[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Settings Home
/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

The law perverted! The law — and, in its wake, all the collective forces of the nation — the law, I say, not only diverted from its proper direction, but made to pursue one entirely contrary!

his is a thread for the discussion of all ideologies that promote self-ownership, individual liberty and the natural order. These include (but are not limited to) anarcho-capitalism, paleolibertarianism, minarchy, objectivism and anti-leftism (i.e. physical removal, so to speak). All others are welcome to learn and debate us.
Reminder that this is a right-wing thread, so libertine degenerates ('live and let live' faggotry), open-border advocates and faux-libertarians (e.g. Gary Johnson) are not welcome here - people here recognise that property rights imply discrimination and a return to traditional, conservative values.

>Pastebin: pastebin.com/iT0Rw8PT
>Discord & Book Club: AbGmGWH

>The Machinery Of Freedom: Illustrated Summary (David Friedman) - youtube.com/watch?v=jTYkdEU_B4o (Watch this!)
>Anatomy of the State (Murray Rothbard) - mises.org/library/anatomy-state
>For a New Liberty (Murray Rothbard) - mises.org/library/new-liberty-libertarian-manifesto
>Democracy: The God that Failed (Hans Hermann-Hoppe) - www.riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

>Reference - See i.imgur.com/wCIpgNA.jpg
>Torrent - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:8d8ec6ef882dee291f119eb69994797574e5d616&dn=Anarcho-Capitalism%20Books

>hoppewave | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | physical removal - youtube.com/watch?v=LP41IK91_qA
>Against the State - (Hoppewave Hans Hermann Hoppe) - youtube.com/watch?v=HLaqr3QorCw
>I need a Pinochet! - youtube.com/watch?v=zhrYY3ocQ5o
>Drop it like it's Hoppe - youtube.com/watch?v=HPKGgo4kGQM
Tfw two threads
File: DIMxxcIXUAII34P.jpg (60 KB, 655x437)
60 KB
I don't see one in the catalog
File: ron_paul_nap.jpg (39 KB, 540x960)
39 KB
Then it must've died.
As long as no one is bumping this shit im gonna plug my youtube channel. I'll be uploading all the good radical agenda bits there!
>In Defense of Capitalism
>Individualism and Group Interests
Any Hoppe experts here? I’m reading “The Private Production of Defense,” and to me it seems like he generally emphasizes voluntarism and self-determination inside private property borders, but yet, he does approve expulsion of people from the neighborhood come the neighbors see it as desirable. What is the relationship between the private and the public here?
>The Truth About Libertarianism | Immigration and Borders
File: 1uooh0.jpg (137 KB, 1420x946)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
From what I know, he's not really advocating for mob rule by helicopter, he's just arguing that a society which holds private property rights as the summum bonum is more likely to discriminate against and thus expel any undesirable tenants/renters/etc.
Im not sure exactly what your question is, there is no public property in Hoppean theory.
Anarcho-Capitalism is a system where all property Is privatized. People can agree to share their property in such a way that it would be open to the "public" but someone still owns the property.

If i misunderstood your question please clarify.
just checking >>144444444
File: Hoppe (1).png (154 KB, 443x500)
154 KB
154 KB PNG
>is more likely to discriminate against and thus expel any undesirable tenants/renters/etc.

So you couldn't drive a landowner out - even if he was a known menace to the rest of the community - because he owns his property? To me it sounds like he would approve such procedures:
>On the other hand, for the owners and residents in “bad” loca-
tions and neighborhoods (who experience emigration rather
than immigration), forced integration means that they are pre-
vented from effective self-protection. Rather than being
allowed to rid themselves of crime through the expulsion of
known criminals from their neighborhood, they are forced by their government to live in permanent association with their
What I gather from this is that the neighborhood can in certain cases take the law into own hands, unhouse someone antisocial. Hope I'm not coming across to confusing.
*into their
So why does /lrg/ never expresses opposition to war? That was one of the main themes in Rothbard's writing but somehow I never see /pol/ "libertarians" talk about it.

I wouldnt say never. /pol/ as a whole has always been against interventionism. Other than conservative culture it was the one of the few things that the libertarians and stormfags of old /pol/ agreed on.

Do you remember during the Ron Paul campaign, he pretty much talked about foreign policy and the Federal Reserve 90% of the time. Whenever he was asked about something other than those two issues, he often segued back into foreign policy and the Fed somehow.

yep and considering he was the only one addressing those points Id say he was pretty successful. We definetly should keep pushing the issue.
None of our enemies extol the wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan, so it's rarely brought up. I don't think any of us would defend expansionary war, though.
It's not so much that people would seize an undesirable's property and kick'em out, it's more that they would just refuse to do business with him and effectively drive him out of town.

I imagine such a situation would never arise in the first place, as white neighborhoods wouldn't sell houses to blacks, and vice versa.
Oh, right. And I guess, now when I actually apply his argumentation ethics to this, it would be seen as permissible, for example, to vandalize property of someone who has vandalized his neighbors' property.
What is the future of Libertarianism or actual Conservatism in Britain, OP?
2nd amendement is vital
File: Taxes.png (260 KB, 1907x475)
260 KB
260 KB PNG
Name your ideal tax system.
>Federal government only gets taxes through tariffs
>State governments only get taxes through sales tax
File: State tax.png (200 KB, 1623x968)
200 KB
200 KB PNG
Pretty fucking bleak looking at Labour's gains
File: tree_of_liberty.png (2.7 MB, 1280x720)
2.7 MB
2.7 MB PNG

For an actual answer, I can't pinpoint much. We have an overton window constantly shifting leftward ho, government constantly getting bigger. Not as if the tories are libertarians.

Regressive tax system - tax the poor more than the rich, to get them to overthrow government.
>property rights imply discrimination and a return to traditional, conservative values.

False flag operation, co-opting of libertarianism to provide the alt-shite desperately needed legitimacy.

Abandon thread immediately.
How much of this do you reckon is explained by the dissolution of Bretton Woods?
Explain to me how support for private property rights is "co-opting" libertarianism.
File: 1507392246822.png (163 KB, 382x452)
163 KB
163 KB PNG
Wheres the discord invite
Hey boys, good to see this general on the homepage again, its been too long. Pleased to see your presence on here regardless though, I couldn't count how many gun control shills have been BTFO over the past few days.

Do they have an equivelant 'Libertarian' party over in Brittain? It was my understanding that standing for anything that isn't Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May makes you an "anarchist".

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.