Put a fork in him

that's an m16

m16's don not have collapsible stocks and short barrels.

if that isnt an ar15 its an m4.

get the fuck out

fuck off retard

Libertarianism is garbage.

Liberty is nothing more than the abolishment of obligation, and duty cannot exist but in the context of obligation.

Libertarianism is the ideology of shirking duty for the sake of personal freedoms - they truly are nothing but autistic liberals.

Grotesque tbh fam.

>>>/faggot/

Listen fuccboi, every M4/M16/etc is an AR-15, but not every AR-15 is an M4/M16/etc.

No its not

this is

Redundant.

No one cares.

...

LISTEN FAGGOTS. NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR GUNS

Piss off, Holla Forums,

post-Vietnam stock M16s look fuckin mean

no

Hardly.

Most liberals are not autists, which is why they are only liberals or progressives.

Libertarians are what happens when you apply autism to liberalism.

Then come and take them, you worthless (((faggot))).

You can perch on Feinstein's shoulder like the good goy parrot that you are.

...

no the m16 with the m203 is way more sexual looking imo

Sure you know better than the drill sergeant.

Yeah you'd like that huh you fucking commie.

I do. Its not an m16. m16a2 does not have a collapsible stock nor does it have a 14.5 inch barrel.

Eat shit

Lolbertardianism has always been a product of the jewish powers that be.

I think we just found the perfect party for the likes of Glenn Beck and Bill Kristol.

this

lolbergtardianism is post-war kike propaganda used to fleece the goyim after they went Keynes-Nationalist

It's obviously some shill faggot who is probably trying to bait /k/ crossovers.

It's built on the AR platform, doesn't have a full-size barrel and has a collapsible stock and not a fixed stock. It's not an a2. It's an AR. Maybe it's an M4, but I doubt it has burst fire.

jew

people wonder why Holla Forums is such trash. Its people like you who keep setting the bar lower and lower

Not only that, but Gary Johnson himself is an obvious crypto-Jew. I've been telling people that since 2012.

...

they're not from /k/, just trying to shill/troll the people interested in firearms on Holla Forums.

Maybe at one point, although Keynesianism is now the preferred economic model of leftists. American nationalism incorporates similar ideas to Keynesianism but is still rooted in market-driven capitalism.

Lolbertarians are faggots who are fine with unlimited shitskin invasion so long as they get some of them to do their lawn

Libertarianism is a de facto Jewish intellectual movement.

pastebin.com/R2RHQcHJ

not that user, but user didn't say that. that's not what I interpreted

I'm not implying that - I'm straight out fucking saying it. Now, go suck some more jewdick and get off my board

No. No its not. It's not at all. Although there was some concern about Lefties infiltrating some of the more bureaucratic aspects of the Keynesianism plan and turning it to their advantage. And, of course, they prefer it to all-out lolbergtardianism, for that reason, of course. Keyenes works much better in an ethnostate, and Keynes himself said it would work much better under a dictatorship. Keynes is not "Leftist" at all.

Perhaps you should read up a little more on the Academic side, and stop listening to Fox News and CNN.

this

The Libertarian Party is a Jewish inside joke.

I like sports analogies.

The Libertarians are like a sports team that everyone can't wait to play: boring, safe, and extremely predictable. You can practically pencil in the W as soon as the schedule comes out.

Why is this party so full of faggots? I don't agree with the hardcore libertarians, and that's fine, but why do they have to go out of their way to disgust me too? Why is there fat man dancing naked and a nominee throwing a gun in the trash? It's almost like they don't want to succeed. They could have gotten record numbers this election, but they sabotaged themselves with high autism. They blew their big chance. All they had to do was keep it together for 6 months, and they couldn't make it one day.

If Hitler could morph a Jewish political system (((Socialism))) into something that was incredibly effective, why can't we do the same with Libertarianism?
Like turn it into National Libertarianism and make it the more popular solution.
Essentially promoting large freedoms and limited government, but only for actual native citizens. And of course the big topic that would seperate us from Jewish Libertarianism is a closed borders policy.
The ideals of Libertarianism with huge amounts of freedom and a restiction on corrupt governments really rings through to me as the 'right' American way, but I hate the puritanical approach with open borders and globalism you see Jews promote in their brand of it.

Does Holla Forums think this is an alright idea?
Can we turn Libertarianism into NatLib like Hitler turned Communism-Lite into NatSoc?

Dead at the starting gate.

Too fucking rich

dude cuck lmao

Lolbergs are the reality deniers and fantasists just like Marxists, they believe people are the same and hard work is all they need and a chance and the cream rises.

But reality is white people have enough social problems within our own population, brining people with far worse mental capacites and social problems they can never fix is fucking insanity.

You can get white scum into middle class in one generation, you can't do that with nogs or Muslims to integrate in one generation.

...

Oh wow, so now you pay lip service to Hitler.
Fuck off, you had your chances.

what kind of retard throws away a firearm like that?

got anymore upskirts like that?

Lol, what are you talking about Mr.
?

I'm glad those days are over.

Little Hairy Johnson

Still fires a pussy weak mouse round.

The funny thing is that this year Johnson is going to pull more Hillary voters than Trump voters, and flip the conventional thinking about the Libertarian candidate always harming the Republican. This isn't 2012 where both of the main parties were pro-immigration and Johnson's open borders stance wasn't as relevant; if you wanted the border closed you had no real options.

Now Trump is the nominee and so voters get to choose between a literal America-firster and some globalist hag. Add to that the migrant crisis. Nearly all of the Ron Paul people are going to vote for Trump despite his problems while Johnson is going to keep some bernouts from voting for Hillary.

Stop giving this retard any coverage.

GOD EMPEROR or GO HOME

...

Lolbergs are a walking catastrophe. How do these people even manage to function?

2 posts now, retard.
Happy?

>I was one of the

That's a pretty shitty move. I voted for this fag in 2012 but only because I could not vote for a Jew-like vulturous Mormon cultist anymore than I could vote for an anti-white Marxist nigger. Thank God for Trump this time around.

The difference, at this point, between the republican and the lulbertardian parties is that the lulbertardian party has been handily co-opted while Trump has single handily co-opted the republican party.

I fucking hate lulbergs and their snide know it all attitudes. I've been rubbing The Johnson in their face and they act like they don't mind it but they hate it. You know they hate it.

Yup. You can either have your society based on fidelity or liberty and, protip, societies based on liberty don't last in the longterm because the thing its people are getting liberty from is societal obligations.

LULBERGS LEAVE

REEEEEEEEEEEEE

This is autism

The leaders don't care about winning, for them the libertarian party is just a way for Democrats in safe Democrat areas to not have to be affiliated with the Democratic Party's authoritarian policies.

The national party doesn't have anything really to offer local candidates.

The national party doesn't care to control their branding at all or adherence to the (L) platform. In 2013 here in Virginia they had a guy named Sarvis that wanted a fucking carbon tax and miles-driven tax.

They can't separate their politics from their ideology, so they can't ever cut a deal. For free trade fanatics they don't apply market principles at all to politics. If they are 0.5% of the voters in a state they should sell their votes for something commensurate with that instead of perpetually losing and in the process burning out good candidates or discrediting themselves with joke candidates. For instance in Virginia they would be 10x more relevant and effective if they just picked one issue, like say drug decriminalization, and offered an endorsement based on which of the two main party candidates were better…of course they don't even endorse other candidates it seems as that would contradict their principles.

Would you expect anything different from a lolberg?

Whatever bitch frame you have fun with your .22. Real men use 6.5 Grendel.

Fucking hell

The shame of it is, Austin Peterson isn't even a bad guy. Not great policies, but a decent person. Johnson? Not so much. But more than that, his policies are even worse, and less Libertarian.

So what does the Libertarian Party do? They elect the idiot who doesn't even represent their own interests.

This is why I don't affiliate myself with these cucks. The real work is unfucking the Republican party.

...

Enjoy your lack of common ammo. 2 Seconds into a happening you are SOL

Give it up, the Libertarian party is completely Jewish coopted just like the Tea Party was coopted. The only possible hope at this point is praying Trump is elected and sticks to his words.

And yet, it's the next most shilled-against philosophy behind ethnic nationalism. Certainly the most demonized in the mainstream. Yes it came from kikes, doesn't mean it's something the kikes truly in charge (i.e. globalists) hate and fear.

Keynes was a homosexual. Because he was childless he had a high time preference and lived in the moment like a nigger. "In the long run, we'll all be dead"

Which is why his theories are unsustainable in the long term health of any economy, and loved and defended by the money-printing jews in the central banks. Keynsianism is responsible for the shitty world economy and the parasitical kikes that manipulate it.

Any white ethnostate that implemented Keynesian policy and existed beyond the short term would suffer economic collapse.

Good enough for urban combat

well done faggot

Kek I can't believe we were all once lolbergtarians. They are really showing their true colors now.

I guess that picture was correct, lolberg is babby's first step to becoming a shitlord.

Yeah we were (many of us at least) when we hoped Ron Paul could do something but it's a mostly shitty neo-liberal movement otherwise.

Go to /liberty/.
You can have 100% profit from the salt being produced everyday there.

On July 18, 2016 Donald J Trump will officially be the head of the Republican party

This pic?

Sage cause we already have a thread on this

Literally this, retards.

gunbot.net/ammo/rifle/65grendel/

Because you retards actually attacked Holla Forums users and got BTFO when Rand Paulberg revealed his color.
How does it feel to have the truth coming down on you?
poal.me/mtzfjw

...

Holy shit, steel case Grendel is now as cheap as 5.56.
Im so glad it won the game.

you can convert 5.56mm in to 300. AAC.
granted you need to be precise.

It's a definite bonus of using the AR platform, but over the long haul, if you like to target shoot often, you might be better off with an AK platform due to the cost of the round… unless you reload.

Best to learn how to reload and buy a cheap press, anyway. If you reload, whatever your shoot is going to be reasonable and renewable.

Nigger, i'm not a libertarian. Anyone who identifies as such these days is a legitimate cuck.

What I'm saying is libertarian economic theory is sound, they have some good points about the long-term nonviability of central banking and central planning, and it pains me to see retards on Holla Forums promote a white ethnostate just so we can engage in the same socialist, redistributist, big state policies that the kikes have been using to rob us blind.

"Hurr it'll work in a white ethnostate!"
no, it won't.

if you're going to use a 1,000 yard meme round in an autoloader, quit pussyfooting around and get an ar-10 in 6.5creedmor. you can push 123gr at 2800 out of a 16.5" barrel ffs.

I am genuinely shocked steel grendel is so cheap. the only thing making a grendel ar worth it

Holy fuck. You had one job Gary. The calling for a third party run is bigger than in decades and you manage to fuck yourself as soon as you get the gig.

Fucking cucks

Hurr durr

The Third Reich worked and accomplished all of its original goals which are all inline with what we want.
Solve the problem first then freedom comes after safety.

Calm down, faggot. I read it wrong.

It fell before the consequences came to bear. That's the whole point of economy manipulation. The good effects come first, and then the consequences are paid for later. You can't build a long-term sustainable nation out of it.

The 3rd Reich got one thing right, which was to purge the kikes and other Weimar parasites. But given time, the centralized economy breeds new parasites. Ideologues eventually die, and are replaced by career bureaucrats looking to expand their power.

Free market economics and ethnic, even civic, nationalism are utterly incompatible.

Free movement of labor is required for a free market because labor is a good just like any other. If you limit labor movement, you're limiting the free market.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying that you SHOULD have free markets.

Free markets are shit. Tariffs funding the government is better than high taxes.

Cucks are in every party man, the GOP still might sperg out and try to steal the nomination from Trump.

Every time you say this a white baby is aborted.

...

Nat Soc is the final red pill. It acts, NRx fags do not.

its like one of those greentexts of a sjw controlled dystopia.

I dunno, I'd probably take the homegrown parasites of a planned economy to the predatory foreign and transnationals of "free" economies, the devil you know is better than one you don't.

Pic related is the best summary of NRx you'll ever ssee.

Fascism is just another treatment, it isn't the cure.

History and culture have zero market value. All publicly funded museums should be scrapped if they can't turn a profit.

All hail the free market.

...

It isn't.

And keyboard warrior NRx'ers are. LOL

a jew

...

Are you fucking high mate?

Fascism is required because we can not bank on a decentralized model like the HRE, or for example early Anglo-Saxon England, without the liberal filth of the cities eventually trying to centralize again. Ideologues think they can make people better and they WILL fight you for that. The worst enemy is one who thinks he's doing a good thing. That is why, incidentally, the Enlightenment was such a cancer. It created enlightened despot kings.

Fascism is what you need to root out the filth. After that, each country must look to itself and find it's own way.

For example, an HRE spanning across Europe? City states doing their thing and rural areas doing theirs? Things divided down to old duchy and county lines? Villages allowed to have their own militia independent unless the lord of that land call them forth and ONLY at great need?

That is ideal

what the fuck?

defend your right as an American to wield a gun

I understand. Really i wouldn't expect the average person to put their trust in theory alone. Even the average informed white man. The planned-economy lesson is something that has to be learned the hard way. At least it won't be as bad as the current kike-run shithole we're all living in. And, when the planned-economy white ethnostate collapses, the booming and prosperous free market white ethno-gated community will take you in. No hand-outs though, you have to pay.

What happens is early middle ages again. Communities rallying together and going full fyrd on the beaners, niggers and muslims

I wonder if face mask helmets can be a thing again.

Fascism is crisis era methodology, once shit is fixed we ease back into our traditional monarchies and aristocratic republics.

Monarchy is superior to Democracy but National Socialistic technocracy is the future. New more robust Noble Lines will inevitably form, but the Jew will not return.

Exactly.

My fear is that I can't help notice the parallels with Marxism and his argument that the totalitarian socialist state is merely the middle term before free communist society

Dude both "free" (and it's not free, it's just controlled by extra-governmental actors and organs) and planned economies have their pitfalls because, surprise surprise, there is no magical ideology or system that just works with no issue. It's a matter of choosing which drawbacks you're willing to deal with, I'm more willing to deal with the pitfalls and problems of a planned economy of a white ethnostate rather than exposing national markets to predatory foreign and transnational subversion and domination. Free market is the strategy of opening up your gates, inviting in your rivals and hoping they just take your stuff and not your lives too, and that's best-case; worst-case is free-market is delusional idealism right up there with fantasies of a dictatorship of the proletariat.

Graceless Johnson is his name. He's a 'libertarian' that pretends to believe the second amendment is for hunting.

That would be an ideal state of affairs, but we're just not in the era anymore. Maybe when we get to space and are all spread out, then feudal revival and decentralization returns as the norm.

Trust me, once we kick out the kebab and other assort shitskins and our old population dies off, it'll be fine.

Plus our cities will be ruins. Europe's population will drop.

Good job stealing my thread. Learn to use the catalog, newfag.

Fascism is the best of the garbage that came after the Enlightenment and that isnt saying much

...

Yeah, let's listen to the aristocracy who sold off their birthrights to kike bankers so they could live like decadent merchants, I'm sure they have plenty of sage counsel to give.

I agree. And pardon my snarky reply, what i was saying is let the future be the testing ground for our respective ideas. If and when one idea fails, the superior idea will subsume and replace the inferior.

We can both agree to purge the diseases of the current age, and then we'll have the luxury of comparing economic theories.

That was an Enlightenment symptom.

And I'm not even going to bother explaining what's wrong with your characterization of free markets. Let's let the future decide.

Who started the whole Enlightenment, was it peasants or was it aristocratic thinkers? Who are the biggest proponents of communism, socialism and progressivism historically and still today: the common laborer or the idle gentry? The leftist cancers all poured out from the so-called upper-tiers of society.

There isn't a single Neo Reacto street activist group in the world. Not a single one. You are elitists that inhabit internet forums and have contributed almost nothing to the on-going struggle against the total destruction of our civilization.

You're even opposed to populism as a method of movement growth and constantly claiming some irrelevant non-existent moral high ground against all radical competitors despite achieving nothing.

Meanwhile, Fascism/National Socialism and Ethno Nationalism is running rampant across Europe while it continues to stampede across young white male minds in America.

I can't think of a single N-R party, movement or even activist group in the world. You are irrelevant and you will remain that way until you grow a ball sack. Intellectual elitism is the bane of your entire ideal.

Indeed. Fascism/National Socialism was thought out and acted by the working/ lower middle classes. And even then, the Aristocratic toffs turned on them.

Nobility across Europe has married into Jewish Houses. It's completely pozzed. Fascism was a working class revolt against upper class decadence.

"Free", I've come to find out, is a Jacobin buzzword that mean "free to be dominated by the international mercantile class". The free market can do nothing to prevent internationalist extra-governmental banking cabals from dominating currency-creation powers, they have the ability to shut out competitors and can bankroll their own monopolies of violence and it's all in keeping with libertarian ideology.

This.

No it hasn't. Like all things they stole it.

Neither?
It was the merchant and intellectual class. The bourgeoisie (you know, in the actual meaning of the word), and of course the kikes.

By the way, gentry is specifically non nobles with money.

They turned on them because again, fascism is just a treatment. It is not a cure. It is ultimately still left of center.

Tradition is blood and soil. You don't get more populist than that.

OK fine I'll bite.

Free means taking responsibility for your own destiny. Certain groups of people would use that freedom irresponsibly, and be punished by circumstance for it. Other groups of people will use their freedom to disassociate from the first group in the interests of their long term survival.

Patently untrue. The only thing that gives currency creators power is that government prevents competition. Ever tried to create a competing currency? If you had, you'd be in jail.

If they're not providing a valuable service, customers will go elsewhere, something they can't do with a government that already does the things you listed. Ideology has fuck all to do with it.

While not white Japan has been going down the Keynesian rabbit hole for decades and are now irreversibly fucked, China is beginning to do the same thing and is showing signs of entering into a coma economy like Japan has been in for close to 30 years now.

Protip, there is only one person on Holla Forums who posts that strawpoll graph, and that arguing with him is futile.

True, all the non-cucked freedom loving people identify as AnCap or Paleoconservative or Minarchist, 'libertarian' like 'liberal' is a term which has been hijacked by leftist degenerates who need to be thrown out of helicopters.

Yep, where there is a concentration of power the kikes will find a way to infiltrate or corrupt it.

Parasites only exist through government intervention because given the choice of keeping ones money or paying for some sheboon's 15 fatherless kids the vast majority of people will choose the former. Because of this they don't exist in a free market.

You talk like a helicopter pilot, friend. 1433

Looks like an AR-15 to me, but it doesn't really matter. They are essentially the same weapon. The AR-15 is simply semi-automatic only, while the M16 also has 3-round-burst and automatic options on the selector switch. There isn't any such thing as a "stock" AR-15. Different manufactures will sell their stock models with different types of stocks, and barrel lengths, and triggers, and well pretty much nothing is standardized besides the sizing of the lower and upper receiver and barrel bore. I doubt the military even has a standard M16. Different branches almost certainly use different variations in at least length of barrel.

In respect to your video, that drill instructor is an actor. Even if he is a real drill instructor, for the purposes of your clip, he was filling the role of an actor. More than likely, his recruits do get an M16, and to sound realistic for reality TV, he called that weapon a M16. In reality they probably used an AR-15. Without knowing all of the legality, and without knowing all of the military regulations regarding citizens borrowing military weapons, handing some guy a restricted automatic weapon that he could never legally own, for a show about faggots pretending to be commandos, might be a big no-no.

Its good to see there are more of us here.

Forgot my embed

HA HA! Excuses. They turned on a perfectly capable and successful government so they could stop the deportation of Jewry? They continually sought power because they felt entitled to it? Might Makes Right. And the Reich Made might.

Economically? Yes. Socially? No. Upper classes ruined Germany, Lower classes made it Great again. Making excuses for the German aristocracy is a joke, what did they do since? Jack shit. They all jumped on to the Poz train, and we're all supposed to hand it over to them when we succeed? Fuck no.

Then where is your movement? Where is your Party? Where is your activism? Not so popular are you?

Most NR are anti-populist. You might be the minority, which is even sadder. You don't do shit, it's all words and claims of regality that don't exist. Fascism is the future.

I had an argument about this faggot with my ex many months back. I have always said as many times as I could as many places as I could, this guy is complete shit.

Ex was a libertarian, started out liberal, gradually moved right as we dated, was still kind of an idiot about it. (she thought athletes should have their salaries capped because 'like, who likes sports anyway? All they do is play games!' despite claiming to be a libertarian.)

We'd argue about her wanting to take part in the Free State Project, she said she wanted Ron Paul to take over the Republican party so they could turn it into the Libertarian party, and since neither Paul got the nomination she was voting for Gary Johnson.

I'm so sick of seeing this faggot's face every time I go to Omegle.

First off, only major royal that turned on the Reich was Willy and everything he said about them and Hitler himself was right. Hitler had no respect for Prussian tradition and that's why most of his generals didn't respect him, and he felt the need to meddle in what was the greatest command force assembled in the 20th century.

Secondly, other royals WORKED with fascists and many fascists were monarchists too.

Thirdly, might makes right is enlightenment materialist cancer thought. Moral truth is not beholden to who wins. Good is good, even if the Shadow overtakes. And there is high beauty that evil can never sully. And to believe otherwise is to be no better than a leftist.

You don't understand what left means, that's how broken we've become. Go back to the great assembly of Paris in the late 18th century. That's where you find the true left and right.

Also funny thing there. The aristocrats of Germany were deposed of all power and the Prussian junker elite that had made it the greatest threat of anglocuck evil of the 19th century were pushed to the fringes of society, their great moral code surviving only in the army. Why do you think Germany was that good? It wasn't the industry, they were behind in terms of that. It wasn't the politics, they were a poor man's fascist.

It was the army. In the army survived Prussia of old. And nothing that has been forged in the 20th century could withstand that. Guderian and von Manstein and their doctrines and ethics were the reason Germany destroyed everyone and it stopped winning when Hitler thought he could do better

There are more traditionalists in the nationalist uprisings of our day than fascists, because people are sick of state authority with forceful ideology. Ask anyone if they'd rather pick a decentralized society with focus on kin and old morality or the fascists of the early 20th century, and they'll pick the former every time. You're the minority in this movement, you're just the most loud.

It always was this way. Even fascism was just Mussolini taking from Evola. And if you read "Fascism viewed from the right" maybe you'll start being less of a little modernist shit

Sure mate, which is why traditionalism is literally the ideology of the European man. Fascism is the treatment. That's all it is. It isn't the cure.

It'll treat us of the degeneracy and then it can be done away with like everything post enlightenment.

This isn't how inclusive fitness works. Keynes still had other people related to him. This meme about Keynes started by a Libertarian is based on leftist notions about genetics and kin selective altruism. Essentially the notion that kin selective altruism only extends to your immediate kin and not to anyone more distantly related to you. Mathematically modeling the notion that you are actually related to more people than your own children would lead to some very "problematic" discoveries about race not being a social construct.

Which is a rebuttal to Liberalism's prophesied utopian end state wherein Capitalism will eventually erode all religions, ideologies, borders and peoples into a single, stateless world and that we should stay the course regardless of the proximate side-effects of Capitalism in the present and for the foreseeable future. The destruction of one's nation and destitution and possible death of one's own children is a small price to pay for the coming Humanity!

Trump's whole economic platform is "In the long run, we'll all be dead" so let's plan for our posterity instead of riding out the browning of America because it will ultimately result in world peace. Which is to be clear the basis for Economic Liberalism.

On the contrary. It is promoted and discussed far beyond any merit. Libertarians are irrelevant to the point most people will be born, live and die without ever having met a Libertarian. The fact that you even know what it is is a testament to it having been shilled. This shit exists only on the Internet and it gains mainstream press coverage with several mainstream anchors or journalists identifying themselves as Libertarians. Comparatively you've got kosher ideologies like Anarcho-Syndacalism that are just as insignificant and non-existent in real life and of course virtually no one even knows what the fuck it is. There certainly aren't any anchors being told by their producers to label themselves as Libertarians for their audiences.

"Libertarianism" is actually a social phase in Marxist thought in which the bourgeoisie are so dominant that their attitudes become the moral principles of society and many traditional bulwarks are torn down to aid in freer commerce. Once you have a highly mercantile population that is essentially amoral except for compunctions against violence and a disdain for suffering and privation they will naturally gravitate towards socialism. The byproducts of economically liberal policy are raised up as a moral principle begetting libertarianism as an ideology. The societal byproducts of normative libertarianism are then themselves raised to an ethical plane to be pursued in an of themselves as well. The policy that fostered eusociality are abandoned in pursuit of the thing itself in a truer form.

Libertarianism is the brother of Bolshevism. Marxist-Leninists believed this was all a science, and so they were scientists that could transmute reality like it was a kind of chemistry and so sought to skip essential steps in the process knowing for certain what the end goal was. A doctrinaire Marxist has no problem with Libertarianism. It's the course history was always meant to naturally take.

Except of course that the entire Marxist worldview is nonsense and Libertarianism is just something pushed on us and its' extremely meager popularity is the product of unwarranted media attention and constant shilling on the Internet from Jews and cognitively defective gentiles who need to be ruthlessly weeded out from gene pool.

Well put

...

Go back to 4chan.

There isn't really a parrallel. Both Fascism and Marxism have that common Hegel link so there are bound to be some superficial similarities in language to explicate the ideas.

The distinction between Marxism and Fascism on this one point is that the Fascist's desired end state is similar to the status quo ante which we know existed in reality in the past, so it can theoretically exist again in the future.

Except Fascism isn't based on the whims of the hoi polloi. Meanwhile NRx is a thoroughly bourgeois movement that appeals primarily to weak people and was dreamed up by Jews that misrepresent the ideas of the rulers and the political formula of the past based on Jewish misanthropy directed at the traditional folkways of European peoples.

This is a total platitude and reveals your level of thinking on the subject.

Economic Liberalism is left-wing.

This is Low Church Protestantism, which is about as left-wing as you can get. You are basically promoting that Divine Law and Natural Order are separate because "In Allah all things are possible".

Might Makes Right isn't a normative claim. It's a descriptive one.

National Socialism is superior to Italian Fascism. Majorly. The NS really got it in a way that the Italians never did. They really had the tragic view as Heidegger put it.

This is a result of the infection of Libertarianism and the demonization of an exercise of power by any white population or individual. The view of the "alt-right" in general is wholly modernist and not at all "traditionalist" when it comes to this question. You said it yourself. They are "sick of state authority and foreful ideology". That is an anti-traditionalist stance.

There are more bourgeois libertarians that call themselves traditionalists simply because they are nominally Christian, but aren't traditional in the pursuit of their religion either.

Everyone has relatives. By whatever degree Keynes cared about his Nth-removed relatives, a man with children will have cared that much more about his direct descendants. If saying a man should care about only his direct kin is absurd, so is saying he should care about his cousin's son as much as his own children. It's a legitimate criticism of the man, and calling it "a meme" and pinning it to leftist theory doesn't disqualify it.

Do you have an authoritative source on the context? Because all I see is Keynesian theory around the world resulting in short term gain and long term pain. Which coincides directly with the most immediate interpretation of the quote. Even if context somehow reverses the meaning of the quote, Keynes obviously didn't know what the fuck he was talking about, since Keynesian policy is the immediate go-to for every globalist regime and central bank out there. You know, the same kikes who want to
and are currently orchestrating

Did Trump say that? Doesn't sound like him, sounds like you trying to tie your ideology to a beloved figure to garner credibility.

In other words, "Any amount that libertarianism is promoted is more than it should be, because it's irrelevant, because no one's heard of it, which is why you hearing about it means it's promoted more than it should be." Circular reasoning, sophistry.

You know what's shilled, heavily, in every mainstream media source, with no major pushback or smear campaigns to speak of? Keynesianism, the most kosher of all economic systems.

And yet the Marxists actually causing problems in today's society seem to hate it more than any other ideology. (Except perhaps ethnic nationalism as stated.) I wonder, why the discrepancy? Why does everything you say run directly contrary to observable real world evidence?

I don't see how that's a thing if early pagan societies held these views as well.
You should not confused natural law with morality.

Also you seem to be assuming by moral truth I mean the one of God. While that is MY faith, it is not necessarily where others may gather the moral truth of creation. We ever strive to approach it as we ever strive to know the universe of the material. Or well, we DID, until individualism and materialism supplanted morality in the enlightenment.

Those who win aren't always right. To fight the long defeat is as European as you get, and is a sigh of courage and virtue. The fight itself is worth fighting, and your deeds will echo in the end, even if you lose.

Completely disagree. Natsoc ignores culture too much in favor of genetics. What makes the West might is more than just our race, it is the culture and morality of Europe.

I think you are confusing traditionalism with enlightened despotism and the divine right of kings. That's still very much a travesty. You must travel to the high middle ages in places like the HRE to find the true tradition of Europe.

Libertarians are not and can not be traditionalist, as the free market economics are completely opposed to traditionalism.

lolbergs are unanimously in favor of aborting white babies

I love the helicopter meme, death to the 1488ers!

nope

There are no Keynesian economists anywhere in the world. Every "Keynesian" is a Marxist and their theories belong to the 'Marxian' school, but you can't say that in America much of the rest of the western world.

What we have in Keynes isn't even an economist but a Nationalist who subverted economic theory.

In Keynesianism there is no welfare. At all. It's not not a part of Keynesiansim. It's explicitly discussed and forbidden. Nor are there open borders, migrant workers programs or widescale immigration schemes. Keynes was fully aware of that which you subsidize you get more of which is why he wanted to subsidize proven winners in the market so they could have more children and skilled labor projects to foster the growth of the domestic skilled labor market.

Does any modern "Keynesian" program sound anything like that? Keynes is a guy picked out of relative obscurity in the 60s and 70s by Marxists to associate with their economic policies both as a smoke screen but also to disassociate a legitimate patriotic economist from the Right whose analysis was not based on Smith-ite moral philosophy.

It's from a book he wrote in 1923. Get well versed in the history of Economic Liberalism from the mid-19th to the early 20th century
by reading the primary sources to see for yourself exactly the mindset he was rebutting.

You can just cut the chase and read Adam Smith. He's falsely portrayed as this studious academic who simply identified Capitalism as a phenomena taking place, when it is patently clear from his politics and writings that he had a desired or perceived End State for humanity and built up an economic system around those goals and buttressed it with a moral philosophy.

Keynes rejected the extremist liberal moral philosophy of Adam Smith, but he's basically a Communist right?

Are you literally retarded? I didn't say it was a direct quote. Donald Trump is not a radical Liberal, and his economic platform is based on his nationalistic impulses so his approach to the whole thing is coming from Keynes angle and not that of Economic Liberalism.

Not at all. There are no fucking libertarians anywhere. Yet everyone knows what it is. It gets discussed ad naseum. There are mainstream press that have their own shows that get to tackle things from a Libertarian perspective.

There is a direct parallel to another media phenomena. There is this shitty little sandnigger country of no real accomplishment where everyone follows this outre religion whose adherents number only in the millions globally. Yet we can't stop fucking talking about in the media all the fucking time.

It's really transparently obvious that Libertarianism's public profile is inflated beyond any sense of scope. You don't need to shill against libertarianism as proved by Ron Paul's presidential campaigns. You just don't talk about it. It's not a real force. It's fluffed up to look big, but it's fucking nothing.

Most of whom aren't doctrinaire Marxists. They are just Progressives and its' a patchwork ideology that is mostly the implacable application of egalitarianism to everything. That doesn't mean that some very smart, very rich people involved with social engineering via media and other means are as poorly read as your typical SJW. SJWs do nothing but attack the perceived outgroup so all you have to do to draw their ire is not be one of them and gain their attention.

If you base everything you think on simply being reactive to the Left then you are an idiot. You are being controlled by simply taking society's perception of what is the diametric opposite of a hated outgroup. Except the same people who manage perceptions and define the boundaries of political discourse also give the radicals their marching orders. SJWs are there to antagonize you so you'll run hard to Libertarianism which is actually a closely related philosophy that ultimately will just breed additional SJWs.

What the Left does really should have no bearing on your own thoughts and actions. The opposite should be true. They react to us, and since they react to us and are predictable when we control our own thoughts and our own actions we also control theirs.

What is the meaning of that image?

[Citation Needed]

Only a Holla Forumsfag would unironically think ad-hominem is an argument

How new are you?

It depends on which pagan societies you are talking about. The societies of Classical Antiquity did not. Nordic paganism we know very little about, but if what is theorized is true they were "more spiritual than religious", which is a meme of the modern New Age leftist which does accurately reflect them.

Although I personally believe that the Nordic pagans had a religion and society nearly as suffuse with the logos as their Mediterranean counterparts based on the extant Eddas which seem full of moral lessons elevating notions of self-control and reason over the appetite and spirit.

So basically Universalist Unitarianism? That's more Low Church Protestantism. "More spiritual than religious" yet again.

Over a long enough time horizon for all intents and purposes they are. Usually when might didn't make right on short time horizons it was due to insufficient might. I can give theological justifications for this as well.

Regardless, "Might Makes Right" still isn't a paean to Whig History wherein the good guys always win, but to Power Morality. Which again, if you can't square power morality, the law of the jungle, with the divine order you've got a serious problem on your hand as a "traditionalist".

It doesn't. At all. The promotion of high culture was far and away a much larger part of NS than it was Italian Fascism which was much more modernist in focusing on politics, economics, and overall having a systematized, bureaucratic approach. They were incapable of breaking from the social trends at play in Italy outside of waging war in Africa (which could still be argued as a trend of flagging economies for democratic governments).

I'm not. Arguably Divine Right is an Enlightenment Era idea put forwards as a rebuttal to the Enlightenment.

Not at all. It never had it's day to even be a tragedy. It was just an idea never put into practice. Reconciling Athens with Sparta has always been the ideal in Europe (among anyone who had an opinion worth mattering) that was never realized, and was put on ice for centuries with the dawning of the Enlightenment.

Which is the teeming masses yearning from liberation from their oppression? Which is what you stated as the reason for the popularity of "traditionalism" among the 'movement'. Except that's purely an Enlightenment view.

You can find in some places recorded the actual opinions of peasants in the late-comers countries to the Enlightenment, and it's patently clear that they were not giving out the sigh of the oppressed. The notion that they were a subjugated people had to be educated into them. Newspapers circulated into Italy and elsewhere to inform the people that they were oppressed. They couldn't read so it didn't matter. Garibaldi educated them though and let them know that they should be miserable and behold they were.

The so-called "traditionalists" that are actually Merchants of the Soul are similarly inculcated into this noxious narrative of oppression.

Also, in case you weren't aware Europe exists elsewhere than the HRE and in other periods of time as well, so concocting that this is the "True" Europe is quite a thesis which you haven't and I suspect can't justify.

Libertarianism isn't just an economic system. In fact it is primarily not. The economics are aligned as they are to suit Libertarian Virtue Ethics. The position of "alt-right" traditionalists who hate Kings and the Church in favor of decentralized authority so that they can avoid "oppression" are simply applying their Libertarian Virtue Ethics selectively. For now.

Alright user, you've given me a lot to think about. I will read up on Adam Smith's original works and Keynes's responses. If Adam Smith was really a utopian social engineer that would change my understanding of a lot of subjects. And you will have done me a favour.

I still don't buy
as it contradicts my personal experience. Can you prove it? But whatever, it's less important.

Not proof per se, but…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Johnson_presidential_campaign,_2012

To some extent the GOP absorbs Libertarians, but the numbers were even worse in 2008 when McCain the warmonger statist was running against Obama. Most self-identifying Libertarians are just dude weed lmao or just want tax cuts to distinguish themselves from SoCons. Actual libertarians are few and far between, and yet John Stossel is an actual Libertarian. Lots of Libertarian think tanks, publications, et cetera.

What is the 4th largest political party in the US? I don';t have a fucking clue and I doubt anyone else does either.

Pay close attention to his notions of British Honour. He hates it. The traditional virtues of his own society he says should be replaced with "Shopkeeper Morality" wherein economic considerations alone should be the moral apparatus of the individual. He laments that his view of the way the world should be can't be made manifest in his contemporary Britain because of martial virtues, patriotism, et cetera.

...