/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.5225975]

Looking for anti communist/anti socialist/pro libertarian book recommendations

[Anonymous No.5225979]

>>5225975
go

[Anonymous No.5225984]

>>5225979

But where?

[Anonymous No.5225986]

>>5225975
That's great.

[Anonymous No.5225987]

>>5225975
anti-communists, anti-socialists, pro-libertarians don't read though.

[Anonymous No.5225991]

>>5225987

Yes we do.

[Anonymous No.5225992]

>>5225984
fricking hell

[Anonymous No.5225996]

[Anonymous No.5225997]

>>5225992

Nah, I think hell is reserves for communist/socialists/tyrants.

[Anonymous No.5226001]

>>5225997
Jesus was a communist.

[Anonymous No.5226003]

So is /lit/ just full of people who cry when someone has a different view than them or is somebody actually going to recommend some good books?

[Anonymous No.5226006]

>>5226001
No, Jesus was a white christian American who could bench 660.

[Anonymous No.5226007]

>>5226003
The problem is there aren't any good books on that subject.

[Anonymous No.5226008]

>>5226001

So? I'm not even religious.

[Anonymous No.5226010]

>>5225991
If you did then you wouldn't have to ask us for books because you would have already read them.

[Anonymous No.5226012]

>>5226003
Said books would have to exist to be recommended.

[Anonymous No.5226013]

>>5226007

Alright. How about just pro libertarian books?

[Anonymous No.5226017]

>>5225975
everyone with those views decides to keep them unquestioned instead of reading or writing books

[Anonymous No.5226018]

>>5226013
Surely you've heard of Rand...?

[Anonymous No.5226021]

>>5225975
you could try anarchy, state and utopia by nozick

but honestly rawls just tears that shit apart

[Anonymous No.5226023]

>>5226010

No. There are more than just a few. I've already read a bunch by Friedman and a couple by Ron Paul.

[Anonymous No.5226024]

>>5226013
Read Ron Paul's books, you posted him for gosh sake.

I don't know if they're any good though, most likely they're shit.

[Anonymous No.5226027]

>>5226013
On Liberty by John Stuart Mill

It's more of an essay than a book though.

[Anonymous No.5226029]

>>5226018

Of course. I've read a bunch by Rand/Friedman/Paul but those are the ones that everyone knows. I'm looking for others.

[Anonymous No.5226035]

>>5226027

Thanks

[Anonymous No.5226052]

>>5226027
>John Stuart Mill
>Libertarian

>The Distribution of wealth... is a matter of human institution solely. The things once there, mankind, individually or collectively, can do with them as they like. They can place them at the disposal of whomsoever they please, and on whatever terms. Further, in the social state, in every state except total solitude, any disposal whatever of them can only take place by the consent of society, or rather of those who dispose of its active force [i.e. government]. Even what a person has produced by his individual toil, unaided by any one, he cannot keep, unless by the permission of society. Not only can society take it from him, but individuals could and would take it from him, if society only remained passive; if it did not either interfere en masse, or employ and pay people [i.e. police] for the purpose of preventing him from being disturbed in the possession. The distribution of wealth, therefore, depends on the laws and customs of society. The rules by which it is determined are what the opinions and feelings of the ruling portion of the community make them, and are very different in different ages and countries; and might still be more different, if mankind so chose.

[Anonymous No.5226074]

>>5226052
Thanks for ruining my subversive attempt to expose him to new ideas.

[Anonymous No.5226080]

>>5226074

I used to be a communist. I'm not interested in leftist ideologies anymore. If there is one thing I've learned it's that the vast majority of you are batshit insane.

[Anonymous No.5226088]

>>5226080
Who says I'm a communist? I'm apolitical.

[Anonymous No.5226091]

>>5226088

I never said you were a communist. But in general, I'm not interested in any leftist political ideas.

[Anonymous No.5226104]

>>5226080
What swayed you from communism towards reactionarism?

[Anonymous No.5226105]

>>5226091
>the vast majority of you
>implying I'm a communist

You also just now implied you're disingenuous.
Go eat a dick, nigger.

[Anonymous No.5226121]

>>5225975
Ten Things Every Child with Autism Wishes You Knew: Updated and Expanded Edition by Ellen Notbohm and Veronica Zysk
The Reason I Jump: The Inner Voice of a Thirteen-Year-Old Boy with Autism by Naoki Higashida
The Autistic Brain: Helping Different Kinds of Minds Succeed by Temple Grandin and Richard Panek
No More Meltdowns: Positive Strategies for Managing and Preventing Out-Of-Control Behavior by Jed Baker
Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition by Milton Friedman
101 Games and Activities for Children With Autism, Asperger’s and Sensory Processing Disorders by Tara Delaney
The Myth of Autism: How a Misunderstood Epidemic Is Destroying Our Children, Expanded and Revised Edition by Michael J. Goldberg

[Anonymous No.5226132]

Anarchy, State, Utopia by Robert Nozick

Hey, look, it's even online: http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/provisionalia/nozick.pdf

You could also just go peruse the archives on mises.org, but I can't in good conscience actually recommend such a thing.

[Anonymous No.5226135]

>>5226105

>The vast majority of leftists are batshit insane
>Implying communism is the only leftist ideology

>>5226104

Numerous things. It's an unrealistic, utopian, ideology that is incompatible with our species due to human nature. There has never been a real communist society. The USSR wasn't even communist. However, despite this, I see too many leftists glorifying the USSR which was a tyrannical shithole where you could be imprisoned for 10 years or worse if you were overheard criticizing "comrade Stalin", and other moronic authoritarian pieces of trash. Further more, my grandparents came from the USSR so I know all about it. In general, I see a lot of leftists hate the rich. Apparently if someone has more money than you they are big, bad, bourgeois scum? Nah, that's bullshit. I can't be associated with people who think that they should be entitled to other people's hard earned wealth.

[Anonymous No.5226142]

>>5226132
>Why even Robert Nozick, the philosophical father of libertarianism, gave up on the movement he inspired.
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/the_dilettante/2011/06/the_liberty_scam.single.html

inb4 >slate

[Anonymous No.5226153]

>>5226121

Cheers

[Anonymous No.5226156]

>>5226135
The key word is "you", moron. Not "leftist". Regardless you were lumping me in with "them" whoever they were.

As I said before, go eat a dick, you backpedaling little shit. At least other reactionary dipshits have the conviction to stand by what they say.

[Anonymous No.5226159]

>>5226052

I think you are misunderstanding this passage. Mill was a classical liberal, which translates (sort of) to modern American libertarianism (though many people who actually hold similar beliefs would balk at that label, considering the character of the political figures that have laid claim to it).

Here's the key:

>The distribution of wealth, therefore, depends on the laws and customs of society. The rules by which it is determined are what the opinions and feelings of the ruling portion of the community make them, and are very different in different ages and countries; and might still be more different, if mankind so chose.

The whole passage is descriptive, not prescriptive, but there is a hint here that, if society were inclined towards more liberal organization, they could very move in that direction, without any violation of justice. Mill's task is to show why this would be a net good, which he proceeds to do.

[Anonymous No.5226172]

>>5226156

You're tears lead me to believe you're a leftist. Go get pepper sprayed at Occupy Wall Street, cunt.

[Anonymous No.5226177]

>>5226156

Your tears lead me to believe you're a leftist. Go get pepper sprayed at Occupy Wall Street, cunt.

[Anonymous No.5226179]

>>5226142

I've read the article before, it's very misleading. Nozick made a comment towards the end of his life to the effect that participation in civic government might be a critical ingredient of fulfilling life for a good many people, and that he failed to take this into account in his earlier writing. This is still perfectly consistent with a libertarian position.

[Anonymous No.5226182]

>>5226135
>Numerous things. It's an unrealistic, utopian, ideology that is incompatible with our species due to human nature.
How is communism any more utopian or in contridiction with "human nature" than libertarianism?

>There has never been a real communist society. The USSR wasn't even communist.
There has also never been a libertian society. The USSR never even claimed to have acceived communism.

>Apparently if someone has more money than you they are big, bad, bourgeois scum? Nah, that's bullshit. I can't be associated with people who think that they should be entitled to other people's hard earned wealth.
The rich didn't accumalte their vast ammount of wealth via mirth or labor, libertarianism is simply a justification for extracting the value produced by others for oneself.

[Anonymous No.5226185]

>>5226177
You're mistaken, friend. I'm not sad or mad, just disappointed you're such a mental midget you can't even defend your own inane verbal spewing.

[Anonymous No.5226204]

>>5226135
this nigga even wrote 5 lines thinking he would devastate everyone and could only spit predictable cliche crap

[Anonymous No.5226214]

>>5226159
American Libertarians are anti-democratic out of necessity to maintain any form of libertarian society. If society peacefully decides to go socialist and begins to confiscate the private means of production, this would need to be prevented somehow realistically via force by the state.

[Anonymous No.5226215]

>>5226135
>It's an unrealistic, utopian, ideology that is incompatible with our species due to human nature

Spouting bullshit like this makes it hard to believe you were ever a communist in the first place. Marx refutes all of this within the first chapter of Capital. Did you even bother to read it?

[Anonymous No.5226231]

>>5226182

A libertarian society is more plausible and can be achieved. For instance the closest thing to a libertarian country we have today is Switzerland.

>Everyone has a gun
>Everyone is totally free
>No restriction of banking or gold
>National sovereignty is defended and important

As a matter of fact, the Founding Fathers were libertarian. The USA before the Federal Reserve act of 1913 was fairly libertarian.

>>5226182

>The rich didn't accumalte their vast ammount of wealth via mirth or labor, libertarianism is simply a justification for extracting the value produced by others for oneself.

That's what you think, but you're wrong. My father accumulated his wealth via hard work. Many wealthy people are intelligent and talented and worked hard to get to where they were. You think they just woke up one day and were millionaires? No, it takes hard work, planning and entrepreneurial skills. Also there is nothing wrong with paying people a fair wage to work for you. They didn't start the business, they didn't put in the hard work to get said company/business to where it's at.

>>5226185

There is a cup labeled "leftist tears" on the table. Come back when it's full.

[Anonymous No.5226239]

>>5226215

>Spouting bullshit like this

Except it's not bullshit at all. Every communist I know thinks it's the most perfect, realistic ideology that will fix every problem in the world. There is a reason why every time communism has tried to be implemented, it degenerated into authoritarian socialism/state capitalism.

[Anonymous No.5226256]

>>5226215
No, because I'm just a teenager looking for something to grasp onto. I gravitated towards libertarianism because it's simple answers for to complex questions. This makes me feel like I have it all figured out, which gives my fragile self-esteem a much needed boost.

[Anonymous No.5226266]

>>5226239
I guess you haven't bothered to read it, then. Did you become a communist to fit in with your hip friends at the university? No wonder you gave up on it; after all, reading and thinking is hard work.

[Anonymous No.5226270]

>>5226214

If you agree with Mill, yes, there is nothing stopping a society from becoming socialist.

American Libertarians, like Nozick, do not accept the same premises as Mill, and justify their liberalism on a basis of natural right. For Nozick, this is the inalienable right to the ownership of one's body and the product thereof.

There is nothing intrinsically "anti-democratic" about American Libertarianism, though there of necessity limitations on what is possible through government intervention. The rights of the individual are not to be violated for some grand conception of distributive justice.

[Anonymous No.5226271]

>>5226231
>Everyone has a gun
Firearms are heavily restricted and controlled via the state
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/switzerland.php
>The Swiss Weapons Act requires an acquisition license for handguns and a carrying license for the carrying of any permitted firearm for defensive purposes. Exceptions exist for hunters. Automatic weapons are banned.

>Everyone is totally free
No they are not.
>No restriction of banking or gold
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_Switzerland#Law_and_regulation
>National sovereignty is defended and important
By the state

>As a matter of fact, the Founding Fathers were libertarian. The USA before the Federal Reserve act of 1913 was fairly libertarian.
This is a complete lie. The American Founding Fathers were classical liberals but far from any modern notion of a libertarian. The USA also had a powerful central state apparatus and heavy involvement in the affairs of the market before the creation of the Fed.

[Anonymous No.5226272]

Hey guys can you rexommend some pro-existantialist/metaphysical/nihilist anti-postmodern/absurdist/thatcherist?
Thanks guys!

[Anonymous No.5226277]

>>5226256

I'm not a teenager but I gravitate towards libertarianism because I don't believe in oppression, stealing, executing people who are more financially successful than I am or slavery. It's sad that you let your socioeconomic status gravitate you towards an insane ideology that would lead any country to degenerate into an authoritarian shithole.

[Anonymous No.5226288]

>>5226272
On the Heights of Despair by Emil Cioran

[Anonymous No.5226292]

>>5226277
Spoken like a true teenager. So full of idealism. Maybe one day you'll move past political ideology all together and become a cynic.

[Anonymous No.5226297]

>>5226277
>It's sad that you let your socioeconomic status gravitate you towards an insane ideology that would lead any country to degenerate into an authoritarian shithole.

>Everyone who disagrees with me is a communist

You're a real cute kid, you know that?

[Anonymous No.5226306]

>>5226271

Pretty much every household in Switzerland has a rifle.

>In some 2001 statistics, it is noted that there are about 420,000 assault rifles (fully automatic, or "selective fire") stored at private homes, mostly SIG SG 550 models. Additionally, there are some 320,000 semi-auto rifles and military pistols exempted from military service in private possession, all selective-fire weapons having been converted to semi-automatic operation only. In addition, there are several hundred thousand other semi-automatic small arms classified as carbines. The total number of firearms in private homes is estimated minimally at 1.2 million to 3 million.[7]

>This is a complete lie. The American Founding Fathers were classical liberals but far from any modern notion of a libertarian. The USA also had a powerful central state apparatus and heavy involvement in the affairs of the market before the creation of the Fed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G00Sq3xaE1g

If Ron Paul, arguably the most libertarian person around today, says the Founding Fathers were Libertarians, I have a hard time disagreeing.


>By the state

I never said it was a libertarian society, did I?

[Anonymous No.5226317]

>>5226292

I'd never become a cynic. Are you one of those people who think everything that happens on Earth is meaningless because

>le universe is so big, our planet is just a little dot. Nothing matters xD

>>5226297

>Everyone who disagrees with me is a communist

I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth.

[Anonymous No.5226319]

Don't know about pro libertarian, but some good anti-communist/anti-socialist works are

Raymon Aron - The Opium of the Intellectuals
Leszek Kolakowski - Main Currents of Marxism
Czesław Miłosz - The Captive Mind
Arthur Koestler - Darkness at Noon
Alexander Zinoviev - Yawning Heights
Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn - The Menace of the Herd
Jean-François Revel - Last Exit to Utopia
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - The Gulag Archipelago
Igor Shafarevich - The Socialist Phenomenom

[Anonymous No.5226323]

>>5226306
>If Ron Paul, arguably the most libertarian person around today, says the Founding Fathers were Libertarians, I have a hard time disagreeing.

>I blindly follow the propaganda of my political messiah

If you were a communist, Lenin would have called you a useful idiot.

[Anonymous No.5226326]

>>5226277
>oppression
Oppression would be rampant under any libertarian regime.
>stealing
Theft is a pure product of the capitalist mindset. It exists most under capitalist society.
>executing people who are more financially successful than I am
No one has ever called for this. Working-classizing the bourgeoisie would work better. Executing counterrevolutionaries could be justifiable under certain circumstances however.
>slavery
Slavery is the backbone of laissez-faire economics. The American south being the greatest historic example.

[Anonymous No.5226333]

>>5226317
>I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth.

Ok, so what did you mean when you said, and I quote: "It's sad that you let your socioeconomic status gravitate you towards an insane ideology that would lead any country to degenerate into an authoritarian shithole"

What "insane ideology" were you assuming I gravitated towards? Please do explain. I'd hate to put more words in your mouth.

[Anonymous No.5226336]

>>5226306
>If Ron Paul, arguably the most libertarian person around today, says the Founding Fathers were Libertarians, I have a hard time disagreeing.
Ron Paul is a fringe nutjob who has no formal knowledge of history. His subjective opinion is worthless.

[Anonymous No.5226339]

>>5225975
I'm not a libertarian but read an introductory economics textbook. Most of their arguments come from there. If it gets more complex than that it's probably not libertarianism anymore.

Also Hayek's Road to Serfdom is readable.

[Anonymous No.5226344]

>>5226319

Thanks.

>>5226323

>Lenin

Oh, the guy that killed a bunch of people he didn't like because they disagreed with his politics. Him calling me an idiot would be a compliment. Lenin and Stalin were butchers. If anyone here blindly follows propaganda, it's you. Too many leftists buy into the Soviet propaganda about the USSR being great and quality of life being good.

[Anonymous No.5226345]

>>5226270
>The rights of the individual are not to be violated for some grand conception of distributive justice.
Except that's exactly what Nozick is doing with his principles of holding. He is taking away the right to democratic participation in the establishment of wealth redistribution for the sake of the establishment of an inalienable right to "the ownership of one's body and the product thereof."

Mill is claiming that the natural right is for democratic participation in wealth distribution (on the basis of wealth as a collective enterprise of freely-acting individuals within a social system) whereas Nozick claims the natural right is for absolute freedom of trade (on the basis of of wealth as an individualistic enterprise of freely-acting individuals within a series of private contractual agreements). Both of these are axiomatic in nature, but Mill's is more democratic.

[Anonymous No.5226349]

>>5226317
>Are you one of those people who think everything that happens on Earth is meaningless

Nah, I just realize that every political ideology is flawed and the people who adhere to them are usually passionate but naive and clueless.

I adhere to non-political ideologies though.

[Anonymous No.5226351]

>>5226339
oh and Dismantling Utopia (I forget the author) is an entertaining read that deals with a lot of the terrible stuff in the USSR

[Anonymous No.5226353]

>>5226319
Half of those guys are jewish(!), OP. Are you really gonna let those bastards continue to control your mind, even as a right-winger?

Most of the other guys are catholic. Are those sanitized enough for you?

[Anonymous No.5226368]

>>5226339
>I'm not a libertarian but read an introductory economics textbook. Most of their arguments come from there. If it gets more complex than that it's probably not libertarianism anymore.

Any introductory economics textbook will spew neoclassical dogma and not backup libertarian utopianism. Libertarian economics are Heterodox

[Anonymous No.5226376]

>>5226344
I wasn't agreeing with Lenin's politics. I'm saying you're an idiot who blindly follows propaganda of political figures you like. Switch Ron Paul with Lenin and Libertarianism with Soviet Socialism and you're exactly what you're erroneously accusing me of.

Also, you should read up on what a "useful idiot" is.

[Anonymous No.5226394]

>>5226326

>Oppression would be rampant under any libertarian regime.

Kek. No it wouldn't. Oppression was most rampant under the pseudo communist-socialist regimes.

>Lenin
>Stalin
>Mao

>Millions of people killed
>Millions of people literally enslaved and forced into hard labour
>Millions of people dead due to famine.

You are delusional, buddy.

>Theft is a pure product of the capitalist mindset. It exists most under capitalist society.

Nope. Wanting to forcefully redistribute the wealth and freeze people's assets is theft. Explain to me how someone who got rich by selling for example, cellular phones is a thief.

>No one has ever called for this.

Oh yes they have. It's rampant among leftist political forums. Extremist leftists call for execution of the rich all the time.

>Slavery is the backbone of laissez-faire economics. The American south being the greatest historic example.

So forcing someone to work in the sulfur mines in the USSR, that wasn't slavery at all huh?

[Anonymous No.5226416]

>>5226376

I don't agree with everything Ron Paul says. I don't idolize him, but I do respect him.

>>5226353

What's your political stance?

FYI, I am part Jewish. There is no Jewish conspiracy. If there is someone left me out of it and I want my share of the gold.

>>5226351
>>5226339

Thanks anon

[Anonymous No.5226419]

>>5226394
Just for clarification, you do realize that there are more political positions than just libertarianism and communism, right? So someone you're talking to could potentially oppose both? What would you say to a person like that?

[Anonymous No.5226433]

>>5226419

Of course.

[Anonymous No.5226442]

>>5226419

>Trying to doge the facts

[Anonymous No.5226445]

>>5226416
>I don't agree with everything Ron Paul says. I don't idolize him, but I do respect him.

So why would you assume that the Founding Fathers were libertarians or even a politically coherent group? Particularly since libertarianism as a political philosophy didn't exist at the time.

[Anonymous No.5226449]

>>5226319
Also, to understand revolutionary mind in general.

James H. Billington - Fire in the Minds of Men
Norman Cohn - The Pursuit of the Millenium
Eric Voegelin - The New Science of Politics
John N. Gray - Black Mass
Eric Hoffer - The True Believer
José Ortega y Gasset - The Revolt of the Masses

[Anonymous No.5226456]

>>5226445

They came to the USA to escape tyranny and start a society based on freedom/libertarian values.

That is legitimately the general basis of what being a libertarian is. Being against tyranny and enabling others to have rights and freedom. I can't make myself any more clearer than that.

[Anonymous No.5226480]

>>5226456
>They came to the USA to escape tyranny and start a society based on freedom/libertarian values.

They were born in colonial America, and broke away from the Motherland to gain power. And Britian was hardly tyrannical.

Are you for real, or is this "I was only pretending to be retarded" tier trolling?

[Anonymous No.5226481]

>>5226121
10/10
sides

[Anonymous No.5226495]

>>5226480

No it's written in the history books. The libertarians were British people who came from the UK and Ireland where the leaders were fascists to start the USA. They basically invented freedom.

[Anonymous No.5226501]

:^)

[Anonymous No.5226509]

great libertarian story, although the economic construct isn't practical

[Anonymous No.5226553]

>>5226495
>They basically invented freedom.
Ok now you went too far and I know you're pretending. You had me going for a while though, so I tip my fedora to you.

[Feminister is a man !N3AhtZvY6I No.5226557]

>>5226553

>Cue the electro swing

[Anonymous No.5226616]

>>5225975
Nabokov was all about that individualism, and would probably be considered a libertarian now.

[Anonymous No.5226636]

>You are either a leftist, or have autism and are in need of someone subversively giving you shitty book recommendations

Keep thinking you aren't a slightly better read version of /pol/.

[Anonymous No.5226646]

>>5226336
>Ron Paul is a fringe nutjob who has no formal knowledge of history. His subjective opinion is worthless.

Ron Paul is unquestionably better read than 90% of /lit/. I seriously doubt you have read anything authored by him, or even watched him in an unbiased setting.

[Feminister is a man !N3AhtZvY6I No.5226651]

>>5226636

You have autism

[Anonymous No.5226678]

>>5226646
>an unbiased setting
There are no unbiased settings, genius.

You mean a setting where the bias was directed towards him? Yeah, I've seen a lot of his sycophant followers' video mashups of him.

[Anonymous No.5226750]

>>5226651
>that trip
>that post
oh boy

[Anonymous No.5226769]

>>5226750
The most shocking part?

That's actually Feminister.

[StopMusic !UOro5Veu2o No.5226773]

>>5226769

But Feminister is a man. It was proven.

[Anonymous No.5226782]

>>5226023

you're bad at b8

[Anonymous No.5226786]

>>5226773
How is that incommensurable with what I said?

[Anonymous No.5226836]

>>5226345

Mill does not argue that democratic participation is a natural right. He follows Bentham's skepticism of natural rights. His argument for democracy is on different grounds altogether, and as I said before, the passage cited is not an argument for wealth redustribution, but an explication of what is valid under democratic control. This of itself is neither an endorsement or criticism of democracy. Again, it's just a description, and Mill will argue for limitations on what wealth distribution legislation is desirable in a vein similar to the libertarian, though again on different grounds.

[Anonymous No.5226853]

>>5226773
how was it proven?

[Anonymous No.5226857]

>>5225975


'witness' by whittaker chanbers
'chronicles of wasted time' by malcolm muggeridge
'the fatal conceit' by hayek
'antifragile' by taleb

[StopMusic !UOro5Veu2o No.5226864]

>>5226853

"She" was caught samefagging on /adv/ pretending to be a man.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5226899]

>>5226853
It wasn't. She doesn't appear to be coming back though, so anon may be right. He's just crowing about it being "proven"

[Anonymous No.5226912]

>>5226899

I know I'm right. I'm the one that started the original thread. "She" was going full damage control. It's obviously a man.

[Anonymous No.5226929]

>>5225975
pretty much all pro-libertarian books are garbage. sorry buddy.

[Anonymous No.5226940]

>>5226864
How does that prove anything?
>>5226899
Thats unfortunate. Feminister annoyed me a lot but I had some good discussions with her. You could at least count on her/him to provide interesting topics to discuss.

[Anonymous No.5226963]

>>5226940

>Her

[Anonymous No.5227055]

>>5226963
Regardless of the sex of the actual person behind it, the persona of Feminister was female. Nothing wrong with referring to her as such.

[Anonymous No.5227173]

>>5226121

[Anonymous No.5227184]

>>5227055
>tumblr

[Anonymous No.5227604]

>>5225975
Left wing libertarian here to gum up the works

[Anonymous No.5227738]

>>5225975
But libertarianism can be communist. Or are you talking about John Birch bullshit? Go read some Kropotkin.

[Anonymous No.5227743]

>>5227184
>I judge people by traits I've never actually experienced

There is no place for you. Maybe you should just go outside for a change. It'll help with things.

[Anonymous No.5227779]

>>5225975
"The Law" by Frederic Bastiat

[Anonymous No.5227786]

>>5226006
Jesus was the last Christian

[Anonymous No.5227863]

>>5226006
and shot guns

[Anonymous No.5227865]

>>5227786
The first and the last. Alpha and Omega. Beginning and the End.

[Anonymous No.5227869]

OP is obviously looking for anti-statist writings. He's American, give him a break.

[Anonymous No.5227883]

Well you're not half rationalising after the fact, OP. Good job, nice objective investigation. We need more people like you in the world.

[Anonymous No.5227887]

>>5227869
But anti-statist writing can be pro communist. Marx himself imagined the state withering away as communism was ushered into reality.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5227889]

>>5227887
But that's a secret!

[Anonymous No.5227903]

>>5227889
No secrets between friends, Cio-Cio San.

[Anonymous No.5227920]

>>5227887
That was the point

By the way, "the state will wither away once it has usurped every inch of property and beaten bourgeois ideology out of society" doesn't qualify as anti-statist.

[Anonymous No.5228082]

They are anti-statist in regards to particular aspects of course. For example THEY SEE NO FUTURE FOR THE STATE EVENTUALLY, and they take into account that human nature is primarly socially constructed and needs to be changed before a new system (or no system frankly) is implemented. If you merely took away the state, then people would either not know how to function with certain power relations, economic, cultural, and social inequality. The state came out of private property and economic surplus; that is not entirely intertwined with the nature of "the state" in itself. Capitalist states work for capitalist aims. Systems leave paths of least resistance, and when the norm and structural functioning is capital, then there ya go

[Anonymous No.5228561]

Virtue of Selfishness - Ayn Rand

[Anonymous No.5229013]

>>5226121

[Anonymous No.5229045]

>>5227865
Amen.

[Anonymous No.5229201]

For libertarian books, try What is Anarchism by Alexander Berkman, The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin, and God and the State by Mikhail Bakunin

[Anonymous No.5229242]

>>5226001
Jesus was not a communist, further more no at that time period could be because the material conditions for such an ideology simply were not present.

[Anonymous No.5229259]

>>5229201
Do you really think someone who asked for anti communist and anti socialist literature would even consider reading something on anarchism?

[Anonymous No.5229285]

>>5225975
What communist or socialist works did you read OP?

[Anonymous No.5229296]

>>5226288
This.

[Anonymous No.5229346]

>politics

[Anonymous No.5229533]

>>5229201
Those are actually fascists.

If you really had to post fascists you could also have posted something half-decent like Proudhon.


I suggest this book.

[Anonymous No.5232266]

>>5229533
>Comparing proudhon to those figures

How do you define fascist?

[Anonymous No.5232281]

>>5226001
Render unto Caesar what is Caesars ~ Dirty statist and freedom hater

[Anonymous No.5232321]

>>5229533
>kropotkin
>fascist

wut