all 73 comments

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Noticing that almost all of the foundational libertarian writers are Jewish.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Like Jesus. I don't have any definitive proof but the main impression I get from what he says is really close to the NAP, if not identical.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Lol God is not a libertarian, nice try though.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Says who? The lying pen of scribes? Religions? Flimsy sources.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Lmao

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well, every time in history that God showed up it was to expose the fraudulent religions that were in his name. And using his name for evil is seriously wrong. Indeed most orthodoxy tries to conceal the third commandment by changing it to "don't say God's name improperly" when it really says "don't do deceit with God's name". If it was really the former, all the writers of the Bible wouldn't have used the tetragrammation so often.

Also notice how the Bible is a Jewish book, so it's quite ironic that anyone who thinks they follow it is anti-semitic.

[–]nordmannenLegionnaire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Didn't read. You libertarians never fail to amuse, though.

[–][deleted]  (12 children)

[deleted]

    [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

    Most libertarians are not feminists or into forced diversity, which in fact go against it. Those are the far left SJWs who are exactly the same as you once the personal preferences are removed from the equation.

    create a society vastly different from what I wanted.

    "I". The problem is other people might not want the same kind of society. Or want one at all. Frankly it only exists to control us and oppress dissidents and outcasts, and steal from us. Society itself is not a good thing.

    [–][deleted]  (10 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

      Nonetheless, they (most of them) support the second wave of feminism (careers are more important than children, abortions, birth control, no-fault divorce, etc.).

      I don't see what's so hard about giving women rights and treating them like human beings. I'm super jealous of those who are born female but that's not an excuse to mistreat someone. No, this does not include abortion, and libertarians are about 50/50 on that.

      Like I said above, the guy on the throne makes the decisions. Libertarians do not like this, but it still is a fact.

      Which is exactly why the solution is to get rid of the throne.

      [–][deleted]  (8 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

        I believe the tradtional family should be at the center and not some atomistic individual, that actually does not even exist.

        Actually the individual is what does exist. The "traditional family" is only a concept.

        Why exactly should I want to get rid of the throne, if I was the ruler? My main question is, how do I become the king?

        So you want world domination? You want to be ruler of the world? Why? That causes others to suffer! That makes you evil!

        Do you want to have some rules, that prevent your neighbors from listening to loud music at 3 AM? Do you want to prevent your neighbors from shooting porn movies in their front yard, because otherwise you and your children have to see and hear this? Let's take another example. Let us assume you have a classical single-family house. All your neighbors decide to build some multi-story skyscrapers, so that you literally never get any daylight in your home. Would you be happy?

        Those are quite outlandish scenarios, but since they do affect my property it could be argued that they violate the NAP.

        Would you want to have some other rules, that are not clearcut violations of the NAP?

        Absolutely not, because that is abuse of power. Me not liking something is a horrible reason to take it away from those who do.

        Sure, you can debate, what violates the NAP and what does not. The problem, that even Libertarians themselves can not answer these questions, should be a warning.

        Don't pretend like every other system in existence doesn't suffer from the exact same problem. It's not libertarianism's fault, it's because humans are flawed.

        Let me end with one final question. I assume you want to have some rules other than do not kill and do not steal from someone. Why do you not want to be the guy deciding on the rules?

        You assumed wrong.

        Why should you prefer trying to make some joint agreements with everyone in your neighborhood to just making the rules by yourself? Obviously the latter option would resemble your ideal, while the former option will probably end in some compromise.

        Because that would be incredibly selfish and inconsiderate of others' needs. That would be hypocritical. And if I do it myself, I have no right to complain when I am the victim of it. But alas, I am anamoly; human instincts are not moral or principled.

        Why do you not want to be the guy deciding on the rules?

        Same reason. I want to decide what happens in my own life. I have no business dictating others. In fact, since I care about my own autonomy, it is crucial that I not infringe on others' autonomy.

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

          I talked about an atomized individual.

          Well you're talking to one so they do exist.

          Being powerful is always better than being weak.

          Not being weak does not mean being evil. Let me ask you, would you consider Jesus weak?

          Why is it an abuse?

          Because why should everyone else have to conform to your personal preferences?

          If you are sure, that your ideas are great, then why should it be a horrible idea to make others follow these ideas?

          Because you are not God and could still be very wrong. Almost everyone is sure their own ideas are great. And they are often evil and selfish too.

          Is being selfish always wrong?

          Yes.

          Interesting to hear a Libertarian caring for other people's needs.

          You clearly believe in stereotypes about us then which don't represent us one bit. In fact concern for others is the only thing that holds back the desire to rule them like you want.

          Anyways, I have already addressed above, that I believe I would help others, if we made them follow my ideas.

          But some may disagree.

          Why do you not have a right to complain yourself, if you are the victim? In one scenario you are the victim and in the other you are not. That's a huge difference.

          Because that would be hypocrisy.

          Finally, we once again agree on something. How does this help a Libertarian "society"?

          It's not a society, and human instincts don't help. In fact they're probably the reason why so few ever like the idea; only those open-minded enough to question their instincts, their deepest primal convictions, will take it seriously.

          Your life is affected by others.

          Which is why they should not rule.

          Once again, I have to ask why?

          Because I believe in morals. Consistency. Not being a hypocrite. Equality of opportunity for all. I don't like pride. Others do not inherently deserve more than me, nor do I deserve more than them. If I had it my way everyone would have their own reality and only interact when they want to. But this prison, the matrix, and maybe the real world that contains it, keeps us locked in this world, so all we can do is respect one another.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

            [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            The fundamental difference is whether you have the right to other peoples' lives and belongings. The way I see it, everyone is entitled to their own. And I also believe that following principles and morals will give the best results in the end, even if there are short term gains in not doing so. The best results for everyone, not just those in power.

            [–][deleted]  (2 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              catholic church hates moral relativism

              they want to be the ones to define that

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Not when you define them by the golden rule.

              [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

              Libertarianism at it's core is almost the exact opposite of what we want, yet many made the transition to here.

              From talking to a lot of these people what I find is that lolberts have been tricked into thinking the policies they advocate for will have the exact opposite effect of what they actually result in.

              The smart ones eventually start applying the abstractions to the real world and realise libertarianism is just a jewish trick, the dumb ones (majority of them) just stay as lolberts forever.

              Edit: I think that the major issue is that, of the tiny proportion of them that are literate, these people only read lolberts to reinforce their dumb ideas. I think if they read Distributist stuff (which is what libertarians think libertarianism will result in) then they can be brought around to reading other rightists afterwards. But alas, the vast majority of people don't read; especially those dumb enough to become lolberts.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

              Why do you say Jewish? Wasn't it popularized mainly by certain American founding fathers?

              [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

              No, libertarianism as it's known by most was popularised by Rothbard, Rand, Nozick, Mises, Hayek, Friedman etc. Almost every figure that is associated with libertarianism is a jew.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

              I would guess because Jews were the minority and hated because of unfair stereotypes (which you are promoting). They suffered under the system, and that's what it usually takes for a human to wake up, because our instincts are socialist and violent and evil. I used to be a typical authoritarian asshole too until being abused under it one too many times. And the more it happens the more I realize humans are incapable of dealing with power responsibly, and the more I drift toward anarchism.

              And you're forgetting all the anti-federalists who passed the Bill of Rights and founded American ideals of liberty. They started the trend in America, even though sadly humans don't like it because we're tribal animals.

              [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              Yeah bro jews are the good guys all throughout history and the whole world just hated them for no reason at all. Remarkably they all cite the exact same reasons, through some kind of magical coincidence.

              And you're forgetting all the anti-federalists who passed the Bill of Rights and founded American ideals of liberty. They started the trend in America, even though sadly humans don't like it because we're tribal animals.

              America was started as a way for a bunch of rich people to exploit everyone else. The bill of rights was simply a concession.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Everyone hated Jews because everyone hated everyone who wasn't themselves. Humans are idiot tribal animals. Jews aren't innocent either, a lot of them were and are racist against goyim.

              America was started as a way for a bunch of rich people to exploit everyone else. The bill of rights was simply a concession.

              Only the federalists wanted that, and Britain was already doing that before they won their independence. And contrary to your fairy tale storybook characterizations of George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, the federalists were practically monarchists themselves, and resisted things like the Bill of Rights. If I'm not mistaken most of the anti-federalists envisioned America as a nation of farmers and small businesses, not monopolous corporations which can only exist through collusion with a government that has too much control.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              And what's ironic here is that much of Judaism has been about covering up the "Israel shouldn't have a king" God that started it all, and replacing him with their own made-up "Alpha God" who promotes their orthodox and authoritarian agenda (And Christianity does the same thing making up imposter Gods and Jesuses who promote their agenda).

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (24 children)

              Niggers.

              Edit:

              Libertarianism at it's core is almost the exact opposite of what we want

              I disagree, but I'm not quite drunk enough to elaborate on why. Look, you have to understand that nationalism is not opposed to the ideal of universal... not suffrage, but the idea of rights. If "libertarian" can be reconciled with the idea of a state at all (as in minarchy), then that state itself can be defended from the malicious hordes at our doorstep.

              Maybe the leftists are perceptive (not likely) when they lump libertarians in with right-wing extremists, despite their own left-libertarians getting caught in the crossfire. It's the path of self-ownership and self-actualization. And what is a body, if not part of an ancient lineage? Do we have the right to cohabitate private land together or not?

              The ethnostate is a proper subset of the libertopia. QED.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (19 children)

              what is a body

              A rotting piece of meat that keeps you prisoner and enslaves you in it to the point of limiting and partially controlling even your mind. Like in The Matrix.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

              Yeah, but if you don't know why the meat works the way it does, you're a fucking idiot.

              Seriously, do you think you're a robot programmed from first principles? Humans are emotional machines, and I sure as fuck don't feel like my retard-IQ neighbors do. That's not for lack of probing.

              If you accept the meat-only principle you're only proving my point.

              [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

              You're not going to get much out of him. He's probably only on the internet because his mom knocked over his Puzz-3D project.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              Luckily no, or I would be very sad about it :{

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

              Yeah, but if you don't know why the meat works the way it does, you're a fucking idiot.

              I know why it works the way it does. So humans can spread like a virus, no matter how much suffering and destruction it causes. This is why humans love social order and authoritarianism and tribalism: because even though it makes 99% of peoples' lives suck it's more efficient at maximizing procreation and destroying competing tribes, and people are generally very willing to make such a sacrifice for this pointless agenda. It's also why life will always suck for those unlucky enough to be born male, because the whole reason for making us that way is so we are specialized to slave better for that cause at our own expense.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

              Gross. No.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

              You took the blue pill. I understand. The red one hurts, a lot, and more or less depending on your own situation. I often wish I could take it too so life would at least be tolerable, but it simply doesn't work on my autistic brain.

              [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

              wouldn't the red pill being we're just meat here mean morals don't matter

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

              No, because the truth is also that if this body is holding me prisoner, chances are that others have someone in them too, especially with them being aware and all.

              [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

              agreed solipsism is false, we're stuck in our heads but we can tell it's the same for everyone, so it doesn't really matter if we're meat or not. My question is why focus on it. If something doesn't matter why bring it up.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

              Because whether others are "real" or just AI that look like me and imitate consciousness matters a lot for how I treat them. If they're fake it doesn't matter if I harm them, but if they're real I need to love them as myself because that means someone else like me is actually experiencing and feeling it.

              [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

              So you're just another racist libtard deep down.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

              No, I'm racist.

              There's a difference.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              There's really not. Except whether you hate white or black people but you didn't specify.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              That's not how racism works.

              [–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

              They never go on the offensive. Their solution to everything ia do nothing

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I think you're misunderstanding us. What we mean is that people are better off solving their own problems rather than having the government tell them what to do. If they mess up that's their own fault, and the government I think is even more likely to go wrong or even intentionally evil, which is why the freedom to yourself is so important.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Well there's no reason to harm something which is not harming me or someone else. In fact that is evil, and indeed a valid reason for them to then attack me in self-defense.

              [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I was never firm libertarian, like I never read any lolbert book (besides The Law by Bastiat). I basically became libertarian just because I witnessed corruption and inefficiency of our healthcare, wasting 50% of my parents' salaries while we barely get anything in return.

              There are several things that changed my mind tho.

              • When I went to university, I couldn't imagine how expensive life would be without all the subsidies we received (I was living in rural area beforehand so I took many things for granted), and I felt extreme sense of gratitude towards all the taxpayers, but also duty to give my best

              • I noticed libertarianism/AnCap does nothing to preserve free speech and expression

              • I did some heavy mental gymnastics regarding borders, arguing that you could have strong borders in AnCap society and not let immigrants in

              • I naively believed in voting with your wallet, shortly coming to realize that unorganized individual boycotts don't do anything at all in regards to preserving traditions and environment (even mass boycotts aren't effective)

              What can I say, I was young and stupid (inb4 now you're just stupid xD) and everyone makes mistakes lol

              [–]NeoRail 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

              I am not a libertarian, but I think for most of these people libertarianism is a way to assert political and ideological independence from the coastal liberalism of the elites. The appeal is not the actual ideas, it's the sense of autonomy. Libertarian ideology is just a means to an end.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

              I nearly always see it the other way around. Libertarians usually agree more with conservative ideals (by the American definition, not classical), but wish to distance themselves from the tribalism and authoritarianism that results from conservatives thirsting to defeat their enemy (liberals). Basically they are purists guided chiefly by principles and morals rather than personal desires and groupthink.

              [–]NeoRail 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

              I suppose it depends on what type of libertarian you are talking about. The more "intellectual" and bourgeois types are as you describe. If you speak to a working class libertarian Baptist from the deep South, however, you will probably encounter something quite different.

              [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

              Yeah there are the NIMBYism, Get Off My Lawn, I Just Want To Be Left Alone libertarians who are often just white flighting really. And then you have the autistic, gleefully revelling in the worst of the worst demonic ideology types.

              [–]NeoRail 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

              You nailed it. A very pessimistic perspective underlies the worldview of even these people - the state cannot be stopped or changed to serve the people, it can only be limited and decentralised, reduced to a deeply hated "small government" instead of a deeply hated "big government", but never redeemed. Professional political conmen of the libertarian persuasion are really shrewd for pushing, popularising and entrenching this ideology, because it can be used to mobilise people to fight other political forces without offering anything in return.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

              Because humans are inherently evil by instinct, that's why. We are hardwired to have hope in glorious governments and hierarchies due to our tribal nature, but they never work.

              [–]NeoRail 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I disagree.

              [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              This guy is a perfect representation of the libertarianism you describe at the end. I always say like anarchism it's merely an expression adolescent angst and neuroticism usually coupled with incredibly anti-social personality traits.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              I became "anti-social" after experiencing society for what it really is.

              Take the red pill and know the truth, but quite possibly be miserable depending on your situation. I understand why you take the blue pill. Sometimes I wish blue pills worked on me too, because it's hard.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              Of course you hate people with autism. It prevents large parts of social brainwashing from taking place and the person becomes a threat to society's power.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              If anything I'd expect the southern Baptist to be more conservative-minded and the cognitive elites to be more liberal.

              [–]NeoRail 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              "Cognitive elites" is a very generous description for the human type I was thinking of. Anyway, you get my point.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

              I never made the switch but most conservatives, our former allies and mostly made up of more moderate libertarian-minded people, did.

              I know I sound crazy but I think it might be the matrix either dumbing down its AI or replacing formerly real people with AI. Conservatives now act less like actual conservatives and more like liberals think conservatives are. Liberals themselves underwent this same shift long before, probably sometime around the Obama Era. They both act like cartoons at this point. Also remember that all it would take is to alter the key players, to most people politics is little more than tribalism and they will blindly go with whatever their party tells them.

              I've seen these "AI takeovers" on a few people in real life too, it's sad. They either become extremely Flanderized or super secretive and refuse to interact with you, even long-time friends, and act nothing like themselves.

              If that's not it I have no reasonable explanation. The switch literally happened overnight in May/June 2020 and they now seem to have no memory of changing and think they were always like this. Even though they did a complete 180 on their core values.

              You mentioned those who do remember being libertarians, I would guess they probably started going by their human instincts but what do I know. You'll have to ask them.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

              Conservatives now act less like actual conservatives and more like liberals think conservatives are.

              You projected on them your ideals. This is a mistake.

              I've seen these "AI takeovers" on a few people in real life too

              Don't disgrace the dead. Facebook posts on behalf of dead users, that doesn't mean that living ones are victims of the same.

              I would guess they probably started going by their human instincts

              What do you think libertarianism even is? Have you read locke?

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

              You projected on them your ideals. This is a mistake.

              If I were doing that, there's no reason for me to suddenly stop doing so and not realize it. Second, we were in large agreement in the past. The residue here is all the libertarians like Ron Paul and Adam Kokesh who always aligned with the Republican party. I am not the only one to notice this sudden and unexplained shift either.

              Don't disgrace the dead. Facebook posts on behalf of dead users, that doesn't mean that living ones are victims of the same.

              I literally said "in real life".

              What do you think libertarianism even is? Have you read locke?

              I don't need to read Locke or anybody, it's common sense. It's the only position that makes even a lick of sense or has any real morality or principles and not mere tribalism. Which is unfortunately probably the reason it never wins out in a human world.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

              we were in large agreement in the past

              That's where the projection lies. Also, sorry to break it to you, but kokesh is a left-libertarian. He leaves ideals behind when it suits him. Ron Paul argues with principles and votes for his people, easy to see he's consistent

              it's common sense

              haha, no

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

              Also, sorry to break it to you, but kokesh is a left-libertarian. He leaves ideals behind when it suits him.

              I don't know a whole lot about him but I do know he was on Fox News which is generally right leaning. You may be right but I don't trust your assessment because libertarians are being called leftists by conservatives now. Completely the opposite of before, when they actually felt were simply a bit too extreme.

              Ron Paul argues with principles and votes for his people, easy to see he's consistent

              What's your point?

              haha, no

              Other people do not have the right to enslave me or steal from me or harm me without consent. Other systems do not respect this. The problem is it goes against human instincts, which are totalitarian, violent, and socialist.

              [–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              My point is that Ron Paul sings the song of his people. Adam Kokesh is a bad grifter.

              Whatever you think is "common sense" doesn't matter. Imagine that you're fighting for your life among others like you in a temporary fortification. What do you believe? Why are the invaders so angry?

              How will this answer change when it's transmuted to the present day? Are they still angry? Maybe it doesn't matter from where the rights of man derive, and we are all bound in common by the hatred of our enemy.

              [–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Humans define themselves based on group loyalty and hatred of others, even at the expense of their own basic rights. I find it unbelievable just how few see why this is bad. REALLY bad.

              [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              I never understood why libertarians even exist in the first place. Then again, you hardly see them here on the continent.

              [–]socksuckersocks_sucks 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I neither. Liberetardianism is my least favourite ideology alongside anarchism and progressivism, which for me constitute a sort of 'triangle' of the most dangerous and ignorant ideologies.

              Thankfully, it's also a fringe ideology outside of America. Practically no Hispanic country bar Costa Rica has a political movement that identifies with it, and in that exceptional case they since became conservatives in practice. Similarly, it has no presence in Africa except in a minor South African "Capitalist" party who have a libertarian platform in practice. Support base mostly White and Indian.

              Generally, it seems to only have White adherents (e.g. Germany's FDP or Australia's Liberal Democrats as better examples of parties that are rather libertarian in practice). It's just like the Green 'progressives' - outside of Brazil and a select few others, it is very difficult to find these people outside of the West (but they increasingly plague France, Germany and Australia, in Canada they seem more of a fringe personality cult party big on conspiracy theories).

              [–]TheWorldToCome 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              I still think within a white society a more hands off approach to government is best,, however in our current world I am a white nationalist out of self defense. If we do not use state power to defend against the blatant genocidal anti white powers at work my quality of life is going to suffer.

              [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I am a white nationalist out of self defense.

              I hope more whites wake up to this. We are running out of time.