420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
The Problem With The Libertarian Party by Ian Sorrylock - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 18:55:57 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396058 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1503269757682.jpg -(299092B / 292.08KB, 800x443) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 299092
This may be the first in a series of threads questioning the health of the various political parties. Feel free to start your own for other parties...

So, in an attempt to understand the "alt-right," I subbed myself to an AR FB group that just shy of 600 members.

Today I was kicked off for simply saying that the Holocaust actually happened.

So, I start mulling over what I had learned from it all. The biggest lesson I got was this -

The Alt-Right love to hide behind the title "Libertarian."

It sort of seems to catch a lot of them. They declare themselves "Libertarians," and then go into all sorts of weird contortions to justify alt-right bullshit.

This lead me to realize that the Libertarians, as a party, are pretty fucked up right now. Besides this infiltration of alt-right types, they are also known for shit like this...which got a ton of press...


Yeah...you ain't looking good Libertarians. You have a shit show inside the tent, and OUTSIDE the tent are a bunch of assholes claiming to BE you! That is gonna be a big PR disaster coming up, as eventually alt-right and Libertarian could end up synonymous. Now, I think true Libertarian beliefs reject racism and a bunch of the shit the alt-right wants. But, you guys now have these problem players running around.

In short, the Libertarians need to get their shit together and grow up. Get the weirdos out of the convention...kick out any asshole with a Gadsen flag or a G-String on. And get in front of the damn alt-right mess that is coming down the road. Personally, if I wasn't more educated about Libertarians than I am, I would be assuming they are Holocaust denying twerps who live in the future Land.

Get it together...
Emma Dreffingchut - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 20:16:51 EST ID:NmweLP+h No.396062 Ignore Report Quick Reply
At least the US libertarian party wants to go back to the gold standard (or some other non-fiat currency). Feel free to tell me I'm misunderstanding this, but that's a non starter for me.

Libertarian policies seem OK when we're all on an equal playing field and every misfortune can be planned for, but US society is far from that.
Clara Findlebanks - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 20:47:49 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.396065 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>The Alt-Right love to hide behind the title "Libertarian."

That and "Classical Liberal" gets passed around a lot lately. What's worse is that it's being conflated with Libertarianism. It's alt-righters or alt-lite that want to keep their liberal card while still being a bigoted politically naive moron.
Frederick Disslegold - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 21:26:10 EST ID:nppI2w1T No.396068 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503278770314.webm [mp4] -(4398333B / 4.19MB, 640x426) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
This isn't new. Back when the tea party was doing their thing, you had "libertarians" who were against "the government regulating marriage and religion" who weren't rejected.

The Libertarian party is a corporate puppet.
This is why their only successes have been replacing top-bracket income tax, property tax, and other taxes that fall on the rich with consumption taxes and other taxes that target the poor and deregulation.

Cutting military spending, legalizing pot, gay marriage, etc are only paid lipservice for their popularity.

Right-libertarianism is self-contradictory anyway. Capitalism and liberty are mutually exclusive, and the right always chooses capitalism over freedom.
Right-libertarians are good people who have been terribly misguided at best and closet fascists at worst.
Oliver Billinghall - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 21:32:51 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396069 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You, I fucking like!
Augustus Dobberridge - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 21:58:17 EST ID:YLo8bzbW No.396070 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>want to shrink the government to the point it barley exists
>closet fascists

Oliver Billinghall - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 22:16:29 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396071 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Libertarians who are against gay marriage are my favorites. And yes, they exist.
Frederick Disslegold - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 22:32:25 EST ID:nppI2w1T No.396072 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503282745314.webm [mp4] -(2520164B / 2.40MB, 640x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Right-libertarians don't want to shrink the entire government, they want protection of private property expanded.
The just want to shrink public education, welfare, progressive taxation, industrial regulation, enforcement of civil rights, and other things fascists also happen to be against.
The main difference is that libertarians believe this will result in greater freedom, whereas fascists see all these things as helping minorities at their own expense.

Since the latter is not something one articulates in polite companies, most fascists just say it's about freedom.

Every presidential election, the Libertarian primary debate has a question to the effect of "Should businesses be forced to serve niggers", and any candidate who argues yes gets attacked by the audience and other candidates.
Oliver Billinghall - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 23:24:27 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396073 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah, I remember Rand Paul getting shit for that stance. Then I started seeing the alt-right kinda co-opt it. The idea is an old one though. That somehow being a total dick to an entire segment of the population en masse is "freedom."
Augustus Billingstock - Mon, 21 Aug 2017 01:08:07 EST ID:+NSAEK8g No.396077 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Great post.

Honestly, left-libertarianism or liberaltarianism seem like a more pure version of what libertarianism should be.
Graham Suppertitch - Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:55:19 EST ID:HsGDoYnF No.396085 Ignore Report Quick Reply
In America Libertarian is short hand for states rights, which is short hand lets let the red states commit genocide or reenact slavery, please.

These people don't want gay marriage, or gun rights, or free flowing cheeba. They want the states to make the call instead of the feds. But at the end of the day, they just want to repeal civil rights in the states they actually live in.

Be a socialist instead.
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Thu, 24 Aug 2017 05:15:34 EST ID:QiGBcKwL No.396172 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The loose American political movement of Ron Paul libertarians proved extremely susceptible to fascist entryism. This might seem confusing until you realize that American libertarianism is not liberalism but in fact an extremely reactionary ideology of political economy. These "libertarians" do not want to dissolve the state as they claim; instead, their disagreement is in how the settler empire should arrange itself internally. Right-"libertarians" believe the state should be controlled directly by rentier capitalists rather than administered by specialist bourgeois functionaries. Seen in this light the gap between right-libertarianism and fascism was never large.
Nigel Cullertare - Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:09:25 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396184 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Interesting points.

Basically, it sounds like they want Feudalism.
Augustus Cheblingdock - Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:58:15 EST ID:1WScNS4p No.396187 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503604695608.png -(68844B / 67.23KB, 617x177) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Its actually a very planned system of propaganda. Libertarian always basically meant anarchist around the entire world. The person who formed the oath keepers used to be in a leftist group before being contacted by libertarians way back in the day. Also its no surprise that libertarianism in the american sense is just reactionary fascism. Their policies and theories influenced and directly supported a coup in Chile, replacing a socialist loved and adored by the people of Chile with a violent, brutal maniac who was ready to fill mass graves with "anti capitalists and druggies". This was all done with Milton Friedman's economic plans and theories in mind. Libertarians praised it. Pic related.. Libertarians at work.
Fanny Climmlesidge - Thu, 24 Aug 2017 18:06:33 EST ID:kZUMXybj No.396190 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pinochet was more the doing of the statists at the CIA than any libertarian minded individual. When libertarians spoke of it, though, they weren't too good:
>General Pinochet deserves to be remembered for having rescued his country from becoming the second Soviet satellite in the Western hemisphere, after Castro's Cuba, and, like the Soviet Union, and Cuba under Castro, a totalitarian dictatorship
>The General is denounced again and again for the death or disappearance of over 3,000 Chilean citizens and the alleged torture of thousands more. It may well be that some substantial number of innocent Chilean citizens did die or disappear or otherwise suffered brutal treatment as the result of his actions. But in a struggle to avoid the establishment of a Communist dictatorship, it is undoubtedly true that many or most of those who died or suffered were preparing to inflict a far greater number of deaths and a vastly larger scale of suffering on their fellow citizens.

They think it was just totally cool that a democratically elected Marxist leader got removed from office through violent, coercive, force, with the assistance of the United States via the CIA, which was, incidentally, also conducting genocide in Latin America at the time.

We know how many people the "totalitarian" Castro killed: Archivo Cuba estimates (and it's a high estimate) that Castro's regime ordered more than 4,000 political executions between 1959 and 2016. That is, ~70 executions a year. In 16 years, Pinochet "disappeared" 3,000 people, at a rate of ~188 killings per year. The military junta overseen by Pinochet was responsible for human rights abuses that paralleled Castro's regime, but Castro didn't grow the economy like Pinochet did. This really expresses the worst of vulgar libertarianism, the idea that political liberty can be sacrificed in the name of greater economic growth.

The irony in all of this is that Chile's economic miracle happened after Pinochet rolled back the most important of the Chicago Boys' policies. Chile, because of right-libertarian resentment of socialists, has become a kind of model for a handful of them, mostly those in the Mises clique with authoritarian personalities (but who are still loyal to business interests above all else).
Caroline Bardhood - Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:09:33 EST ID:BTigF2iT No.396240 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The connection between the Austrian school (right-wing "libertarianism") and the Chicago school (Friedman, Reaganism, Thatcherism) is that they're both part of the broader neoliberal 'movement'. Market fundamentalism.
William Clemblestone - Sun, 27 Aug 2017 21:02:17 EST ID:SUMygqNx No.396293 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Kid in Pinochet shirt and his father btfo by anarchists in Berkeley lmfao.


How can anyone align with Pinochet and believe they're a force of freedom? Someone who filled mass graves.
Sidney Sablinggold - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 00:00:15 EST ID:a4VQLhKZ No.396298 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Remember how "democratic" was supposed to mean for the votes/majority? Remember how "Republican" was supposed to mean representing/majority? It's all bullshit people hide under

Full communism
Lydia Muggleweck - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 02:42:29 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396303 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503902549044.jpg -(37883B / 37.00KB, 460x287) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Stalin killed more people than Pinochet did in a month. Sorry buddy. Try to consider that Chile is now beautiful and Russia is a shithole. Mind blown. Yet these freaks still complain. Further proof that they will continue to be a nuisance until all of our nation States cease to exist.
Priscilla Shittingwater - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 05:25:39 EST ID:xQbV1JEs No.396308 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Try to consider that Chile is now beautiful

Fuck Crerrybare - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:11:06 EST ID:iYYYad4Q No.396315 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>How can anyone align with Pinochet and believe they're a force of freedom?

The same way someone can call themselves an anarchist or a marxist and believe they're fighting "oppression"
Sidney Bardhall - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:34:49 EST ID:sydpBwjz No.396316 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Arctic Chile is beautiful man, try visiting it once. It's bizarre, like a mix of Norway and America with brownies everywhere.
Betsy Cepperkure - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:41:03 EST ID:kosw8Fl2 No.396317 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>The Alt-Right love to hide behind the title "Libertarian."

Well ACTUALLY the LP is extremely for open boarders. It isn't a split issue to them like abortion. Pretty much all libertarians support open boarders. Gary Johnson was governor of New Mexico elected by a large hispanic population for fucks sake.
Betsy Cepperkure - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:47:41 EST ID:kosw8Fl2 No.396318 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503935261837.jpg -(120523B / 117.70KB, 830x465) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Considering the LP nominated Gary Johnson as their representative in a landslide victory, they're pretty PC too. To be fair, if you watched the LP convention, a lot of them actually really hate Gary.

Myth busted.
Shit Hupperson - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 13:50:22 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.396319 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The LP was also for gay marriage back in the 80s. Now, since the Tea Faggot invasion, they are "split," on the issue....
Lydia Muggleweck - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 15:56:09 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396321 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503950169044.jpg -(88799B / 86.72KB, 960x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>comparing anarchists to Pinochet

Jesus fucking Christ. Read a history book. You don't always have to "see both sides". Sometimes or in fact a lot of the time, history is biased towards certain conclusions. History is scientific. Freedom isn't objective, its a physical reality for most people. Anarchists have played a larger role in history in resisting oppression and developing progress in society, and even Marxism played a role in the civil rights movement. The likes of Pinochet historically are there to thwart this freedom, to resist this progress. They may voice support for liberty because its what most of humanity strives for, but with their actions they value the strength of the nation state above the freedom of individuals. Don't even bring stalin up when were talking about Chile. If you want to know that Stalin hated anarchists and the red army betrayed the black army in Ukraine. Even with that being said, any historian knows the soviets were defending themselves against fascists (Hitler wanted slavs and Jews genocided) and fascisms body count greatly exceeds any jackbooted Leninist.

Tl;Dr anarchists actually do fight for freedom. Dictators? Does it really need to be said? Don't think so.
Thomas Sambleman - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 16:15:17 EST ID:uW9KWJtY No.396322 Ignore Report Quick Reply
> Does it really need to be said?
we're living in an age where people are okay with nazis and other white supremacists marching in the street and people call those counter protesting them "fascists"

so, unfortunately, yes, it does have to be said.
Lillian Pockdale - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 16:37:45 EST ID:BTF+ZlJt No.396323 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've studied history extensively and can honestly say I'd rather live in Fascist Italy than revolutionary Catalonia if I had to choose bebetween the two.
Lydia Muggleweck - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 16:41:08 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396324 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503952868044.jpg -(98557B / 96.25KB, 800x337) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Yeah it does need to be said but overall anarchists have more support globally than fascists. That's why you always see them complaining about "unfair fights". If your group was as popular it wouldn't be a problem. In Berkeley the other day, hundreds of people were cheering "thank you" when a bloc showed up. My liberal grandma is posting "I pray for antifas safety". Even the rolling stone, new York times, and MTV are being forced to acknowledge them. The internet and reality are two different things. Of course your perspective is going to seem broad when all half of them do is eat Cheetos and calculate raids and forum slides of all social media, and comment sections. Reality is the numbers on the streets are always different.. Around the world.
Lydia Muggleweck - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 16:42:10 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396325 Ignore Report Quick Reply

So you're a fascist? Not like your opinions matter.
Fuck Crerrybare - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:54:47 EST ID:iYYYad4Q No.396327 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There were no fascists in Berkeley yesterday, the event was organized by a trans-woman and she specifically told the alt-right not to come. The event was cancelled anyway and only a few people even showed up. THe local press isn't exactly saying you're heroes either: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Masked-anarchists-violently-rout-right-wing-12041287.php

As long as you attack people who aren't fascists you're just as bad as the actual fascists.
Barnaby Brodgestet - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:19:42 EST ID:/zHBN1g2 No.396328 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Why would I expect the media, to even ever side with the narrative of anarchism or anything that advocates for uprisings against neoliberal economics? The local media are the same fucks that took part in the amping up of the fear of criminal elements in light of an increasingly powerful police force. The same people who beat the drum of war every time the Pentagon is preparing for military operations. The same media that cries of the violent anarchists clashing back in December after police fucking murdered someone. Local media really? When's the last time the local media had an in depth analysis of any occurrences? The only reason I mentioned some larger mainstream media sources is, it shows a group forcing their way into the narrative globally. Time magazine had "the protester" as person of the year even.

There were no fascists there because on person said so? That's shit logic. There were people in Pinochet shirts being welcomed because "he destroyed Marxists" aka an oppressive scum bag who filled mass graves. There were idiots who believe in banning muslims and waging imperialist wars present. Fascist or not. They're enemies of freedom.
Barnaby Brodgestet - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:24:51 EST ID:/zHBN1g2 No.396329 Ignore Report Quick Reply

That last argument is weak as fuck. Reactionaries are the main force that historically try to reverse or block peoples struggles for freedom. I bet you're the same type of person to say the IRA was as bad as loyalist paramilitaries for their actions and support of mass Catholic rioting. Get real. The numbers also don't lie. A fringe amount of "anti Marxists" vs hundreds on the other side.
Fuck Crerrybare - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:41:24 EST ID:iYYYad4Q No.396330 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The IRA was fighting actual oppression, American anarchists aren't.
Barnaby Brodgestet - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:45:47 EST ID:/zHBN1g2 No.396331 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I'm going to respond again because be real man. The media views police dispersing anarchists as brave heroes. Meanwhile anyone who so much as throws a tear canister back is labeled a violent extremist. The media is what paves the way for oppression against social movements. They voice the flawed logic and justifications of repression. They aim to isolate rebels from support so repression becomes a task with less backfire. During occupy the media constantly twisted shit as feds planned with local police to violently go after.

Anyone who was in Berkeley the other day knows violence wasn't that great. A few fights broke out when people chased known reactionaries and people brandishing images of dictators out of mlk. If a black bloc was a few hundred strong and all were engaged in high intensity violence it'd look way different. If you sport a Pinochet shirt with mace you deserve no freedom. Pinochet can rot in hell as can all of his supporters.
Barnaby Brodgestet - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:47:43 EST ID:/zHBN1g2 No.396332 Ignore Report Quick Reply

American anarchists are short sighted and have shit strategy. That doesn't mean the usa isn't a colonial police state and that anyone who opposes that is atleast somewhat on the right track.
Barnaby Brodgestet - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:56:24 EST ID:/zHBN1g2 No.396333 Ignore Report Quick Reply

So basically we kind of agree. I think they're opposed to oppression but they aren't exactly opposing it well or successfully. In fact a lot of them are jokes. Though if you go to mexico or Greece anarchists will be less childish more dedicated to finding oppression and more understanding of what it means to do so. There's more to anti fascism than being reactive. Until people realize this they're just fanning flames without a game plan.
Edwin Warryket - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:17:48 EST ID:6FuU8+qj No.396339 Ignore Report Quick Reply
you'd rather have fucking China or Russia take a bigger chunk of global control if not become major world power, gotcha.

Despite its flaws the US is the best option.
And no, the EU can't do shit. They are protected by NATO which is 75% paid for by the US.
Phyllis Dupperfig - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:30:44 EST ID:nppI2w1T No.396340 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503973844785.png -(1590471B / 1.52MB, 1500x1275) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>And no, the EU can't do shit. They are protected by NATO which is 75% paid for by the US.
France, Germany, and the UK combined spend twice as much as Russia on their military.
The US might account for most of NATO but the rest of NATO is still be bigger than China or Russia.
Charles Huttingridge - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:49:39 EST ID:uW9KWJtY No.396341 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>claims "media views police dispersing anarchists as brave heroes"
>literally responding to a link that puts those exact anarchists in a negative light
jesus christ, dude. at least try a little bit.

I'm sure you're personally not oppressed. I'm sure you even live in a community where no one else is oppressed, either, so you've never experienced this first hand. That doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to the entirety of the USA. Whether you believe it or not, outside of your cozy little bubble, people are oppressed.
Phoebe Claydock - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:51:48 EST ID:ZAZJvmlj No.396342 Ignore Report Quick Reply
this. it hurts american fee fees to admit that the EU actually amounts to anything, if not that they're actually bigger in terms of military, population, and economy, but hey, can you blame a guy for irrationally downplaying them when his empire is crumbling?
Caroline Chebblebud - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:53:44 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396343 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503975224473.jpg -(35740B / 34.90KB, 320x213) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Rather then pick between the lesser of evils (if you think the us is the lesser you're just happy to reap the benefits of us militarism) I'd prefer to spend my entire life undermining these global structures of dominance that treat us all as pawns in their worldly chess games. Its called principles. Try it sometime. I criticize every world super power; every empire. The UK can eat a dick too. All that aside, The US is the most expansive state apparatus in the history of the world with a higher body count than Russia or China.

420chan just ain't for the boot lickers anymore. I saw a few anti anarchist pro militaristic police posts and within seconds they're gone. Sorry boys.
Clara Derringbit - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:56:20 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396344 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503975380620.jpg -(79419B / 77.56KB, 706x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>396333 >>396332
The Kurds recently wrote a critique arguing just that, and they have a point. I think the critique was more apt a decade ago, since at that time it was mostly infoshops, summit-hopping, and issue-based organizing that didn't look beyond that specific issue.

The longer term strategy is mutual aid work and organizing popular assemblies that focus on local issues and practical solutions to them. Now with all the mutual aid work going on, the slow-and-steady game is gaining steam. The focus is spread out through many interconnected issues, from prison solidarity work, to aid for the houseless, tenant and worker unions, solidarity networks, environment and animal protection, police accountability, street medics, anti-fascism, food, and neighborhood organizing.

Not being aware of effective actions and organizing != lack thereof. Though more people could be participating in such, and the focus on helpful practical actions could be greater. This goes back to the question of media, corporate media will never support anarchist projects, and even when they cover such, its either negative or ridden with misrepresentations.

The grueling work of mutual aid gets little to no attention yet street battles with the police and/or fascists and white nationalists gets tons of attention. This is probably also because of ratings, organizing looks boring, but street actions are spectacular.

It'd be nice if others outside anarchist or anarchist-friendly circles were to chip-in and do positive work along side them, as some are, but not many. Is ideological purity or the stigma of anarchism too great a barrier to cooperation despite our differences? I think the focus on practical actions bridges the ideological divide.

How about US libertarians (or right-libertarians), are they too caught up in their own mechanizations to participate in positive work?

Its cool most US libertarians are for open borders, hopefuly not just for trade like how globalism is, but for the free movement of people as well. It does seem like a contradiction that they'd be for the government restricting the actions of people (gay marriage) yet against the government intervening in people's lives. Which is it?

The reason authoritarian communists (aligned with Lenin, Mao, and Stalin's line of thinking) are against anarchists is because anarchists are anti-authoritarian and wouldn't support a centralized party dictating from above what is right and what is wrong. Liberals' sentiment of anarchists seems more mixed. Recently support for anarchist projects and anti-fascists actions has been increasing hella, but there's plenty of disagreements, and as it should be, because there is no one way, but many ways.
Caroline Chebblebud - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:01:46 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396345 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503975706473.jpg -(63049B / 61.57KB, 964x493) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I meant to say the police are viewed as heros by the media. We've been hearing about violent demonstrations for over 20 years now, and up until now, even still, the tactics anarchists in america are engaged in are nowhere near as militant as demonstrations literally everywhere else in the world. This is the case because the media's definition of violence is based on legitimacy; they give the state the utmost legitimacy. So much that police shooting gas canisters into a crowd isn't violence its peace keeping. Meanwhile if someone simply throws that canister back its called a violent demonstration. Why? Because the media gives no legitimacy to rebels.. Which means they so much as disobey a cops orders Its violence. This is the narrative that has allowed cops to stamp out resistance time and time again. Yet fighting back as a concept is unimaginable. No way the state have been the aggressors despite the huge amount of evidence telling us so.
Augustus Pickforth - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:02:01 EST ID:dLSgzthc No.396346 Ignore Report Quick Reply
"xyzzx is alt-right" is pretty much the battle cry of shareblue trolls

libertarians aren't alt-right, i don't always agree with them but just because they're not terrified of racism the way the left thinks everyone should be doesn't mean they're racist or nationalist or whatever. proof lies in the torrent of articles from the actual alt-right attacking libertarianism.

of course anyone with a memory knows that liberals have been saying this about libertarians since 2007 with ron paul's newsletters and so on and so forth. calling the opponent racist is one of three things liberals know how to do (other two are protesting and asking for money)

people love to hate on pinochet but they also love to visit the country he built. first latin american member of OECD ain't nothing to sneeze at. it's not like the US had the option to install whoever they wanted in chile, it was this idiot or that idiot, it just turned out that the right-idiot was less destructive than the left-idiot, at that particular point in time.
Caroline Chebblebud - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:04:51 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396347 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Anarchists in the us hardly have street battles though. That's why its amazing they still get called violent. Like I said the demonstrations here are all low intensity. Everyone freezes up when the police come marching in. They run. Still get called violent. I've been to Mexico and when anarchists demonstrate there it can accurately be called street battle. In the us its more of scuffles or brief skirmishes. It just shows the media's intentions of counter insurgency if anything. Nb
Caroline Chebblebud - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:11:39 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396350 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503976299473.jpg -(58379B / 57.01KB, 1067x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Chile sure is great If you belong to the right class or race! Jesus just fucking come out and say it.. Freedom means jackshit the prosperity of some is much more important. Fuck Pinochet and fuck the idea that foreign despotic forces ought to instill puppet dictators to violently thwart a popular socialist front. People in Chile didn't want western capitalism and the CIA said well you're gonna have It even if it takes jamming guns down all your throats. If you're OK with this I'm not OK with you.
Clara Derringbit - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:20:41 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396351 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503976841620.jpg -(64873B / 63.35KB, 720x556) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>396347 >>396345
Aye, some windows are damaged or something gets thrown at the riot-cop line, and they declare the assembly a riot. The corporate media repeat the police tweet verbatum, the headline reads: Riot in blahblahblah, and alot of people not involved start calling it a riot too, because that's what the news said. Either the police commanders don't know what a riot is or they're being intentionally disingenuous.
Clara Derringbit - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:37:13 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396352 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503977833620.jpg -(119045B / 116.25KB, 720x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
My point was public demonstrations get alot more attention than the organizing that goes on in the background and the practical actions that directly help people. Which is probably intentional. Monkey see, monkey do. Thank goodness for independent media contradicting the misrepresentations of corporate media. The problem still being that waaayyy more people see the corporate version than the independent coverage.

I think mutual aid work is far more meaningful and builds capacity for popular actions in the future. Holding a rally has its merits, but it doesn't seem to have much of a longterm effect. Even the groundbreaking demonstrations such as The Battle of Seattle were successful because of all of the background work and coalition building that led up to it. The Kurds were right to criticize US anarchists because there are only a few popular assemblies in the States, while the Kurds' Democratic Confederalism is getting shit done and proving the effectiveness of their beliefs and systems of governance. Although the conditions are different.

pic is Occupy Sandy distributing aid to people harmed by the hurricane, who weren't getting help from FEMA or other government and nonprofit agencies.
Augustus Pickforth - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:51:07 EST ID:dLSgzthc No.396354 Ignore Report Quick Reply
we didn't install pinochet any more than we installed santiago as the capital of chile. pinochet was promoted to the position he got as of 1972 by the natural unmodified procedures of the Chilean military. from that point forward, the CIA did two things:

  • told him we'd support him if he staged a coup

  • offered to do our usual helping of pretending to know what's going on while he and his goons took out the president

is chile great? no. is chile better off than argentina, uruguay, peru, paraguay, brazil, venezuela, colombia, ecuador, or bolivia? yep. funny how that works. why? God only knows, but it's frankly hilarious that people give the US credit for that. if you actually read the CIA cables it's pretty clear that the US goons were like "who is this asshole? let's see how much cheap copper we can get out of him" when pinochet showed up.

i love the liberal mythology where the us is simultaneously incapable of running its own economy and able to "install" dictators by fiat whenever we please. the ability of the CIA to control such goings-on is wildly overstated.
Fucking Murdwater - Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:56:34 EST ID:kZUMXybj No.396355 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't have anything against the LP except that a lot of them are cranks who are completely disconnected from reality.

t. also a crank that's completely disconnected from reality, just on the left
Clara Derringbit - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:08:17 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396360 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>396355 There used to be alot of right-libertarians on this board years back, and the discussions were good.
Caroline Chebblebud - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:22:13 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396361 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503984133473.jpg -(165187B / 161.32KB, 690x459) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I mean it also helps to do what you do right. People don't like to see tactical failures on the street. Ferguson and Baltimore went harder than any anarchist demonstration in America and surprise, it resonated with oppressed people around the country. I feel like there's still the problem of subcultural thrill seeking. In Baltimore it was the pure rage of the oppressed. In Greece they are using autonomous zones to organize and act in tactically sound ways. In the US they scream "police brutality" and run when police charge. People see that and want no part in it. Its still too disconnected from the struggles of your every day person. The assemblies play a part too, as does building and using space properly but when people do get the numbers and act.. They fall short. Imagine if in Greece they were like "eh we ain't gonna resist today were waiting on Nazis to show up" or the ra during the troubles was like "we were going to organize a militant street demo today but we figured wed wait for loyalists to ravage our neighborhood so we can counter it". If you have thousands of people in the streets and you're entire point of action is a counter then you put all the monumentum in the hands of others. It may not be summit hopping but its still an activist trap of "responding to events" rather than building on your own terms. Even Ukrainian nationalists realized the need to occupy space.
Caroline Chebblebud - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:25:44 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396362 Ignore Report Quick Reply
And link me the Kurds criticisms I wanna share it.
Caroline Chebblebud - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 02:04:37 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396363 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503986677473.jpg -(71495B / 69.82KB, 580x578) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

The CIA has been playing a role and manipulating global events for years. Just because they can't predict the exact future gives you no reason to deny or down play how extensive their reach is. They have established numerous coups many when socialists wanted to nationalize oil companies. You mean to tell me that's a coincidence? The bottom line is they pushed to have a popular and adored man in Chile murdered because he stood in the way of american dough. Don't tell me they didn't expect the outcome when they did Iran the same damn way.

People in Chile are still disgusted with Pinochet's legacy and America no matter how you want to paint it.
Augustus Pickforth - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 03:52:57 EST ID:dLSgzthc No.396375 Ignore Report Quick Reply
the outcome in chile was positive for chile, mostly irrelevant for the US, and chile doesn't actually have any oil. and yes, many chileans hate pinochet. although it's worth noting that

  • of all the dictators in world history, pinochet surrendered power peacefully and left behind a stable democracy, and it's hard for me to think of even one other such case,

  • in the 1988 plebiscite 44% of Chile voted *for* Pinochet so he was hardly *that* unpopular

but while "the US caused Pinochet" may be a calling card for the anti-American radicals on the Chilean left I don't think the average chilean is dumb enough to believe we created him from whole cloth.

i have plenty of good reason to downplay the CIA's activity. for one thing, the mythology of the all-powerful CIA is what supports them being continually given more and more power, which is bad for everyone. second, they don't actually have as much power as you think they do, and that means that *someone else does*. third, the idea that the US is responsible for all of global anti-communism delegitimizes the real actions and feelings of the many many people around the world who are opposed to communism because they simply don't like it, not because an American held a gun to their heads. of course disenfranchising those people is exactly what you and your friends on the left want, but i'm not going to let it happen without a fight.

so, in conclusion, go fuck yourself, and stop appropriating the trials of chile, thanks
Clara Derringbit - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 04:42:17 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396377 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503996137620.png -(943312B / 921.20KB, 812x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Its a uh, *gulp*, post from circlejerk. https://www.circlejerk.com/r/Communalists/comments/6tjp4z/message_from_rojava_apoists_to_western_anarchists/

I agree with your critique to an extent: >>396361 . If you're going to fight, fight for something.

Negation is good and all, but what fills that space afterwards? Destruction doesn't go very far if there's not something better to build (or already built) in its place. That's why the focus should be on positive and practical actions that help people. Imagine the significance of a critical mass of people going around doing positive acts in the city. Or a non-hierarchical institution that provides services and aid for the general populace, and space to organize at. We obviously don't need to rely on politicians or officials to get shit done.

The events in Ferguson and Baltimore were inspiring for sure. After the dust settled where did it get the participants, or the citizens there in general? I imagine it was empowering for those involved, but what next, is it a memory in their life to look back on, or a springboard?

If you have thousands of people in the streets and there's either reaction or symbolic targets, little good seems to come from that. If there's something to defend, like Greece's autonomous zones, Standing Rock, the Occupy encampments, the ZAD in France, the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong, or a person or a church or something being attacked by a fascist, the resolve will be there. Aggression for the sake of it? Meh. But build something meaningful and helpful to defend? Count me in.
Caroline Chebblebud - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 06:27:48 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396379 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Blah blah America and Pinochet didn't do nothing. You can't just throw words together and list points that contradict history and expect anyone to take you seriously. "Anti communism is global durp" nope sorry in Chile Allende was adored and elected by the popular vote. You're entire argument is weak. Anti Americanism is a propaganda term created by supporters of imperialism. You're using prosperity of a few to slyly justify thousands of mass executions. Might as well celebrate the southern slave society because before it came to an end, the south had more prosperity. Must be easy to get votes when you filled your opponents into mass graves. Stick your anti communist nationalism up your pig dogged american ass.
Caroline Chebblebud - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 06:35:02 EST ID:6zExGW/M No.396380 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>not gonna let that happen on my watch

How dare you criticize violent reactionaries. Filling mass graves with communists and criminals! Glorious. Just come out and be an open jack boot already. Afraid of that ban? I bet you loved the Ukrainian anti communists who cheered German invaders on and attacked Jews mob style. Or the white army of Ukraine before that, fighting tooth and nail for wealthy barons. God forbid anyone isolate them. Not on my reactionary watch!
Eliza Gundertot - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:54:21 EST ID:y3vRkLWZ No.396387 Ignore Report Quick Reply

No. Legit anti american is what nationalist war mongers who want to stifle the worlds legitimate criticisms of an empire. Even on the home front the term stemmed from dismissing dissidents without an actual argument against them. The nationalist ferver in america is strong and carefully manipulated by those in power. Go to Italy or Spain and see if they say 'that's anti Italian!!" Or "that's anti Spanish!" When someone criticizes their government. It won't be a thing except maybe by fringe nationalists who mean nothing to anyone. Learn something outside of your own borders you uncultured swine.
Lydia Shakestone - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 13:17:55 EST ID:gwYR5V77 No.396395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
"Blah blah", the rallying cry of the defeated. Allende was not wildly popular, read a book sometime. The 1970 election was highly contentious.

I have a question. If America is "always" responsible when a right-wing military coup tosses out a lefty President, explain this:


Keep in mind the Assad family went on to start a war against Israel three years later, before you type out some harebrained conspiracy theory about how the US really was behind it all. I don't know everything, but I know that Hafez al-Assad was never our friend.
Lydia Shakestone - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 13:21:31 EST ID:gwYR5V77 No.396396 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Let me be clear: Allende got 36% of the popular vote in 1970. Pinochet got 44% in 1988.


Allende got less of the popular vote than Bill Clinton in 1992 or Donald Trump in 2016. The truth hurts, especially if you're a Communist.
Phyllis Dupperfig - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:20:51 EST ID:nppI2w1T No.396397 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Allende got 36% of the popular vote in 1970
The left was split between two candidates.
The nationalist and liberal parties coalesced behind one candidate and only got 35%.
In any alternative-vote system, it's pretty safe to say party made up of socialist christians and conservative christians would have gone socialist before they went nationalist/capitalist.
Eliza Gundertot - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:15:31 EST ID:y3vRkLWZ No.396400 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1504037731777.jpg -(14473B / 14.13KB, 268x188) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Right you're making this comparison after over 3,000 people were killed, around 80,000 interned, and 30,000 confirmed they were tortured. He did what was expected of him; he destroyed the opposition to western capitalism. You forgot that the left was split into multiple factions but still held the most widely accepted narrative in Chile. Hence why a coup and mass campaign of violence was waged against them. He straight up banned trade unions. Hundreds of thousands left Chile after the junta.

You're scum. You support violence and mass executions in the name of destroying all opponents of capitalism. You see freedom as a nuisance for forces that wish to implement prosperity and order. Nobody said America was responsible for every right wing coup, but if you deny they are for a lot of them you're just a plain idiot. Go watch Alex Jones and Milton Friedman videos and gtfo of 420chan you jackboot.

Right wing death squads have way more ties to violence than any group you supposedly oppose, even the Leninist despotic ones. What a feat. Do you support the Ukrainian forces who cheered German invaders as a liberation against communism? How about the white army? What about the iron guard?

Just stop tip toeing around you're clear allegiances to total authority ruling over opposition. I know you're sick of the bans and having to see your pathetic arguments get deleted as you slide onto a new proxy in defeat.

Pic related. Its what the person I'm responding to likes to see happen to anyone who dedicates their life to questioning authority and economy. Up against the wall mother fucker, were bringing prosperity to the nation! Work makes you free!
Jenny Buzzcocke - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:17:44 EST ID:iYYYad4Q No.396401 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're not entirely wrong but why do you ignore the mass graves filled by communists? Is it ok because they killed people you don't like?
Clara Derringbit - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 19:46:51 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396423 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1504050411620.jpg -(85344B / 83.34KB, 790x705) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
You mean a world where any expression not aligned with the Party would be criminalized. Authoritarianism, be it the Bolsheviks or the Nazis, was bad mkay. That you don't see anything wrong with killing people because of their beliefs and identity is a pretty clear sign you want blood. Your idea of a beautiful place is a dystopian hellhole.

>>396401 Doesn't seem like they're ignoring it.

nb cause nothing to do with the LP... I hope.
Ernest Wennerhood - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 22:22:11 EST ID:tJsVDsjQ No.396444 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1504059731714.jpg -(29805B / 29.11KB, 456x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Just read Crimethinc's analysis "Not Your Grandfather's Antifascism" and they had a good counterpoint to the self-defense and defense of others point I made in this post >>396377 .

>Ultimately, a thoroughgoing anti-fascist movement should not focus on targeting fascist groups that are so marginal that they stick out from the rest of the political spectrum, but take on the infrastructure through which any authoritarian program will be enacted. That is to say, it should focus on the state itself. If we simply fight defensive battles, the fascists will eventually gain the initiative. We should take the experiences of fighting together that we can experience in anti-fascist struggle and use those as points of departure to work together to solve all of the problems that we have. This is the way to take the offensive and move on to confronting the fundamental sources of oppression.
Fuck Sedgebune - Tue, 17 Oct 2017 21:28:35 EST ID:dLSgzthc No.397885 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Couple of things:

  • I was never banned. I haven't been banned, because my posts don't contain racism or hate speech. I also never said I supported Pinochet, go check. What I did say was "the US did not install Pinochet". Which is true, was true, and remains true. I do occasionally depart from the thread because I... have better things to do.

  • You know who else voted for Pinochet after the horrible awful killings of 3000 communists? 44% of Chileans. As for the other 56%, does that mean they were leftists? Not really: it only means that they didn't agree with, y'know, slaughtering communists. Which is not something I agree with either. What did the 44% believe in? I dunno, maybe they believed in not being dirt poor.

  • Pinochet laid the groundwork for economic growth in Chile and that groundwork is still in place today. You can hate it all you want, but you're still going to live on the result of it.

The left was never the dominant faction in Chile. Just look at all of their presidents *prior* to Allende. In 1964 they elected a moderate from the Christian Democrats. In 1958 they elected a conservative, Jorge Allisandro. In 1952, they elected Ibanez del Campo -- who had been a military dictator in the '20s! That's right: in 1952, Chileans reelected a general who had previously been a military dictator.

You have no actual arguments. Your arguing style consists of projecting terrible views onto your opponents and tearing down those strawmen. You take absolutely no responsibility to reality in constructing your claims: you simply think nobody is going to look at the facts and prove you wrong.

For example:

>Right wing death squads have way more ties to violence than any group you supposedly oppose, even the Leninist despotic ones.

Communists have killed more people than the right. But most of the people communists killed were killed by famine. But does that make them any less dead? Is it less awful to die of starvation than by the bullet of a gun?

So go ahead, bitch, piss, and moan -- am I apologizing for Pinochet? Sure. But I am, by doing so, clearly acknowledging that Pinochet's dictatorship was an event worthy of apology.
Jenny Cremmlestat - Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:28:23 EST ID:ztlt33H7 No.397895 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508293703668.jpg -(129119B / 126.09KB, 1200x745) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.


I actually have an extensive understanding of Chilean history and not just that, but of the indigenous struggles there and how the Chilean state has attacked them in the name of economy.

Of course I'm painting you as an apologist for a dictator. You are doing that. Of course I tear that down. I live and breath every inch of my life against authortarianism. We are two different beings. No matter how much prosperity a dictatorial force brings to an economy, I will never submit or put respect on their name. To me, earth, dignity and freedom even if unobtainable in a world of despotism mean so much more to me than "growth" of economy. In that sense I am a true libertarian. If in soviet Ukraine, the red army would imprison me. If in Pinochet's Chile, the threat of filling a mass grave would be very real. So to mention soviet atrocities means nothing to me. I acknowledge them.

Is this idealism? Is it utopian? No. Because I have no hope for a brighter future no ideas of some red Communist paradise. I carry a burning resistance in my heart towards all men who wish to lift their hands to physically control individuals in the name of economy whether that be capitalism or some pipe dream of a workers state. You mention starvation, as if entire economies haven't starved millions! As if prosperity isn't an illusion in which the earth and humanity is bled dry for the comfort of a few.
Sidney Gattingway - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:25:27 EST ID:kZUMXybj No.397998 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508444727430.png -(11603B / 11.33KB, 500x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Pinochet killed as many people as Castro did in a shorter amount of time. He never privatized the copper mines that Allende nationalized, and the immediate effects of his economic policies were disastrous. Most Chileans lived in poverty until the late 80s economic boom, which coincided with the start of the commodities boom (guess what commodity Chile produces a lot of?)

The fact that right-wing libertarians are chill with Pinochet, despite the fact that the inflation rate that was worth killing Allende over was twice under Pinochet what it was Allende, despite Chile being in economic chaos the entirety of his term of power, despite the fact that he was more tyrannical than Castro, despite the fact that he really has no libertarian credentials beyond nominal commitment to private property (which he didn't care about when he was torturing or executing his political opponents), really goes to show how little concern there is for liberty in contemporary libertarianism. Are you sure you're not basing your politics entirely on resentment of the left? That seems to be the case with most Pinochet worshipers.

Seriously. If Allende had been allowed to complete his term, like the Chilean Constitution said, and like the people of Chile approved in a popular vote, he would be taking credit for Chile's success. If Allende was such a disaster, why worry?
Martin Cledgebune - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:15:58 EST ID:x5cT5GmQ No.398028 Ignore Report Quick Reply

As an actual libertarian I apologize for those tiki torch scum stealing our political position. They call us randlets, ruin ben garrison's work and then they pose as us.

Just because some /pol/tards pose as us don't spread your hate to the entirety of libertarianism.
Albert Ficklehood - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:56:56 EST ID:VXipp9JK No.398033 Ignore Report Quick Reply

He also banned books and repressed certain artistic expression. Very, very Libertarian eh? Also to say the CIA didn't have a major and direct role in the coup is straight up far right,nationalist propaganda.
Martha Murdson - Wed, 25 Oct 2017 19:56:08 EST ID:dLSgzthc No.398194 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508975768948.png -(90481B / 88.36KB, 496x533) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
typical adolescent politics: claims to understand Chilean history, fails to incorporate this understanding into an argument. "I live and breath every inch of my life against authortarianism." -- this is just posturing. Authoritarianism even in its wildest dreams could never hope to kill as many people as poverty. This is the fundamental error you're making. Whether or not you would have been killed in Ukraine, you have still used a fundamentally wrong conception of mid-20th-century Chilean politics in order to paint a misleading picture of why Pinochet took power in Chile.
You probably do know a lot about "indigenous" struggles in Chile. I'd bet that's one of your primary concerns, because your ideology revolves around blaming Chile's problems on things that happen outside of Chile and not on things that happen inside of Chile. So of course you want to think Pinochet was an evil dictator installed by the Americans who never did anything good for Chile. It allows you to justify your own victim narrative. But the fact is that part of Chile's problems come from within. This is true of every nation on Earth, and always has been.

From the post you quoted: "I also never said I supported Pinochet". From your post: "The fact that right-wing libertarians are chill with Pinochet".

Listen: if you can't attack my actual position, don't respond to me. The reason I attacked Allende was in order to explain how Pinochet was partially driven by Chilean nationalism rather than his alleged subordination to the Americans.

"If Allende had been allowed to complete his term, [irrelevant grandstanding], he would be taking credit for Chile's successes" -- this is false, Chile's successes have sprung partially from economic reforms implemented by Pinochet. This is literally incomprehensible to some people: that a bad person can do a good thing whose consequences are ultimately larger than that person's own badness, *even though they are still a bad person*. A surgeon who commits murder may have saved more lives than he killed, but he's still a murderer. That's Pinochet. People want good things to come from good people and bad things to come from bad people. They're not used to good things coming from bad people and bad things coming from good people. But that's just how it is sometimes.

I am not defending Pinochet. I am explaining Pinochet. I am apologizing for Pinochet, for the same reason I might say: "I'm sorry your house was destroyed by the hurricane". You just don't want the world to be as ugly and unfair as it really is.
Frederick Snoddock - Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:28:21 EST ID:mv5oRpxE No.398197 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Poverty isnt some abstract concept, its a reality kept in place by authortarian class structures. Adolescent politics? I'm well into my 30s. Nice attack. The equivalent of submission to capital and authority with maturity is an age old schmere tactic pushed forth by capitalist think tanks. Capitalism is inherently depdant upon structures of dominance. You're lack of understanding of this basic science shows who the real adolescent is. Either that or youre rich.
Frederick Snoddock - Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:14 EST ID:mv5oRpxE No.398199 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Lol I bet you think poverty comes from drugs, and lack of personal responsibility. Not capitalism and the violent structures and dominance it implies. Typical "Libertarian" idiot.
Fanny Tillingbury - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:34:47 EST ID:5IdieRNJ No.398208 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yep, Most of Africa and Asia are just smoking that wackie tobaccie. If only they were good Protestant work ethics they could have their two cars and a picket fence.
Fanny Tillingbury - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 01:49:39 EST ID:5IdieRNJ No.398210 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Hahaha, you're just some Eton loser. I'm shocked your not so inbred to know what a keyboard is.
Augustus Pinnernark - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 10:16:01 EST ID:eJ/pZGZv No.398212 Ignore Report Quick Reply
i'm 30, upper middle class, work in business development, and smoke weed errday. fight me passively aggresively.
Augustus Pellybury - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 15:31:43 EST ID:ntYqXQyY No.398218 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Capitalism and liberty are mutually exclusive

A free society also means that the government won't mess with your wallet, bank account or business (If you have one).

>closet fascists at worst

One of the main characteristics of fascism is that the state itself gets involved into people's lives, that's the opposite of what libertarianism stands for.
Lillian Devingsire - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 16:57:18 EST ID:nppI2w1T No.398222 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509051438990.jpg -(510781B / 498.81KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>the government won't mess with your wallet, bank account or business (If you have one).
Capitalism means the means of production are privately owned.
This requires a government that uses violence to separate the worker from the product of his labor and enforce rent.

When property rights extend to the land, homes, and labor of others, it results in less freedom for those who don't own their farm, home, or means of production.
Capitalism only means freedom if you don't notice the line of police keeping people from unoccupied land and houses, and workers from seizing the product of their labor.
Hannah Hashfield - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 18:53:55 EST ID:q3Gx1WUh No.398223 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509058435904.png -(6006B / 5.87KB, 234x210) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>As long as you attack people who aren't fascists you're just as bad as the actual fascists.
>"fighting fascism is fascist because I am way too mentally retarded to understand the difference between fascism and patriotism"

Anyone who pisses themselves and wishes death/harm/etc against people who, for example, protest against an anthem IS in fact a fascist.

The constitution (esp the first amendment) that the alt-right love to defend unless the free speech doesnt agree with them protects the people from govt retaliation during a protest against it.

If you are against protesting the govt and FOR exterminating anyone who is not the same race/gender/orientation as the ruler then you ARE in fact a fascist
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Sat, 28 Oct 2017 02:50:13 EST ID:QiGBcKwL No.398237 Ignore Report Quick Reply
US patriotism is either outright fascist or proximate to it.
Eliza Dasslechadge - Sat, 28 Oct 2017 03:14:09 EST ID:q3Gx1WUh No.398238 Ignore Report Quick Reply
US patriotism celebrates constitutional rights of protest against the government running it. Which at its start was libertarian, because colonials needed independence from getting taxed by their British homeland. Hence their "taxation is theft" rants. They wanted to create their own country with their own property rights.

From there they added the right to protest in their constitution, since they did the same against their british motherland when becoming a country.

Nowadays it is democratic and capitalistic, however some right-wingers are trying, via their angst, to dismantle the constitution regarding protesting the govt, (aka "their" president), mainly by working tooth and nail to demonize anyone who stand up to fascists trying to revoke their right to protest and exist.
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Sat, 28 Oct 2017 04:34:52 EST ID:QiGBcKwL No.398239 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The colonies waged a settler war against the British crown to safeguard their "right" to chattel slavery. The possibility that Britain would force abolition on the colonies was very real in the minds of the settlers. Gerald Horne has an entire book on this subject if you are interested.
>the right to protest
The state has never deigned to suffer speech and political organizing that poses an actual threat to bourgeois class power.
Hannah Chicklewater - Sat, 28 Oct 2017 23:35:44 EST ID:SUMygqNx No.398242 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I never got the entire thinking freedom of speech was real thing. Maybe if you're in an elite social class. American history is legit filled with people being mowed down with gun fire, hung, thrown into dungeons, and stalked/deported for making a stand. Freedom doesn't exist if the structures and insitutions of the ruling class are alive and well. Nobody can argue a damn word against our point because in the end our words are backed by thousands upon thousands of historical accounts. Freedom of speech is fake, power is real, and chances are unless your a pig or an elite, you have very little of it. You might have some privileges but in the end your a disposable stallion integrated into white supremacy in turn for your silence and active support of your masters.
Jarvis Pubblebidge - Sun, 29 Oct 2017 20:51:37 EST ID:kH2Y1mpx No.398250 Ignore Report Quick Reply
A thread on /b got pruned awhile ago for being off topic and shit, but it was basically asking, "why so many libertarians end up going "fascist" which is seemingly contradictory, etc etc" which I find to be relevant to this discussion.

I think we sometimes analyze people as if they're rational or somehow care about the big philosophical picture and shit --- people are ultimately tribal, and this tribalism innate to man can manifest in a manner of ways, some end up aligning with a faggot intellectual movement, or being a racial separatist, or becoming furry-supremacists.

to explain why the libertarian-ish people so often deviate toward the "alt-right," I think it has to do with a perceived sense that the real "tyranny" is coming out of the ranks of the left, so as a defensive instinct, they coalesce to confront it. This of course becomes self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing, as each respective political tribe push one another to ever-deeper extremes.

In a cultural environment where for the past several years, so many people have become so irrationally aggressive toward the perceived power of the "white-cis-male" archetype, reaching bonkers-level extremes of SJWism in the process, naturally there's going to be an equal & opposite reaction. The "don't tread on me" crowd, who value notions "freedom & personal liberty," become threatened by the hordes of identity-politics control freak zealots on the left who actively wield political & cultural sway -- empowered by the GoogleTwitterFacebook censorship Borg, most of popular culture, and academia, the majority of the youth are ever aligning on the side of nanny-state tier political correctness & big government censorship, so naturally the "1776" people get spooked and become defensive, as a means to act as a kind of bulwark against what they perceive to be the Soviet-weirdos who want to control all thought and speech.

Although you might be some well-read intellectual acquainted with the competing arguments, most people aren't and most people operate off "feel" and aesthetic -- given the self-reinforcing culture war going on, it's easy to see why large swaths of the population are bifurcating into these tribes.

It's also triggering (even if it's exaggerated) for a lot of people to see shit like the streets of some European city loaded with "Liberian-cannibal"-tier sharia rape muslims knocking people out and tossing acid in random women's faces on a fairly regular basis, then have the prevailing socially liberal culture seemingly not give a shit about it -- it's crap like this that stokes the flames of primordial racial rage in people, whether you like to admit it or not.
Phyllis Goodman - Mon, 30 Oct 2017 09:16:28 EST ID:PnCRIIh1 No.398260 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Going further, can you imagine that some people actually unironically think the state has ever been interested in enabling citizens to overthrow it with force of arms?
Albert Bobbermet - Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:49:40 EST ID:eQF19MiR No.398266 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The problem is that libertarians are no longer relevant. What people are reacting to on the both the left and right is the failure of unregulated capitalism. The right is pissed their jobs have left overseas, and their borders are open to cheaper labor. The left is pissed that there's no longer such a thing as a living wage for minimum wage workers, and that the top 1% is richer than ever.

For 20 years both the Dems and GOP have basically found common ground over Libertarian free-market ideals, privatization ideas, open borders, and deregualation, and the invisible hand. The result has been the rich looting the wealth of the country, and the poor getting choked out. Now the bases of the parties are in full revolt, the libertarians don't know who to ally with because the right has turned against them.

Libertarian ideas have been the order of the last two or three decades, and they have failed. Libertarianism no longer has a leg to stand on.
Emma Grimhood - Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:57:03 EST ID:uW9KWJtY No.398267 Ignore Report Quick Reply
yeah, this is what I don't get about people who deify the 2nd amendment in the US. it doesn't matter if assault weapons are banned or not, we're never going to have enough firepower to stop the police, let alone the army. just ask the Branch Davidians or MOVE.

>to explain why the libertarian-ish people so often deviate toward the "alt-right,"
I don't think anyone is actually deviating their view. i think this is people in the alt-right hiding their true motives by saying "i'm libertarian, that's totally different from white supremacy". They say their libertarian, but they aren't actually libertarian in any definition of the ideology.
lumpen !rGOAfuB3jA - Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:59:40 EST ID:ZnZp0v18 No.398273 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well we always told them anarcho-capitalism would devolve into fascism, must've finally sunk in after all those years.
Albert Pumblestock - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 13:12:40 EST ID:kosw8Fl2 No.398292 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509469960436.jpg -(103480B / 101.05KB, 634x456) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I don't think anarcho-capitalism would devolve into fascism as long as the population is educated to be class-conscious, which it should be, but that's contradictory, isn't it?
Augustus Clenderleck - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:06:43 EST ID:JqisyNfn No.398295 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Yup. The general population wouldn't be educated at all in a mature anarcho-capitalist state. Education costs should be prohibitive for most workers. They don't need an education to sew wallets.
Sophie Worthinggold - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 17:56:02 EST ID:MLmCrJ8J No.398299 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The US has a history of disarming and imprisoning individuals and groups that threaten elite interests. The 2nd amendment, like all the abstractions known as rights, only exist within certain realms, usually granted to the most privileged or reactionary elements of society. For instance, God fearing white Americans can be armed to the teeth, yet when blacks with liberation in mind are armed openly, laws, and regulations on "rights" become passed and people are vioently disarmed via the prison society and the police who serve it. You listed one of those.

Secondly you don't seem to understand guerilla warfare. It's psychological and one of the hardest things for even the most well equipped armies to deal with. Look at groups like the IRA. The British army was way more funded and equipped, but what does that mean when ol joe is out on a stroll with his family, then returns to his home with masked gunmen sitting on his couch? The highest risk of guerillas is not always during their initial acts, but from being marked and hunted down by the law after their acts. Most guerillas in history are more likely to face life imprisonment than death, unless we're talking jungle combat. The entire tenant of guerilla warfare is to be able to suffer the greatest amount of struggle over long, incessant time periods until the enemy is drained and spent. Your mistake is you imagine "revolution" in a pre 1900s era in which there are great battles in the open between visible armies. Even the US military admits, "this is a horrible approach towards warfare". They go on to describe we live in an age of insurgency and even though "killing as many enemies as possible" would be easy, it often leads to the creation of 20 more in the shadows. Therefore the only way to win wars, in the age of guerilla warfare strategy abroad, is psychological and smart approaches. They learned the hard way during Vietnam, but also on the home front in the same era that might alone will not win wars in the modern era. They adapted, and have done so well.
Phyllis Shittinghall - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 03:05:43 EST ID:Ndmw2Klh No.398313 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm libertarian in the sense that I'm against big government
Hamilton Blendlebat - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 08:21:13 EST ID:kosw8Fl2 No.398315 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What about a libertarian socialist system in which the courts have a tendency to rule in favor of the working class based off of NAP? I think applying the non aggression principal in a general favor of the working class in the court system would be jolly good, but that's just assuming that everyone is class-conscious which they probably wouldn't be. I think a general sense of whose coming from a position of power is a precursor to an "enlightened" system.
Jack Crellerforth - Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:19:27 EST ID:dixyb44e No.398333 Ignore Report Quick Reply

We need total anarchist capitalism to gradually become anarchist communism bro have u even read Milton marx
Edwin Hurringware - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 09:57:23 EST ID:1FD/bOAh No.398336 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That doesn't define libertarian though (and libertarian basically means no government, not not big government). Are you also for open borders? No gun control whatsoever? Gold standard? Private police forces? No public education?
Wesley Cimmerchine - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 10:18:38 EST ID:L7Dp7Ocv No.398338 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Libertarians have been infiltrated for quite some time. All that tea party fuzz was also about getting "libertarians" to support republicans and all the "cut down on government regulations" surely wouldn't seem attractive to big business...
Jarvis Dengerhood - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 12:39:45 EST ID:PrJHLMRG No.398340 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>All that tea party fuzz was also about getting "libertarians" to support republicans

This was easily my biggest problem with that Tea Party rubbish and its my biggest issue with the Libertarian Party.

Go your own way and drop the GOP like a bad habit. It'd benefit everyone in the long run.
Eliza Snodway - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:19:43 EST ID:i+8mSKdH No.398341 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509650383153.jpg -(92759B / 90.58KB, 658x576) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
My impression from coverage and from reading comments here that it began as a Right-Libertarian movement (with Ron Paul esque adherents), then got coopted when it was labeled the Tea Party, and redirected back into electoral politics along mostly social conservative issues.

Both Democrats and Republicans support privatization (partly neo-liberal policy). As others have pointed out here, that means institutions that are bad and good depending on affordability and maximizing profit. Less funding to public schools, more funding to private schools, etc. Poor people wont be able to afford a quality private school, so there'd be even more discrepancy of knowledge and skills based off of wealth. Isn't that what Ancaps support as well as Right-Libertarians? Intentionally or not.
Sidney Huckleworth - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 22:17:09 EST ID:k1T4yVqN No.398347 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>For 20 years both the Dems and GOP have basically found common ground over Libertarian free-market ideals, privatization ideas, open borders, and deregualation, and the invisible hand.
>Libertarian ideas have been the order of the last two or three decades, and they have failed. Libertarianism no longer has a leg to stand on.
This. I don't think a lot of outspoken libertarians realize just how much their ideology has already radically altered American society over the past few decades, or just how much the two main parties have incorporated their beliefs into their own often over the furious cries from their base.

The problem with the Libertarians is that they already "won" and they don't even know it. Possibly because they don't want to accept that this is the kind of world that their glorious ideas lead to.
Sophie Dezzlestudge - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:23:41 EST ID:2R+v5G46 No.398719 Ignore Report Quick Reply
As an ancap yes I fully reject all taxes. If people would like to make a private school that's fine, I don't care. If the poor can't afford it that's fine, I don't care. There should be enough sissy leftists to deal with that on their own property the fuck away from me, with their own money and the products of their own labor. Why not form a leftist state on their private property while they're at it. Doesn't matter to me. Please don't attempt to coerce me out of my property.
Caroline Drambleridge - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:51:17 EST ID:IIsxRMZh No.398720 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You sound like a grade A asshole.
Emma Hicklekire - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:22:20 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.398721 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm glad taxation is legally mandatory so that your sentimentality doesn't destroy our society.
Nicholas Geckleman - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:47:33 EST ID:ml7JC9ez No.398723 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I hope you don't use roads, or power, or water, or communications, or GPS, or...
Oliver Cruvingkon - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 19:45:24 EST ID:2R+v5G46 No.398727 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I am
I KNOW you are
The only one of these that is immediately impossible to not provide privately is road use (I don't have a use for maps or GPS) the rest I'm capable of doing on my own. (Buy land with running water or with a lot of wind for personal electricity)

Thanks for hearing me out. I'll leave you be.
James Clindlemen - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 19:56:23 EST ID:etpGilrp No.398728 Ignore Report Quick Reply
at least you acknowledge ancaps as being utterly devoid of any notion of morality.

enjoy your edgelord lifestyle made possible by a system of stolen property.
Phyllis Goodman - Fri, 24 Nov 2017 22:44:39 EST ID:uqOazCJA No.398729 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Nobody will respect your "private property" claims on the basis of your having had more money to bid for the waterfront real estate. Nobody will "voluntarily" work for your shit wages, either, they'll just tread all over your NAP and take the means of production for their own use.

Ancaps don't understand that the modern state was literally invented to enforce private property claims. The state is a function of capitalism. This is why all actual industrial powers vie to buy off politicians, and why Austrian economics will never be anything more than a hilarious joke on the Internet.
David Pockshaw - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 17:30:20 EST ID:XqOr0TAj No.398730 Ignore Report Quick Reply
why not just drop anarcho capitalism for anarcho mutualism by replacing the system of private property with personal property? People would already own where they live and own where they work by nature of living and working there.

No more extortive contracts or rent seeking. No more convoluted property law to keep track of who really owns what. No private or public police force to keep workers from unionizing and evicting tenets. Nor must you embrace that NAP hippy bullshit.
Fuck Funningcocke - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 18:03:13 EST ID:pVAP57VP No.398731 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Alt-right is a psy-ops movement. Many of the leading voices are paid.

We're offically stuck in a 2 party system thanks to the shitshow that took place last year.

Democrats and republicans are on the same team whose goal involves maintaining oligarchy. Obama was a propagandist, big friend of Wallstreet. At least with republicans, we can all agree that they're evil unless you're a dope.

Fuck modern democrats, absolutely corrupt. That party should be avoided.
Martha Doblingwater - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 18:27:01 EST ID:HadFzcmR No.398732 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1511652421008.jpg -(36055B / 35.21KB, 219x156) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

because ancaps aren't going to suddenly support someone who said "property is theft". Properterians is more so the correct term. Ancap is a propagandist disinfo movement used to rally "anti state" sentiment of white people into a ruling class frame work, you have on one end the useful idiots and on the other the Richy rich fucks who have all the reason in the world to support such an ideology. Their ideas constantly cross paths with white suprenacy. You'll see ancap flags among "far right" demos. You'll find them marching side by side people who support nationalism and dictatorships (they love Pinochet). They don't even disagree with police, anarchists since their dawn have legit been in an incessant war with police both mental and physical.

There's nothing anarchist about ancaps at all. They're simply a fringe reactionary faction that wants to revert to the pre "social democracy" capitalism in which private police,violent detective agencies and sweatshops flourish outside of the first world. We see how violent the police are now, how much they serve the rich yet these people think "not enough" so that shows you how authoritarian they really are. They miss the days of Rockefeller calling up the national guard or pinkertons "can you assassinate some dissidents for me". They're people who scream non agression but what they really mean is they want to hinder the 'agression' of the poor while emboldening the aggression of capitalism. They're scum.
Martha Doblingwater - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 18:31:06 EST ID:HadFzcmR No.398733 Ignore Report Quick Reply

For instance this one ancap had a sign at a demo being held by actual anarchists to counter them and it said "get in my bracket scum" and he marched with 'libertarians' and suit and tie nerds, Nazis and they had ayn Rand and mein kampf at a table. They're bourgeise fascist scum.
David Peggleladging - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 20:54:03 EST ID:2R+v5G46 No.398736 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Alt-right is a psy-ops movement.
Yeah this is pretty well documented too
>Fuck modern democrats
Wait until you hear what the democrats of old used to be about!
David Peggleladging - Sat, 25 Nov 2017 21:36:58 EST ID:2R+v5G46 No.398737 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>they'll just tread all over your NAP and take the means of production for their own use.
Baseless claim but for the fuck of it why not humor it with a nice "hurr like how they do now???"

If I'm not mistaken if you create something in a mutualist society but want to keep it for later and not use it for a while but someone else decides they do want to use it then it becomes theirs until they stop using it?
I don't know what kind of admission you're making about race when you claim ancap is only good for whites but I think you should think about it beyond "only big wallet is happy >:("
Also fuck nazis to me they're collectivist leftist scumbags that wish to impose their will upon others through force. My biggest thing is "please fuck off and leave me alone" and I think if anyone tries to take your shit you, whoever you are, should be able to defend yourself and your shit.
I think most of what you're saying is attacking people instead of dealing with the idea itself and when you do you only dismissively mock it. While that's fine and dandy I'm going to point out it's an intellectually fraudulent thing to do. If it's all such a joke then there's no reason to joke when you can instead disprove through logic, seemingly easily judging by how flippant you are with your mockery.
Do I think ancapistan will ever become reality? No of course not that's equally as stupid as thinking real communism will ever become a reality. Not going to happen, it will never get that far. Politics at this level is pretty much just philosophy but with the added math of economics and, for some politics that involve controlling others through a state or whatever you want to call it, statistics and ethics and shit. Obviously it goes much deeper than that but I'm not going to start writing essays.

I'd be willing to wager 90%+ of "'an'caps" are frauds that are just racists that want to starve off blacks because by a lot of current day metrics they don't perform as well. I AM NOT making a claim as to the validity of these metrics or motives, just a wager on the intent of these people. Either that or they're memesters

Can you start making character judgements about a person that wishes to be left alone to do what they will on their land with their own shit? I'm sure you can but it baffles me.

I only say I'm ancap as shorthand so we're all on the same page about me thinking Mises and Hoppe got the idea down and that I think the math behind Austrian economics adds up. I'm personally more leaning toward agorism but I also think that works less as a political ideology and more of a way to personally live your life so I typically don't even mention it as I don't see it politically even though that's how it's posited.
Phyllis Buffingforth - Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:46:55 EST ID:XqOr0TAj No.398738 Ignore Report Quick Reply
> if you create something in a mutualist society but want to keep it for later and not use it for a while but someone else decides they do want to use it then it becomes theirs until they stop using it?
What like if you built a summer home and over the winter someone squatted it? If so yes and that's good. A homeless person now has a home. But frankly you'd never build a summer home in the first place which is fine IMO. Most homes would only be built to be sold at upfront costs.
Nigel Sodgebid - Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:40:34 EST ID:jsFt+Sq9 No.398742 Ignore Report Quick Reply
"Today I was kicked off for simply saying that the Holocaust actually happened."

well theres your problem
Jarvis Mubberstidge - Mon, 27 Nov 2017 07:20:44 EST ID:oYZD+Ql9 No.398744 Ignore Report Quick Reply

To me, the biggest problem with anarcho-capitalism is that it's utopian. Maybe you can procure clean drinking water and electricity if you live in the countryside, but how will city-dwellers be self-sufficient? Who will supply water and electricity to the cities? Who will stop a water supplier from buying up its competitors? How would you even go about ensuring competition in a market like that?

An-caps don't recognize the implications of privatized essential common goods. If you depend on a single company for your water, electricity or food, then that company has great power over you - regardless of whether it calls itself a state or a publicly listed company. No amount of libertarian ideals are gonna change that.
Nell Goodfield - Mon, 27 Nov 2017 20:26:22 EST ID:3tfX16xD No.398766 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is that really a new development? The tea party also called itself libertarian but was only a tool to get extremist republicans to support normal republicans.
Thomas Miffingman - Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:37:42 EST ID:OdhxED3z No.398769 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1511840262175.png -(1385027B / 1.32MB, 1263x8337) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
From what I gathered from libertarian posters on here during the Ron Paul years, the Tea Party movement was sparked by right-libertarians and coopted by social conservatives and corporate media like Fox News n' such. Said it once, I'll say it again, at least with right-libertarians you can have a decent debate.

(Not that this screencap has anything to do about this, its just a neat thread.)
Samuel Bardstock - Tue, 05 Dec 2017 08:21:45 EST ID:nvjynQvV No.398846 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>the alt-RIGHT "hide" themselves in a historically right wing party in the U.S. that was only recently taken on and allied by left wingers almost solely because of their policies on drugs, gay marriage, and isolationism
Close the case, Sherlock figured it out.

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.