Whats wrong with the Libertarians?

[David_TheMan]

No. Show me. Directly.

I would usually say no, I already wrote it, stop being lazy.
I then thought, you are just trying to find a way to weasel out, so I provide the quotes for you in this thread.

The most extreme to you might be the anacap camp.
We support anarchy or the removing of the state as a whole and favor a system of government known as voluntaryism.
As for the political party and the minarchist in that, removing of the safety net might be an extreme position, but Gary Johnson doesn't believe in that and neither does his VP.

Ask away and I'll answer your questions, (everyone)

How it would work

Calling something corrupt and broken in its very design and saying we need something new and presenting something new is what i've done. So I really don't understand your first paragraph, because that isn't what i've done and you know that, if you've actually read what I posted. Fact of the matter is the system is doing what it is designed to do, you talk about fixing it, it isn't broken so until you come to the realization that the very system you want control of leads to the negative effects you are living through now, nothing will change.

I told you how the security will be paid for, by those who want it with currency. Its very simple.

Privatize security is an answer to monopoly, because you have different vendors to come in the market to compete. That is the point of privatizing and having competition for the anacap.

Nothing prevents abuse, like laws don't prevent crime, the only thing we want is to limit the ability to remedy abuse, and hold those accountable. It is easier to hold private security accountable because they aren't a monopoly, because they don't run every aspect of the process because they don't have full control of investigating their own actions than any other alternative.

Its pie in the sky to say we need to stop doing the same thing with the same results if we want different outcomes, but it isn't when you claim we can fix this with the processes put in place by those in power, which hasn't worked since these processes have been talked about. I think you are projecting.

Yet private policing existed in environments without government policing and its documented in the very link I presented to you, as well as with regard for the wild west and the private security offered there, and in the case of the Wild West, it provided greater security, less violence than the US in the East during teh same period.

Who said anything about bartering, you literally have to pull up things no one said to knock down, because you can't logically construct an actual argument.

Why should i admit someting you want, when i don't believe in that, and i have told you what i'm in favor of? That literally makes no sense. It is if you have given up, but you want me to agree that you are right so you can save face. Very strange.

Self interest is what drives the creation of societal norms and customs, and these have very little to do with an outside body with a monopoly of force imposing them.

What do the US marshalls or sheriffs have to do with what i actually argued? Absolutely nothing.

Self-interest doesn't mean selfish, nice attempt to play on words and by the connotation shift game, but I see through it. If we were to hold your logic constant, you would tell us the "golden rule", do unto others as you would have them do unto, is selfish. No its self-interest of those that follow it.

I have no want to make the state as small as possible, I would like to see the state cease to exist. Again read what i've written instead of arguing with the man inside your head.

I said a new process of enforcing norms, whcih is through more voluntaryist means. Honoring that a person has full control of their property, which means their income, body, land, and etc. Enforcing norms through more ostracization and contract and government via contracting more than monopoly of force through the state.

The law doesn't stop lawbreakers though, and if it had a disincentive effect, it would definitely show up with regard to capital crimes, yet historically studies on the effect of capital crimes show they do not have any disincentivizing effect.

Poor people, rich people, middle class people get nothing but what they work for and buy or what others give them voluntarily.

 

[SirReginald]

Debate with HOEpoleon brehs

 

[Shogun]

All parties
As long as you pay them. Gays with Obama, Jews with everyone....

Cant argue there, breh.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I would usually say no, I already wrote it, stop being lazy.
I then thought, you are just trying to find a way to weasel out, so I provide the quotes for you in this thread.



How it would work

This was a bunch of shyt against corruption. I saw nothing advocating for what you call a radically different proposition.

 

[Misanthrope]

Anyone got an over/under on how many times Johnson will mention black people or black issues at his first campaign rally tonight in lily-white Reno, Nevada?

Line opens at 2.5.

 

[David_TheMan]

This was a bunch of shyt against corruption. I saw nothing advocating for what you call a radically different proposition.

No it wasn't it was specifically an alternative to the state.
If you can't see it that is on you, but its there, whether you want to read it or not.

 

[winb83]

They want to get rid of pretty much every social program the government funds.

So unemployment, welfare, food stamps, socialized healthcare, etc. Survival of the fittest basically.

So they're Republicans basically.

 

[acri1]

So they're Republicans basically.

Pretty much.

Libertarians = Republicans that like to smoke weed

 

[EndDomination]

I read Kropotkin for years, and when I met a libertarian for the first time I was surprised at how retarded he was
"Whose Bakunin, I have mah Ayn Rand and a modified AR-15."

 

[Chipdeez]

Pretty much.

Libertarians = Republicans that like to smoke weed

Republicans favor larger government. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[winb83]

Republicans favor larger government. Actions speak louder than words.

Republicans don't really favor larger government. They favor government intrusion when it backs their religious beliefs but in reality they want to shrink government so they can rid themselves of taxes and keep all the wealth.

 

[714562]

Republicans favor larger government. Actions speak louder than words.

Republicans don't really favor larger government. They favor government intrusion when it backs their religious beliefs but in reality they want to shrink government so they can rid themselves of taxes and keep all the wealth.

Both of you need to throw this line of thinking in the bushes. There is no Republican theory of government intervention because there is no such thing as a "Republican" ideology, any more than there is a "Democratic" ideology. The two main parties are voting blocs. That's it. There is no ideological consistency within them.

 

[Misanthrope]

Weld was a lot more supportive of BLM than I expected, him and Johnson. I'd feel a lot better if they were the Republican nominees, instead of Trump.

Still voting None of the Above '16, tho

 

[NZA]

private security for those who can afford it, and anal rape for those who cannot!

 

[88m3]

private security for those who can afford it, and anal rape for those who cannot!

would make a hell of a bumper sticker!