1.“Federal agencies have the authority to intervene in protests, picket signs, or blockades. The law is impartial: it must be enforced without exception.”
2.“Federal forces are not required to have judicial oversight for their actions.”
3.“Forces are not obligated to consider alternative entrances or pathways. If the main path is blocked, their duty is to clear it.”
4.“This action continues until the flow of traffic is fully restored.”
5.“To carry out these acts, forces will use the minimum necessary force, which is sufficient and proportional to the situation they are addressing.”
6.“Instigators and organizers of the protest will be identified.”
7.“Vehicles used in the protest will be identified and subjected to citations or penalties.”
8.“Data of the instigators, accomplices, participants, and organizers will be transmitted to the authorities through appropriate channels.”
9.“Notices will be sent to the judge in cases of damage, such as burning flags.”
10.“In cases involving minors, relevant authorities will be notified, and the guardians of these youths who bring them to these demonstrations will face sanctions and punishment.”
11.“The costs incurred by security operations will be borne by the responsible organizations or individuals. In cases involving foreigners with provisional residency, information will be forwarded to the National Directorate of Immigration.”
12.“A registry will be created for organizations that participate in these types of actions.”
Libertarian comes into power
Is a fascist
Gee, really interesting how libertarian reforms are extremely unpopular and can only be maintained by brutal state violence. Luckily they’re a democracy and not authoritarian communists where the people have no say!
Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.
Libertarianism is about individual independence.
I just have doubts over how any libertarian would explain these events in particular, so going to search for some amusement in the few ancap TG channels I remember.
Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.
Libertarian uses fascist argument
unapologetic, but peaceful and harmless Japan
History of fascist apologism I see
History of fascist apologism I see
That was in a comment comparing Japan to Turkey, so either you really failed to read anything else or you are expecting others to just believe you. In any case you are a clown.
What you said is meaningless. Japan isn’t just unapologetic, they’re actively denying that they committed war crimes. They’re also governed by fascists who actively want to build the military back up, so “peaceful and harmless” for now maybe.
That I actually agree with, their future seems not so cute.
Consider also their 99% conviction rate and legal segregation
i don’t wanna um actually and in no way do i think the current and prior administrations at any level which could be said to hold office has completely vindicated themselves (as i understand is the case as it is said from countries which were majorly affected, e.g. china and south korea)
i do think it’s important to know the sequence of events and that there was something that some people might point to as “aha! we did apologize, what else do you want!!?”
I’m not the one to determine if a proper apology has been made, though I like to be informed what such folks might think and what the perpetrators likewise think, oh, and the history or sequence of events.
I pasted a condensed timeline here, source is wikipedia:
1957: Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke said to the people of Australia: “It is my official duty, and my personal desire, to express to you and through you to the people of Australia, our heartfelt sorrow for what occurred in the war.”
September 29, 1972: Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka said to the people of the People’s Republic of China: “The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war, and deeply reproaches itself. Further, the Japanese side reaffirms its position that it intends to realize the normalization of relations between the two countries from the stand of fully understanding ‘the three principles for the restoration of relations’ put forward by the Government of the People’s Republic of China. The Chinese side expresses its welcome for this” (Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China).
September 6, 1984: Emperor Hirohito said to President Chun Doo Hwan: “It is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again.”
NOTE: This one is so lame, i don’t know what the original is (i’m assuming it’s translated) and this seems so watered down, especially because HE WAS ALIVE THEN ARRGHHH AND IT WAS DONE IN HIS NAME ARSDFLJKGSDKLJF
July 6, 1992. Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato said: “The Government again would like to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship as so-called ‘wartime comfort women,’ irrespective of their nationality or place of birth. With profound remorse and determination that such a mistake must never be repeated, Japan will maintain its stance as a pacifist nation and will endeavor to build up new future-oriented relations with the Republic of Korea and with other countries and regions in Asia. As I listen to many people, I feel truly grieved for this issue. By listening to the opinions of people from various directions, I would like to consider sincerely in what way we can express our feelings to those who suffered such hardship” (Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato on the Issue of the so-called “Wartime Comfort Women” from the Korean Peninsula).
August 10, 2010: Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed “deep regret over the suffering inflicted” during the Empire of Japan’s colonial rule over Korea. Japan’s Kyodo News also reported that Cabinet members endorsed the statement. In addition, Kan said that Japan will hand over precious cultural artifacts that South Korea has been demanding. Among them were records of an ancient Korean royal dynasty.
The trend is towards lameness I think. Even repeating the words someone else said before (to honor them or something) would be nice as what was said before seems to accept way more responsibility and, crucially, acknowledges the specifics of what happened.
None seem to mention the ‘presumed supremacy’ and ‘pan-asian empire’ that I think drove some of the ideology. I don’t know what else to call that kind of obfuscation besides cowardice.
He is raising taxes too though. Gotta pay for the people to repress the reaction to your dogshit policies.
Well, politics are like this. “Stability and anti-fascism” in Russia, “democratic” North Korea, and now a “libertarian” police state in Argentina. Names matter very little.
Can’t avoid touching on the subject of this instance:
USSR was also:
“socialist” (with only state-controlled unions and job appointment for 5 years by distribution you couldn’t refuse after university),
“Soviet” (with Soviets controlling maybe some local funds and a bit of logistics at best)
and a “union of republics” (which broke apart the moment its central government allowed some autonomy to those),
and half those “republics” are still governed by the same people\families\clans 30 years after.
I’ve seen Markov chains produce more coherent output. Come back when you’ve figured out how to have a coherent thought.
I like this, I am taking it, o7
I mean, coming from you.
“No u”
Get better material please
All taxes ultimate came from the working class who is the one that produce everything. The rich people getting a bigger tax break,on the rare cases this happens, is just a small correction from all the surplus value they capture.
Individual independence is a nonsensical concept in this context because humans are not independent from one another.
Private property as a concept is incompatible with individual independence, because its existence is itself dependent on some form of collective agreement. “Ownership” only exists when a group of people agrees that it does and sees a need to enforce it.
Libertarianism, in practice, is entirely aware of the dependencies between individuals, and what it really is about is tipping the scales in favor of property owners, maximizing the power of the strong over the weak by removing the state’s role as an equalizer and instead turning it into a sole enforcer of private property, at which point it is functionally indistinguishable from fascism.
Private property as a concept is incompatible with individual independence, because its existence is itself dependent on some form of collective agreement. “Ownership” only exists when a group of people agrees that it does and sees a need to enforce it.
I get a feeling that person doesn’t know the distinction between personal property and private property.
Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation
on a basic moral level this is an evil thing to want to happen.
Fuck poor people they should be drawn and quartered, am I right?
Most humane libertarian
lmfao you’re an enormous loser
Libertarian reforms are supposed to be unpopular among people who lose from them, which would be everyone getting more than giving from taxation.
lmao so basically admitting your ideology is predicated on tyranny and the dispossession of individuals for the benefit of a powerful few
I just have doubts over how any libertarian would explain these events in particular
Translation: You don’t know how to flower up your disgusting anti-individual rhetoric without rightly coming across as a hypocrite and sociopath lmao
And he immediately and unsurprisingly just pushes the actual fascism button
He really just won the speed-run, huh?
Libertarians are 99% of the time just fascists
Yes, if you ask a libertarian what they think about unions and they say “that’s fine, everybody can choose to associate and bargain within a free market” you might have found a real libertarian! Wow! You will almost never hear that though because they are all fascists
You will almost never hear that though because they are all fascists
This contradicts every time I meet a person who calls themselves a libertarian and knows at least something about that to pass through my initial filters (those who don’t apparently think that libertarianism is about capitalism, free love and marijuana).
More than that, one of the most popular branches of ancap is panarchism, which is an idea of a society embedding all kinds of non-territorial voluntary associations, including communist ones.
It might be that you’re just talking outta your ass.
Nah, libertarianism and “anarcho”-capitalism are just both joke ideologies that nobody will take seriously for a reason.
Eh, let’s hold that particular argument on a tankie instance.
How do you feel about the age of consent?
That really was unfair, age of consent and copyright are two issues on which libertarians are split.
How do you feel about free speech, due process, victimless crimes, freedom of conscience?
age of consent and copyright are two issues on which libertarians are split
deleted by creator
Where do you sit in regards to this split?
… 
You don’t think anyone takes China seriously? You don’t think anyone took the USSR seriously?
Ukraine and South of Russia were parts of the USSR and it was buying grain abroad at the same time. Not because of not having grain production of enormous scale, but because it was abhorrently inefficient with typical Soviet quality of logistics.
USSR possessed simply enormous economic resources and strategic resources, but managed to misuse them to the degree of asking for humanitarian aid and then crash all by itself.
I would say that qualifies as “not being taken seriously”.
I would say that qualifies as “not being taken seriously”.
Then you are a fucking dolt
Aight this person isn’t real, its just a troll asking Chat GPT to RP as a lolbertarian
“Crash all by itself”
Do you honestly believe Western nations weren’t doing everything they could to accomplish this short of nuking Russia?
They legitimately unleashed yearly plagues on Soviet Agriculture, and this is all declassified information. That’s just one of thousands of actions taken.
Only for dumbfucks like you to, fifty years later, say “It crashed all by itself”
At least admit your side managed to destroy them, holy fuck lol.
Lmao, you are an enormous loser
Ancaps are just fascists with a DLC skin
Not a surprising turn of events. He just halved everyone’s savings and on top of that drastically increased the cost of living for everyone as companies increase prices due to the currency devaluation.
The result of that being massive strike and protest action is entirely unsurprising… As is a crackdown on it.
This will escalate much further very quickly.
On the bright side, the warlord era preceded communist China.
That’s supposed to be the bright side? I think many people of those who know the difference would prefer to be shot or hanged than to die from hunger.
Holy shit what happened in china in 1950 to cause this jump in life expectancy? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1041350/life-expectancy-china-all-time/
War ended.
So your explanation for “life expectancy is about 33 years in china from 1850-1950” is “a war that started in the 1920’s ended”?
Yeah with logic like that I can understand how you’re a libertarianCheating is impolite and also discards yourself, putting a stain on your position and ideology. Be better than that.
You’ve mentioned the “change in life expectancy in 1950s”, which is not the same.
And yes, in “1850-1950” regard for human life among various people holding power in China has been kinda the same, including communists immediately after taking power.
I’ve visited a lot of socialist countries and one thing I’ve found is that one truth is universal; “a thief believes everyone steals”. I.E., those who see nothing but greed and selfishness in communist parties that see overwhelming support by the population tend to just be greedy and selfish themselves.
If even the famously Chinese backed Harvard can run a study on public satisfaction in China and find 95.5% satisfaction, whereas Washington only gets 38% satisfaction, obviously something is up. Maybe the propaganda you’ve been fed your whole life… isn’t true, and relies on the racist trope of the hopeless asiatic who doesn’t value life.
In the 1950’s life expectancy suddenly went up from what it had been for a century. Did you learn to read in that weird way, were you just memorized the shape of words?
And yes, in “1850-1950” regard for human life among various people holding power in China has been kinda the same,including communists immediately after taking power.
Yes you are correct. The capitalists and imperialists that had ruled China did not care for human life. This changed once the communists came into power after winning the civil war. Glad we agree.
The life expectancy started to raise before the war ended my man
Living in pre-revolutionary China was literally worse for your health than WW2
Wow the war spend seventy years ending?!
Anyway you unserious dipshit, behold the unstoppable material supremacy of a centrally planned economy
OK, war and repressions ended.
Yes under the leadership of the Communist party which won the war thank you for finally coming to class.
Yes the communists ended famine and repression, good job.
Any comment on the clear superiority of a centrally planned economy?
Motherfucking COWARD I asked you a question
Yes, a country descending to war led by privatized armies is a bright side
would prefer to be shot or hanged than to die from hunger
Lol. This doesn’t even warrant a serious response
I know you’re banned and probably won’t read this but my grandfather literally joined the communists when he was a teenager because pre-revolutionary China was so bad and inequality was so rife, his father died from a completely curable disease and had a cousin starve to death.
He’s 97 years old now and his biggest regret is he didn’t join convince more people to join the PLA sooner.
There’s no way he makes it more than a couple of months as president right? He’ll be forced to resign.
I have no idea. Depends how hard he cracks down? Round up the left and throw them in prison pinochet style, even kill a bunch of the top organisers? Could do some real damage to anyone that would oppose him properly if he has any competent advice.
libertarians as soon as they own the boot:
A snake stepping on its own ass
“What the fuck, I summoned libertarianism out of the frictionless void where it usually resides and it immediately oxidized into fascism on contact with air.”
That’s just phlogisticated libertarianism
But if falsely egalitarian/radical liberalism is offered insistently as an ideological alternative to the disarray of present day society, it is because the front of the stage is no longer occupied by utilitarianism (from which so-called egalitarian liberalism is scarcely distinguishable), but by the excess represented by rightwing libertarian ideology (the extreme Right in fact). This ideology substitutes the couplet of liberty and property for the Enlightenment’s triplet, definitively abandoning the idea of giving equality the status of a fundamental value…
In the right-wing libertarian version, ethics disappear because human beings, if they make their history properly, are authorized to make it by behaving as if they were in the jungle: they are not responsible for the consequences of their acts, in particular any inequalities they intensify, which are even welcome. Yet, without responsibility there can be no ethics. It matters little then that some, many even, of these right-wing libertarians claim to be Christian believers. Their religion is, in reality, amoral and tends even to become a simple social convention, hardly more than the expression of a singular community.
- Samir Amin, Eurocentrism
Without responsibility, there can be no ethics. And without ethics, there is no way for libertarianism to seperate itself from fascism as an ideology.
Wtf he can’t do that. That’s a violation of the NAP
That’s just because you don’t understand the NAP. When you’re NAPping you’re supposed to find the original instigating aggression. How do you find that? Easy, you take the side you don’t like and point at something they did that hurt your feelings.
Tear gassing protesters is just a legitimate response to the initial aggression of blocking traffic. But wait, isn’t the blocking of traffic a response to the aggression the government did by throwing the country into poverty overnight? No it’s not. Why? Because it just isn’t.
Place a pinkie on the wrong part of the lawn? That’s a nuking (NAP also seems to ignore any concept of proportional response, at least from what I’ve seen)
Ah, ancaps are weird. Part of them actually likes Latin American dictatorships and this kind of thing exactly because of the state not pretending to have any mandate but force.
Source - I’m a libertarian (not culturally of that group of ancaps, cause they tend to be fans of something far away and not try and build a working system at least among themselves ; makes them similar to tankies in the sense of “we can’t build our utopia without killing all the problematic people first”).
Source - I’m a libertarian
Source - I’m a libertarian
Why the fuck would you ever admit this you fucking dork
Libertarianism is not a coherent ideology based in political reality or science. It’s an ad-hoc justification for why capitalism is incompatible with liberalism, that is the values of democracy, freedom, liberty, etc. There is no such thing as stateless capitalism. Capital depends on the state and will always increase state power as more capital is accumulated. They like the dictatorships because the state is acting purely in the interest of capital while embracing the ideological misdirection of bigotry. That is the dictatorship is free to grind workers into paste with the use of near unlimited state control and power while the wealthy and petite bourgeois explain it all with racism, sexism, xenophobia, and nationalism. It uses those things to nudge workers away from class consciousness. They’re not actually hypocrites because ideological consistency is not the goal nor does it matter in the pursuit of power. They have the material edge and being hypocritical only helps them.
This is why we can’t take you seriously. You’re stuck on why your fellow libertarians are hypocritical, you don’t understand what’s actually happening. You’re stuck in a world of ideology and abstractions away from the actual bare-bones model of society. Since your ideology has no explanatory power in the real world, your only recourse is clinging to models like the horseshoe theory. You don’t have a deep understanding of your own ideology let alone that of tankies, they just exist as points on some graph of extremism in your world.
Libertarianism is not a coherent ideology based in political reality or science. It’s an ad-hoc justification for why capitalism is incompatible with liberalism, that is the values of democracy, freedom, liberty, etc.
To further this point, the original libertarian theorists rejected the enlightenment’s triplet of “equality, liberty and property” for a couplet of just “liberty and property”. The basis of libertarian ideology is a rejection of equality as a fundamental value.
As for why actually existing libertarianism is indistinguishable from fascism/right wing authoritarianism in practice, it is because it is fundamentally not an ideology compatible with any concept of ethics. The core of libertarian thought is an abandonment of social, political , economic, and ultimately societal responsibility for others. However, without responsibility there can be no ethics. And without no ethics in an ultimate “might makes right” world where capital is in control and equality is abandoned as a fundamental value, what prevails? We all know what.
good response to a good response o7
Just like communism may mean ancom, ansyn, trotskyism in various kinds, stalinism in various kinds, libertarianism may mean minarchism, ancap, panarchism, georgeism and so on.
It’s an ad-hoc justification for why capitalism is incompatible with liberalism
It’s not. It’s just voluntarism put over anything else. Hence age of consent arguments, for example.
It’s actually the most coherent ideology, because any compromise for practicality would make it a part of some other existing one.
That’s also the reason for very little of it existing in reality.
This is why we can’t take you seriously. You’re stuck
It’s ok, I’m not taking your particularly seriously too, one really shouldn’t, it’s all a mix with pieces of gold very rare.
However, I’m not stuck in general.
You’re stuck in a world of ideology and abstractions away from the actual bare-bones model of society.
There’s no “actual” model, a model by definition is a simplification allowing you to analyze a phenomenon spending a fraction of energy needed to recreate it.
And that’s the problem ML has - instead of producing one model after another, some for one use case, some for another, some being discarded, some being used further, ML just has one model based on Imperial Germany as a dogma and puts it over reality.
I don’t need a deep understanding of something which may or may not fit. I don’t even theoretically, potentially have access to source of any “deep understanding”.
It’s like algebraic solutions vs numeric ones.
Stalinism isn’t an ideology btw, Stalin was just a Marxist-Leninist.
That’s the Stalinist point of view. Cults of personality, nationalist propaganda, banning abortions and so on are not exactly ML.
Cult of personality
Oh okay, you’re operating on a 9 year-old’s epistemology
I bet you also believe the clapping story.I’m still stuck on this, this shit has me fucked up. So the people who supposedly are in a cult of personality…steadfastly refuse to give the subject of their adulation credit for being a theorist? This is the first I’ve ever heard of a personality cult where the orthodox view is “Nah, our guy didn’t create anything particularly unique or worthy of deliniation.”
Actually, I prefer it when my leaders are deeply unpopular.
any compromise for practicality would make it a part of some other existing one.
That’s also the reason for very little of it existing in reality.
…so why are you a libertarian? In your own words it doesn’t exist because it does not actually address the practicalities of the world.
If I knew that my political ideology isn’t compatible with the real world, I would find a better one.
No ideology is compatible with the real world.
And I’m not a libertarian. It’s just the closest known point so I called myself that.
A distributist would be closer, just you are likely not aware of such a thing.
What do distributists think about age of consent laws
It’s basically a political ideology grown from Catholicism, so all the usual.
It’s an ad-hoc justification for why capitalism is incompatible with liberalism
It’s not. It’s just voluntarism put over anything else. Hence age of consent arguments, for example.
Voluntarism is capitalist apologia, yes. The very premise is that society is a collection of independent individuals, exactly the premise which is both prerequisite for and produced by capitalism. Voluntarism takes this state ideology and proclaims it as an eternal, natural truth which cannot be escaped; the only problem, claim the libertarians, is that the state is interfering with the free expression of this ideology — which is exactly the reverse causal direction.
“Truly, one must be destitute of all historical knowledge not to know that it is the sovereigns who in all ages have been subject to economic conditions, but they have never dictated laws to them. Legislation, whether political or civil, never does more than proclaim, express in words, the will of economic relations.”
You must rip out the idealism which has rotten your logic if you want it to have any connection to material reality. Start scientifically from the world as it really exists, and from history as it really unfolded, not from your abstract models of independent individual exchanges, which so happens to justify the status quo or an intensification thereof.
You need to investigate how society is in fact a web of interrelations and dependency; ie the very opposite of non-interacting isolated individuals. There is no society without dependency. A theory that starts with an assumption of independence is absolutely useless.
Source - I’m a libertarian
For your sake I really hope you’re not legally allowed to buy booze yet
Tankies don’t even believe that. We would prefer to not kill anyone, but reactionaries (like yourself) always try to fight against us which is why you go into the pit. Also Utopianism is anti Marxist.
Low energy comrades: the CIA is very tricky. They might try to ingratiate themselves into our community and tear it apart. They’re masters of deception
The CIA:
Rofl
We need more ASCII emoji
So much for “small government”
Libertarians are just fascists with nonce aesthetics.
Fascism is a bullshit ideology that only cares about the supremacy of the fascists themselves. Outside of that it has no real principles, only whatever ad hoc opinions will further their supremacy at the given moment. When someone is not amplifying their fascinating they will whine about much freeze peach, when protests challenge their grasp on power they will use every coercive measure of the state to repress it.
This is not true though.
Fascism only sounds incoherent if you take it at face value, but it is integral to protecting and preserving the liberal capitalist order during times of crises. Italy and Nazi Germany served the role of crushing left wing and working class movements in post-WWI Europe following the success of the Bolshevik Revolution. Fascism saved “international capital” in Europe from falling into the hands of the “Leninists”, and continued to do so well into the 21st century.
I don’t take fringe ideologies (like national bolshevism, lol) seriously because they fall apart at the slightest scrutiny under materialist thinking, but fascism - fascism is well grounded in reality and should be taken extremely seriously by everyone who considers themselves on the left. There is a reason why fascism as an ideology historically succeeded while many others never even got off the ground.
Clara Mattei’s The Capital Order is essential reading to understanding how liberalism invented fascism to preserve private property ownership and wage relations during the turbulent years following WWI, and provided compelling arguments, using contemporary political and economic records, to show that both liberalism and fascism are two sides of the same coin whose functions synergistically protect the capital order.
The causal mechanism for the libertarian to fascist movement is idealism. Libertarianism is a completely idealist rules based worldview that only bears tangential relation to reality. It somehow creates a peaceful and morally justified hierarchy for a given body politic. Because it is a hierarchical worldview the only people who would willingly adopt it are those who preceive themselves as benefiting from the system, aka being securely on top already or would be on top if the system were adopted. When they gain power and the world doesn’t conform to their idealized view that must mean that someone broke the rules, cheated, and therefore those malefactors fall outside the Civil body politic. Because ypu now have an external enemy you are now justified in using any method necessary to defeat and reestablish the “rules based order.” This is how you can get a cognitive dissonance free genuine movement from libertarian to fascists
deleted by creator
Holy shit its not even a week
Dude went from get the goberment out of our lives to full on nazi dictatorship in a week.
He should ask Bolivia how that went. cw su*cide attempt
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Nice state you got there, dickhead
looking forward to all the lolbertarians in the US and abroad talking about this guy to do the 'ol collar tug and look side to side.
EDIT: Free shipping to my home in less than a day!
5.“To carry out these acts, forces will use the minimum necessary force, which is sufficient and proportional to the situation they are addressing.”
Is just flavor text when
2.“Federal forces are not required to have judicial oversight for their actions.”
Alright you piggies, that’s enough time spent with snouts in the slop. rottingleaf is banned, comments left up for anyone who wishes to continue dunking.
comments left up for anyone who wishes to continue dunking.
Thank you I was afraid I’d miss the fun.
Truly a freak
Just saw that, they went on to mention there’s a split in libertarian ideology on issue of copyright and age of consent.
Why are they always like this?
well it was a libertarian
A true libertarian by the looks of things
