capitalizt reblogged
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money." - Margaret Thatcher
capitalizt reblogged
One of the tenets of militaristic fascism in America is the oft-repeated slogan that “you don’t have to agree with the wars to honor those who fight them for us.” Something to this effect is repeated thousands of times during Memorial Day bloviations all across the fruited plain. And it is all complete nonsense. “Honoring” paid killers for the state for participating in non-defensive, unjust wars only serves to make it more likely that there will be even more unjust wars in the future. And it rewards individuals for engaging in some of the most sinful and reprehensible behavior known to mankind.
There have been one or two exceptions in American history, but in general what Americans are “memorializing” on Memorial Day (which began as “Decoration Day” shortly after Lincoln’s war) is wars of conquest, imperialism, mass murder of foreigners and the confiscation of their property, the abolition of civil liberties at home, the slavery of military conscription, and the debt, taxes, and inflation that are used to pay for it all. The state orchestrates never-ending memorials to itself and its wars because war is the health of the state (and in almost all cases, the deadly enemy of freedom and prosperity).
Thomas DiLorenzo (via laliberty)
capitalizt reblogged
dee43i42nt42us42a42
capitalizt reblogged
“I have never understood why it is “greed” to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.”
Thomas Sowell (via maybenextseason)
capitalizt reblogged
Anonymous asked:
why are you anti gun gabbie?
Well, there’s a few reasons. But I really don’t want to start a massive debate over it so I’ll keep it short and if you want to argue with me, go here.
I live in England and we do’t have guns and the gun crime rate is a lot lower, mass killings are rare to nonexistent and it’s just overall really nice to know nobody on the street is carrying a gun and I am in no immediate danger. Australia abolished their guns and since then things have improved a lot (It’s been nearly 2 decades and there have been no mass shootings and just generally things seem to have improved)
I think it’s crazy to let people carry something that could turn them into a killing machine in no time at all and kill 20 people in 5 minutes. To me, that’s mad.
But I’m not American and I realise the situation is different over there but still… so many people are killed by guns it’s just so sad to see them not decreasing in popularity much.
southern-conservatism
Maybe that works in England but here criminals don’t respect laws and find ways to hurt people. No one is going to tell me when and how I can protect myself and take away my best defense.
It doesn’t work in England. Crime has gone up since they have banned guns, Someone is misinformed.
I'm pretty sure the surge in knife crimes compensated for the drop in gun crimes. Murderers will always murder, no matter which weapons you try to take out of their hands.
capitalizt reblogged
thevodka-aunt-deactivated201511
Anonymous asked:
Anarchism or Minarchism?
Minarchism.
Minarchists represent!
Minarchism on the road to anarchism? Anyone?
Minarchism isn't a transition phase. Minarchism is an end-phase. While on the road to anarcho-capitalism, you obviously have a transition phase where everything is being sold off to private companies, but that's not minarchism. Not to mention that minarchism is not immoral and arises naturally from anarcho-capitalism anyway.
capitalizt reblogged
thevodka-aunt-deactivated201511
Anonymous asked:
Anarchism or Minarchism?
Minarchism.
Minarchists represent!
Minarchism on the road to anarchism? Anyone?
butmuhgains
Minarchism is minimal government. It’s not “on the road to anarchism”
ancap-princess
It could be.
concerninglibertyfirst
LMFAO. if you advocate for any state at all = you advocate violence against non-violent/innocent people who would like to opt out of your fantastic idea which needs to be forced onto ppl at gun point. #letstrytobeconsistent shall we? opt for voluntaryism!
ancap-princess
I like how you’re missing the “on the road to” part. Straight-up smashing the state right now starting tonight grab your guns boys will only lead to a power vacuum and probably something worse. What we need to do is localize government functions, preferably down to the city level Ideally, this would lead to government functions being divided up between private enterprises, and the real core of government, that is internal security and external defense, would be dissolved completely, to be left in the hands of the armed citizens.
Yes, we get rid of 80%, and then we keep going. But the first 80% still needs to be removed.
Minarchism isn't the transition phase into anarchism: anarchism is the hypothetical transition phase into the most moral, says Rothbard, minarchism. Do you guys even Nozick?
capitalizt reblogged
Today in History, May 23rd, 1957 —- Chairman Mao announces the beginning of The Great Leap Forward.
The Great Leap Forward was Chinese communist leader Mao Tse Tung’s pet project to rapidly industrialize and and collectivize China. In essence, the Great Leap Forward was Mao’s plan to turn China into the communist utopia he fought for most of his life. The project began with collectivization of the populace. In a matter of months, 700 million people would divided up between almost 27,000 communes across the nation. Each commune was assigned a part leader who oversaw the commune’s work and ensured planned quotas were met. Private property was eliminated as was all forms of commerce. The idea behind this was to eliminate class differences and make all citizens as equal as possible. A part of the collectivization of the populace was the institution of a new agricultural revolution. It was hope that with collective efforts, the people could produce an overabundance of grain, which would help fuel a new industrial economy.
The second and most important goal of the Great Leap Foward was to rapidly industrialize the nation. One of Mao’s obsessions was in the production of steel. In fact it was his goal that in 15 years China would produce more steel than the United States. New steel factories and foundries were built all over China. The obsession of steel production went so far that peasants were made to produce steel in special backyard furnaces. For the most part these people, who grew up in a life of simple agriculture, had little to no education in metallurgy. As a result, most of the steel produced was of poor quality.
The life of a Chinese person living in a commune during The Great Leap Forward was pretty bleak. Most time was spent working on the collective farm. When not working on the farm they were typically making steel. There was little to no free time, and eventually people were worked harder and harder as production quotas increased. Many thousands of Chinese labors were worked to death trying to meet impossible quotas. Party leaders whose commune’s could not meet quotas, or who protested the tyranny of the quota system were executed.
The emphasis on steel production and industrialization had a terrible side effect. After a few years of the Great Leap Forward steel production had hit record levels in China. Unfortunately people cannot eat steel. The mass numbers of workers employed in the steel industry caused their to be a deficit in the labor needed to grow food. Worse yet, the new agricultural commune system was beginning to fail. Harvest after harvest overworked and exhausted peasants produced less and less. Part of Mao’s new agricultural plan depended on new farming machinery produced from China’s new steel industry. However the poor quality steel that was produced caused machinery to break down easily and often. By 1959 the several regions of China began to face a terrible famine. Millions began to starve. In response the Chinese government did the unthinkable by increasing grain exports to enhance its international prestige. This combined with drought and poor weather culminated in one of the worst famines in human history. Between 1959 and 1961 between 20 million and 40 million people died of starvation. Growing you own food was illegal, so people were often forced to eat tree bark, insects, weeds, and other marginal food sources. In some instances the most desperate were forced to resort to cannibalism. Another 2-3 million were executed for criticizing the program.
Due to the failures of the Great Leap Forward, Mao Tse Tung was removed as head of the Communist Party and sidelined in the government. He would later regain his position by creating a social-political movement called the “Cultural Revolution”, a propaganda movement designed to instill hard line communism into the country’s youth, and more importantly eliminate his enemies and critics. The Cultural Revolution would lead to another two decades of death, torture, and tyranny under Chairman Mao.
Source: historylearningsite.co.uk
capitalizt reblogged
Just watch it.
cutebabe
oh……my fucking
No, seriously. Watch the video.
but guys…can you imagine what would happen if someone hacked the highways?
timetravellingtimelord
tegansenpai
SIGNAL BOOST THIS SHIT
I WANT THIS FUTURE
pwnyponymod
yes
doyouevenliberty
Would this mean privatized roads?
But…muh roads
doyouevenliberty
You spelled ‘government’ wrong, Conley. It is not spelled ‘r-o-a-d-s’.
Had the roads been privatised much earlier, private companies would have enacted this lucrative idea in a heartbeat. Don't stop at Solar Freakin' Roadways: start looking in to privatising roads.
capitalizt reblogged
thinksquad-deactivated20190405
capitalizt reblogged
sixmilliondeadinternets
Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.
chaz-gelf
To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:
Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?
Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255. On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.
And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!
a-little-melancholy
“On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.” I about pissed myself laughing at this.
*incoherent giggling* XD
I will always love this
capitalizt reblogged
radicalanarchism
"There are not enough jails, not enough policemen, not enough courts
to enforce a law not supported by the people.”
Hubert H. Humphrey (via moralanarchism)
capitalizt reblogged
Individualism, as I understand it, is not opposed to community. I am in favour of clubs, associations and co-operative ventures of every conceivable kind. There should be as many and as varied a set of associations as people want. The one essential condition is that they should be voluntary.
Michael Prowse, “Paternalist Government is Out of Date” in The Libertarian Reader (via anarchei)
capitalizt reblogged
Way back in 1850 the great free market economist, Frederic Bastiat, famously instructed his French readers on the “broken window fallacy”. He decisively proved that destroying assets so that money can be spent on their replacement does not cause economic growth nor increase societal wealth. But now it turns out that was not the end of the matter. Apparently, French socialists have been looking for a way around Bastiat’s proof for the last 164 years and have finally come up with an answer. Namely, to break the frames, not the window! What has happened is that the government ordered 200 new trains to replace existing units. This is supposed to goose France’s flagging socialist GDP because such trains do embody a lot of metal, electronics, furnishings and labor—even if this infrastructure “investment” maneuver does require scrapping the perfectly serviceable units now in operation. But in a rebuke to Bastiat, the specifications for the new trains required that they be too wide to fit the 1,200 train stations that dot the French rail network. That is, the French government will now tear down the stations so that the new trains will fit. French dirigisme is a wondrous thing. The GDP will now get a double dose of “investment” it doesn’t need and that the French state (sic: taxpayers) can ill afford.
And here’s Zero Hedge:
In a time before the New Normal “fairness doctrine” where socialized companies such as GM have 60% more recalls in 5 months than they had sales in the prior year, a story such as the following would belong at best to a surreal “Polak” joke. Unfortunately, in this centrally-planned day and age, it is all too real. Reuters reports that in order to boost GDP and to cement that even under hard-core socialism France is still a manufacturing powerhouse, the French national rail company SNCF had ordered some 2000 trains for an expanded regional network from the national rail operator RFF. There was just one problem: the trains were too wide.
And since the local station platforms can not fit the misshaped trains, France now has to spend countless millions and add to its already disturbing budget deficit in order to repair and construct wider stations. The good news, of course, is that France gets to double count the benefit of the GDP “boost” - first for the screwed up train order, all thanks to some bureaucrat who didn’t feel like double checking his numbers, and second to reconstruct all of its incompatible train stations. Surely this is the purest definition of economic “growth.” …
How could such an idiotic mistake take place: does nobody double check anything under a socialist utopia? Apparently not:
The mix-up arose when the RFF transmitted faulty dimensions for its train platforms to the SNCF, which was in charge of ordering trains as part of a broad modernisation effort, the Canard Enchaine reported.
The RFF only gave the dimensions of platforms built less than 30 years ago, but most of France’s 1,200 platforms were built more than 50 years ago. Repair work has already cost 80 million euros ($110 million).
Still, it wouldn’t be a story about socialist success if it wasn’t someone else’s fault: apparently in this case the responsibility lay in the “absurd rail system” changes made by the previous government.
Transport Minister Frederic Cuvillier blamed an “absurd rail system” for the problem, referring to changes made by a previous government in 1997. “When you separate the rail operator (RFF) from the user, SNCF, it doesn’t work,” he told BFMTV.
Hopefully the French will get rid of Hollande and lose faith in the lost socialist cause, turning to a more peaceful and moral alternative. There is no proper libertarian party around here, just plenty of statists unfortunately. Sigh.
capitalizt reblogged
Guess what everybody’s going as this Halloween.
capitalizt reblogged
At least capitalism, when people attempt “not true capitalism”, it leads to everyone being better off.
When people attempt “not true communism”, millions die.