/lit/ - Literature

>>21224783
Well more than 2000 but less than 10,000. Honestly not sure and don't care to make a better estimate.
Frank Herbert, Robert Heinlein, Peter F Hamilton, Kamachi.exe, Homer (no particular order).

This was a good rant thread.

https://youtu.be/ehhWHy9pyW8
https://youtu.be/QZzwdrUuZrc

>>15085373
History: probably better to ask /his/, but some i've read (most only partially).
>Volume 1: The Ch'in and Han Empires, 221 BC - AD 220 - Loewe
>Imperial China 900-1800 - Mote
>China: A History (Volume 2) - Tanner
>The Economic History of China - von Glahn
>The Chinese Economy: Transitions and Growth - Naughton
Philosophy: I haven't read anything on Chinese Buddhism but it did have a major influence on post-hundred schools Chinese Philosophy.
>The Analects - Confucius
>The Doctrine of the Mean - Confucius
>Tao Te Ching - Laozi
>The Zhuangzi - Zhuangzi
>The Mencius - Mencius
>The Xunzi - Xunzi
>The Mozi - Mozi
>The Book of Lord Shang - Shang Yang
>The Shenzi - Shen Dao
>The Hanfeizi - Han Fei
>Zhu Xi: Selected Writings - Zhu Xi
After this read Marx and Mao i guess, but it's debatable whether something like the little red book or Xi's 'Governance of China' can be called philosophy: they're just books of quotes and speeches i.e. agitprop
also stay the fuck away from "New Confucianism" (not to be confused with Neo-Confucianism), they'll try to convince you of the great comeback of Confucian values in governing but it's just crap.
Culture:
good question.

>>14370181
i fucking hate the 3000 character limit. anyway, this should shine some lights as to why they want others also to be libertarian. ignore the idiosyncrasies in the post from the original thread.

Libertarians believe that the free market is a natural outcome of Man's tendency to truck, barter, and exchange. They believe that this natural market is internally perfect in its efficient service of human needs and desires, and that any problem with the market is caused by interference from the government. This natural market is a result, as mentioned before, of human nature (hence natural market) and as such manifests and maintains itself without external compulsion—this tendency for the market to manifest without being "created" or guided by a central force is called "spontaneous order". Libertarians generally believe that spontaneous order doesn't apply only to the Market, but also to the organisation almost the entirety of society. The typical argument that libertarians give for for this (and against the idea of planned economies) is that there is an insurmountable epistemic problem for any directing authority to know and facilitate every individual need in society, and as such it must be left to the forces of the market to serve them. They also stick a sentiment similar to Mill's statement in On Liberty that no one can know what is for the good of an individual that that individual them self, and as such they should not be compelled to live in a way that they do not wish to; however they apply this to consumption and production. This absolute belief in the ability of the market and spontaneous order to perfectly organise society naturally leads to the question: For what purpose does the state exist? the libertarian will, depending on his ideological commitment to the market, either argue for the Smithian obligations—defense, justice,public infrastructure—,this a typical libertarians; if they are "radical", they will answer the question: the state is a parasite that only infringes on the market and free human action, and as such should not exist at all—this is a full-blown anarcho-capitalist (the greentext in the OP is more along this line of thinking). However they answer, the result is a deep skepticism of the State and a strict censure of its reach. After all, if society always organsises itself most efficiently naturally, then anything the government does will tend to tip it off balance and create problems. As such, individuals need the utmost liberty to participate in the market and the satisfaction of their wants. Typically they will pair this economic foundational argument with the traditional liberal arguments against arbitrary state interference with individual lives, formal equality in society and before the law, and a strict position against paternalism. So whenever you think libertarian, think of an economic faith in market society to fulfill social and individual needs which is always at odds with the government.

>>14234836
Libertarians believe that the free market is a natural outcome of Man's tendency to truck, barter, and exchange. They believe that this natural market is internally perfect in its efficient service of human needs and desires, and that any problem with the market is caused by interference from the government. This natural market is a result, as mentioned before, of human nature (hence natural market) and as such manifests and maintains itself without external compulsion—this tendency for the market to manifest without being "created" or guided by a central force is called "spontaneous order". Libertarians generally believe that spontaneous order doesn't apply only to the Market, but also to the organisation almost the entirety of society. The typical argument that libertarians give for for this (and against the idea of planned economies) is that there is an insurmountable epistemic problem for any directing authority to know and facilitate every individual need in society, and as such it must be left to the forces of the market to serve them. They also stick a sentiment similar to Mill's statement in On Liberty that no one can know what is for the good of an individual that that individual them self, and as such they should not be compelled to live in a way that they do not wish to; however they apply this to consumption and production. This absolute belief in the ability of the market and spontaneous order to perfectly organise society naturally leads to the question: For what purpose does the state exist? the libertarian will, depending on his ideological commitment to the market, either argue for the Smithian obligations—defense, justice,public infrastructure—,this a typical libertarians; if they are "radical", they will answer the question: the state is a parasite that only infringes on the market and free human action, and as such should not exist at all—this is a full-blown anarcho-capitalist (the greentext in the OP is more along this line of thinking). However they answer, the result is a deep skepticism of the State and a strict censure of its reach. After all, if society always organsises itself most efficiently naturally, then anything the government does will tend to tip it off balance and create problems. As such, individuals need the utmost liberty to participate in the market and the satisfaction of their wants. Typically they will pair this economic foundational argument with the traditional liberal arguments against arbitrary state interference with individual lives, formal equality in society and before the law, and a strict position against paternalism. So whenever you think libertarian, think of an economic faith in market society to fulfill social and individual needs which is always at odds with the government.

Feuerbach's essence of Christianity of course

Libertarians believe that the free market is a natural outcome of Man's tendency to truck, barter, and exchange. They believe that this natural market is internally perfect in its efficient service of human needs and desires, and that any problem with the market is caused by interference from the government. This natural market is a result, as mentioned before, of human nature (hence natural market) and as such manifests and maintains itself without external compulsion—this tendency for the market to manifest without being "created" or guided by a central force is called "spontaneous order". Libertarians generally believe that spontaneous order doesn't apply only to the Market, but also to the organisation almost the entirety of society. The typical argument that libertarians give for for this (and against the idea of planned economies) is that there is an insurmountable epistemic problem for any directing authority to know and facilitate every individual need in society, and as such it must be left to the forces of the market to serve them. They also stick a sentiment similar to Mill's statement in On Liberty that no one can know what is for the good of an individual that that individual them self, and as such they should not be compelled to live in a way that they do not wish to; however they apply this to consumption and production. This absolute belief in the ability of the market and spontaneous order to perfectly organise society naturally leads to the question: For what purpose does the state exist? the libertarian will, depending on his ideological commitment to the market, either argue for the Smithian obligations—defense, justice,public infrastructure—,this a typical libertarians; if they are "radical", they will answer the question: the state is a parasite that only infringes on the market and free human action, and as such should not exist at all—this is a full-blown anarcho-capitalist (the greentext in the OP is more along this line of thinking). However they answer, the result is a deep skepticism of the State and a strict censure of its reach. After all, if society always organsises itself most efficiently naturally, then anything the government does will tend to tip it off balance and create problems. As such, individuals need the utmost liberty to participate in the market and the satisfaction of their wants. Typically they will pair this economic foundational argument with the traditional liberal arguments against arbitrary state interference with individual lives, formal equality in society and before the law, and a strict position against paternalism. So whenever you think libertarian, think of an economic faith in market society to fulfill social and individual needs which is always at odds with the government.
Read Locke, Mill, Smith, Hayek, Rothbard, Mises, and Friedman. Hope this helps clear some things up.

>>8759693
Yuru Yuri is written by a woman tho

>>7808990
how true Anonymous, how true