Why libertarianism is dead

I can’t remember who linked this, so I can’t credit them. It’s a speech by Hans-Hermann Hoppe about the future of libertarianism in light of the Alt-Right.

The theoretical, irrefutable core of the libertarian doctrine is simple and straightforward and I have explained it already repeatedly at this place. If there were no scarcity in the world, human conflicts or more precisely physical clashes would be impossible. Interpersonal conflicts are always conflicts concerning scarce things. I want to do A with a given thing and you want to do B with the same thing. Because of such conflicts – and because we are able to communicate and argue with each other – we seek out norms of behavior with the purpose of avoiding these conflicts.

Libertarianism and the Alt-Right
In Search of a Libertarian Strategy for Social Change

The Alt-Right may have some cracks that are beginning to show under pressure, but calling this theoretical core “irrefutable” is the height of intellectual masturbation. It is, in fact, exceedingly simple to refute.

Let’s imagine there is no longer any material scarcity in the world. Rather than fighting over the same thing so I can do A with it, I could have my own thing. But I don’t want my own thing. I want your thing. Why? Because I want to have a thing and you not to have it, which makes me better. Special. And we have observed in behavioral economics that the primary driving post-material motivation for economic activity is not material scarcity (by definition), but rather status scarcity. We don’t need to explain this empirical fact, only to observe that it will guarantee conflict until humans no longer wish to feel important, which is to say until the trumpet blows. Thus, the irrefutable foundation turns out to be made of sand. (Compare: the narcissistic roots of globalism and the political anthropology of slavery.)

When someone finds a way for everyone on earth to be the most important person at the same time, then we can talk about resurrecting Frankenstein’s patchwork monster. Until then, Hoppe should consider taking up math, music, or computer programming, which will be more his speed.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Why libertarianism is dead

  1. kensuimo says:

    https://mises.org/sites/default/files/styles/social_media_1200_x_1200/public/static-page/img/6494.jpg?itok=fcPgkjkn

    Imperfect but probably fauxcippital.

    Libertarianism is (maybe) agitation for low population density governance.

  2. Obadiah says:

    And we have observed in behavioral economics that the primary driving post-material motivation for economic activity is not material scarcity (by definition), but rather status scarcity. We don’t need to explain this empirical fact, only to observe that it will guarantee conflict until humans no longer wish to feel important, which is to say until the trumpet blows. Thus, the irrefutable foundation turns out to be made of sand. (Compare: the narcissistic roots of globalism and the political anthropology of slavery.)

    Based and redpilled. One of the important things to understand about the Judeo-melonsons is that they as a majority aren’t so much psychopathic as they are the ultimate narcissists. In this way TRS/Mike Enoch/White Nationalism/Naziism are yet again just reflections of Judaism, as has been [accurately] stated many times

    Though it must be said that feeling somewhat important or attaching some bit of significance to one’s own existence could be sort of like dopamine in that we, as organic bio-lifeforms sewn in dishonor, may not even be able to reproduce or execute adaptations without it

  3. “But I don’t want my own thing. I want your thing. Why? Because I want to have a thing and you not to have it, which makes me better. Special.”

    Then you are talking about a scarce thing.

    “(…)but rather status scarcity.”

    You talked again about a scarce thing (even if not material).

    So you think that you can refute Hoppe’s argument about conflicts only being possible about scarce things by providing two examples of possible conflicts generated… about scarce things? I’m a bit confused.

  4. Aeoli Pera says:

    >So you think that you can refute Hoppe’s argument about conflicts only being possible about scarce things by providing two examples of possible conflicts generated… about scarce things? I’m a bit confused.

    That’s because you didn’t read carefully. The argument is, in short, that conflict is the revealed preference. And designing an economic system to minimize the expression of revealed preference is absurd.

  5. Aeoli Pera says:

    >Imperfect but probably fauxcippital.

    Impossible to say from that one.

    >Libertarianism is (maybe) agitation for low population density governance.

    It’s agitation for a political environment within which Asperger’s is adaptive.

  6. Aeoli Pera says:

    >Based and redpilled. One of the important things to understand about the Judeo-melonsons is that they as a majority aren’t so much psychopathic as they are the ultimate narcissists. In this way TRS/Mike Enoch/White Nationalism/Naziism are yet again just reflections of Judaism, as has been [accurately] stated many times

    The moral level of war does not admit of fine distinctions, so effectively yes.

    >Though it must be said that feeling somewhat important or attaching some bit of significance to one’s own existence could be sort of like dopamine in that we, as organic bio-lifeforms sewn in dishonor, may not even be able to reproduce or execute adaptations without it

    Yes, this is worth saying. Or in religious terms, the admonition to “love your neighbor as yourself” takes on a rather different meaning when you hate yourself.

  7. Heaviside says:

    >It’s agitation for a political environment within which Asperger’s is adaptive.

    Just because guys with Asperger’s may be libertarians, doesn’t mean it would actually be good for them.

  8. bicebicebice says:

    lolbertarianism is stealing things with your mind, this angers thugmug croms who can not compete in that field hilarity thus then ensues when the egghead-berts get a good bashing and cry foul when someone else uses another method of “acquiring”.

    hoppe is the poster boy for thardism paving the road to hell with golden bricks.

    “Let’s imagine there is no longer any material scarcity in the world.” ehmm that already happened my dude, your american singers sang songs of growth and now africa is saved with a projected population of 4 billion, the only people that will survive the extinction event of autonomous automated craddle to the grave creature comforts are people with genuine hobbies and interests (thals), or the homo erectus “tomorrow” big ape-sloth.

    If you care about the wellbeing of melons, don’t abolish politics and the stockmarket, let them believe what they say matters (it is tho 100% obsolete). As stated, they need this to breed. Or, they will simply gravitate towards what they perceive as the IT (not itz), being the IT-girls they are, saying such thangs such as “yeah man I always loved watching paint dry in fact i’m the best in the world at it (status).”

    All ideologies that are a means to an end of jewing are nothing more than tools, this is why I aktchually support croms bashing lolberts because they are jews. The only political ideology worth a damn is Treestumping, at this stage, you will discover what human you are or if you are a real human at all. People think the elites will replace humans with robots but if you are edenpilled itz more like sapes will replace themselves with robots, or go live like cannibal rapists in the third world instead. There is nothing for an 69 IQ to do in a society of 200+ IQ, only destroy or be a monkey dancing around for the amusement of others. It is thus better to be so muh dicky lording over a territory of cannibals where no 200 IQ smartboy ever wants to set foot (because it is a shithole), but the groid feels that he has chased those people out of his territory, giving his life permanent meaning guarding it from said people.

    It just works

  9. conductor says:

    No supporter of Libertarianism but surely there’s a better angle to take here, your point seems to lack strength. “Let’s imagine there is no longer any material scarcity in the world.” — seriously? Are you not also engaging in “intellectual masturbation” here? Status exists within the material world, how does one separate latent material scarcity from latent status scarcity?

  10. Aeoli Pera says:

    >Are you not also engaging in “intellectual masturbation” here?

    I’m accepting his theoretical core premise, so that the refutation by counterexample is both abstract and empirical.

    >Status exists within the material world, how does one separate latent material scarcity from latent status scarcity?

    An argument from counterexample does not require a better model. Demonstrating the contradiction is sufficient.

  11. Aeoli Pera says:

    Re: aiaslives

    Sidis was far more of a melonboon than I could ever aspire to be. In particular, the melonboon feels no duty to account to anyone for his own priorities, and thus argues only for the sake of expedience.

  12. Aeoli Pera says:

    >Just because guys with Asperger’s may be libertarians, doesn’t mean it would actually be good for them.

    I would compare it to feminism and the happiness of women.

    >hoppe is the poster boy for thardism paving the road to hell with golden bricks.

    The key to repairing a machine of irreducible complexity is not to insist it is the abstraction of a primary, fundamental component which holds all these complex implications in microcosm. It’s necessary to work the problem backward, as an anthropologist or a detective, and not forward as a theoretician or novelist. That is, an onion must be peeled from the outside.

  13. Schrödinger's Psych Evaluation says:

    @Aeoli,

    >Sidis was far more of a melonboon than I could ever aspire to be. In particular, the melonboon feels no duty to account to anyone for his own priorities, and thus argues only for the sake of expedience.

    “Melonboon”? Can you spare a cup of terminological clarification? To me, Sidis looks like a thallish melon. (Thallish face, melon frontal, and parietal-fauxcipital dual-back)

  14. Aeoli Pera says:

    His phrenology suggests a melon’s mind trapped in a neanderthal’s personality, which is to say a bigmelon MT. It’s the melon back which produces this particular combination of expedience and hubris. To wit: “If you haven’t already understood me, then you aren’t smart enough to deserve any further explanation.”

  15. bicebicebice says:

    Ask any ideologist how many people whould benefit from ideology x or religion y, everybody!

    “That is, an onion must be peeled from the outside.” Just let it boil itself into a soggy mess and
    sprinkle ot on your food some problems just problemize themselves out of existance. However, when you call capitalism communism, as they do in china, it just works. But when you call SJW-ism communism as we do in the west, or communism SJW-ism neither works.
    Was america really started by libertarians and their love of freedom, or was it by white pirates? Libertarianism shitlibism and lolberting all have one thing in common and that is skrawny or fat whiny bitches and bitch ass hoe antics mixed with reeking of assburgers, not a good optics if you want to win over thugmugs in general or anyone else for that matter.
    Itz like when kids say they are superman and play fight as superman, liberty is autism for manchildren. It is the male version of travelling to morocco and make nice with the world and get your head chopped off. A lot of these people are now in the alt-right. Good luck with that. heh

    “When someone finds a way for everyone on earth to be the most important person at the same time” DUDE add me on instagram.

    “Sidis was far more of a melonboon than I could ever aspire to be. In particular, the melonboon feels no duty to account to anyone for his own priorities, and thus argues only for the sake of expedience.” keeping others informed is just how you socialize and win goodboy social points! if Sidis had klled a bitch or two, he would drown in pussy in jail and be very articulate about the problem of society and why he killed a bitch or two, winning the admiration and praise of the entire world.

    Ehm I forgot what we was talking about.. right libertarianism dead. Really real stone cold dead. Kickstarter ideology at best, the hippy of 1969 isn’t a libby, whom even is this shit for? Feelz like you are mocking the handicapped at best and talking shit about a dead persons funerat at worst. Liberalism not even once.

    “yeam mannn just need dem freedumbs whoooo muh” bruh go live in san fran and just shut the hell up. Then again Democracy only worked in ancient greeks amongst ethnic homogenous peeps with an average IQ of 120

  16. conductor says:

    >I’m accepting his theoretical core premise, so that the refutation by counterexample is both abstract and empirical.

    You say theoretical I say hypothetical.

    >An argument from counterexample does not require a better model. Demonstrating the contradiction is sufficient.

    Ya responded to most of my comment but skipped over the “Let’s imagine there is…” part which is my point your both doing the same thing. Living in the land of make believe. No/without scarcity LOL. Both sides are dislodged from reality hence intellectual masturbation, no?

  17. bicebicebice says:

    Scarcity is interesting because if you ask a melon the world needs more melonism hence scarcity exists because lack of melonism but real scarcity does not exist as proved by 4 billion ooga boogas in africa.

  18. Obadiah says:

    From https://salo-forum.com/index.php?threads/the-gospel-according-to-thomas777.4482/page-17

    Its not so much ”altruism” as it is an innate individualism and a concomitant ‘live and let live’ ethos that is deeply ingrained in the White cultural mind and is probably a feature of deep evolutionary-psychological development that was wrought by development in a (basically) sparsely populated arctic climate in which social life was centered on a nuclear family unit and politics developed along the lines of loose confederations. Kevin MacDonald penned some interesting material on this in ”The Culture of Critique”.

    The problem with Whites isn’t that they’re ”nigger lovers” or pathological altruists (although some are, the majority are not). The problem is that the White man assumes that Blacks, Browns, Orientals, etc. think like he does. He doesn’t realize that non-Whites (with the exception of some highly developed races like the Japanese) have no meaningful concept of the individual, are entirely primitive in their awareness of self and conceptual horizon (particularly of social relationships) and that they will always follow a zero-sum and collectivist trajectory vis a vis race relations/politics even when its totally self-defeating to do so.

    For people of my generation, the OJ Simpson verdict was I believe somewhat instructive – it was bizarre to the uninitiated to see Negroes behaving as if the trial was a football game and the primitive tribalism that took hold of their simple minds. Mind you, I didn’t begrudge them for not caring about the victims (a race traitor prostitute and a Jew) but it was incredible how childlike their sensibility was about the whole thing.

    Whites – even stupid ones – simply don’t think that way. Its the way people think who are a millenium behind on the evolutionary ladder as it were.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s