Is Hoppean Libertarianism the most moral system?

The argument is that something which is owned by everyone is owned by nobody.

And something that is owned by nobody becomes the target of careless incompetence, mishandling, and eventual destruction.

per example.

The welfare office is not really owned by anybody. So the people in positions and the people getting welfare rape the shit out of the system for maximum profit.

Dysgenics is a real thing.

t. Someone who was homeless for a few years

is that like when Michael Ironside in Starship Troopers says "anything given has no value"

Pretty much. We see children destroy beautiful toys because they haven't had to sacrifice and pay for the cost of the toy.

Which is why UI is going to be universal slavery.

Because that UI is going to be spent on the stupidest shit because most humans have a quirk of psychology where "gifts" are sacrifices to their ego and model of how they stand socially.

>babies break toys therefore society is doomed
cool logic you fucking dinks. it's so easy to tell when someone is underage because all their metaphors are about children and high school and shit

the alternative is far worse

in a world where intellectual and physical labor become redundant from machines that can learn unsupervised, the only remaining value a human has is their biological material

the alternative to UI is a world where the poor have to rent out their bodies and minds as incubators for genetic and neurological experiments

your angry reaction doesnt really help your cause or make much sense.

Individuals vary in competence to great extremes but society is cumulatively not any smarter than a baby, even though we would very much hope otherwise.

I'm literally a 34 year old former submariner.

I told you, I was homeless for a few years. You get an understanding of how humans actually act under pressure. AKA along stereotypical racial/group lines.

There is no alternative to a world that has the capability to churn out hyper-predators after hyper-predators.

It would be an irony if rich people and/or AI complexes had some fun by marshaling the masses into leadership under a "Julius Caeser" template person and unleashed them against each other as a matter of play.

Human history has no obligation to be kind, idealistic, or agreeable to your moral models.

What have you learned when you were homeless?

Also, are you a Christian?

>no alternative to a world that has the capability to churn out hyper-predators after hyper-predators

that alternative is a collective nonlocally distributed organization that becomes the biggest hyper-predator to keep down lesser ones AKA "the state"

>Human history has no obligation to be kind, idealistic, or agreeable to your moral models.

sure, but don't get butthurt when the masses begin to work in their best interest in ways that don't throw game theory out the window for Carlyle fandom

>I was homeless for a few years
According to Hoppe you're trash and should be genocided.

>Libertarianism
>racial/group lines
group lines maybe
german vs polish
muslim vs non-muslim

yes, arabs are the same race as you
either that or there are 20+ races out there

>that queasy feeling you get when you spend to much time thinking about the future

No sir I do not like it.
Science was a mistake.

I learned that a magnetic cooking plate + special skillet is the best $70 I ever spent. I ate like a king on eggs and bacon...as long as I could find an outlet.

I learned that people will ignore the specter of tragedy until it comes to them.

And no I'm not a Christian. I think the concepts of karma and eventual justice are bunk unless broken down into notions of thermodynamics. You waste energy, you waste life.

The state is going to morph when people of ever-increasing IQs create and explore genes to produce ever-increasing IQs.

Then you throw dominance posturing and aggressive behaviors designed in...

The "state" will collapse into the confederation of city-states.

"...but don't get butthurt when the masses begin to work in their best interest "

The masses won't work in their best interest unless a populist Spartacus type of man arises for each "mass"/conglomeration of people.

And then we throw AI in the mix...

If you saw a homeless man before you were homeless yourself, what would you do?

If you saw a homeless man now, what would you do?

Before? I had pity and compassion for them
After? He's most likely going to parley the money into some addiction that becomes a downward spiral of destruction.

A lot of that is the lack of inertia in leaving a shitty area. There's people in South Central LA who've never gone beyond a 15 mile radius. Not even to the beach. The world looks like Los angeles crap to them.

>literally a former submariner
Wow cool, i'm so impressed that you're gay enough to live in a can underwater with 100 other dudes.
>I told you
how the fuck do you think this works? not everyone who replies to you is the same person

>Metaphors about children make you childish, not patronizing.

Haha nice one faggot

>Then you throw dominance posturing and aggressive behaviors designed in.

now you're assuming aggression is an inherent feature of the universe, whereas even the selected psychopath CEOs today have exponentially lower levels of aggression than the average simian thousands of years ago, stable and powerful states select for stability

it's stupid to spout "the universe does not care about your ideals", then proceed to assume aggression is ideal, especially in a social structure that stays intact only because impulsiveness got selected for when humans evolved for society, it's either hobo-tier logic or you're projecting your own experiences, which unlike our more primitive ancestors did not consist of eating each-other for food

>The state is going to morph when people of ever-increasing IQs create and explore genes to produce ever-increasing IQs

again, you assume increase intelligence will increase the stability/power of states, many people with schizophrenia have high IQs, it doesn't make them stable, we're seeing the schizostate phenomena in the dissolution between the CIA/NSA/FBI

" i'm so impressed that you're gay enough to live in a can underwater with 100 other dudes."

Not gay, just stupid. I would never recommend submarine service to a naval recruit. It's being stuck in a can with 120 other fuckers sharing two showers and toiler. It's being paid an insulting bonus for doing 5x the work of a normal sailor.

The closest thing to the hell of submarines is working on an old frigate.

I was talking about genetic engineering. Think Ender's Game type of training.

"many people with schizophrenia have high IQs, it doesn't make them stable, we're seeing the schizostate phenomena in the dissolution between the CIA/NSA/FBI"

But high IQ does not equal schizophrenia at all. There's far more low IQ schizophrenics who are left as disabled addicts because they can only quiet their brain with booze, nicotine, meth, or crack.

again, you assume runaway elitist genetic engineering will yield power and stability, rather than more likely result in disastrous instability and lead back to stabilization feedback mechanisms, in your methamphetamine-fueled vision of the world

>because they can only quiet their brain with booze, nicotine, meth, or crack

yeah because before their mind was constantly processing information

Power sure. Stability? never said anything about stability.

Well from personal experience, they make connections without sufficient supporting evidence.

EX: A schizophrenic (above average IQ but not by much. Maybe a 110-120) told me to look at all the shapes in corporate logos. He claimed it was a conspiracy for a NWO.

So I looked it up and realized that the creation of logos was its own industry and that a field called "shape psychology" had emerged. Different shapes impart different meanings. No NWO, just psychology in the service of advertising.

Power = stability, the only reason the Laws of the Universe are the Laws of the Universe are because they are stable

Not an argument

true enough, but that's what public works projects are for, be they governmental, corporate, religious, or individualist

The problem is that I think power is going to be far more disruptive to stability for a while.

But I'm not a fortune-teller. I'm just a gambler who sees various scenarios and realizes it's a con game to see the future when the rate of change is increasing.

And a darker intuition tells me stability might be more dystopian.

EX: Most people are forced to live in simulations. classically hedonic simulations would be a sort of hell in comparison to higher hedonics that man can cultivate and enjoy. Dystopia of base pleasures.

Or the simulation can be a moral-pedagogic tool where loyalty and notions of transcedence are associated with service to an AI complex or nation or city. A man molded into a tool so unerring that he can rationalize the difference between a simulation and a "real world". He might be fighting for a warlord but its his warlord who showed him a thousand years of struggle. A dystopia of classic virtue.

>The "state" will collapse into the confederation of city-states.
good, we should be less centralized
I mean city-states would be too small, but state-sized nations or regional nations would be better

>that I think

Does anyone care what you think? You're a retarded ex-navy grunt not a Stratfor analyst. Go on the webz and actually learn about this stuff before making bold claims on the bases of your age and "experience" if you want to have a valuable discussion instead of coming across as a retarded meth head.

>darker intuition

its the meth, your painting of the world is informed by meth and science fiction pop culture

I like how you triggered all the redditors and NEETs aka worthless people.

>>>
Underrated post.

>quotation marks
>earnest, self-aggrandizing response
dude what the fuck are you doing man?? is this literally your first day? i wasn't considering being a submariner but thanks for the advice i guess. here i am making fun of you and you're expounding about your life like fucking it's interesting or something

P H Y S I C A L L Y
R E M O V E D

"Human Trash" would probably refer to anyone who doesn't fit the mold of society in which they live in. So yes, even though someone might be a great worker, it still doesn't cover for his lack of religious vigor.

It could also be "Well he is a great worker, but he doesn't use all 36 gender types so he has to go."

I'd never do meth after staying at a shelter. The only "press dopamine button" I do is jacking off to Burmese Candlemaking schematics.

It's a very dangerous thing to mess with.

Psychedelics on the otherhand are amazing. Once a week party time is far better than fiending for something.

> it still doesn't cover for his lack of religious vigor.
>It could also be "Well he is a great worker, but he doesn't use all 36 gender types so he has to go."

except entire nations have been founded on the former example, whereas there are 0 examples of the latter, Peterson was asked to use they/him/her, 3 != 36

no one gives a fuck, this is the Veeky Forumstory we're here to talk about history and philosophy not LOL MY LIFE HAZ BEEN SO EDGY I know dozens of jackasses like you.

People have been told/forced to use certain formats (titles and such) to acknowledge one another since forever.

Your example was 36 gender types, medieval Japan didn't have that many titles for address.

>MY LIFE HAZ BEEN SO EDGY I know dozens of jackasses like you.

Meh. I guess the larger point is that personal experience has an impact on how you retroactively view the past and how you try calculate the future in relation to yourself and in relation to larger organizations and groups.

Especially since people try to ascertain the psychology and motives of figures without thinking about the lifeworld that surrounds each figure. But maybe that's just a function of people being mostly tribalistic.

take it to livejournal buddy

I was homeless too, the fact that there was a shelter at all should inform your opinion of human nature not hobos stabbing eachother over Juggs magazine. But again, no one gives a fuck, this is the Veeky Forumstory board, everyone has already thought about what you're claiming to spout as wisdom.

this

It's not the numbers I'm trying to emphasize, but more about the fact they want to force you to use certain words or titles, even though they are arbitrary, irrelevant or just straight stupid.

Back in the 1400's you better call the Pope by his proper "rank" or you'd get fucked over, just like how you better call a tranny zi or you'll get fucked over.
And yes, it is law in NY to call a tranny by *their* preferred pronouns

You're so retarded dude, i'm not even gonna argue with you because I can only imagine how much of a hard time you have getting thru the day if this is how you think about the world

>hould inform your opinion of human nature not hobos stabbing eachother over Juggs magazine.

Did I mention hobos stabbing each other? I mentioned that a lot of them have an addiction that binds them in a vicious feedback loop.

>everyone has already thought about what you're claiming to spout as wisdom.

Not really. Maybe some people on Veeky Forums but outside everyone seems oblivious to the consequences of increasing rates of change directed towards increasing rates of change.

it's like living in a world where most people are the equivalent of NPCs. It's horrible.

>Does anyone care what you think? You're a retarded ex-navy grunt not a Stratfor analyst

There's nothing more hilarious than ad hominem attacks and implied appeals to personal authority/superiority in an anonymous environment.

Like how stupid do you have to be to believe that your anonymous opinions somehow have more weight than the opinions an anonymous guy who might be roleplaying as hobo Namor?

>an anonymous guy who might be roleplaying as hobo Namor?
aka you. This is clearly you. As is this stop samefagging and stop talking about your stupid opinions

Cool argument.

>aka. you
lol
Whatever helps you sleep at night buddy.

Take the unapill

What? That doesn't even make sense. why would I lose sleep over you being a spastic old weirdo

Yes.

I already did, that's the problem!

Shhhhh, it's OK.
Just relax. Don't strain yourself thinking about it when it will only upset you.

>And something that is owned by nobody becomes the target of careless incompetence, mishandling, and eventual destruction.

Did the tragedy of the commons ever happen in real life?

Yeah the breakroom sink at work.

Modern bureaucracies are incarnations of the principle.

People only "own" their positions for a few years in a system which absolves people of responsibility. They have the freedom to kick the can towards future replacements until the cost of system complexity overwhelms the handlers.

People have far more incentive to milk a system for the few years they're in it than to plant sustainable programs and leadership.

>most moral
What is "most" mean when it comes to morals and what does Hoppe propose what is moral, amoral, and immoral???
>geniuses and superior people will not.
not demonstrably true, arguably the opposite (im not gonna argue that tho)
>a democratic ruler undertakes little to actively expel those people whose presence within the country contitutes a negative externality
whose job is it to decide whats positive or negative? If you take this ideology to the extreme you just come to one person, the smartest and fittest of them all, if you extrapolate this ideology it ends up in the hands of individuals...is he proposing people....just do what they want??? Old people are a drain on the economy, does Hoppe advocate deporting them or something?

He's angry because using children in a metaphor about society is absolutely retarded and was obviously not thought out, and yet someone uses that crappy logic to inform their ideologies.

>children in a metaphor about society is absolutely retarded

You've never observed children beating the shit out of toys because they don't understand what went into it? They only know that it's a "gift", not a "sacrifice".

The point is that people take far more care for their sacrifices than for the gifts they receive.

>someone uses that crappy logic

It's an observation, not a completely monolithic block of logic. People treat their gifts far worse than their sacrifices.

That holds true for anything though. Unless you hold personal stake in your job (like a farmer), there's no reason for you to not pass the problem to someone else, that can happen in a welfare state, and it can happen ina corporation, and it can happen in a society as a whole, whether your government or lack thereof is libertarian or not. The only way this makes sense is if everyone was a landowning farmer or self employed artisan

That leads to Hoppe's point about monarchs and aristocrats.

There is actual ownership which leads them to make less 'kick the can down' decisions than suits in modern government. If they squander, they squander the inheritance for their children and children's children.

Meanwhile, a national politician segregates any personal contact with the results of his decisions.

I'm not 100% convinced that it's totally right but it makes more sense after being channeled through bureaucracies for a large portion of my life.

>because they don't understand what went into it
First of all, you have no idea if that is a part of the childs motivation for destroying a toy or not, 2nd of all, you're trying to apply this bullshit to adults. The assertion that something given isn't as valuable is ridiculous, have you never seen someone cherish a gift? Do people just throw away their EBT cards without using them because they were just given to them? No, they fucking buy food with them. "Children break toys therefore lets be libertarian" yeah, solid

Monarchs squandered their lands and fortunes for their own personal gain all the time, Louis XIV's expenditures literally left his grandson without a head. A monarchy is literally Patriarch does the work, ancestors reap the rewards.

I would actually argue that it is the least moral system. At least fascist's n shit are fighting for some kind of racially pure imperial utopia, Hoppeans seem hardly more than business savvy hedonists.

>Do people just throw away their EBT cards without using them because they were just given to them?

No, they sell the benefits (illegally) for drugs or for other needed items because apparently people are such children that the government needs to specify that the money is only for food.

And because most people have absolutely crappy diets, most people on EBT buy absolute shit.

It's a sick system. $20 of nicotine liquid a month would do far more for the sanity of the homeless than exchanging $2 of benefits for a $1 of real money so they can get chemicals that make them not feel like such shit for a bit.

It's sicker when you realize the cost of the bureaucracy that provides comfy jobs, for political cocksuckers, and the cost of which exceeds the amount given.

Not to mention EBT is more welfare for major snack and drink corporations. That's a separate chain from the point about ToC but it's intertwined into the viciousness of the system.

>Children break toys therefore lets be libertarian" yeah, solid

It's a metaphor and far from the chain of logic and experience that led me to such great suspicion of "how things are"

People would rather own "compassion" for the homeless than own effective methods for reducing and treating such people.

>EBT is more welfare for major snack and drink corporations.
Yeah that's totally what the problem is, and not massive corn and sugar subsidies

That's a true point but doesn't that make the system more sick?

The bottom is bled out of money (given by gov) while the executive bleeds for the ravenous appetite of corps with successful lobbyists. And then the costs are passed down to the medical system which is another money trap.

>seriously acting as if children aren't just proto-adults and there's no overlap in behavior

>reddit spacing

>He reduces morality and philosophy to petty insults.
>neurotic degenerate sadists

>muh corporate subsidies
So another example of revolving door bureaucrats/politicians with no sense of intimate connection to the system treating the treasury as a bottomless pool to use to fund welfare programs for the undeserving?
:3