Libertarian RMB

WA Delegate: The Amerikanisches Reich of ThinkPads (elected )

Founder: Whipjangle

BoardActivity History Admin

World Factbook Entry

Visit a region where you can gain the benefit of a small group of like minded players, but with no other restrictions, where your rights end at the tip of the other guy's nose and where smaller government is better government, and no government may be best of all.


Embassies: Red Army of the USSR, Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, USSF, The Red Fleet, Benevolent Capitalism, Libertarian Capitalist Zone 716, The Mystical Council, Peoples Federation of Qandaristan, Dill Country, Neoreaction, The Jedi Council, and ACA.

Tags: Social, Casual, Featured, Password, Conservative, Liberal, Libertarian, Medium, Founderless, and Serious.

Regional Power: Moderate

Libertarian contains 13 nations, the 1,033rd most in the world.

Password required

Today's World Census Report

The Most Extreme in libertarian

The World Census developed the following ranking based on a rather vague survey of nations to uncover 'odd or fundamentalist social, economic, or political systems'.

As a region, libertarian is ranked 4,125th in the world for Most Extreme.

#NationWA CategoryMotto
11.The United States of KinofopiaWA MemberNew York Times Democracy“Wewe kufa.”
12.The Incorporated States of Ron Pauls ToupeeInoffensive Centrist Democracy“Economic freedom”
13.The Confederacy of NaafInoffensive Centrist Democracy“So we evolve”
Page:  «  1  2  »

Regional Happenings

More...

Libertarian Regional Message Board

By the way the United States had a basically open border to the south for a century without mass immigration from Latin America.

The mass immigration from Latin America started when the government started to hand out FREE STUFF (Food Stamps, "emergency" health care and on and on).

The southern border is over a thousand miles long - even the Soviets would have problems preventing people crossing a border like that.

The key is to roll back the hand out of FREE STUFF.

And Donald Trump (like the late Juan Peron in Argentina) is a classic FREE STUFF candidate - he is not going to roll anything back (not even a bit).

On the contrary it will be more FREE STUFF for everyone under him.

As the Republic (like Rome before it) collapses.

Milton Hayek

This not about small government anymore, it might be too late for that. If I was American voter, I'd settle for candidate who doesn't actively want to destroy white Americans.

If Cruz manages to slash federal govt after getting elected, good for him, and good for America. I'd be genuinely happy for them to be proven wrong about Cruz.
But if Cruz is serious about getting elected, he needs to do something about his supposed ineligibility.
The way I see it, if his mother was US citizen, he is natural born citizen of US. Good enough for me. But not good enough for Americans. It might cost him election, unless he gets some sort of legally binding supreme court ruling that he is natural born citizen, or it WILL haunt him. Was Trump harsh on Cruz regarding eligibility? Well, Democrats are gonna be harsher.

If Cruz tries to slim down govt, unelected bureaucracy will do "damage control" (damage being Cruz getting elected), and stop him.
Cruz is not more likely to slim down government than Trump is to close borders and expell illegals. Trump is tricky enough to be able to go around unelected bureaucracy. The moment Cruz decides he'll play even remotely by the rules, it'll be the moment he lost.

One thing that does work for Cruz, in my mind, was that even if he was for a moment supported by establishment against Trump, they dropped him pretty quickly in favour of Marco Rubio when it looked like Rubio might have a chance. That implies THEY do see him as genuine threat. Of course, they see Trump as number one enemy, and because of that I cannot help but see him in even better light.

If it comes down to Cruz vs Trump in final round of primaries, shouldn't we be more suspicious of whomever establishment favours for nomination?

You whine about being called a fascist, and then this:

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:When did I say that I favour that big government? I'd prefer if Nazi Germany released prisoners from their concentration camps, but if that was impossible to convince them to do, I'd prefer they'd at least feed and clothe those prisoners.


Case closed. You don't oppose the people being in the concentration camp even though they weren't criminals but innocent Jews, but think they should have been fed and clothed better.

The ad hominem started with you about me some time ago. Don't like it? Then don't serve it.

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:I sometimes do requests, but when they are followed by kind word, not insults.


Oblivious hypocrite.

The rest of your post is the usual froth at the mouth ravings using a series of incidents in one night in one area of one town in one country to justify your authoritarian/totalitarian, racist-hinting tendencies.

I've called you out for it some time ago, and you resent it, deny it, then make more posts merely vindicating my argument.

Keep ranting if it makes you feel better, but I won't be listening or reading.

The Confederation of Paul Marks wrote:By the way the United States had a basically open border to the south for a century without mass immigration from Latin America.
The mass immigration from Latin America started when the government started to hand out FREE STUFF (Food Stamps, "emergency" health care and on and on).
The southern border is over a thousand miles long - even the Soviets would have problems preventing people crossing a border like that.
The key is to roll back the hand out of FREE STUFF.
And Donald Trump (like the late Juan Peron in Argentina) is a classic FREE STUFF candidate - he is not going to roll anything back (not even a bit).
On the contrary it will be more FREE STUFF for everyone under him.
As the Republic (like Rome before it) collapses.


Excellent post.

The Night-Watchman State of Milton Hayek wrote:Case closed. You don't oppose the people being in the concentration camp even though they weren't criminals but innocent Jews, but think they should have been fed and clothed better.

There were more victims than just Jews. 5.93 million Jews and and least as much gentiles. Red cross and other charities can, and did send prisoners some packages with food, clothes, medicine, etc. Did they supported concentration camps, because they wanted prisoners to at very least be treated better?

You continue to interpret everything I say in most insane way possible. You are incapable of assuming than your opponent might make hold certain beliefs differing from yours with best intentions in mind, everyone but you must be stark-raving murderous lunatic, or your narrow world-view would collapse: "Could it mean I am not misunderstood champion of truth and justice? Nah, I'll just call everyone else names."
I specifically, at the start, said that my first choice would be if there was no concentration camps in the first place. You then openly lie, with evidence right in front of everyone's eyes, about me supporting them. I baited you into doing it, because I suspected you'd do it. And you did.

And you keep making accusations without refuting any of my points, seemingly they don't count because it was I who said them.

If I judged you by the same insane standards you judge me, I'd assume that since you object to expulsion of refugees from Germany, you support German women being raped. I could also assume that you support German and American welfare state, since you support mass immigration of peoples who will vote for more welfare. But I am not gonna make assumption like that. Because I am not "everyone but me is Hitler" insane.

The Night-Watchman State of Milton Hayek wrote:racist-hinting tendencies

Racist hinting? I beg your pardon, there was no hinting, I am racist. Why aren't you? Are IQ tests racist? Are French hospitals racist for administering test for sickle-cell anaemia only to black babies, and no white ones? (Because whites don't get it)

The Night-Watchman State of Milton Hayek wrote:fascist

No a fascist. Modern neo-nazis are dumb larpers, holocaust deniers are idiots who can't count to three, or they'd notice that there was millions of Jews before the war, and there weren't that many after it, anti-semites apparently think Jews have mind control beams they use to brainwash innocent gentiles. Fascist is merely progressive from 1930s, I am reactionary, and for someone like you, that is much worse.

If you are incapable of refuting arguments, and keep lying outright, I have nothing more to say to you.

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:If you are incapable of refuting arguments.


Your ravings don't constitute an argument, your ravings are your ravings, and yours alone.

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:and keep lying outright


You are still happy to tolerate the existence of concentration camps:

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:
I'd prefer if Nazi Germany released prisoners from their concentration camps, but if that was impossible to convince them to do, I'd prefer they'd at least feed and clothe those prisoners.


So where is the lie?

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:I have nothing more to say to you.


I'm happy to hear it, and you should stick to it.

You never have anything to say to me or anyone anyway but self-justification for why totalitarian/authoritarian is best in a region founded on libertarian values and then gets very angry when people disagree with you.

Very strange behavior.

You're an attention-seeker who evidently has run out of friends to rant at and so seeks to do so to a bunch of strangers on the internet who you knew may find your views unpalatable if you managed for one minute to stop ranting, that is.

Kindly let the grown-ups have the regional message board back and stop filling it with your babbling unless you somehow miraculously have something intelligent to say.

The Night-Watchman State of Milton Hayek and The Empire of Snifkowoland: come on dudes. look to improve our world. ww2? really?! wtf!
as for the election, my views are these: bern is the disaffected, the poor young. hillary is the classic dems, and has half decent dem policies. trump is a populist, and will most likely win. cruz seems to be a rare republican that might try to reduce debt. but every republican i have known has blown out the debt/deficit spending. actions speak louder than words. only bill clinton reduced debt, implemented greenspan policies of deregulation and free market etc. the issues with america are the following: electoral system not representative, tax system too complex, tax system taxes income not wealth, excessive govt power and regulation.

Improving world would be hard if someone I am supposed to work for that goal will interpret everything I say as secret desire for gassing Jews. If I am denied basic humanity, there is no room for cooperation.
Bringing up WW2 was just me trying to get him to admit that he'll twist everything I say, it was him saying equivalent of "only a witch would deny being witch!".
I wonder if prisoners of those camps, who accepted food from their captors, were "tolerating concentration camps", since rather than all perish trying to escape, they were accepting food. Also, apparently Oliver Twist was douche-bag, since he said "please, sir, I want some more".

The Empire of Snifkowoland wrote:
I wonder if prisoners of those camps, who accepted food from their captors, were "tolerating concentration camps", since rather than all perish trying to escape, they were accepting food.


The prisoners of the camps were inside the camps, their conditions were intolerable for them considering many were gassed and murdered in various other ways such as being worked to death, were not actually fed well so starved to death, or died of the cold and illness resulting from their horrific maltreatment.

You however, outside this situation, proposed that you supported the premise of concentration camps, which were death camps, as long as people were fed and clothed well - was this before or after they were murdered by firing squad or gassing on the basis of being "undesirables"?

You are an exercise and a warning in the extreme intellectual limits of those with authoritarian/totalitarian tendencies and a healthy warning to all those who stand against tyrants that there will always be those who follow tyrants due to their own lack of intellectual foresight and immature child-like rationale.

One born every minute, as they say. If that's true then the future is a bleak one.

I'm skipping your posts from here on as they make me sick.

[quote]murdered in various other ways such as being worked to death, were not actually fed well so starved to death, or died of the cold and illness[/quote] so wishing fewer of them starved / worked / frozen to death is fascism? if anyone successfully convince fuhrer to increase their food rations 50%, that person would be complicit in Holocaust, by decreasing deathrates?

Someone who prefers there being no concentration camp as his first choice, his second choice prisoners not being starved to death, is a fascist - MH premise
Prisoners of concentration camp first choice would be there being no concentration camps, their second choice was them not being starved to death - indisputable fact
Hence, according to MH logic, prisoners of concentration camps were fascist, since they accepted premise of concentration camps, by wishing to be fed better.

Only a witch would deny being a witch... I say am not a witch, and this is a proof I am one.
etc...

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics