Nationalist Libertarianism Thread

I address that point in the video.
It is compatible. It isn't compatible with left-libertarianism, or with the euro definition of libertarianism, but it is quite compatible with 99% of the Nationalist Ideology intact, and about 80% of the Libertarian ideology intact.

Nah
Nationalism>paleoconservatism
also it is more expansive.

No it is not. You cannot take a kike ideology and unkike it, retard. You should read the ordo-liberals and the market socialists. National Libertarianism is a contradiction in terms, period.

And, no one is going to watch your shitty video, especially since you are clearly retarded

WEEKLY NATIONAL LOLBERTARIAN THREAD

REMINDER NATIONALISM AND LIBERTARIANISM ARE NOT COMPATIBLE BUT ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

Libertarianism is big government for (((minorities)))

Libertarianism is open borders

Libertarinism is anti-traditionalism

Libertarianism is the most libcuck [thus the lib] political ideology there is. moreso than Communism

REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE

you realize this is the exact argument bernie supporters give for their definition of socialism.
Also your math doesn't pan out.
Market Socialism- Classical liberalism= Nationalism

If you claim that the jews created capitalism which is the free exchange of currency based upon the forces of supply and demand while a monopoly on force enforces private property rights, then wew lad.

Even if those terms are not the definitions you are using?

Those guys seem OK; I might read up on them.

Paleoconservatism is American nationalism as well as being the closest thing that you're suggesting without being contradictory.

the founding fathers weren't libertarians you fucking retard. they were (civic) republicans. pics related

plato.stanford.edu/entries/republicanism/

I'm disregarding the rest of your post bc you are such an incoherent retarded faggot that I'm not going to waste my time anymore.

read a book asshole

Yes, but I find Paleoconservatism not nationalistic enough, and Nationalist Libertarianism is more reliant on Nationalism, than the Paleoconservative ideology.

It is weird how Holla Forums is more preferencial to a less nationalistic ideology, just because they get upset that an American uses an American definition and not the euro definition.

REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE

I don't really understand this ideology but I never applied labels to myself since everything seemed so broad. So the one libertarian I know is "let the free market handle it" almost in the sense of do nothing, and by that I disagree.

It has some good ideas

but I think the economy should be kept in check since there are legitimately exploitative things companies can do to their customers or employees if there are no restrictions in place, which I consider something like the FTC necessary, or that current civilian equivalents are kind of lacking (either apathetic people, or don't care to understand issues entirely for a consensus to be made).

Do you consider these concepts part of whatever "let the free market handle it" is? Or are they completely separate issues?

REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE

Lawdy have mercy.

You cannot get any more nationalistic than the paleocons you goddamn retard. you are literally talking out of your ass right now.

this faggot is such a fucking retard he's not even worth engaging with. just sage and leave the thread

So you dont think there needs to be bank regulation or anti-degeneracy measures?

This really boils down to you libertarians being too cowardly, weak and or autistic to accept and deal with the existence of objective morality. You are afraid to enforce it because you are too busy wanking over materialist logic and economic equations, afraid to be branded by your fellow liberals as "illogical". What makes you different from a liberal, less welfare? Have you heard todays libertarians? They are all cucks and left wingers, pathetic inactive sophists.

I heard your empty surface arguments before, bla bla society will enforce social norms by itself etc etc. In that case why not make murder legal? Where do you draw the line on "liberties" exactly?

The hand of the law is literally meant to be the manifestation of the will of the people to enforce universal social morals. Its there for convenience, so people dont have to form a lynch mob every time something socialy unacceptable happens or disown a family member for making a dumb move.

Laws and regulations are naturally occuring.
The real issue is with who is making them, and in a country which has gun rights and free speech laws the government would never be a problem.

REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE
REPORT + SAGE + HIDE

But it's actual American nationalism. It emphasizes racial identity, which in this case was the ethnogenesis that became "American."

But it wasn't. The Founding Fathers already had their economic school called the "American Way."

Nationalist Libertarianism is an oxymoron, we had a ton of threads about it.

I have never seen a single paleoconservative talk about the need for our country to enact the death penalty for treason on a daily basis.

This is an issue I would leave up to the states or local communities rather than make it a nationalistic issue.
small scale I have no problem, large almost scam like opperations is a topic that I think should be dealt with by state.
I think there ought to be a legal path to bringing up a lawsuit for validity, and then it is decided in court if they promoted a lie for personal benefit, if it was a mistake, or if they were valid, and if it was the first two the organization produces a retraction and update with the correct information
I have no opinian on this topic as I haven't looked into it
I believe in monopoly busting, especially if it is based outside of the Nation or extends outside of it.

The Nationalist Libertarianism ideology rarely says, "let the free market handle it." the only place that applies is the economy and markets between individual citizens of the nation.

It's like you don't even care about facts. Filtered.

more retardation. go fuck yourself

remember to sage and report this shitty troll

That's because they were forced to the fringes by the Neocons and Neolibs in the GOP for being "racists", "protectionists", and "isolationists." Pat Buchanan talks a lot about conserving the pre-1965 American demographics, religion, keeping jobs here, staying out of wars, and generally being a wise old sage shitlord. This is a man raised on George Washington and Father Coughlin; you can't get more nationalist than that. You are trying to justify something contradictory.

Ban usury and international banks, but besides that, not much.
In addition, it would be against pro-degeneracy policies.
In addition there would be a lot more trials for treason, and as outlined in the constitution, punished by death.

Yes, but i find it takes to much of a left-libertarian stance on culture, and doesn't declare nationalistic culture as the best culture.

Please tell me how libertarianism is just a synonym for anarchism and its creators are ayn rand and other jews again!

Libertarianism allows degeneracy to flourish. Just because something isn't doing physical harm to others, doesn't mean it isn't doing harm to society.

How? What the hell are you even talking about? That's not even close to Paleoconservatism; those fuckers are straight up moral crusaders. There's nothing "left-libertarian" about it.

Libertarian Nationalism still sounds better.

;)

You didn't read my post did you? The American libertarian movement started in the 1950's.
It was putting a name to the policies and ideologies of the founding fathers and the general term of Americanism.
"Arizona United States Senator Barry Goldwater's libertarian-oriented challenge to authority had a major impact on the libertarian movement,[15] through his book The Conscience of a Conservative and his run for president in 1964." Robert Poole, In memoriam: Barry Goldwater – Obituary, Reason Magazine, August–Sept, 1998.
there how is that for a source? Would you prefer it in MLA or APA or Chicago Manual style?

We have definitions of words for a reason OP. It's so they can define a particular thing.
Nationalism is a form of Socialism in a National frame. A Nationalist state will do what's best for the Nation as a collective group, that includes regulating imports/exports and banning products that are not good for the Nation and country as a whole.
As much as Nationalism recognizes a member of a Nation on an individual level and encourages him to develop to his full potential, it does so because individual can contribute to his Nation only as much as he himself is strong.
So, duty and responsibility to the Nation as a collective by the authority of its state comes before individual freedom.

Banana will never be an apple, just as Libertarianism will never be Nationalist. And where did you get those exact percentages anyway?

Overall a nice video and good approach on the issues of politics of our age, just don't use the words Nationalist Libertarianism, you're forcing wrong words to describe your ideology.

you just believe it is contradictory because we are using different definitions for the same words.

I find them to tolerant of other ideologies.

Nah because it stays in the same format as national socialism, but it may be more acurate as the ideology is like 80% nationalist, and only 20% libertarian.

Reminder, libertarianism works beautifully with nationalism.

If the nationalists that we vote in actually honor liberty, sure

Care to give an example? And if they really are, why does it matter when they put their nation before anyone else?

See: post.

Nationalism and Libertarianism aren't exactly in the same units so-to-speak, but they are symbiotic.

I still find it amazing that these people refuse to acknowledge a libertarian nationalist opposes globalization that a pure libertarian supports.

Those are fascist policies which are entirely contradictory to libertarianism.

That is also a fascist policy, but also stupidly reduntant. If youre admitting morality why not go the extra step and simply be against degeneracy itself? Abortions, marriage rights, miscegenation, equal voting rights and purposeful lying in a public position should all be crimes, and there is absolutely nothing libertarian about that.

I disagree, Americans define socialism as the state ownership of the means of production. I know the difference between prussian socialism and marxist socialism, but I have never seen a Prussian socialist define capitalism different from the Marxist socialist.
Of course, not so much on exports, but definitely reducing imports as much as tolerable.
from outside the country, absolutely, but between individuals, I disagree.
Sure.
technically, yes.
nothing that you said led to this conclusion.
by looking at all the policies that make up each ideology, then comparing what percentage remain or have to be compromised with each in order for them to become cohesive.
Thanks very much for the feedback. But, can you tell me. Did you mind I only used a background picture? Would you have prefered if I made a slideshow or relevent pictures to the particular points at their given time? Would you have prefered anything else videowise?

Saved.

Why do you faggots have to go all special snowflake about your name, you're simply paleocons
and you aren't nearly radical enough to turn back the current tide drowning the west

There is nothing libertarian about what you believe in unless you want to define libertarianism as "not communist economic policy".

The modern libertarian movement are all liberals and dont believe in any of these regulations.

Just like we dont call ourself alt-right you should not call yourself a libertarian.

Conservative implies a religious component (that's the entire foundation of conservatism).

Libertarianism doesn't have a religious component, so calling a libertarian conservative is inaccurate and dated.

I have found them to be against duel citizenship in government positions, but I have never heard them address the issue of foreign tourists or here on visa professionals espousing anti-american ideologies within the nation.

Death penalty for treason is in the US consitution.
Banning usury and international banking is just common sense, and was also practiced in christian europe by those who had nothing to do with facism.
I don't only admit morality but I recognize the catagorical imperative. Because I believe the state should be involved in purely physical matters.
Abortions are something the state should ban from being practiced commercially,
The state should have nothing to do with marrages outside of saying, "The church of blank says __ and ____ blank are married."
All who qualify for citizenship have equal rights, I prefer an IQ based requirement along with civil standards. Although it would be great to have a single vote per household to make the family unit the smallest unit in society, I think it is to utopian, and could not be implemented easily without decades of soft and gradual steps towards it
This is hard for two reasons.
1. It would be hard to prove that they were intentionally lying.
2. It would hard to prove the context of the words that were said to negate the justification for the lie. Sarcasm is intentional lying, and acting (theaters and movies) are also intentional lying but the context justifys them.
I would be against purposeful lying in public, but it creates a nitemare to prosecute and a horrorshow of possible abuses.

And where's your source?

Within Nationalist Libertarianism, I define it as capitalistic, and compactly efficient in the relationship between citizens and the government. There is way to much bureaucracy and complexity to the current governmental system, the average citizen ought to be able to understand the governmental system and the law in its entirety.
Here are the political stats.

You want me to give a source for something they haven't talked about…

"libertarian nationalism"
About 2,040 results (0.30 seconds)

"nationalist libertarianism"
About 382 results (0.31 seconds)

5.34:1

Whoops, my bad. But yeah, it makes as much sense as your ideology.

Read through this book and tell me what you think of it:

Gottfried Feder - The German State On A National And Socialist Foundation

It's available at archive.org. You don't need to go full NatSoc afterwards, but it might give you a different perspective on what "national socialism" really means.

Socialism as a term has been corrupted from what it really used to mean by (((them))). The German state was protective of private property.

I used to be like you, but found that my ideas weren't compatible with how I ended up seeing the world.

That is just a flavor.
Would it be any different then calling it Socialistic nationalism?
I think that NatLib is alike to NatSoc, and they would be better then, LibNat and SocNat.

muh founding fathers

you were not related to any of those assholes coward.

btw, anglo americans are about dead, and yes it was their fault they let jews into their country.

Go ask your local masonic fags because those were the jewish lickspittle that made america what it is today.

The desire for an efficient government with less beurocrats is something every person even normies want. You dont need a special snowflake name for that.

A government does not need to be large and complex to have high executive power and long reach in legal matters.

Nationalist has a negative connotation, so why lead with nationalist when you're trying to bring people on board? People know what libertarians are, it's already gained some ground, ADDing nationalist to the end of it forces people to think about the difference between libertarianism and libertarian nationalism

I understand it, and will get the book.
But there are two things
1. The term socialism will never fly in America, unless it is marxist socialism appealing to bernie voters.
2. When they define socialism vs capitalism, they give the wrong definition of capitalism thus it makes it difficult to accept their rejection(socialism) of it.

Believe me I know the difference between prussian socialism and marxist socialism. But I find the differences between prussian socialism and capitalism, in favor of the capitalist side and their criticisms based off a false interpretation.

I think they are interchangeable.
Use it how you will, but I am still going to call it Nationalist Libertarianism. My only concrete support I can give is just because of the ordering of National Socialism and the better abbreviations.

You're looking at Socialism from a purely economic standpoint and as an independent ideology which it never will be.

You need to regulate exports as much as imports. If you export without much regulation, you'll soon find yourself forced to import goods that are already being produced in your country.

Come on now :^)

A slideshow of relevant pictures would of course be better, make them symbolically related. Also I would advise against using pictures with text on them, let the listener focus on what you have to say.

More direct approach on the topic with max 8 minutes of length. I'd need to watch it again to make better criticism.

Wasn't the nature of American people always to value personal liberties above all else while maintaining isolationist status?

Should have searched google long before. I'd almost say libertarian nationalism is emerging independently.

ex-army.blogspot.com/2014/07/libertarian-nationalism-vs-national.html

"Except for a quibble here and there, they seem to be pretty much the same thing. I (and others) call it Libertarian Nationalism, while Vox Day calls it National Libertarianism. Whatever you call it, it's essentially a policy of realistic libertarianism, as opposed to the rainbow-unicornian view of the world that too many libertarians have absorbed from their progressive pals.

One of my favorite people has been going on about how opposing the free movement of people over our border is anti-libertarian. She is dead wrong, but she can justify it by taking libertarian principles to a ridiculous extreme. She is absolutely sincere in this, make no mistake about it, and is simply in the position that so many of us are, of not seeing the forest for the trees. Because libertarianism isn't a theory of reality. It's a political philosophy. And a political philosophy stops being useful the minute it begins denying reality in favor of philosophical consistency. And, in this border connection, reality tells us that open borders will change the demographics of the nation in precisely the wrong way for the furtherment of libertarianism. It will change it for the furtherment of liberalism/neoconservatism. And if there is any value to libertarian thinking, surely one of the first things one should do is take steps to preserve it, not drown it in a flood of barbarian hordes."

One other book to look in to is:

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn - Liberty or Equality: The Challenge of our Time

This book is not explicitly NatSoc, but tries to explain how democratic equality cannot give the liberty you desire. Worth a read just to see things from the monarchist/aristocratic perspective.

I don't understand why this kind of philosophy is seen as contradictory, by so many people.

I'm sure that many people here started out as libertarian before becoming more nationalist. What's the one thing that a libertarian starts to realize, as they grow up? Only white people really seem to care about these kinds of liberties and hold these ideals.

That is, a libertarian society will only continue to exist if white people live in it and are the majority. Just because you realize this, that doesn't mean you suddenly want to go full fascist and control the culture and morality of everyone's lives.

american libertarianism is infested with jewish.
there is no future in this rubbish.
go check out all the top people supporting libertarianism, they are jewish, all their books and publications.

...

That's what happened to me. I like most of the goals of libertarianism, it's just the who open borders/globalization bullshit that I always despised because it completely absurd and devoid of reality.

So the solution was to take the good from libertarianism and couple it with the nationalism to protect the country.

I suppose you could argue there varying degrees of nationalism (like white nationalism), but it seems to me "nationalism" requires a qualifier like white, socialist, or libertarian.

mad typos, running on serious lack of sleep

well it also has to do with the relationship of government to the people.
But socialism has to be separable from nationalism, because it is imaginable, and it would be redundant to call something the same thing twice.

you'll soon find yourself forced to import goods that are already being produced in your country.
Not nessesarily, I would like to see an economic proof of this. If imports are controlled then supply and demand would dictate an equilibrium between domestic consumption/demand and international demand.
I'm serious. You listed a bunch of Nationalist policies, but then state that libertarian policies have no places to be applied where Nationalism doesn't relate.
duly noted. I assume that using mathmatical text such as graphical proofs and the like would not only be an acception but better as well?
Yep, I recommend the book, "Cuckservative" by Vox day and some other person I can't remember the name of.

I would like to ask you to then catagorize how many of those libertarians cite ayn rand and murray rothbard, and those who say they are nationalist or have nationalistic sympathies. Then come back to us on that.

You sir win the prize!

I have the sole theory that they are using the Euro definition of Libertarianism, which to them translates to anarchism.
Or they can't dissociate American Libertarianism, from the left-libertarians in America.

pipe down there cupcake, I don't work for you. Do your own homework. self claimed libertarians think jews are people; and are afforded some type of intangible concept called 'rights', so fuck off biatch.

Europeans think libertarians are anarchists? Jesus, they are beyond mentally cucked by leftists.

over in europe, that is their definition for it.
To be fair they used the word meaning anarchism first.

Never been out of The South.

Are you in Atlanta?

Damn it mods you don't need to bumplock the thread with only 75 posts.

Nope, FL.

I swear, neo/pol/ has forgotten about their roots.

One of the mods is infiltrated.

I did notice the quality of posts have dropped dramatically. It's sad really

I've noticed a shit load of threads being bump locked lately, just look over the catalog. Maybe it's time to move over to the back up site for me.

>>>/politics/

Don't tell me you're french.

Are you retarded or you're just pretending?

then do something about it faggot

also

this has to die
fuck off,
Holla Forums is eternal
Holla Forums is always right

Neo/pol/ is real.