>inb4 muh roads
Pffft yeah why would a free-market economy want to invest in infrastructure? It's not like roads are needed for commerce or anything.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
What is unironically wrong with Libertarianism?
how enforce property rights
people have family and friends
Sounds more like communal property than private
>some guy steals your property
>tell your friends and family about it and you all go over and kill him/beat him up
How do you have proportionality in justice? If you steal a car I cannot castrate you and murder you can I?
doesnt sound easily abuseable at all
>Oops looks like he had more friends/mercs than you and just killed all of you and took the rest of your stuff.
Wait a second, what if me and my family were to enslave some people, and then force them to work for me, and i use the value of that slave labour to pay off thugs to protect me and my family, and what if, overtime, in order to prevent slave rebellions, i provide certain benefits to my slaves, and create a system wherein conflicts between the slaves can be resolved via mediation on a set of established rules i created.
Man, you're right, this whole thing sounds way better than some yucky state
I can hire mercenary group.
I mean this is what a Libertarian society produces in practice. An organized group will form, with some sort of communal tribute for protection, which is in effect taxes, and they'll stomp all the unorganized libertarians into the ground.
Organized societies are simply stronger than hyper libertarian ones.
>all their gear is made in America
Except with pointy sticks and bones in their noses
>I mean this is what a Libertarian society produces in practice.
Future doctors, lawyers and astronauts?
>people have family and friends
They also do in China. Property rights aren't protected in China.
I suggest you move to an African tribal warzone if you honestly think this is a good way of organizing society
Libertarians fail to understand that the wealthy created and maintain the state to cement their extractive relationship with the working class.
The state exists to manage that relationship. If it did not exist, it would need to be created, a la
Congratulations, you've invented tribes.
Market failures. This has been known since the 19th century.
The man with the pointy stick gets to make the rules.
>Oh yeah but we can all have pointy sticks
Yes, but someone also has to give out orders. People naturally and subconsciously elect and follow leaders. If you have a leader, you have a government.
For libertarianism to work you'd need a society without hierarchies, and now we're entering communist tier moronation.
those hierarchies and leaders are voluntary though, if your leader ends up being a shitc**t you can all just decide not to listen to him and tell him to frick off
And he won't have built up any structures to stop people from doing this because he's a super cool dude?
>if your leader ends up being a shitc**t you can all just decide not to listen to him and tell him to frick off
>and then you elect the new one
Authority isn't a bug, it's a feature.
professional soldiers will follow the money, what are the workgays gonna do to compete with that? I'm gonna buy all of the knights and sick them on the angry peasantry
>if your leader ends up being a shitc**t you can all just decide not to listen to him
And then he uses his superior strength to either beat your ass until you submit.
Look at Chimps or Gorillas son, hierarchy is inevitable, losers always submit or they suffer (be it ostracization or death)
dickhead chimps and gorilla regularly get owned when betas team up to kill/fight them, doesn't matter how alpha you are in a 5v1
>It's not like roads are needed for commerce or anything
Whose commerce OP
>free-market economy
there's your problem
Markets can be free and regulated.
>a man can be free and under arrest
lol, you don't have a clue to what you are saying
Who will feed the Blacks till they develop diabetes?
The problem with libertarianism is that it never understands that it always in a specific group's interest to use violence, coercion or manipulation against another group. Like, if I kill you, that means you lost; it doesn't matter if you've written 500 books where you defend your ideology, because now you're dead.
ITT morons, morons everywhere
>he doesn't know about diminishing returns on the use of violence
>>he doesn't know about diminishing returns on the use of violence
Not that anon but
>Implying I care about returns
Violence is good for the sake of violence.
>diminishing returns
That's not the point. The point is that libertarianism assumes that it's universally in everyone's best interest regardless of who they are to follow libertarian rules and moral principles, and this is just false on the face of it.
Why should thousands of workers follow the rules when following the rules makes 3 people insanely rich at their expense, and they can instead just take their shit and kill them? Questions that libertarianism can never answer.
Then just use more violence
>diminishing returns on the use of violence
For the market or just in general? There's many militaristic dictatorships that have survived for decades, some warlord has plenty of incentive to consolidate his control.
diminishing returns for the economy as a whole, diminishing for my piece of the pie? hell no. That's why dictators in 4th world african shitholes are perfectly content with the way things are.
>he doesn't know about diminishing returns
No, I don't. Now face the wall
What do?
Libertarianism is just diet-fascism. Private property rights just means only the wealthy have power, and if you're poor, you should die.
>and if you're poor, you should die.
Well, no, you can still provide utility to those that have money, you'll just be paid a fraction of a penny on the dollar.
Wealth is nature's way of determining who's smart and who's poor.
Wealth isn't natural. All the wealth that exists in the US today was stolen by colonialists and imperialism. Workers produce all the wealth and receive a fraction of the wealth from it. Bosses keep it because the state protects them with violence and through the manipulation of the people through the corporate media and the bourgeois legal system.
>Wealth isn't natural
The desire to have wealth is however.
>Workers produce all the wealth
Workers won't lift a finger for you unless you advance capital to them in the form of wages.
Libertarianism assumes that everyone is a 100% rational actor that looks out for their own interests 100% of the time. This is most often not the case. People are kind of morons a lot and will often do insane shit with very little justification. Decentralization only works to a point before it just becomes a clusterfrick of a mess and frankly, some industries SHOULD be nationalized anyway because they're just too important to be left in private interests. One of those I believe should be goods like baby formula, there's absolutely no reason for it to be a private market.
>Decentralization only works to a point before it just becomes a clusterfrick of a mess and frankly, some industries SHOULD be nationalized anyway because they're just too important to be left in private interests.
The irony of this statement is fricking staggering.
You do realize the American baby formula crisis happened because of the government, right? The federal government basically consolidated the industry into one producer with exclusive incentives and standards, you know this before talking dumb shit, right? The government awards contracts to something called WIC which completely controls the industry where the government awards the majority of these contracts to one Abbot Nutrition company, who are responsible for the overwhelming majority of baby formula in the US and who closed down plants just before this crisis occurred. Funny how that works, huh?
I swear to god you statist boot lickers are the dumbest mother frickers on the planet, the same things happen over and over and you keep coming back to the same 'solution'.
Most libertarians are edgy sheltered suburban high-school kids who've never held a real job or had to deal with American medical bills or deal with American health insurance.
Source: I used to be a libertarian back in high school as well, then I grew the frick up once I went out into the real world. As did all of my libertarian friends.
Can anyone trust that a billionaire will uphold the NAP? No they can't. He will literally hire mercenaries and the contemporary equivalent of Pinkertons to beat people over the head with batons or shoot them to get his way, if other forms of soft power doesn't work.
This alone is proof libertarianism is a complete meme and simply means a society where billionaires are the government.
Private insurance, private courts and private security will better protect the little man's interest against the domineering billionaire than the present state system
No it won't because all of those private interests will put 9000 things in the fine print of their contract that make it so their help is void, just like they do today.
>private interests today just take money and don't provide services
Leave the discussion to the adults please
Not an argument
>Not an argument
No need to argue with libertarians. They're children. You don't even have a real ideology. It was made by billionaires.
>private interests today just take money and don't provide services
What part of "If X, the contract is null and void" don't you understand moron?
I understand what an agreement is, I'm wondering where the objection is
Look at me I'm a libertarian, I'm just going to pretend an insurance company doesn't do anything in its power to not cash out millions in insurance money if it doesn't have to.
>get raped by a hospital bill
>don’t blame the hospital
this is why shitlibs will always be worthless
McPolice, McCorps, Mc judges
Libertarianism is just feudalism with extra steps
As an oldgay who actually has an actual job I will 100% guarantee you they will make me a slave to my work if they had the chance
You need to be clear if you are talking about anarcho-capitalism or minarchism. Ancap isn't possible because of the free rider problem and the right to use violence can't be a market commodity. Minarchism is a good ideal but could only work for homogenous white society.
Libertarians are amusingly similar to old-school communists.
Try to tell a libertarian that unregulated markets with no consumer or worker protections have been tried in the past and see how quickly they will tell you it "wasn't a REAL free market".
libertarians aren't an caps moron
>government doesn't build roads
>all construction companies spontaneously combust
>people who want to go somewhere just stand around confused
Allright I will bite,
Leaving the market deciding for itself thru supply and demand and market forces is a simplistic answer to a complicated question, what is good for a society ?
Well it would stand to reason that more money equals more wealth and more "societal good" from increased wealth and if we only could get rid of these pesky rules we could make more money and thus a better society.
Rule of money without rules would only compound inequalities, what would a free market do about a intelligent but poor man, unable to cultivate his/her skills and become an engineer potantially creating a very productive member of society.
Under a no rules market , there would be fewer cheaper colleges and options, investing in people is risky and we already see the consequences of for profit colleges in the American education system. Society would benefit as a whole with more engineers, doctors, skilledcraftman and tech experts, investors etc, but sometimes you have to be willing to take a loss to increase those numbers (education programs, loans, scholarship)
By its nature of only caring about profit a market society wouldnt offer this man a fair chance, short of selling his liver to pay for his éducation (If Amazon could sell human livers, without oversight they would, libertarians would argue the liver market would right itself, thats a nice society to live in, keeps you on your toes)
Whats good for a society and for compagnies are sometimes at opposites of course there are those who say society doesnt exist and we are just a bunch of individuals just walking past each others on our way to the capitalist grind (awesome)
My two cents, we are more than just bank accounts, and compagnies should be more than just deep pockets, what is the ultimate point of pooling all this wealth (in few pockets I will add) if we cant better ourselves collectively. Few will have yachts and the rest of the serfs will toll away.
You need the State to have a market, even if it was just police, military and courts.
At the end of the day all libertarians want is to be a little dictator which is why they idolise meaningless violence toward their neighbour, such as in the movie OP is referencing. For a belief system to be valid it must exist in a vacuum, and Libertarianism cannot possibly exist outside of modern societies that have been built up under the guidance of strong and safe communities. Example;
Lets say you have a society with no technology. No medicine, nothing. Unless every individual is capable of inventing everything possible to sustain human life, the average human will likely die early. This was recognized by our ancestors who almost instinctively formed groups, divided tasks and as a result built wonders. That is the other criticism, libertarianism is unnatural. Hierarchies exist in all species and they are good. Denying their existence is lunacy, railing against this fact is Communism, embracing it is Fascism. Libertarians exist in the lunacy department, and therefore libertarian ideology has only ever been practiced in works of fiction and the daydreams of the fat neckbeards who subscribe to it. Eventually every libertarian hits 15 years old and discovers the reality of living in society and (now that it is part of libertarian ideology to be tastefully racist and sexist) they will usually gravitate toward extreme right wing thought.
Anyone who lived through the events of 2020 and still claims to be a libertarian in even a moderate sense is kidding themselves.
Way to say a lot of assumptions, homosexual.
>At the end of the day all libertarians want is to be a little dictator which is why they idolise meaningless violence toward their neighbour
The end goal of libertarianism is to make even morons like you free to choose if you want to be enslaved or not, that movie has nothing to do with it and libertarians do not refute the state of nature where people are not associated with each others and may start a war.
>libertarianism is unnatural. Hierarchies exist in all species and they are good. Denying their existence is lunacy, railing against this fact is Communism, embracing it is Fascism
Hierarchies being good or bad depends on the point of view, any hierarchy is an advantage for those at the top if the bottom get fricked without saying shit about it. This is why people try to form balanced structures and don't rely just on "hurr durr muh wiener is bigger than yours", any alpha male to stay alpha needs the trust of betas.
>Denying their existence is lunacy, railing against this fact is Communism, embracing it is Fascism
It is lunacy pretending people are puppets you can manipulate at will, like any planned economy tries to do.
>Anyone who lived through the events of 2020 and still claims to be a libertarian in even a moderate sense is kidding themselves.
Why? It just means that people are willing to take advantage of a centralized system shitting on its population day and night just to shut the mouth of anyone they don't like, it doesn't mean people are brainless zombies.
The rest is just ad-hom shit and projecting.
Libertarianism assumes the market is infallible and not able to be manipulated if left alone by government which is just as moronic as the Marxist theory that all business owners profit from exploitation.
Anarchist systems always seem so short-sighted to me. Like
>How are rules and laws enforced?
>Oh, everyone has complete respect for the law out of their own free will because they are all perfectly good citizens who will never try to exploit anything
This shit is so absurd that it shouldn't even be given any serious consideration.
we're currently experiencing a climate crisis because even though a functioning planet is necessary for commerce, the short term thinking of capitalists didn't want to pay for it.
Capitalism's logic is that those who cut the most corners win.
>What is unironically wrong with Libertarianism?
Leftiods hate them and they talk about the banks too much