Hardcore libertarians would have been the slavers.
Free market rules all slaves are property.

This post was edited by Plaguefear on May 1 2020 07:07pm

Libertarians would have been the ones saying blacks aren't actually people so they are free to do what they want without violating the NAP, and if slavery is actually bad the free market would allow people to stop doing business with plantation owners.

firstly it is a massive violation of the NAP, so that's not a thing u can just skirt around. but secondly many people in 1860 were indifferent to slavery, and a bunch were against it. only few were for it. but did it just end? no. even the civil war was more of a battle between northern textile factory owning elites and southern plantation elites than it was about slavery. the war wasn't about the moral stance of slavery, that is to say it wouldn't have been fought on those grounds without MASSIVE economic incentives. so what would libertarians do? literally nothing, like all the other people did. who did do something? elite northerners who used propaganda and the federal govt to levy a war to undercut southern wealth. beyond that it was a war for political representation among more political elites.

the other two answers you got are just butthurt nonsense that makes it seem like their side would have done anything, those two posters in 1860 would watch a lynching with a smile on their face from a captured slave. historical revision is the tool of the lazy when they don't understand actual history or just want to bait out shitposts.

wrong account, camboy.

My side did do something, they ended slavery.

Its nice that a reasonably explained post with several points and historical context reminded you of me, but I didn't post that.

I wouldn't cede as much ground as he did and I have a better understanding of radical libertarianism.




This isn't entirely an exercise in guesswork. Several prominent radical individualists and classical liberals of the time were abolitionists. Spooner, Douglass etc
Radical and uncompromising libertarians of today have a radical support for liberty.

Libertarians are individuals and have varying preferences.
I won't claim to know exactly how it would be handled if radical libertarians were magically a majority force in the 1800s.
"libertarianism is a doctrine about when it is permissible to use coercion, and not generally about when it is required."

Yes its plausible there wouldn't be the will to invade the south and risk getting killed in a war.
Even today there is slavery and forced labor in some places.
Is it necessarily good and wise to invade those countries? No.
Would we personally want to go fight there? Probably not.

Radical Libertarians are not against armies and security forces per se. They are against conscription(forced labor) and stealing from people to fund it. Big difference.
There are a variety of books and articles dealing with the production of security in a free society and I can link some if you want.
There are also plenty of papers explaining the preferability of volunteer armies over conscripted forces. Fighting effectiveness, etc.

Diplomacy is another option. Ex: Making various concessions in exchange for the abolition of slavery, including eliminating predatory taxation on the south.

interesting way to spell 'completely deluded and riddled with fan fiction that has no connection to the real world', but sure...

that said, your 'understanding of radical libertarianism' is so flawed that you couldn't even begin to describe a concept of how an efficient, safe, and affordable healthcare system would look like under it, so i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for you to have any realistic views regarding historical or current issues - just edgy teenager's fantasies that you never grew out of... just libertarian things...

Choosing to not waste time with a hateful mental midget does not mean I can't describe liberty oriented healthcare options, which is something i've done many times on here.

The values difference is over whether a democratic majority means more than an individual's perceived rights.

To me, taxation is approved by the people who vote for political parties favouring taxation. That trumps an individual's perceived right to not be taxed by the state.

We can disagree but the reality is it's extremely unlikely a major country like the US will not tax income and all principled attempts to change that will fail. To my knowledge there isn't a single libertarian country in the world. Luxembourg? The US? Not really.

If you live in the United States then you agree to be taxed, ofc. The government can steal from citizens but i don't consider taxation to be theft like imminent domain is. Saying taxation is theft is like saying you ought to be able to yell fire in a crowded theater. No difference in the identification of the logical limits of civil rights.... I just can't drag a corpse on the bus even if I didn't hurt anybody in the process.... And that isn't really a violation of my rights. Rights are not freedom, as freedom is the absence of limitation, and rights limit your ability to move freely and take things, etc, because of things like the existence of property.

In the United States you can just go live in the woods somewhere and its unlikely anybody would ever bother you it's unlikely anyone would ever bother you for taxes.

Some people just what the have cake and eat cake. I wanna have protection but what my neighbors to pay for it. Want rights but don't want duties. These are kneejerk thoughts of immaturity manifesting.

Being a citizen of the United States is worth at least a 1/2 million dollars.... Of course if you are successful in this system you have to pay some money for it.

When I started posting on his forum I was very poor. I was uneducated and i worked at a deli getting two week checks for a couple hundred bucks, barely making it. No that person should not have a tax burden. I don't think I did.

Poor people really don't have a burden though.

The people who pay the most taxes are the people who received the most Justice in the United States. People who don't want to pay taxes don't want to become untaxable truly, because that entails poverty. If you're paying taxes you are paying for a very high quality of life and more justice than your poorer neighbors.

My wife and I never truly pay taxes until we bought property and earned over 6 figures. And this case being taxed is a sign of privilege.

This post was edited by Skinned on May 2 2020 07:01am