Fkn BASED

[Anonymous No.11785123]

[Anonymous No.11785174]

I don't know about you, but he is /myguy/

[Anonymous No.11785225]

>>11785123
AND

[Anonymous No.11785256]

>>11785225
Post the one where he effortlessly dismantles multiculturalism and the libertarian left.

[Anonymous No.11785260]

SHALL

[Anonymous No.11785265]

HELICOPTER

[Anonymous No.11785266]

>>11785256
I'm not OP, nor do I have that image, but I do want to see it.

[Anonymous No.11785273]

Any other philosophers like Hoppe worth reading?

[Anonymous No.11785275]

>>11785266
Not him either but here's one I have from a while back

[Anonymous No.11785281]

>>11785266
The final stage has it, but I don't have the quotes in isolation.

[Anonymous No.11785283]

I hate this faggot for releasing a book called "The God that Failed" that makes it difficult to find the actual bokk called "The God that failed"

[Anonymous No.11785284]

>>11785273
Jurgen Habermas, Alain de Benoist, Nick Land? I mean are you looking for extremelt right wing or violent views?

Maybe Georges Sorel is up your alley then

[Anonymous No.11785302]

>>11785284
>violent views
We're talking about the right wing, not bloodthirsty lefists.

[Anonymous No.11785318]

the god that failed is my next book on my stack, cant wait to read it

[Anonymous No.11785433]

>>11785302
/pol/acks fantasize about right wing death squads and the day of the rope. I'm not gonna say they're indicative of all rightists but let's stop pretending either side is infallible. You just make an easy target for the other side and make the rest of us look bad.

[Anonymous No.11785454]

>>11785433
I'd love to know who you think you're talking to. Actually I don't care.

[Anonymous No.11785463]

>>11785454
Am I talking to a guy who thinks the right has never harbored violent views?

[Anonymous No.11785486]

>>11785123
From this, that the Law is a Command, and a Command consisteth in declaration, or manifestation of the will of him that commandeth, by voyce, writing, or some other sufficient argument of the same, we may understand, that the Command of the Common-wealth, is Law onely to those, that have means to take notice of it. Over naturall fooles, children, or mad-men there is no Law, no more than over brute beasts; nor are they capable of the title of just, or unjust; because they had never power to make any covenant, or to understand the consequences thereof; and consequently never took upon them to authorise the actions of any Soveraign, as they must do that make to themselves a Common-wealth. And as those from whom Nature, or Accident hath taken away the notice of all Lawes in generall; so also every man, from whom any accident, not proceeding from his own default, hath taken away the means to take notice of any particular Law, is excused, if he observe it not; And to speak properly, that Law is no Law to him. It is therefore necessary, to consider in this place, what arguments, and signes be sufficient for the knowledge of what is the Law; that is to say, what is the will of the Soveraign, as well in Monarchies, as in other formes of government.

[Anonymous No.11786224]

>>11785174
Agreed, Hoppe is /ourguy/.

[Anonymous No.11786248]

>>11786224
Hoppe: Patron saint of /lit/.com/forums

[Anonymous No.11786347]

what even is the point of having a social or political philosophy that isn't rooted in christianity? it's like taking a bath without water

[Anonymous No.11786586]

>>11786347
Post-Christian European and East Asian societies are way better than Christian theocracies.

[Anonymous No.11786601]

>>11786586
How?

[Anonymous No.11786611]

>>11786586
Nope fuck off. Not him but the main problem I have with Christian society is that it's susceptible to degeneration. That's mostly a Pr*d thing, but Catholics gave birth to them, so...

[Anonymous No.11786616]

>>11785123
Whoa whoa whoa, so people who are bad at playing Capitalism are animals who should be abused and people who are good at playing Capitalism should be punished to "make them understand the nature of their wrongdoings"? How much was omitted from this? Or is this deliberate nonsense?

[Anonymous No.11786654]

>>11786616
You'll get yours one day, my red friend :) Apple and Facebook and Google won't need you around forever, and the browns you import into western countries certainly don't give a shit about white commies and libs. Enjoy it while it lasts...

[Anonymous No.11786675]

germs confirmed for insects

[Anonymous No.11786697]

>>11786654
can you read?

[Anonymous No.11786986]

>>11785174
Apparently Hoppe is anti free speech?

[Anonymous No.11786991]

>>11786986
Not even close. You would need to actually read him to understand his positions.

[Anonymous No.11787470]

>>11785225
REDPILLED

[Anonymous No.11787541]

A tad bit autistic for me but I'd love to see an actual Hoppean covenant society in practice

[Anonymous No.11789233]

>>11785123
Bump

[Anonymous No.11789335]

Libertarianism is just another liberal idea, just like communism and socialism and democracy.

All enlightenment ideas.
Neo-absolutism is the only concept that takes into account all things necessary and closes all loopholes.

[Anonymous No.11789365]

Did /lit/ turn to the right?
It's been a while since I visited /lit/ and now I see right wing propaganda spouted.

Right wing theories are all about ooga booga masculinity, I hope you realize that.
They're not intellectual or analytical or deep in any sense.
Try reading some Derrida and Gramsci pls.

[Anonymous No.11789443]

>>11789365
Did /lit/ turn to the left?
It's been a while since I visited /lit/ and now I see left-wing propaganda spouted.
Left wing theories are all about ooga booga toxic masculinity, I hope you realise that.
they're not intellectual or analytical or deep in any sense.
Try reading some Hoppe and Carl Schmitt please.

[Anonymous No.11789466]

>>11789443
2011 was the era I browsed lit intensely, back then poststructualism was nonexistent in here, later the lefty wave came in and now the right phase.

[Anonymous No.11789519]

>>11785123
>>11785174

>claims to be libertarian
>unpersons anyone who disagrees with them

[Anonymous No.11790181]

>>11789519
That's why he's great.

[Anonymous No.11790198]

Kai murros is much better than this libertarian chucklefuck.

[Anonymous No.11790211]

>>11789365
>Right wing theories are all about ooga booga masculinity

Dorothy wants her straw man back

[Anonymous No.11790348]

>>11789519
>unpersons

[Anonymous No.11790620]

>>11790198
Literally who?

[Anonymous No.11790735]

>>11790181
why is that great? i am a libertarian because i believe in individual freedom

[Anonymous No.11790911]

>>11790735
Maybe you should read Hoppe then. He does a wonderful job of deconstructing why the "liberal" libertarians are not "libertarian" at all, but merely useful idiots for the left and crypto authoritarians.

Seriously, if you claim to be libertarian there's literally no reason why you shouldn't be familiar with him, so it's not even worth talking about. You should just read some Hoppe.

[Anonymous No.11790921]

>>11785318
the first few chapters made me totally re-think democracy vs. monarchy. he makes a very strong argument that monarchies make more sense in a lot of ways

[Anonymous No.11790941]

>>11790735
>>11789519
Private property capitalism and egalitarian multiculturalism are as unlikely a combination as socialism and cultural conservatism. And in trying to combine what cannot be combined, much of the modern libertarian movement actually contributed to the further erosion of private property rights (just as much of contemporary conservatism contributed to the erosion of families and traditional morals). What the countercultural libertarians failed to recognize, and what true libertarians cannot emphasize enough, is that the restoration of private property rights and laissez-faire economics implies a sharp and drastic increase in social “discrimination” and will swiftly eliminate most if not all of the multicultural-egalitarian life style experiments so close to the heart of left libertarians. In other words, libertarians must be radical and uncompromising conservatives.

[Anonymous No.11790986]

>>11790941
you come from a position of thinking you already know the truth. i come from a position of knowing you do not. we as a race have a lot to learn from one another. i support free speech and free thought even for those who want to destroy me (ie communists) because progress is made in the free marketplace of ideas and in a society of minimal state interference there is nothing to fear in the statist derrangements of communism and fascism - they are inferior systems and cannot take root without the heavy coercion which libertarianism seeks to eradicate.

the moralizing fatalism of a "libertarian" like hoppe is antithetical to the whole project of liberation unless you believe we as a human race and as sovereign individuals have already reached our apex intellectually.

[Anonymous No.11791005]

>>11785123
nice try wagie

[Anonymous No.11791017]

>>11790986
That's a lot of words to not make any arguments. Meanwhile in reality, non whites have NEVER preferred any sort of libertarian project, and in real life libertarianism is just a vehicle to convince right wing people to vote for open borders. Which by the way immediately defeats the libertarian project by flooding a given country with people who will vote against libertarian ideas.

If I'm wrong, name one (1) instance where this hasn't been the case, or even one (1) non white society to show any interest in libertarian ideas.

Your absurd haughty moralism aside, nothing you claimed can be substantiated by any instance in history. It's complete fantasy.

[Anonymous No.11791024]

>>11790986
Yeah free market place of ideas, like in the US and Western Europe where free speech is rapidly being quashed! Good one.

[Anonymous No.11791035]

>>11790986
>We as a human race
DROPPED
This shit is why lolbertarians are loosing.

[Anonymous No.11791049]

>>11791024
>like in the US and Western Europe where free speech is rapidly being quashed!
because an international statist cartel is staging a takeover, because we have not been vigilant as citizens.

>>11791017
>Meanwhile in reality, non whites have NEVER preferred any sort of libertarian project
>libertarianism is just a vehicle to convince right wing people to vote for open borders
ahh, the now the fascist reveals himself

[Anonymous No.11791066]

>>11791049
>ahh, the now the fascist reveals himself
Ahhh now the conservatard Koch funded boomer has revealed himself

[Anonymous No.11791068]

>>11791049
>because an international statist cartel is staging a takeover, because we have not been vigilant as citizens.
Right, because "free marketplace of ideas" didn't work. How dense are you? This is an immediate, recent example of your claim being falsified by reality

>ahh, the now the fascist reveals himself
This isn't a rebuttal of an objectively true point, and I think you know it. Namecalling doesn't work. I don't care if you think I'm a fascist. I'm a Hoppean Libertarian. Now that we've cleared that up, feel free to respond to the actual question.

You've demonstrated yourself to be someone who ignores reality and namecall in the exact manner a leftist would. You're not exactly giving anyone cause to become a libertarian by your definition.

Now, address the issues.

[Anonymous No.11791072]

>>11791049
>name one time a non white group was libertarian
>uhh umm...f-f-fascist!
Fucking LOL

[Anonymous No.11791147]

Well this is sad. The "antifascist" libertarian got BTFO harder than anyone I've ever seen before. Wtf I'm a Hopper now.

[Anonymous No.11791186]

>>11785123
*rate of profit falls*, nothin personnel kid
>For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.

[Anonymous No.11791245]

>>11791072
all men are created equal
you're just being edgy. know that the founding fathers look down on you.

[Anonymous No.11791257]

>>11791245
>all men are created equal
BUT ANON THAT IS SEXIST!!! ;)

[Anonymous No.11791274]

>>11790620
https://youtu.be/P93C-ZW7y4k

[Anonymous No.11791295]

>>11791274
Holy snap he needs a Wikipedia page.

[Anonymous No.11791300]

>>11791245
Luckily I don't give a shit what they think, but thanks for going out of your way to be even more of a retard.
>the FF weren't slave owners
>the FF didn't draft the constitution which stated that it was a country for white free men
>the FF didn't endorse/pass strict immigration laws that would make Trump blush
Kill self faggot. I'm embarrassed to know you exist.

[Anonymous No.11791308]

>>11791245
Imagine being a retard

[Anonymous No.11791322]

>>11791245
Do you actually have an argument? So far your posts have been empty platitudes and emotional pleading. I haven't even heard an articulation of why you're a "libertarian" in the first place. You're getting your ass handed to you and your posts read like your some sort of noble martyr for a cause you can't articulate.

[Anonymous No.11791640]

BUMP for nite crew

[Anonymous No.11792020]

>>11785123
>>11785275
>simultaneously advocates for functional political ideology for maximizing private property and subjective metric of wealth value rooted in "feelings" rather than operative nature of capital
>has a gay name like "Hans"
Oh, so a racist pseud read by other racist pseuds? Got it.

[Anonymous No.11792043]

>>11792020
>he thinks libertarianism is about maximizing capital rather than being about not violating the nap and enforcing property rights
lol

[Anonymous No.11792101]

>>11792020
>this political thinker doesn't adhere to the strawman i created in my head!
>therefore he's "gay"
OK, this is epic

[Anonymous No.11792109]

>>11790941
>Private property capitalism and egalitarian multiculturalism are as unlikely a combination as socialism and cultural conservatism. And in trying to combine what cannot be combined
Just terrible.

[Anonymous No.11792123]

>>11792043
>nap
>enforcing
kek

[Anonymous No.11792140]

>>11792109
Great rebuttal man. Also, the poster count didn't go up. Why don't you save your next post for when you actually have something to say. No one is interested in your woman-tier butt hurt.

[Anonymous No.11792197]

>>11785123
Does he have any arguments to back that up or does he just share these contemptible opinions with the knowledge that he's preaching to the choir?

[Anonymous No.11792202]

>>11792197
>sources
Full pseud right here

[Anonymous No.11792220]

>>11792197
His books are very empirical and well argued. Surprisingly, a couple quotes do not cover everything laid out in his books.

Even his more recent Short History of Man draws on a variety of disciplines from psychology to history to sociology, and it is incredibly well sourced.

This is coming from someone who thinks praxeology is well spun garbage. I was ready to dismiss him out of hand for that label, but he's just so damn well sourced that he can't be ignored.

[Anonymous No.11792327]

>>11785123

Wow, so edgy you tween.

[Anonymous No.11792347]

(((Hoppe)))

[Anonymous No.11792493]

>>11792327
The whole flaccid tactic of pretending that young people will eventually "grow up" into left wing retards is always so bizarrely transparent and out of touch. Not to mention completely detached from statistical facts about political alignment and age.

But then again you're some retarded nutjob incel who posts on /lit/ at 4 in the morning.

[Anonymous No.11792507]

>>11792493
nobody grows into (((liberterianism))), your mother has to be one

[Anonymous No.11792520]

Why are statists always so anti-semitic? The free market has decided that Jews are the best, and that's final.

[Anonymous No.11792537]

>>11792507
*thoughtfully braps in your mouth*

[Anonymous No.11792576]

>>11789365

>be a faggot like me guys strength is actually weakness

[Anonymous No.11792663]

>>11786986
I have yet to read Hoppe but I think that that he's mentioned that free speech is incompatible with private property. You are entitled to host any speech that you so please on your private property. Nothing special really, many ancaps know this.

[Anonymous No.11792678]

>>11792520
>the free market
jews literally own the federal reserve

[Anonymous No.11792685]

>>11792520
>>11792678
also they owned all the banks in the first place only because they were the only ones legally allowed to charge interest in medieval europe
how is uneven legislation and legal inequality "free market"?

[Anonymous No.11792701]

>>11785123
Feels good seeing Hoppe posters

[Anonymous No.11793267]

>>11791245
Founding fathers were cucks fighting for cuck ideals

[Anonymous No.11793270]

>>11785123
this is pretty funny. is it real?

[Anonymous No.11793427]

>>11792020
One of the fundamental assumptions of Austro-Libertarianism is that value is subjective. Try reading a little more before you comment.

[Anonymous No.11793435]

I agree with Hoppes critique but I don't see a way in which his suggestions work. I think we will never have a perfect society without unlimited resources so a concession I'm willing to support is minarchism, which also makes sense to me. Call me a cop-out all you want.

[Anonymous No.11793439]

>>11785433
>implying /pol/ ist right wing
Have you ever tried asking them about economics?

[Anonymous No.11793536]

>>11785486
they will have no place in the republic

[Anonymous No.11793977]

>>11792663
He would support compact societies that could or could not allow free speech. You have to willingly opt into it though. In his conception of society there could be a town of anarcho communists. His point is just that they wouldn't be successful.

For the anarcho capitalist, capitalism isn't desirable because it is good; it is necessary to deal with because it is true. There ARE fundamental market forces at work in human psychology. They may not look exactly like the capitalism we see today, and they are certainly not tied to the central jewish run banks, but there is a form of "capitalism" that will always exist in human exchange that is grounded in predictable principles like supply and demand.

That's what it means to be an anarcho capitalist. To realize that any true anarchism will still entail dealing with the "capitalism" that leftists anarchists despise. And that any idea that denies this is crypto statism; the only way to enforce equality and pretend market tendencies don't exist is to have a type of government forcing you to act as such.

[Anonymous No.11794064]

>>11790911
>these so called "libertarians" who believe in "personal freedom" are really just crypto authoritarians, this guy who says that anyone with vaguely left-wing ideas should be physically removed from society is the true libertarian

[Anonymous No.11794080]

>>11794064
>should be physically removed from society is the true libertarian
Into their own... You do realize how anarchism is meant to work right?

[Anonymous No.11794146]

>>11794064
Getting real tired of petulant brainlet posts from Libertarian Party USA (TM) - ft. Gary "Hilary Clinton is an excellent stateswoman and FUCK guns" Johnson members

[Anonymous No.11794503]

>>11793977
It's beyond trivializing to claim "capitalism" is simply exchange as such and has absolutely notting to do with any real historic institutions. If "market forces" are ultimately transhistoric "psychological" truths why is human history so devoid of markets? You didn't see homo sapiens emerge historically buying and selling to survive.

Even the notion of a generalized rate of return, the real central dynamic of capitalism, didn't enter into the cognition of merchants in classical antiquity. You didn't get advanced markets for credit instruments being truly viable until modern states started capitalizing upon their national credit to keep generalized debt markets liquid. Imagining a society of private monetized future profit streams disentangled from any state power isn't historic and this is what "anarcho-capitalists" seem to think is possible and even "natural" but there's no historic president... on the other hand "anarcho-communism" is a good description of actual historical hunter gather societies on a primitive level.

Now to speak of "central jewish run banks" is just to hide the real dirty truth which isn't that Jewish, it's a history of the Knights Templar and Italians. The disruption of the monetary powers which had existed in Europe from the days of Julius Caesar during the 4th crusade is absoultly crucial as well as the development of double-entry bookkeeping which was cognitively more revolutionary on the abstract plane than anything else historically perhaps. The role of any wandering Jews in this story is merely superficial.

Also the issue of necessity is very central. Actual transformations in technological and social relations do necessitate judicial/ideological transformations to reflect the reality of the situation to the degree which they can't be dealt with appropriately in the current system and if this doesn't occur you're going to have problems.

[Anonymous No.11794568]

>>11794503
Hi I'm the person you replied to. I'm on my phone and can't give you the kind of reply you're looking for. I don't disagree with some of your points and you're asking the right questions. If you're genuinely curious I would honestly just recommend you read Hoppe's Short History of Man. You can find a pdf of it online in 2 seconds, and the whole book is like 90 pages. I feel that you would benefit from that more than a back and forth here, because your post is just making me think of specific passages from there that I'd reference.

Now if you just wanna argue online and swing some dick, I can do that too, but later tonight.

[Anonymous No.11794741]

>>11794503
Tribes have always traded, and groups run on a social capital internally. Something like "I'll kill the mammoth if you cook the meat." Using barter within groups only developed after populations became too great for everyone to know everyone else, and to be tied to them. You can't really scam someone in a group of 50 since your reputation will be ruined, but in a group of 50,000,000 you can. But even with the advent of capital, reputation and social standing was never fully supplanted.

And to say that tribes were anarcho communistic is just wrong, since resources have never been distributed equally.
Come on now son.

[Anonymous No.11794821]

>>11794503
Some thoughts
>you need to understand the malthusian traps implication for the organization of society
>ancient empires like rome were notorious for subconsciously using economic theory even though such a concept didnt exist and neither did the vocabulary
>primitive hunter gatherer societies did operate by the same psych principles, but the resource and labor situation was different, in fact Hoppe uses these societies as the basis for his thesis

[Anonymous No.11795478]

>>11794503
>there's no historic president
t. clearly haven't read hoppe. European history is full of such instances. Prior to the consolidation of aristocratic power in absolute monarchies, the state as conceived since that time didn't exist. Rather, it was numerous aristocrats who negotiated amongst each other and decided disputes in a court of their peers.

[Anonymous No.11795494]

>"anarcho-communism" is a good description of actual historical hunter gather societies on a primitive level.
Or anarcho capitalism if you actually understood it. The only reason it appears communistic is because of how resources were distributed and how the potential labor each person could contribute was relatively equal. However, even in these communities there were numerous types of private property and division of labor at work. The same psychological economic laws were in play.

[Anonymous No.11795643]

>>11795494
Wrong. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is the communist mantra, and perfectly describes the way hunter-gatherer societies functioned. That's quite different from that division of labor as elaborated by economists. Also hunter-gatherers had a significantly different conception of property. Anarcho-capitalism is a post-apocalyptic vision that can only be realized after fellow-feeling has entirely disintegrated and once perfect cynicism prevails.

[Anonymous No.11795699]

>>11795643
Bald assertion isn't an argument. I've already refuted your claim. Give me something else.

[Anonymous No.11795764]

>>11785486
fuuuk me. Is that Hobbes?

[Anonymous No.11796141]

>>11794568
The problem is Hoppe is methodologically retarded rendering his interpretation of history an a priori joke, how can you take this analysis seriously?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWaGF4GZvTg

>>11794741
Production in archaic societies was carried out on a planned social basis. Specialized division of labour in this context is no different than as within a family, it was subject to totally different laws than contractual market exchange.

>>11794821
I don't know what point you're trying to make with Malthus here, most societies historically have preformed some form of population control and birth rates in civilized countries today is all the empirical disproof you need for the universality of his "law".
There was no "subconscious" drive leading to a equalized profit rate... investment decisions simply weren't being carried out on a rational basis equalizing profit rates... if you had the data it would be possible to see the rate of profit in industries would be radically divergent.
The discovery of new categories historically has changed the cognitive potential of people. You're not just dealing with a quantitative issue.

>>11795478
>Prior to the consolidation of aristocratic power in absolute monarchies, the state as conceived since that time didn't exist. Rather, it was numerous aristocrats who negotiated amongst each other and decided disputes in a court of their peers.
And there also didn't exist anything resembling industrial enterprise, capitalism developed with the rise of the modern nation state... kinda weird huh

[Anonymous No.11796274]

>>11796141
>The problem is Hoppe is methodologically retarded rendering his interpretation of history an a priori joke, how can you take this analysis seriously?
I addressed this in an earlier post. I avoided him for a long time because of his praxeological obsession. However, if you actually read him, he's a well sourced empiricist. I don't have any interest in defending his critique of positivism, but the only time I ever encountered anything praxeological was when he talks about in his intros.

[Anonymous No.11796697]

>>11796141
BALD ASSERTION

IS NOT AN ARGUMENT

[Anonymous No.11796709]

>>11795699
>Bald assertion isn't an argument
Wrong. Now if you have a counterargument feel free to share it.

[Anonymous No.11796742]

>>11796709
I already did. I gave you an example of a society that operated according to Hoppe's standards. I also explained that hunter gatherer societies still retained ideas about private property and ownership and that the reason these societies appeared communistic was because of the way labor and resource functioned and not because of a fundamental change in human psychology. I also pointed out that great empires like Rome utilized economic ideas despite economics not even being a concept, let alone words existing to describe something like supply and demand.

Your response was "Nuh-uh." But that's not really good enough

[Anonymous No.11796757]

>>11792140
>he deserves a rebuttal
>coming off as a bitter faggot in a worthless retort
Remain upset.

[Anonymous No.11796780]

>>11796757
>passive aggressive follow up on a comment a day later, pretending not to be the same person
I laughed, but only a little

[Anonymous No.11796790]

>>11796780
>implying
You still responded, either way.

[Anonymous No.11797004]

>>11785281
This is all types of wrong. The last step is the jewish problem and ethnonationalism for whites, not libertarianism, which is a joke these days anyway lol.

[Anonymous No.11797050]

I enjoy the "neo"reactionaries, but I am sort of hesitant towards their more "libertarian" views so to say, especially in regards to social questions. I consider myself a reactionary but not in the vein of "neo" mainly because I can't come to terms with their obsession over the sovereign self etc and indeed the naivety, for lack of a better word, that Moldbug et al often display on these topics. Do they honestly believe that every individual is endowed with enough reason to think in this manner?

Maybe it's because I'm Orthodox and a slav but I could never see my people existing like this. It just doesn't suit our culture. Perhaps it could work for an anglo country. This is where I agree with thinkers like de Maistre who understand that there is no one absolutely *specific* gov't or constitution for all mankind.

[Anonymous No.11797796]

>>11785283
Either he released both books or you're too retarded to reference the author if the other book.

[Anonymous No.11797924]

>>11791147
Welp, you're easily swayed.

[Anonymous No.11797926]

>>11785123
lol what a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.11797982]

>>11797926
HOLY SHIT HOPPE BTFO'D

[Anonymous No.11798403]

>>11791245
>you're just being edgy. know that the founding fathers look down on you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
>This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were free White persons of good character. It thus excluded American Indians, indentured servants, slaves, free blacks and later Asians

[Anonymous No.11798406]

>>11791186
>*rate of profit falls*, nothin personnel kid
oh shit, how will we ever recover

[Anonymous No.11798421]

>>11790941
>Private property capitalism and egalitarian multiculturalism
>>11792140
Are you even paying attention to what google, facebook and all the other mega corporations are doing?

[Anonymous No.11798428]

>>11785123
I really like Hoppe because he doesn't sugar coat libertarianism as some "individual liberty, natural rights, muh NAP" or any moralfaggotry, he is quite straightforward about employing fascist means to preserve capital, he's truly the spinoza of economics, giving the most extreme version of his idea and not trying to rationalize it for a mainstream acceptance

[Anonymous No.11798460]

>>11790986
>i support free speech and free thought even for those who want to destroy me (ie communists) because progress is made in the free marketplace of ideas and in a society of minimal state interference there is nothing to fear in the statist derrangements of communism and fascism - they are inferior systems and cannot take root without the heavy coercion which libertarianism seeks to eradicate.
>the moralizing fatalism of a "libertarian" like hoppe is antithetical to the whole project of liberation unless you believe we as a human race and as sovereign individuals have already reached our apex intellectually.
you'd realize you just
What good is free speech if it's totally un-actionable? How is it free if you cannot act on your beliefs? If you weren't an absolute moron you'd realize you also just used Hoppe's argument, albeit poorly. The quality of a system being the decider of its success is precisely what he advocates. The difference is he advocates the empowering of superior systems with formal agency rather than some nonsensical tolerance which deludes itself as it is slowly corrupted and destroyed.

[Anonymous No.11798468]

>>11790986
>i support free speech and free thought even for those who want to destroy me (ie communists) because progress is made in the free marketplace of ideas and in a society of minimal state interference there is nothing to fear in the statist derrangements of communism and fascism - they are inferior systems and cannot take root without the heavy coercion which libertarianism seeks to eradicate.
>the moralizing fatalism of a "libertarian" like hoppe is antithetical to the whole project of liberation unless you believe we as a human race and as sovereign individuals have already reached our apex intellectually.
What good is free speech if it's totally un-actionable? How is it free if you cannot act on your beliefs? If you weren't an absolute moron you'd realize you also just used Hoppe's argument, albeit poorly. The quality of a system being the decider of its success is precisely what he advocates. The difference is he advocates the empowering of superior systems with formal agency rather than some nonsensical tolerance which deludes itself as it is slowly corrupted and destroyed.

[Anonymous No.11798479]

>>11798421
A psyops campaign to maximize public image and profit is not the same thing as progressive reform. Especially when it is concomitant with mass exploitation of the public which they are "helping".

[Anonymous No.11798480]

>>11786347
What is the point of Christianity?

[Anonymous No.11798541]

>>11789519
Go to bed, Simone Weil.

[Anonymous No.11798777]

>>11795764
yes

[Anonymous No.11799062]

>>11790735
>my freedom ends where your freedom begins
based retard

[Anonymous No.11799462]

>>11793439
/pol/ is 25% traditionalists larping as libertarians, 25% libertarians larping as nazis, 25% nazis larping as traditionalist, and 25% agnostic shitposters.
The latter 50% are majority redditors, also mostly non-white.

[Anonymous No.11799473]

>>11785275
cringe
Do people on this board unironically think this guy is good?

[Anonymous No.11799515]

>>11791186
*ignores specialization and personal skill*
*crashes your productivity*
Nothing personal kiddo.

[Anonymous No.11799529]

>>11792043
Leftist projection. It is an innerently materialistic and "economic" (sociological) worldview. They have principles, but they relate to matter directly or to people handling matter.
They have a hard time understanding that lolbertarianism is primarily a doctrine of law and only tangentially related to sociology.

[Anonymous No.11799658]

>>11791186
>*rate of profit doesn't fall*
oh shit there goes your theory

[Anonymous No.11799921]

>>11785174
god damn Americans are so fucking thirsty for some self respect

[Anonymous No.11799949]

>>11799921
god damn, how bad must Yurop be if you guys are this obsessed with us? You trying to distract yourself from the nightmarish hellscape you've become?

[Anonymous No.11799986]

>>11799949
> makes meme with 10 words
> 8/10 = muhrica
> muh muh muh muhrica!

[Anonymous No.11800001]

>>11799986
That post was so incomprehensible, are you Canadian?

[Anonymous No.11800009]

>>11800001
this is 4chan

[Anonymous No.11800499]

>>11800009
Very good.

[Anonymous No.11801503]

>>11800009
Is it really now?!?

[Anonymous No.11802408]

>>11800009
so to speak.

[Anonymous No.11803499]

What book should I read next everyone?

[Anonymous No.11803733]

>>11799949
I still don't understand why Americans shit their pants in public spaces.

[Anonymous No.11803872]

>>11797004
I think you're just stuck at step three, my man. Ethnonationalism is a bluepill painted red.

[Anonymous No.11803980]

>>11803733

[Anonymous No.11804005]

>>11785281
Freedumb pill is where most start out, whether freedumb lite libertarianism or freedumb core Hoppeanism.

[Anonymous No.11804028]

Libertarians cannot understand power dynamics, unless they've dug so deep into the rabbit hole that they are brushing Hoppe's ass through his ass, at which point they have deviated as far as possible from their original assumptions of liberty and freedom, that they seem alien

[Anonymous No.11804044]

>>11786347
Because one ideally wants to live a life of dignity, which is not possible with Christianity.

[Anonymous No.11804064]

>>11804044
Isn't Christianity all about living a life of dignity?

[Anonymous No.11804312]

>>11790986
>we as a human race

[Anonymous No.11804591]

>>11804064
It's supposed to be but that doesn't mean it is

[Anonymous No.11804689]

>>11794568
>If you're genuinely curious I would honestly just recommend you read Hoppe's Short History of Man.
Ok thanks for the advice, I got other things to do, I'll post a thread when I'm done but from the introduction so far this is going to be a mess
>Any explanation of historical events must take praxeology—and specifically Ludwig von Mises—into account, and it is the “empiricists” who are insufficiently empirical in their work. In denying or ignoring the underlying praxeological invariants and constants in their observations of the social world, they fail to see the forest for the trees.
He claims all "facts" as given [it should be interesting to actually check out some of the sources of his citations] must be explained in terms of unfalsifiable praxeological "truths" as set forth by Mises.
>And as for the first, ‘normative’ claim, it is contradicted by the entire body of private law, in particular the law of property and contract, that grew up in response to the continued occurrence of interpersonal conflict regarding scarce resources. From the old ‘natural law’ tradition of the Stoics, through Roman law, to Scholastic law, to the modern, secular ‘natural rights’ tradition, a body of law and of scholarly literature on matters of law had emerged by the nineteenth century, that should put any ethical relativist to shame.
Well I don't accept this axiomatic claim. You should go and read some more actually respectable work in the field of historical law e.g. "Order and Dispute: An Introduction to Legal Anthropology"
> Any normative evaluation of historical events and developments that aspires to the rank of science, i.e., that claims to be more than an arbitrary expression of taste, must take account of libertarianism, and of Murray Rothbard in particular.
...
>History, then, is rationally re-constructed, i.e., with the knowledge that every possibly true empirical explanation and interpretation must be in accordance not only with the ‘data’ but in particular also with praxeological and ethical law, and that every explanation or interpretation at variance with such laws, even if apparently ‘fitting the data,’ is not only empirically false but not a scientifically admissible explanation or interpretation at all.
No, this is not "scientific" and like I said Hoppe is epistemologically an idiot rendering anything he says a neurotic joke.

[Anonymous No.11804696]

>>11804689
>Thus the first momentous event in the history of man, the Neolithic Revolution, is reconstructed as a cognitive achievement of the first order and a great progressive step in the evolution of human intelligence. The institution of private land ownership and of the family and the practice of agriculture and animal husbandry is explained as a rational invention, a new and innovative solution to the problem faced by tribal hunters and gatherers of balancing population growth and increasing land scarcity.
This is essiently just slightly restating the worst form of doctarian classical Marxism. Instead of actually attempting to understand archaic hunter gatherers in their own terms I'll just project a contemporary theorized "problem" onto them as logically being overcome by a transformation in productive relations neccesitated by the very historical limitations of the previous arrangement which resulted in its own breakdown. There was notting "rational" about the Neolithic revolution in reality and contemporary anthropological evidence actually shows that the living standards of most people dramatically declined as a result... the physical size of people diminished and they were now tied to the land doing much longer hours of harder work. The "rational" "soultion" in reality must of have been imposed on the people, no "cost benefit analyser" would embrace this new lifestyle. What you're seeing is infantilization and the birth of dependency, the real emergence of Leviathan right here.

[Anonymous No.11804727]

>>11789365
Yeah, for the last 1 and a half years or so.

[Anonymous No.11805220]

>>11804312
This

[Anonymous No.11806575]

Nice blog post guy above

[Anonymous No.11807175]

Is his stuff on Pinker (Ass) up yet?

[Anonymous No.11807301]

>>11797004
Implying you cant have monarchical libertarian white ethnostates, which heavily relies on traditional forms of symbolism and religion, which show the Jews for who they are.

[Anonymous No.11808260]

This man, in my country he is everything.