813 SAD BUT TRUE (media.patriots.win) posted 74 days ago by superfly 74 days ago by superfly +825 / -12 103 comments download share 103 comments share download save hide report block hide replies
correct. living in America comes with responsibility
Libertarianism is absolutely stupid and a failure but it’s not the principle.
It’s that the people espousing it were only doing so in order to achieve social means. Whether that was getting along with people in their personal life or achieving social goals through government.
Limited government works as policy but first you have to change the culture.
When you allow government to be the de facto solution to every problem (as the guy in the tweet does here like an idiot) then you’re stuck when an inevitably inflating government.
We have actually reached a maximum sustainable government size so something is definitely going to have to change soon.
We need to kick these woke elitist fuckers out and have a state comprised of working class Americans.
What a funny and original comment!
Says the facist. Op glows and you dont even see it
Pro-tip: being a speling nazi on a post about facism isnt earning you any credits eaither. Take the L.
Lol. You’re literally not taking the L
A speling L? LAME.
You’re still going? Lol shut the fuck up loser. You got owned. There’s no redemption. Sign off
It’s not just a “spelling” error…You are displaying you don’t know what fascism is or how it’s even spelled or when to take the L and move on.
You are impressive. I bet you are proud of your awesome skils.
I keep looking in the mirror and seeing this facism you keep speaking of.
Read a book.
please don't bother me. i'm not up to it today.
Social hierarchies are a fact of human society. That includes government. You can't flatten them and you can't escape them. Any ideology that tells you otherwise is utopian, and therefore a lie.
The modern state has existed for less than 2 centuries. Societies have existed without any imposed government, with the enforcement of moral codes happening in a distributed, voluntary system. Rural Britain and Ireland, late medieval Iceland.
Social hierarchies will occur naturally, but when imposed by organized violence, they become corrupt and destructive.
That is just patently false. The nomadic tribes had government, even if it was small.
They had modern states, with multi-branch structures and thousands of bureaucrats?
You're gerrymandering the definition of words to pretend I'm wrong.
I never said anything about "modern". You added that to make a point that didn't pertain at all to what I said.
The OP is all about the modern State. The vision it espouses has only existed since the time of Hegel, Marx, and Nietzsche. These figures are the exceptions in history, and both you and the OP treat them as the norm.
Organized violence has dictated power since the first cavemen joined a gang together.
Yes, and we've also created technologies that make that more difficult to do at scale, if we have the courage and tools to resist. Firearms in the hands of rural resistance forces have caused the downfall of empires.
All doing splendidly, I see. Much freedom and morality!
They got conquered. Just like tens of thousands of societies with other governmental structures. Iceland is the least changed from what it had structurally in those days, and it's also one of the least corrupt and most beautiful countries on earth.
Your model of reality is incorrect because the entire history of civilization is the history of our species evolving to overcome the zero-sum game of social hierarchies.
With each civilizational collapse, zero-sum game players get extinguished from the gene pool in war by tribes which are more cooperative, collaborative, innovative and willing to sacrifice for each other. Zero-sum game playing social hierarchy lovers, by contrast, can be easily bribed to turn on each other and are extinguished. They have no cohesion in battle. Like so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzatw32j-i4&t=1405s
We are seeing this happen in Ukraine today. War cleanses the gene pool of the corrupt who cannot restrain their compulsions to gain at the expense of their fellow man.
After each such war the moral code is strengthened to prevent the return of these moral degenerates. The constitution is an example of this.
This strengthened moral code, in turn, creates the conditions for the natural selection of positive-sum game players to counter the sexual selection of zero-sum game players. This increases the competitiveness of the tribe against rivals by growing its prosperity through innivation.
In this fashion, the kingdom of God is expanded on this earth over the crushed skulls of the social hierarchy lovers.
Hierarchy supporters are the last remnants of the “lineage of Satan” whom our ancestors, the “lineage of God”, vanquished to establish civilization.
Libertarians have an honorable goal of a society without coercion. That is where we are headed if we manage to avoid destroying ourselves. However, Libertarians are completely naive about what is required to manifest this reality.
Authoritarian lovers of state power are even more naive about what is required to fully extinguish the disease of the lineage of Satan from the gene pool. These idiots are destined for the same meat grinder that Ukrainians are being fed into today.
The future belongs to men who can use their brains to restrain their biases and see the world the way it actually is and adjust their movements accordingly. By contrast, those who lack the ability to restrain their compulsions will not survive.
I'm not so sure about that conclusion. When barbaric warlords attack defenseless villages with machetes, it doesn't seem like the bad guys who are really getting cleared out.
In an ecosystem of predators and prey, prey who lack the ability to detect camouflaged predators do not survive.
Such is the case of villagers who chose to remain defenseless as the barbaric warlords moved towards them.
Such is also the case of Americans who believed the magical constitution fairy would protect them as the central bankers robbed them blind and enslaved them.
Stupid prey animals get filtered out of the gene pool. Those who remain are alert to the existence of predators.
Predatory zero-sum game playing hierarchy climbers are also stupid but in a different way.
In an environment of peace, their corrupt predatory behavior is rewarded.
In an environment of war, it becomes a liability.
In both cases the cause is their inability to predict the future accurately.
Predatory humans who want to survive the next culling should renounce predation.
Until the 20th century, the US Federal government was what would pass for libertarian (other than the tariff). It wasn't until the progressives, including Theodore Roosevelt, took over in the early 20th century that the federal government started growing and permanently wielding more power. The progressives expected the government to fix their perceived problems rather than just letting the free market fix it.
So the Twitter post is only partially correct. You can have a libertarian government. But you need to use political power in order to achieve and maintain it.
No non state power option? That's what 2A is for.
Yep, and guess what 2A with organization is: Effectively a State.
People have been conned into thinking all States are equal. They aren't. Some are better than others.
Of course, all decay eventually. That's life for you.
They don't have enough enforcers if we all take one out with us. This is why police mostly fear such things.
The VC were unstoppable in the early phases as were the colonial guerrillas. Organization in the early stages was not optimal for the cause but gave the authoritarians hell. Nothing more fruitless than the Nazis stomping out a French Resistance cell in 1941 only to find out its defeat led to nowhere and the other cells were fine.
It's done more than you think, it's not just the killswitch. It's also a deterrent.
2A is the tool of last resort. Basically the people reclaim their right to violence and the govt loses their near monopoly on violence. The state then has to beat down the people to claim a monopoly on violence or they are taken down and a new state is put into place.
The USA is unique in that our founding fathers expected the country to break down and be reformed multiple times. It was built around that idea.
They did not expect it to last this long without a change. They were expecting every few generations.
that's a tool, not a platform.
The only way to end the threat of state power is for everyone to agree not to use it. That’s simply not practical.
We need to go back to the days of Whites using state power to impose their will on non-Whites.
Do like the founding fathers. Give the state little power so they have nothing to wield.
Then people must push for the govt having more power before they can wield it. This is why they want guns confiscated. The state does not have a monopoly on violence yet and they need that monopoly to execute their plans.
Its like saying there is no point in fighting for Good to prevail over Evil because Evil will always prevail. So just give the fuck up already and surrender to the dark forces of tyranny
Yep, op is a faggot.
That's buying into the frame that government is evil but there are plenty of times where the evils lolbergs complain about (like taxation) are completely necessary. Take, for example, living in a town surrounded by hostile savages and wanting to raise a small militia to defend against them. That takes money to purchase armaments and provide training because the people you would send to fight also have to work for a living; it's not fair for them to give up their livelihood to protect the town... and it's certainly not fair for the lolbergs in the center of town to benefit from that protection without paying for it. Hence the necessity of taxation.
It's called volunteerism and voluntary revenue. But like i said it takes people with high morals and ethics
Yes, high morals and ethics which you won't get from lolbergs. I've been to their meetups - it's just a bunch of dumb kids doing drugs all day, complaining about getting traffic tickets, hating on cops and doing faggot shit, cuckoldry, wife swapping, sleeping around, spreading STDs and aborting their children.... just like shitlibs in practice.
LOL . I've been a libertarian for 52 years. Do you think this is the kind of behavior you would see Dr. Ron Paul engaged in? Maybe if cops did not enforce arbitrary laws there wouldn't be any complaining . As far as bad habits go that is the beauty of Liberty. you are free to make good decisions or bad ones and nobody has the authority to make them for you
Nature abhors a vacuum.
"All political power stems from the barrel of a gun" - Mao
"Lets give all the guns to the people" - Founding Fathers
This is why they hate our country and the founding fathers. They did THE one thing you cannot allow in an authoritarian state.
State power breeds authoritarianism and utopianism just as it attracts authoritarians and utopians. You may triumph on the field of battle for a day, but the nature of the State is to infiltrate and subvert everything that should belong to God. It is a satanic tool.
It wasn't libertarianism that made the right give up the power that it took to the left. The power itself forced it. The ultimate solution will not come from clawing the power back for an election cycle, and using it to expand the power. The solution is to destroy the power, and build good institutions outside of it.
A concrete example for you. The Patriot Act was created by the moderate right in order to expand the power of the surveillance state and use it against perceived threats. Then, because the wars in the Middle East went badly and the economy crashed (and was blamed on free markets because the left is very good at blaming the good for the left's own failures), that power was handed over to the left, and then used to cement the left's power.
The One Ring answers to Sauron alone.
The One Ring of Power cannot be destroyed by any craft that we here possess, and we can't even hope to someday bring it to Mount Doom if we don't pick it up, keep it out of our enemies' hands, and occasionally actually use it. Source: The actual LOTR books. Frodo would have died if he never put it on, and it would have been lost to the enemy. Perhaps a world without it is the ideal, but for now, judicious use is necessary to get us there.
Yes, destroying it does mean picking it up and keeping it out of their hands. However, attempting to wield it to destroy them, instead of reducing its power, will only increase their ability in the long run to use it against us. Every single growth of the State grows the power of the people whose entire ideology and methodology revolves around seizing and using it.
I still like the 3rd option of dismantling the state. Tell our forefathers that it was not an option.
Libertarianism always gave me the impression it's about men who don't want to take responsibility and engage in the culture war while indulging in drug addiction, porn addiction and pretend they were cool and okay with everything.
I mean Nick Gillespie probably had some good ideas back in the day but now he's an old, out-of-touch guy wearing a leather jacket pretending to be a greaser whose entire philosophy boils down to being able to blaspheme Christianity and watch porn and smoke a doobie.
His number one question when interviewing anyone is "hey, you okay with saying 'god-damn' and 'Jesus F***ing Christ'. I'm so cool that I won't say bitches and hoes though because that's sexist." while you know that he's saying bitch and hoe constantly when he's not being recorded.
Libertarianism is about freedom. Retards supporting OP and this trash are both racist and supporting division for zero reason at all as of today. You do not get to win by alienating libertarians. Open your big tent instead of being paul ryan. Until then, all posts talking about libertarians in a bad light are really just feds supporting operation wedge.
Glenn Reynolds is one of my favorite pundits and he's pretty much the most stalwart Libertarian thinker there is.
Read his latest substack. https://instapundit.substack.com/p/it-should-be-safe-to-be-unpopular?sd=pf
Also, look at the candidates Libertarians consistently endorse. They're not anyone most reasonable people would vote for. In fact, they're often people who maybe win the endorsement just because they're so triggering to normies. If Libertarians were serious people, they'd put up serious people to run for elections. Instead, they consistently endorse drug advocates, porn stars, sex workers, gender blenders, pimps and assholes. It's one thing to say "to each his own" and "live and let live" it's completely another thing to actually try to get something done. Libertarians are absolute shit at getting anything done.
You jist confused libertarianism with the shitty libertarian political party.
Strange that one is the ideology of the other.
The people who ran it prior to 2022 were progressives who wanted to go to Koch parties in DC. They had taken over the party in the early 00's. You want to see proper libertarianism, look to the Harry Browne campaigns.
oh please, I read reason.com, Glenn Reynolds, bought James McWhorter's books, been following Ron Paul since the 1980s. I'm well acquainted with the libertarian ideology and the party. Most of the libertarian activists are young men who just want drugs legalized and see no problems with porn. The candidates are meant to be shocking, in-your-face and teaching suburbia cookie cutter communities a lesson and the best they could do for the last 25 years is put up "What is Aleppo" idiot and pretend Jesse Ventura was not a clown shoe.
That you read Reason explains why you think this. The Mises Caucus took over last year, we're turning this ship around. Unfortunately, Reason just spends all their time not being weedbros complaining about us being Nazis.
State power, according to the Constitution at least, stems from the People. The biggest aspect of this is not necessarily having politicians use state power, it's having people stop being normie NPCs and actually interact with the political process. Vet the people you vote for, join school boards, don't abandon your kids to tiktok or watching bs 24/7. Things like that. Go house to house in your neighborhood and sign people up to vote. If you're a libertarian, guess what? You need to take control of the state first to implement what you want. That's how things work.
Or how about instead of being authoritarian, you reverse laws of government overreach and shrink government. You know, libertarianism.
Very sad but true. I was a libertarian for a short time and then I considered myself an anarcho capitalist probably for the last 15 years. For a long time everything was very black and white but as I got older I started to realize almost everything is grey. Now when I come across like-minded people who would say well voting is consent to slavery, I will 100% agree with them. But my argument is it's okay to vote in self-defense. If somebody has a gun to the back of your head and says give me your wallet or I'm going to shoot you in the head, it would be wise to give them your wallet not because you want to but because it is the self-defense option that will allow you to continue to fight another day.
Getting pretty sick of jackasses misrepresenting libertarianism.
It's small government and maximum liberty, not no government and anarchy, there's no conflict in libertarianism for using the power of the state to maintain a healthy functioning society.
It took me years to realize this.
In today’s world , yes. But the federal gov was designed to be so small and weak that it was nearly irrelevant when an opposition party had power.
This is complete horseshit. Accepting that there will always be an all-powerful state that is in control is pure communist delusion. The USA was built on a libertarian model of "government that governs least governs best" with all sorts of checks and balances (which don't work for shit now) that were meant to PREVENT any part of government from getting too much power.
Smart white guys' mistake was not refusing to use the State as a weapon, but allowing it to become a usable weapon in the first place.
Early American's would like a word with you.
By this logic, socialism is the only answer.
But wait - socialism doesn't work!
So working towards limited government is perhaps a better solution?
But wait - that's libertarianism.
Fuck all this noise
Obviously, our government is waaaaay too big and spends waaaaay too much money. Libertarian or not, I think we can all agree that we need to cut spending and start cutting useless and counter-productive government departments, programs and regulations.
LIbertarianism, at its core, assumes human beings never talk to each other and never come to agreements. They're ignorant anarchists. Government is inevitable. It's agreements between people. The more people, the more agreements need to be formed and enforced. It's why city folk are always surprised to see country kids riding in the back of pickup trucks and shooting guns in fields, and country kids flip their shit when they can't anymore when they move to the city.
It's not exactly that libertarians don't understand that people form agreements, but that most libertarians think they can achieve a requirement for unanimous consent by arguing from moral presuppositions that not everyone shares. They don't understand what motivates most people's beliefs/attitudes/actions, so the world moves on around them ignoring their arguments and imposing things by force regardless of whether they individually signed any contract. God's law may be written on our hearts, but outside of some uncommon personality types, human psychology defers more to hierarchy and social consensus than rigid adherence to rationalistic NAP morality. The kind of civilization our Founding Fathers wanted leans more on principle than any other, but there's a limit to how far human behavior will uphold it.
Libertarians are like socialists. Their product sounds great as long as you completely ignore history and human nature.
This wasn't always true.
It become true the day humanity lost a frontier, and all land on the planet became owned by one State or another.
Libertarianism is viable, but only with a frontier/ It's essential. I think people forgot this component, since it's been so long since we've had a frontier.
This is actually a brilliant take on Libertarianism.
The non-state power option is what the founding fathers used. Literally just angry men with a gun.
On the contrary, they were largely elected representatives using their legislative power to secede from Britain, and their position as the people's legally and culturally recognized representatives was a prerequisite to the public accepting the validity of that secession and throwing support behind them when Britain predictably attacked.
The problem with libertarianism isn't that it was a "trick," but that libertarians became too rigidly moralistic about tying their own hands behind their backs. They were so afraid of the unprincipled drift of subjective value judgments that they turned valuable peacetime ideals into inviolable religious idols that bound only their own actions, even in the context of cultural and institutional wartime where an authoritarian state already existed and blatantly colluded with "muh private company."
Individualism, at least in the form its practiced in america, is a poison. Our ancestors lived in multi-generational homes and lived off the land for a reason.
I'd make such a good dictator.
Reminds me of 1 Samuel 8
What we need to do is take state power, then crush it utterly so that it can never be reformed.
Might as well be us.
All by design.
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion:
Maybe you should READ the constitution you fucking imbecile because there is nothing more libertarian then the document that literally limits governments power to the point they are not legally allowed to do anything other then foreign policy and interstate disputes.
Maybe you assholes should have done your civic duty and upheld the constitution instead of watching sportsball and bbqing. WE ARE ONLY IN BAD TIMES NOW BECAUSE GENERATIONS OF LAZY AMERICANS COULDN'T DO THEIR CIVIC DUTY.
What local office are you running for? None? Not doing your civic duty because you're from the generation of weak men who created these bad times and now all you can do is cry and talk shit on the internet.
See, there is your logical fallacy.
A piece of paper 'literally limits government power'? Utter nonsense. A piece of paper can do no such thing.
That piece of paper is de jure the law of the land. How's that working out? What's it stopping?
You don't understand how power ACTUALLY works.
I like that Game of Thrones quote from Varys, "Power resides where men believe it resides."
History shows that where men think it resides is never static but an evolving part of culture and circumstances.