I actually like libertarian americans

>libertarian americans
youtube.com/watch?v=ZITP93pqtdQ

>civil war was about states rights
it's all so tiresome

>they're surprisingly common in Canada. the problem with the USA is that your civil war got states rights immediately associated with ebil slavery racism so now it's hard to criticize the satanic federal cartel that rules over you like cattle without getting labeled a racist.

It was never about states rights. Just read any speech or congressional record from the period.

>libertarians are a lot more consistent in my view than republicans or liberals too. it feels like most democrats I talk to pick half their political stances based on what they imagine is most opposite to "the enemy"

On the surface they are. The problem with libertarianism is that true to its nature, there are a lot of degrees of acceptable government interference, which has always interfered with its ability to coalesce into an actual political movement pretty much well, anywhere. Also, like so many fringe political movements, it attracts nutjobs whose understanding of constitutional law - and often their grip on reality - is tenuous at best.

More like the optics employed since the civil war, or at least in modern times, is used to undermine arguments for states rights.

it's weird how in Canada we can openly advocate for secessionist movements and all federal cucks can do is timidly stare at the floor but in a couple kilometers across the border arguing for state autonomy will get you compared to Hitler.

Libertarians are fringe because they entertain ideas like child markets and private roads and say shit like "Lenin was actually a libertarian" and "Mao Zedong was actually trying to tear down the state but CCP bureaucrats stood in his way".

>I'm not saying that I PERSONALLY would pay thousands of dollars to pop a 13 year old's boy-pussy in an unregulated bidding war, just that I don't think the state has any place in my bedroom, it's like Mao said....
>Yes, Mao Zedong, the Chairmen of China. You see he actually was something of a libertarian himself
>No, I don't consider myself a communist. More of a Hayekian-Lenninist
>But back to the topic at hand, of course there's nothing wrong with monopolizing Insulin per se, but you have to admit that if big pharma cartels weren't backed to the military-industrial complex and diabetics could instead exchange sexual favors from their underage children for life saving medication in a market of free exchange it would be an objective improvement on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Attached: 4-2-997x1200.jpg (997x1200, 146.02K)

>[W]hile Marx had centered his attack on market capitalism per se, the major focus of Lenin's concerns was on what he conceives to be the highest stages of capitalism: imperialism and monopoly. Hence Lenin's focus, centering as it did in practice on State monopoly and imperialism rather than on laissez-faire capitalism, was in that way far more congenial to the libertarian than that of Karl Marx.

>In recent years, the splits in the Leninist world have brought to the fore a still more left-wing tendency: that of the Chinese. In their almost exclusive stress on revolution in the undeveloped countries, the Chinese have, in addition to scorning Right-wing Marxist compromises with the State, unerringly centered their hostility on feudal and quasi-feudal landholdings, on monopoly concessions which have enmeshed capital with quasi-feudal land, and on Western imperialism. In this virtual abandonment of the classical Marxist emphasis on the working class, the Maoists have concentrated Leninist efforts more closely on the overthrow of the major bulwarks of the Old Order in the modern world.

>[T]he Communists did not attempt to impose socialism upon the economy for many years after taking power: in Soviet Russia until Stalin’s forced collectivization of the early 1930s reversed the wisdom of Lenin’s New Economic Policy, which Lenin’s favorite theoretician Bukharin would have extended onward towards a free market.

mises.org/library/left-and-right-prospects-liberty

They actually said this shit LMAO

>libertarian shilling govmnt
pic unrelated?

I just like guns, whats wrong with that? You dont want to own guns?

They are stupid retards. Cannot imagine living with them.

They really aren't all that cool unless you think the Kochs are something worth dying for

faggot

>they're surprisingly common in Canada
No
> the problem with the USA is that your civil war got states rights immediately associated with ebil slavery racism
Retard
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech

Why do they bring guns to protests?

libertarians are unbelievably cringe, they think "rights" exist, and that "constitutions" matter
the dogs like to bark

they look cool with the guns

lol take your psychobabble elsewhere Sigmund

those aren't liberarians. Libertarians are anti-state, not pro-state (no pun intended) like the dudes in that pic

Were these guys quickly arrested or at least forced to go home for casually walking around like they're ready for a warzone or is that considered normal and acceptable in the US of A?

Attached: EWEyW1oUwAMT1fG.jpg (960x1200, 191.06K)

Libertarians usually keep to themselves more in the US and in general, also American politics are heavily tribalistic, both rightoid ogros and leftoid ogros are literal stereotypes of their respective ideologies and have almost no nuance in them. Also a majority of them are bootlickers regardless of their party affiliation and don't question authority, very contrary to their based founding fathers.

No, why would they be?

testing

Because it's fucked up? How long would it take for so many rifles to mow down dozens of civilians

Why would they shoot at random civilians?

Notice how he didn't say that?