Anarchocrapitalism, "libertardianism", et al.

[jamesd at echeque.com]

On 1/4/2018 1:56 PM, Kurt Buff wrote:
> Capitalism is the belief that free men in free exchange of privately
> owned resources (including especially themselves) will result in
> prosperity, peace and more freedom.

g2s is trying to manufacture tribalism on the basis of covetousness, 
envy, and theft.

Libertarianism is a response to this effort

The left wing effort to turn econonomic categories into tribes was never 
terribly successful, and now the left is more focused on trying to 
generate tribalism on the basis of sexual identity and race, generate 
tribalism on the basis of actually existent tribes.

Which is a lot more successful.

Also a lot more likely to lead to genocide.

Libertarianism is paralyzed by this turn, which renders libertarianism 
irrelevant.

Instead of stealing the bakery, or price controlling baker's inputs and 
outputs, they demand the baker cheer at a gay wedding.

Which, on the face of it, does not directly lead to mass murder the way 
stealing, covetousness, and envy does.

But fighting over status is just as likely, indeed more likely to turn 
deadly as fighting over stuff.

It has become apparent that there is no stopping point.  Males are just 
naturally superior to women in the male sphere, and white males are just 
naturally superior to nonwhites in most spheres.

This results in endless, and endlessly escalating efforts, to crush this 
natural superiority.  And this endless escalation has no stopping point 
but genocide.

OK, white men cannot jump and cannot dance, and our running is seriously 
underwhelming, but in most spheres, obviously superior.  In particular 
and especially, white males are superior soldiers to any other race by 
far. Notice the hilarious underperformance of the black posterboys of 
both sides in the civil war.  Similarly, notice that any military that 
incorporates females as soldiers never wins a war against a military 
that does not, irrespective of the races.  You might argue that the 
Vietnam war was a counter example to this, but that was a proxy war 
between the blue empire and the red empire, whites fighting over browns, 
rather than with browns.

Today's chinese art is obviously superior to today's white art, but this 
reflects our current decadence.  China is coming out of a dark age, 
while we are sliding into a dark age.   Some blame the Jews for the 
current undeniably crappy state of white art.  But the Chinese always 
had good art, even in their dark age.    We have done better in the past 
than now, but OK, whites are not obviously better than East Asians at 
art, and it is plausible that East Asians are better at art than whites.

Whites, on the other hand, are better at technological creativity than 
anyone, even East Asians (though the Japanese are pretty good), and, 
closely related to this, better at war.  The current technological 
superiority of East Asia is substantially dependent on white and 
Eurasian emigres, among them emigres fleeing the tribal violence and 
political repression in California and Silicon Valley.

The current white inferiority at war is the result of women in the 
military.   If we return to the early nineteenth century style army, 
where logistics are classified as camp followers rather than soldiers, 
and part of the duty of camp followers is getting soldier's dicks wet, 
where the soldiers are all male and the camp followers 
disproportionately female, we will return to winning.