kek

say it again

>please study history more

not an argument

I gave you a modern example you retard

It literally was an argument.

@everyone if you need vetted, get in get vetted

But a liberal disagrees with it

Is it really an argument then

whos the liberal

Aren't you a libertarian?

kek he ignored my argument after saying "not an argument"

Nice argument

says the beta neet cuck

Molyneux is certainly a liberal

Give proofs @Anony6498

***Daily reminder: DRESDEN WAS A HOAX CREATED BY THE SOVIES***

kek you need to give proof first

what proof

You made the claim, Anony

dresden has no proof

nigger its your role

hey

@Greg88 i'm a right wing libertarian so no

both are neet beta cucks

well, technically a minarchist

So you're a liberal

yall better start **DOIN THINGS**

uh, no sweetie

so you are a non-marxist socialist huh :^)

I used to be a libertarian

I'm getting involved with the local party @mememaestro

It's liberalism

Nice, that is actually good

will provide proofs as soon as i can

Just with more rationalization to justify the fucked up worldview

well left wing libertarians are liberals

but not people like me

^

It's literally in the name

then you'd know the difference between yokeltarians and cosmotarians

LIBERtarianism is a branch of liberalism

one is conservative the other is liberal

I'm well aware of the differences between people who emphasize muh guns

Anarcho-capitalism in an ethnically homogeneous society is right wing

And muh pot

my fucking god

National capitalism is also right wing

are you really trying to make an argument that libertarians are liberals

modern liberal=/= minarchism and right wing libertarinism

I can get some economics on ya

to see who is in what side my dude

It literally is

Monarchism + minarchism
THE FUCKING GOAT

It's says it right on the fucking tin

so natsoc is socialist just like sweden because it's in the name?

Argument from semantics is pretty weak

Can be dismissed

It's part of the same family yeah

1/10 try again

what the actual fuck

what

kek

That's what happens when you argue with liberals

But we aren't liberals

They get btfod

And then say stupid shit

let me get in this real quick: national socialism is the same thing as libertarian socialm from sweden

well, I think the monkey has a higher IQ

Or throw out stupid fallacies like above

>everyone is a libshit if they aren't my specific brand of ideology

They could be commies too

if you really wanna argue we get in debate my dude

Those aren't liberals

>I got blown out because I was in the wrong channel

and then we have some good **de** ***baiting***

Sure thing

nice

now?

>throw out fallacies
>says this after arguing semantics

what did he mean by this?

hang on, pizza came in

will be back in a moment

>pizza

What did he mean by this?

mama mia

probably cheese pizza too

uuuhhhh

no sweetie

next thing you know he'll be talking about ordering sixty thousand hotdogs

pineapple

Tfw like cheese

it's best with pineapple

So I can never talk about pizza on here

@mememaestro I know what you're saying but do keep in mind that there are also libertarian liberals now
Gary Johnson ruined the party

we already wen't over that some libertarians are right and some are left

Okay

the argument is that if they are all left

I just skimmed to catch up my b

John "I pay Mexicans to shit on my face" mcafee was worse tbh

Kek

>implying left libertarianism is even a thing

it is

its dumb

"H-hey don't stop me from being a degenerate! But gibs me dat!"

Well there's libertarian socialism

Which is silly

there's ancom

But within the libertarian movement

There's people who care more about open borders and weed

the original ideal for communism was more aligned with Ancom tbh

Anarchomonarchist

And some who care about guns and property rights

And also weed

@GoGo thats just feudalism

Don't violate muh nap

No @Crusading have you read marx's ass dribbles
He calls for a state just refuses to call it one

weed itself isn't bad, its the culture it brings

He literally couldnt escape the state with his ideaology so he just renamed it

Drugs are bad

Weed not so much as most

@Void no i'm talking the first groups of people to follow it, the ones who made little communes

Drug is really too much of a broad term

Oh sure but thats not the first

Yeah it is but people get the idea

Cold medicine is a drug, but so is cocaine

BAN CAFFEINE

i should rephrase my original statement to "early"

Sure

Man I don't have an issue with beer but I hate beer culture

Ill accept it

Same tbdesu

Beer culture is shit

Tbf

I don't even like beer

Lol

Alcoholism is bad

I like cocaine

But coke culture sucks

Mmkay

Dude

STOP TAKING COKE

Honestly if the commies just went off and lived in hippy communes then I wouldnt give a shit we could focus on (((them))) then

the sad part is that i would like to say that things like weed should be allowed, but it is like opening up a door on a warm but muggy day. it'll be okay for a tiny bit, but bring in bad things soon

Where do you think they're proliferating?

Around (((them)))

Ofc

If the link between juden and communism isn't something you know of, definitely read up on it

But attacking commies is just a single arm of the octopus

Hey

Though the strongest

Just a cohencidence

It'd wipe most of them out desu

The really powerful ones are, sadly, capitalists.

feelsbadman

It's all the same to them

Whatever lines their pockets

Plutocrats != capitalists

They're the ultimate pragmatists

How do I vetted?

Ping an interrogator

@AustraliaCalling hop in the get vetted chat

They endorse communism because theyll be the first to be card carrying party members at the top anyways

With a mic

Yeah

Its a power grab

Fucking c# faggot

Capitalism is just a lot better than communism at creating wealth

C# is shit and botnet why mention it

Which means there's more for Jews to steal

So they support capitalism now

The Jews will never be proles in a commie state, so they don't care.

They'd be the party members.

Best system is national capitalism.
Objectively.
>strong leadership keeps enemies out of the state
>strong economy means that you won't be easily beaten in wartime

And the volk get to prosper.

Exactly @Haupstürmfuhrer Pepe

Why not just do corporatism

For a stronger economy

It's not socially darwinistic enough

Over the long term, it creates an undeserving aristocracy

@Greg88 (((corporatism)))

Whereas capitalism creates a deserving aristocracy.

Sounds like capitalism

define the system to create a strong economy if you may Sarkly

Capitalism, my dude.

We have a huge undeserving aristocracy

hence "National Capitalism" as opposed to "National Socialism"

Today

We don't live in a national capitalist society

Jews are allowed to manipulate through in-group preference.

I don't see how shrinking the playing field really changes things

Such would not be possible, since everybody would be part of the volk.

We live in a globalist crony capitalist society

but how, with heavy bureaucracy or low regulations?

Simple as that

Just look at ttp

>heavy bureaucracy
Probably not compatible with capitalism.

Members of the volk are still capable of the same spiritual failings as jews

It's just not endemic

well

Which means that it is controllable.

Simple competition does the trick.

Shits like shadowrun without the cool parts like trolls and cybermancers

I understand you

whereas with Jews, you always lose.

Trve

I'm not saying it wouldn't be better

It absolutely would be

It just doesn't fix all the problems of a capitalist system

Just scales them down

Though getting rid of Jews makes anything run better

It's the most we can do without cutting in to total production.

Corporate states had similar levels of growth to capitalist countries

More controls, like in NatSoc, would inevitably lead to inefficiencies.

Besides killing all the 4/5 jewish guys in society, how do you see we can fix the problems of capitalism? And what actually are they in your opinion?

And we're far more stable

nop

Maybe they're good in the short term, but probably not in the long term.

It's literally the opposite

Were not stable with that huge bureaucracy boy

Chile had a huge economic boom

Under Pinochet

That went to shit

5 months for some rubber tires is a laugh

http://i.4cdn.org/g/1501372255299.png

After the initial wave of liberalization

They adopted free market principles in Chile.

Whereas neighboring Argentina remained economically stable under Peron

For a longer period of time

Stability isn't always desirable.

It diminishes innovation to some degree.

for the market is

>Africa

yea yea

There's still a profit motive under a corporatist system

There's always a profit motive.

But when your livelihood is threatened by your rivals, you'll try even harder.

We always need some problems but generally, stability is preferable

And you'll lose when you deserve to.

And your opponents will provide better goods to consumers.

Which is when you call them fucking bigots

kek

I think the proper term is homophobes

*Eradicates degeneracy internally*

>"but markets are things and things don't exist forever"

nani

>but fatalism works best on the firing line

>fatalism
>working

Oh no something doesnt exist forever lets just all kill ourselves since nothing does