious than anything, right? Wrong. A man will only be pushed so far–he will only endure so much ridicule, only tolerate so much filth–before he has had enough. He will realize what ‘degeneracy’ is. He will see how it has destroyed nations, ruined families (even the very concept of family). He will see it spread disease, poverty, and hatred. He will see fools brag about how “tolerant” they while they march to the guillotine. He will bear witness to the horrors of undiluted, animalistic ‘freedom.’ There’s nothing wrong with ‘freedom’ when it is focused on the good and pure. Libertarianism can (temporarily) work in a 100% demographically pure Protestant Anglo-Saxon society. Libertarianism is suicide when you live in a progressive, multicultural hellhole.

So now we must restore the natural laws. No more can we let people decide for themselves, as not only does it lead to our destruction, but to theirs, too. Africans admit they were far happier and more prosperous under colonialism. So were we–that’s the truth. We all need leadership, and we need to enforce what is right. We have to return to a hierarchical world where opinions mean little; only cold hard facts will be used to determine how we will run society. We have always been obsessed with the truth. You will learn that truth is more important than freedom. The truth of the world is that we are not equal and freedom destroys us. The truth of the world is that women are happy when they are mothers and that they differ from men in many aspects. The truth of the world is that African and European societies are irreconcilably different, and that if we insist on treating them equally we will only harm ourselves and them. The truth of the world is that jews hate non-jews and are trying to destroy us, and that if we do not fight to defend our right to exist, we will lose it. The truth is that there is nothing wrong with fighting back. The truth is that there is nothing our enemy hates more than us discovering the truth, specifically that some ‘freedom’ is truly slavery.Truth is more important than freedom.

>>184251

>Muh NAP

>Well guess we could hypothesise a vague loophole in muh holy NAP because muh NAP is holy and must be followed

Yes indeed, religiously dogmatic and vague, but lacking the backstabber exploitative nature of commie shotcallers.

You're as bad or even worse than commies.

>you're a jew, of which, btw, only few individuals are bad

Piss off, will you?