Libertarianism is a joke.

It's the 21st century version of laissez-faire. Instead of the government raping our asses, it's the corporations. I'd rather have some form of regulation in capitalism than none. Notice how the areas that resembles libertarianism politics the most are the areas that are leeching federal money and relies heavily on manufacturing jobs. Way to take care of your population.

What's worse than trendy liberal fags in real life? Trendy libertarian cunts on teh internets. Look at me, I am a libertarian because everybody else on teh internet is doing it and it's the only third option. I get wet whenever someone mentions personal responsibility.

Ayn Rand makes me happy in teh pants

Libertarianism is a waste of time and brainpower. If I wanted a monopoly or an ogligarchy like the ones we had during the Industrialization Era, I'd move to a third-world country. The American Nazi Party has more street credz than Libertarians.

>>1 >>2 & >>4  
Same idiot.

The difference between a corporations is that corporations can't attack consumers or unions(YES, FREE MARKETS HAVE UNIONS) so they can't rape us too much, or a boycott/strike happen.

Rofl@same person posting to establish a sense a worth

"The difference between a corporations is that corporations can't attack consumers or unions(YES, FREE MARKETS HAVE UNIONS) so they can't rape us too much, or a boycott/strike happen."

You wish that's how it would turn out, don't you? What you said is no different than communists saying communism would make everyone equal even though some people in the government will abuse their power. Same shit with libertarians and corporations.
Ever heard of vertical integration?

How about people posting examples of libertarian first-world countries, eh?

The difference between a corporations is that corporations can't attack consumers or unions(YES, FREE MARKETS HAVE UNIONS) so they can't rape us too much, or a boycott/strike happen)
Y HELO THAR PINKERTON

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_National_Detective_Agency

* > strikers

"Same idiot."

YOU ARE A WINNAR!

Also, why bash libertarianism specifically? Why wasn't the title "Capitalism is a joke"? Libertarianism is just conservatism without the bullshit.

Because capitalism itself isn't a joke. It's an economic theory that works.

Unfettered capitalism is another story. Some people really do seem to think that more is always better.

"Also, why bash libertarianism specifically? Why wasn't the title "Capitalism is a joke"? Libertarianism is just conservatism without the bullshit."

Because libertarianism is an ideology and not just an economic theory, you moron. You might as well call everyone who is not a libertarian a terrorist-loving, freedom-hating, unamerican. Ironically, your point on bullshit-less conservatism is contradicted by your bullshit on trying to connect the two as one. You fail.

>>15

Cool your jets, faggot. He named this thread "Libertarianism is a joke" and his post was him bitching about capitalism. This makes no sense, American conservatism supports capitalism as well, so to pick on libertarianism specifically is illogical. I never said I supported capitalism specifically, but I implied it is better out of it and conservatism. And if you can't connect and discern between libertarianism and conservatism in social/economic views.. then fuck off. It's not hard.

Capitalism has never existed in a nation state. The closest any system comes to capitalism are organisations within nation states such as that used by organised crime ranging from pirates to the russian mafia. Feudal lords were communist, the government controlled everything and forced all their serfs into collective farms which they were stuck in for life. The factory owners in Marx's day were fascist or national scoialist, a free market on the surface, but heavy corruption played out behind the scenes between people of economic and political power. Today's modern succesful economies are crosses between social democrat and free market, with varying levels of democratically authorised government intervention in an otherwise free market. Of these nations those closer to a pure free market have much lower levels of crime and poverty.

>>16
He was not bitching about capitalism, he was bitching about an unregulated exploitive market place.

American conservatism supports capitalism as well, so to pick on libertarianism specifically is illogical.
True, but he is referring to the manner in which the market is maintained (ie, not at all), not capitalism specifically.

"Of these nations those closer to a pure free market have much lower levels of crime and poverty."

Where are these places that you speak of?

Cool your jets, faggot. He named this thread "Libertarianism is a joke" and his post was him bitching about capitalism. This makes no sense, American conservatism supports capitalism as well, so to pick on libertarianism specifically is illogical. I never said I supported capitalism specifically, but I implied it is better out of it and conservatism. And if you can't connect and discern between libertarianism and conservatism in social/economic views.. then fuck off. It's not hard.

I don't know why you even bring up conservatism. I pick on libertarianism because it's the most annoying political trend on teh internets. The only thing librarians have in common with conservatives are their economic views. If unregulated capitilism were truly the shit, then we would see more first-world nations under this system that no one around here can seem to name. "Not giving libertarinism a chance" is not an excuse. You fail again.

Vote Islamic Political Party of America, it's teh bomb.

>>17
Capitalism has never existed in a nation state.
Hmm, why does that sound familiar? Ah, yes, the typical far-left excuse: "Marxism has never existed in a nation state."

I hope the glaring parallel here isn't beyond you, Herr Ideologue.

The word Capitalism is totally retarded.
How about you guys start using words that actually have meaning such as Laissez-faire?

The word Computer is totally retarded.
How about you guys start using words that actually have meaning such as Universal Turing Machine?

Good one.

The word Faggot is totally retarded.
How about you guys start using words that actually have meaning such as Bundle of Sticks.

>>21
The difference is I don't support capitalism, whilst the far left support marxism or something like it. Also stop thinking in terms of left-right up down in your mouth, up the ass, it's retarded and doesn't go anywhere. Just use science to prove  hypothesis logically.

>>23
>>24
same person, gb2 www.proxymyass.com

>>23
The word Universal Turing Machine is totally retarded.
How about you guys start using words that actually have meaning such as Computer?*
fix'd

>>26

if you go far enough right the far right will support capitalism, if you go far enough left, the far left will support communism.

you can't set up the same large-scale social experiment again and again and again, so it's hard to use science to prove an ideology. we have to rely on the empiricla knowledge from the situations we have seen, and from what we know about human beings in general from the studies of psychology.

>>28
Fold the left-right system in half and it will be revealed that the capitalists and communists are just marxists. Their obsession with peculiar and offensive sexual practices, love of tyranny, use of machiavellian extremist tactics to fool the poor into supporting them, their hatred of logic and relentless use of bigotry correlate perfectly into one another. They are 2 cheeks of the same ass.

>>27 wouldn't understand satire if it gang-raped him repeatedly in a back alley.

The rest of the world calls it "capitalism". Stop masturbating, get off the drugs, and get used to it.

>>29
capitalists and communists are just marxists. Their obsession with peculiar and offensive sexual practices...love of tyranny...hatred of logic and relentless use of bigotry correlate perfectly into one another....

er, what?
Are you trying to describe some kind of politcal vampire or something?
You're making a textbook strawman argument.
GTFO of /newpo/

>>12
YOU ARE A FAILURE

Libertarianism isn't about the economy, it's about personal freedom. The Libertarian Party happens to be very conservative economically, but Libertarianism in general is not. I am a Left Libertarian and I think laissez faire is a load of horse shit.

I am a Left Libertarian and I think laissez faire is a load of horse shit.
That makes you Liberal.

This should help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Worlds-Smallest-Political-Quiz.PNG

>>33
That is not what the term left refers to...

>>34
Probably because left/right are rather ill-defined terms. I think the graph made a mistake by mentioning them, but I digress.

Liberal and Libertarian both agree on personal freedom. Where they differ is economic freedom.

>>33

Sort of, not really though. I am more extreme than most Liberals, I'm for the legalization of prostitution and all drugs, small government etc., and am against other traditionally liberal things like gun control and affirmative action. If I say I am very liberal people think I am a hippy and/or a Communist, which I am not. I've gotten many different results on political quizzes, Liberal, Libertarian, Socialist, it depends mostly on the quiz. But the best, most accurate political quiz in my opinion is the Political Compass (http://politicalcompass.org./analysis2), on which I am a Left Libertarian, approximately the Dalai Lama. The problem is political terms are so muddled, Liberal can mean Left, Libertarian can mean Right, extreme Liberalism can mean laissez faire, there are so many differing opinions on what the meaning of each of the terms mean. I just picture like the political compass does, Libertarianism is only about personal freedom, Left-Right scale is only about economics, and the parties all fall within that plane.

>>36
The Dalai Lama is a marxist... http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes1.html

"Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes—that is the majority—as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair. . . I think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist."

Which is ironic considering that Mao kicked his ass.

>>37
That Dalai Lama's country also has a marxist dick firmly inside it's asshole.

>>37
Dolly Llama will kiss anyones ass if they donate money to his terrorist war to overthrow the oppressive Chinese regime and reinstate the oppressive Dolly Llama.

fuck 'em all!

4chan is running the world now. time to do some house cleaning :)

>>32

"Libertarianism isn't about the economy, it's about personal freedom. The Libertarian Party happens to be very conservative economically, but Libertarianism in general is not. I am a Left Libertarian and I think laissez faire is a load of horse shit."

YOU ARE CONFUSED BOTH POLITICALLY AND SEXUALLY.

>>42
your mom isn't

>>43

YOUR MOM HAS A PENIS.

>>44
no urz

>>37
Again, it's just a quiz and not entirely accurate. It exaggerates being pro-regulation to being Communist, when I am more accurately described as a Keynesianist. But I do think they pinned me on the personal freedom scale.

Libertarianism does not work nor has it ever work.

>>47
Hong Kong has a free market economy, and despite the fact that they are a tiny island nation with litte resources, yet their unemployment and crime are both extremely low.  All libertarianism is is a free market economy, with respect for civil liberties, both of which I consider to be good things. 

>>48

http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=284&Itemid=34%20

You fail.

Libertarianism is made of fail and aids. I don't see the difference between being raped by teh government and raped by teh corporations. Both sides needs to be balanced and regulated by each other. It's similar to the three branches of government. Get it?

>>50
The 3 branches failed aswell. One side just gets a lot of power and secretly controls the one that it is supposed to be dependant on.

The only hope is to give the power to the people, by expanding political, personal and economic freedom.

Also liberals < conservatives. Conservatives only hate economic freedom, liberals hate all 3.

>>51
Oops make that conservatives don't hate economic freedom, liberals hate all 3, though conservatives to implement some socialist business practices behind closed doors

hey guyz so i hear theres some caricatures going on here

>>50
Too bad that's all bullshit.  The corporations just buy out the bureaucrats, and then you get double fucked.
1.  You get fucked because you have to pay for the bureaucrats and their cushy jobs and shoddy work.
2.  You get fucked because the bureaucrats get corrupted by big money.  (The little guy gets fucked in this situation as well since he doesn't have assloads of money to insure any regulations imposed are suitable to his situations.

>>51
Conservatives hate economic freedom? This is news to me. 

>>54
he corrected it
>>50
government can freeze prices, change inflation, unemployment, wars, resources, and have a huge army.
believe me in a free market people would still would be like making 5 dollars an hour.

>>54

Exaggerate much? Some govt officials may get bribed but there are at least regulations that prevents some abuse from the corporations. Otherwise, we would see snake oil and lead paint on the shelves. Ironically, the most corrupted govt officials are either conservatives or republicans who claim to be conservatives.

I'm not for a bigger govt but I'm also not for the elimination of the govt's role in capitalism.

>>55
"government can freeze prices, change inflation, unemployment, wars, resources, and have a huge army.
believe me in a free market people would still would be like making 5 dollars an hour."

George Bush did all that? WHAT A FUCKING ASSHOLE.

>>57
Not George Bush, but latter presidents.

>>58
Former you mean, dumbass.

>>55
"government can freeze prices, change inflation, unemployment, wars, resources, and have a huge army.
believe me in a free market people would still would be like making 5 dollars an hour."

The government can indeed change inflation.  It can change it by not causing it to begin with.  Inflation is largely the fault of the Federal Reserve and its monetary policies.  Regarding wars and resources, the government can't just pull resources out of thin air.  When the government acquires new resources for whatever reason, be it to bomb some random country on the other side of the world or to raise a 'huge army,' it typically gets them by taxing - coercively extracting these resources from those who have earned them legitimately. 

As for your notion that we would all be worse off in a rather free market economy? I find that notion dubious at best.  It would be fair to say you could expect decreases in the wages of workers in the United States under such a system.  However there are many benefits to be had from such a system.  For example, in east asia, China specifically, around 300,000,000 people have been lifted out of poverty, and there is a developing middle class in the region, thanks to trade and commerce.  While it is understandable that people would be upset over decreased wages, you must also weigh in this benefit, as well as the many others. 

>>56
I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating not having government at all.  I am simply advocating less.  Hopefully you won't get your panties in a bunch over it.  I wasn't exaggerating, I was making generalizations.  When I say:  "we need to get rid of these government regulations because they hamper the economy," I don't mean to get rid of ALL government regulations.  It is just a general statement, and you are apparently taking it far too literally.

"Ironically, the most corrupted govt officials are either conservatives or republicans who claim to be conservatives. "

Yet the regulatory agencies that house the bureaucrats that are then corrupted were, in most cases, initially created by democrats. 

"I find that notion dubious at best.  It would be fair to say you could expect decreases in the wages of workers in the United States under such a system.  However there are many benefits to be had from such a system.  For example, in east asia, China specifically, around 300,000,000 people have been lifted out of poverty, and there is a developing middle class in the region, thanks to trade and commerce.  While it is understandable that people would be upset over decreased wages, you must also weigh in this benefit, as well as the many others. "

What a retarded example. Anybody could come out of poverty by having a job that pays 1.00 an hour over no job. The problem is that most people will be stuck at those low wage jobs and they would not be able to afford a decent education that could give them the skills to work at a higher paying job. This is a huge problem since most libertarians advocate a private education system with little government involvement. Did your ass not learn anything from the Industrialization Era?

Keep in mind that China is not completely libertarian in their economy and that people over there are fighting for better pay and conditions like the Americans back in the early 1900's that would help them in the future.


"I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating not having government at all.  I am simply advocating less.  Hopefully you won't get your panties in a bunch over it.  I wasn't exaggerating, I was making generalizations.  When I say:  "we need to get rid of these government regulations because they hamper the economy," I don't mean to get rid of ALL government regulations.  It is just a general statement, and you are apparently taking it far too literally."

And I'm arguing that we would be worse off if there are too little government involvement in a free market economy using red states as my example.

Libertarianism = more freedom on paper.

Good luck trying to enjoy your extra freedoms while working 13 hour work days.

Still waiting for someone to name a country that runs successfully under libertarianism. I'm sick of countries like Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Germany, and all those other Eurofags that are topping the quality of life list every year.

>>62
Switzerland is libertarian.

Switzerland is not libertarian.
The free market died before WW2. AFAIK Chile is the only libertarian country right now and it's #1 in South America.
Anyways, >>62 is an idiot for not knowing how the situation in the said countries looks right now.

>>64
they have machine guns

>>64
The socialist party currently holds power in Chile

>>63

obvious troll is obvious. or stupid, your choice.

OH MY GOD THEY WANT US TO HAVE FREEDOM AND THEY AREN'T EITHER REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT! CAN NOT ALLOW!

>>68
"OH MY GOD THEY WANT US TO HAVE FREEDOM AND THEY AREN'T EITHER REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT! CAN NOT ALLOW!"

THE FREEDOM FOR CORPORATIONS TO RAPE US IN THE ASS, AMIRITE?

cho will go shoot ur ass if u don't shut up


KOREANS FOR THE WIN

conservative korean family is conservative.

Hey guys, let's privatize all roads. It will be like, super effective.

Let's privatize the whole government! Who needs representation anyway?

American political hierarchy:

Democrats = Republicans > dog shit > ... > Libertarians

>>61

"What a retarded example. Anybody could come out of poverty by having a job that pays 1.00 an hour over no job."

Well then oh shit, the free market is pulling hundreds of millions of people out of poverty? FUCK WE GOTTA GET RID OF THAT FUCKING FREE MARKET DON'T WE?

"The problem is that most people will be stuck at those low wage jobs and they would not be able to afford a decent education that could give them the skills to work at a higher paying job."

Only if the Chinese government squashes private development and economic growth.  And again, plus, were it not for the evil capitalists stepping in, they would still be wallowing in squalor, misery, and poverty.  I have strong confidence that if the Chinese government were to roll back its rigid control of personal activities in China that China would develop its economy at an unprecedented rate, and that its people would experiance a huge increase in prosperity and personal freedom.

"This is a huge problem since most libertarians advocate a private education system with little government involvement."

Being a moderate libertarian, I don't advocate a completely privatized education system.  I *do* advocate experimentation with a voucher system, and then following this an evaluation of the merits of such a system.  But of course, your definition of libertarianism is probably pretty much "zomg anarchist!1", so you wouldn't know shit about us moderate libertarians to begin with, would you?

"Keep in mind that China is not completely libertarian in their economy and that people over there are fighting for better pay and conditions like the Americans back in the early 1900's that would help them in the future."

And the Chinese government is getting in the way.  Good pay and conditions result from a capitalistic society that is technologically advanced and, thanks to their market-based economy, has the tools, technology, and competitiveness necessary to create an abundance of wealth availible for anyone who will work for it.  Combine this with workers' unions to help organize labor and negotiate good deals for workers, and you have a potent combination to bring people personal freedoms and a growing economy.  Most of the advances labor has made in the United States were not made through government action, but through the action of unions of private workers.

"And I'm arguing that we would be worse off if there are too little government involvement in a free market economy using red states as my example."

LOL? The areas of the United States that lack development tend to lack development because most cities developed near rivers, lakes, oceans, major waterways, or other conditions that are conducive to trade, commerce, industry, and production.  This is what attracted people and industry to these areas, not their left-leaning tendencies.  Sorry, but you fail for complete ignorance of history.  What a fucking retard.

WILL TONY SOPRANO DIE BALD?

"And I'm arguing that we would be worse off if there are too little government involvement in a free market economy using red states as my example."

LOL? The areas of the United States that lack development tend to lack development because most cities developed near rivers, lakes, oceans, major waterways, or other conditions that are conducive to trade, commerce, industry, and production.  This is what attracted people and industry to these areas, not their left-leaning tendencies.  Sorry, but you fail for complete ignorance of history. 

-----

Wow.  Pwnage.

>>75

"Well then oh shit, the free market is pulling hundreds of millions of people out of poverty? FUCK WE GOTTA GET RID OF THAT FUCKING FREE MARKET DON'T WE?"

Why don't you point out where I advocated such a view you fuckface.

"Only if the Chinese government squashes private development and economic growth.  And again, plus, were it not for the evil capitalists stepping in, they would still be wallowing in squalor, misery, and poverty.  I have strong confidence that if the Chinese government were to roll back its rigid control of personal activities in China that China would develop its economy at an unprecedented rate, and that its people would experiance a huge increase in prosperity and personal freedom."



I have strong confidence that you're full of shit with nothing to back up your claims. No one in this thread has yet to point out a country with a completely unregulated capitalist system that lead to "a huge increase in prosperity and personal freedom." All successful capitalist nations have some sort of intervention by the government which you can't seem to comprehend. But don't let that stop you from getting a huge increase in your boner from your bullshit political ideals with no practical results in the real world.

"And the Chinese government is getting in the way.  Good pay and conditions result from a capitalistic society that is technologically advanced and, thanks to their market-based economy, has the tools, technology, and competitiveness necessary to create an abundance of wealth availible for anyone who will work for it.  Combine this with workers' unions to help organize labor and negotiate good deals for workers, and you have a potent combination to bring people personal freedoms and a growing economy.  Most of the advances labor has made in the United States were not made through government action, but through the action of unions of private workers."

Did you just advocate worker unions? FAKE LIBERTARIAN IS FAKE.
Also, I never advocated for the government to run our economy stupid.

"LOL? The areas of the United States that lack development tend to lack development because most cities developed near rivers, lakes, oceans, major waterways, or other conditions that are conducive to trade, commerce, industry, and production.  This is what attracted people and industry to these areas, not their left-leaning tendencies."

Ever notice the connection between red states and education? They rank low in education. Red states pay less tax dollars on education because they pay less taxes overall along with less money being allocated to education. If most of the population were highly educated, they would be able to create a better economy in their area regardless of their surroundings. All those factors you mention gives that area an advantage but it in no way the only necessary means to achieve a good economy. Ever wonder why a small island with little natural resources like Japan was more technologically advanced than a huge country with tons of resources like China during World War 2? Because the Japanese put more emphasis on education and almost their entire population had some form of high school or college education.

If it was up to the libertarians, education would be completely privatized and poorer people would not be able to gain a decent education. Just refer to the red states for example.

So far, you have brought nothing but jibberish to this discussion. You and your libertarian peeps are an embarrassment to mankind. Kindly shut the fuck up and get the fuck out my internets.

^ Meant to put butt buddies instead of peeps. My bad.

Libertarian societies are the most advanced societies in the world. Just look at __________ and ___________ for example.

>>80
Just look at the standard of living in the west and free market asian nations for example.

>>81

"the west" isn't a libertarian society.

like what? singapore?
first of all, singapore has been rich ever since it was a colony, a center of trade for the entire region, this of course helped give singapore the resources it takes to get a proper society running. Huge industrialization processes funded by the government. Public housing made affordable for all. Strict regulation of behaviour and dicipline. focus on technological and computer education from the governments side already from 1980.
Singapore may have slack laws regarding trade and taxes and such, but it's DEFINATELY not libertarian.

>>82
Unlike soviet communism you don't need pure libertarianism to see the benefits, you need but employ a few principles. The west and succesful asian countries implemented the libertarian principle of giving economic power to the people instead of just a few evil capitalists as in the case of fascism or even worse handing it over to state control as in the case of socialism, communism, national socialism and other marx derived forms of government.

>>83

but that doesn't make them libertarian...

i like library's

>>84
But they should be sucking lady liberty's clit in thanks for their prosperity and civilisation.

>>86
l like clit's

>>86

*sigh* so because there some economic principles which have proven succesful, and these principles are shared by libertarians, we should become libertarian?
*shakes head*

>>1
I FUCKING LOVE YOU! finally someone who isnt a fuckface libera.

>>81

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT MONGOLIA?

>>88
They are succesful for the same reason libertarian's other principles will be succesful. Why do you hate logic so much?

What reason is that?

>>92
The reasonning that you are better off without your balls in someone's vice grip.

>>93
your reasoning fails.

>>93
Some vitamin A is good for you.

Therefore more is even better! (hello poisoning)

As if >>88 wasn't clear enough. IHBT?

>>83

LIBERTARIANISM DERIVES THEIR PHILOSOPHY FROM ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND ASSHOLE.

>>91

WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA SO MUCH YOU FREEDOM HATING, TERRORIST LOVING,  BUTT FUCKING, FETUS ABORTING, ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSING, FRIED CHICKEN EATING, JEWISH NOSE HAVING, SON OF A BITCH FAG?

>>97
because its fashionable, sweety.

>>97
wouldnt have anything to do with arrogance would it?

>>99
No, thats the French.

>>100
no. the french are arrogant AND stupid.