What is the deal with authoritarians and learned helplessness?

[Neodanthril]

Oh boy a libertarian. What degenerate behavior are you trying to justify through this belief? Is it drugs or some weird degenerate p*rn?

Other than scalping, which is obviously morally dubious and degenerate but in my experience libertarians are either temporarily embarrassed Nazis or p*rn/drug addicts and either one of these are likely on the tranny pipeline, so which one are you

 

[Frederica Bernkastel]

Stalin tard wrangled them and got pretty well on the nuke and space races.

Stalin is very over-rated. If the US did not finance the USSR's industrialization 1930s, and did not open a front against Hitler in 1940s, history would have been very different. By all measures, he was a pretty incompetent leader. He let Beria go around raping kids, caused a massive famine that was avoidable, and let Yezhov murder people left and right.
Stalin is only really a guy you look up to if you like killing Russians, fags, jews, and communists. That's why he's usually an icon for the far-right in Russia and even monarchists.

 

[grimacefetishist]

Libertarianism is dumb and the market will never be free. Everyone will never be equal. We are all the same in that we're all born powerless and it's not always up to us if stays that way.

 

[Male Idiot]

I am not saying Stalin was a good guy. I am not even saying great model. Just that it worked somewhat, if we look at it from a civilisation/society angle.

So far there has been no great model, though Theocracy and Monarchy did best. In fact I must say some form of Monarchy worked by far the best for 95% of the species history.
Cleopatra in time is closer to you and me than to the first pharaoh. That's how well Monarchy worked.

My family or the world isn't ruled by Jamal because Jamal would be curbstomped by any state, as Fentanyl Floyd found out. This is blindingly obvious for most.

Some form of organisation is needed, whenever it is called the state, the church, or Weyland-Yutani. You need a governing force to get people on mass to complete great works.

Explain what a libertarian equivalent would be, and how it won't just turn into a megacoroporate state dystopia that Visa, Blackrock and others are so keen on WEFing on us.

 

[Frederica Bernkastel]

Then why is the world not conquered by Jamal and his gang?

I am not saying Stalin was a good guy. I am not even saying great model. Just that it worked somewhat, if we look at it from a civilisation/society angle.

I'm not attacking your theory. I'm just saying Stalin is not the best example for a decent dictator. There are way better examples like Deng, Park Chung Hee, Pinochet or even Franco. Even Tito. Stalin was just not good at his role, and made a lot of mistakes because he was pretty dumb at times. Stalin is cited a lot, but he was successful largely because of how many times people saved his ass if anything.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Some form of organisation is needed, whenever it is called the state, the church, or Weyland-Yutani. You need a governing force to get people on mass to complete great works.

The libertarian objects not against organization per se, but against involuntary organization.
The state is a parasite threatening to put you in a cage or kill you if you don't pay taxes or obey its edicts and decrees.
Voluntary organization is morally, ethically, economically superior in pretty much every way.

Explain what a libertarian equivalent would be, and how it won't just turn into a megacoroporate state dystopia that Visa, Blackrock and others are so keen on WEFing on us.

Before I do, please understand that libertarianism is, at its core, more of a framework of rules, rather than some stratified concept.
Like, you can say that "this is communist art, this is communist architecture, these are communist institutions".
Rather than positing a certain set of small rules and characteristics, the libertarian stance is "this is a set of ground rules, as long as you obey those without exception or compromise, you are free to find what works for you".
The libertarian answer to the problem of social order (the possibility of conflict among people) is a decentralized non-statist approach. Namely, the right to self-defense is holy and may not be violated, so everybody is free to arm themselves to the teeth. Secondly, just as you don't produce your own shoes and phones, you rely on division of labor to get those things. So it is predictable that people will demand and supply dispute resolution organizations. Most libertarian thinkers agree that insurers will take on the role of fighting crime.
If need be, I can give you a long and detailed elaboration.

 

[Male Idiot]

View attachment 6941680

I'm not attacking your theory. I'm just saying Stalin is not the best example for a decent dictator. There are way better examples like Deng, Park Chung Hee, Pinochet or even Franco. Even Tito. Stalin was just not good at his role, and made a lot of mistakes because he was pretty dumb at times. Stalin is cited a lot, but he was successful largely because of how many times people saved his ass if anything.

I was just mentioning him for commies.
I realise that and I am just deepthunking.

Dictator is a very wide term.

Voluntary organisation doesn't work on large scales. Too many cooks spoil the broth.

Imagine a military run entirely by generals and having only generals. Movies made by comitee, if you want a real life example.


Morals and ethics don't matter. Even economicality is just a subdivision of efficiency.

Libertarians are only thinkers. It never got past that phase. Same with anarchies, they just don't work. A state or megacorp will come in from the outside and destroy it, if it does not fall apart like Chaz.

Americans are really silly about self defence. It is like a video game. They think they can outshoot a mob or invading army. There is no way you can take on a force of 10 men with just one, unless he is a robot that doesn't eat, sleep, or run out of ammo.

It is a really self indulgent fantasy that never, ever faced reality and won.

Capitalism must be regulated or it turns into a monopoly or oligarchy. United Banans and gunning down work unions, even the Wizards of the Coasts sending Pinkertons is how it ends. Once a corporation has no rivals, like Visa/Mastercard, it is freed from all the positives of capitalism and becomes you overlord. It will send its goons in. They are not IRS but will kill you all the same.

It ends in corporate or oligarch rule, which is the same as we got today. It is just Blackrock with extra steps.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Voluntary organisation doesn't work on large scales.

The existence of international corporations and international supply chains refutes your claim.

Morals and ethics don't matter.

They matter to human beings.
I should perhaps clarify: My arguments apply to humans. They do not apply to bacteria, fungi, spiders, and other non-human creatures.

A state or megacorp will come in from the outside and destroy it, if it does not fall apart like Chaz.

Again, where is the evidence?
Liechtenstein is a relatively free country, for over the past 100 years nobody has come in and destroyed it, or threatened to destroy it.

Americans are really silly about self defence. It is like a video game. They think they can outshoot a mob or invading army. There is no way you can take on a force of 10 men with just one, unless he is a robot that doesn't eat, sleep, or run out of ammo.

Except there is historical evidence of small inferior armies defeating the USA. Vietnam and Afghanistan, to name but two recent examples.

Capitalism must be regulated or it turns into a monopoly or oligarchy.

Where is the evidence for that?

United Banans and gunning down work unions, even the Wizards of the Coasts sending Pinkertons is how it ends.

Again, where is the evidence?

Once a corporation has no rivals, like Visa/Mastercard, it is freed from all the positives of capitalism and becomes you overlord.

You are mentioning companies in extremely regulated market.
Try to compete against them, the state will close you down.

It ends in corporate or oligarch rule, which is the same as we got today

The state leads to the consequences of the state.
Therefore, a non-state solution must be imposed, so that the consequences of the state be avoided.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Most libertarian thinkers agree that insurers will take on the role of fighting crime.

Ah, insurance agencies acting as police. Fucking topkek

 

[Neodanthril]

involuntary organization

The family unit is an imposition on children who are involuntarily organized into a mother father child organization. Do human beings have the moral right to exsanguinate their birth givers to free themselves from this imposed and involuntary organizational system

 

[Male Idiot]

International corporations are monopolies that enforce their will on you like a state. Visa+Mastercard.

States aren't human beings, and some say politicians fon't count either.

Lichtenstein is a police state. I was thinking about it. It is a retirement home for the rich. It has no value outside letting Trump, Soros, Zuckypoo and Musk have a retirement home. It also has a gigantic police with cameras up your ass before it was cool in UK and Cyna!

Afgans were a theocratic cult fighting a dying empire at home. They are a theocracy, vietcong was commies. They both had bettwr motivation and organisation. They weren't fighting for "holy profit association and 2nd amendment" or for oil loot like the US.

Evidence: Latam banan republics.

Evidence: Google the court cases about union murders.

The US corporations control the state through lobbying.

A non state solution is not viable against a state, whenever you legally call it that or not. Call it a kingdom, corporation etc. Many corporations use slaves, like the Middle East.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Lichtenstein is a police state. I was thinking about it. It is a retirement home for the rich. It has no value outside letting Trump, Soros, Zuckypoo and Musk have a retirement home. It also has a gigantic police with cameras up your ass before it was cool in UK and Cyna!

What?
That is new to me, I'll look it up.

 

[Male Idiot]

What?
That is new to me, I'll look it up.

It is a tiny playhole for retired elites. Similar to what the Vatican is for high ranking priests. The Vatican arguably held more power and was a more tempting target in the middle ages.

 

[Raven of the Burning God]

If that were true, then why are there libertarian humans?

Because non-libertarian ideologies and their institutions have created sufficiently robust systems of ordered liberty that naive luxury ideologies like Libertarianism or Communism can be entertained without their proponents being beaten to death in the streets.

History is a repetitive tale of some successful system of organization creating and accumulating wealth on a scale that allows dumbshit retards to try something else for a while before their dumbshit retardation hollows out the pre-existing institution and the empire upon which they depend collapses.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Because non-libertarian ideologies and their institutions have created sufficiently robust systems of ordered liberty that naive luxury ideologies like Libertarianism or Communism can be entertained without their proponents being beaten to death in the streets.

History is a repetitive tale of some successful system of organization creating and accumulating wealth on a scale that allows dumbshit retards to try something else for a while before their dumbshit retardation hollows out the pre-existing institution and the empire upon which they depend collapses.

Statism is a picture perfect example of a "naive luxury ideology"
Big Brother is watching me? Great! Of course he's doing it to take care of me and protect me.
Plus, it takes a real dumbshit retard to not realize that societies collapsed thanks to other statists who started a war and just want a different state than the one being practiced. How are we gonna do that when we are anti-war?

 

[Raven of the Burning God]

Non-statism isn't very good at defending itself against statists, as a practical matter.

A non-statist starts farming some land and statists will come around talking about "private property" and kidnap/murder the non-statist if it comes to that.

 

[redcent]

Yeah, I've noticed it too. Figured A&Hers are mostly weed smoking NEETS talking politics so they can give an excuse as to why their life sucks and how "it's always someone else's fault" instead of the one single person in control of their lives: themselves.

And instead of doing something practical, they come to kiwifarms to bitch and whine. And with all those hours spent posting have gone, yet another day passes where their life still hasn't improved. But hey, you got 3 updoots on some text wall you posted. Truly, the internet is such a great help.

On the bright side, it keeps them distracted from shooting schools.


... I hope.



I wouldn't call them authoritian either. The ones hoping for a politician doing anything useful (lol) are the same guys who would go all ACAB. They hate it when it's them getting their asses handed to them. In the end though, cops, politicians, they serve the people. In the long run, it is the people around them that sets the rules.

 

[Male Idiot]

As much as I want to rout for the Reich option, monarchy has shown itself consistently through history to work fine enough. I'm not even a monarchist but I can see why people like it. It not only worked, it dominated the species for most of its existence and produced civilisations that lasted for millenia.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

As much as I want to rout for the Reich option, monarchy has shown itself consistently through history to work fine enough. I'm not even a monarchist but I can see why people like it. It not only worked, it dominated the species for most of its existence and produced civilisations that lasted for millenia.

I agree with you insofar as monarchy is economically and morally superior over socialism and socialist systems such as democracy
However, monarchy is still inferior to a free society

 

[Neodanthril]

work fine enough

The problem with monarchy is people tend to get real shooty and stabby when the monarch dies