What's the deal with the NAP? Is it justified?

>>2849074
>Justified
Sure, it's basically a law code for self governance without any type of government. Whether or not you think it would work or that groups of powerful individuals banding together to enforce these principals(Kind of like a gov) is actually still anarchist is another ballpark completely.

>>2849074
Came to ask the same question. I've read Rothbard on subject and he kind of addresses most questions about ancap. It's a way to be able to defend yourself without your neighbor being afraid of your aggression .

I re-wrote this post several times because this stuff is still new to me. So, basically: you've got a gun. If you shoot anybody, you have to account for your actions to the court and the victim (if he's alive) or his relatives. Hired private guards still do it, then you have to confirm you gave them orders to do so. If you manage to confirm your actions were a justified retaliation, there is no penalty. Your property is an extension of your body - but empty land isn't property, only something valuable you created with your efforts on that land.

>>2849267
>buy land
>"it isn't yours though"
Step into my property and get shot, commie

>>2849074

How do microaggressions factor into NAP?

>>2849313
If you have nothing on that land you can't confirm it's yours in any way so you are just a criminal calling it yours. Papers you've got right now aren't worth shit because there won't be a State that granted them to you. If you bought it from the State, you've bought stolen land. If it was previously owned by a private company, it is yours alright.

Read the books, jeez

File: IMG_1686.jpg (204KB, 1109x1169px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1109x1169px

It's nonsense that would never work in real life. Peace with your fellow man can only come from a strong state.

>>2849341
You are talking about peace with your neighbor, but not with some armed person who'd been empowered to lock you away and whom you can't oppose legally.

>But police has to account for their violent actions to superiors
And under libertarianism it has to account to public

>>2849325
Can you please define microaggression? If it's about minorities, no one would care about what you. Rand says that "rights cannot be gained or lost by joining or leaving a social group"

>>2849353
>public
Aka mob violence without legal recourse

>>2849458
And the alternative is tyranny and arbitrary behavior of a single person. Your point?

Unjustified court rulings won't be applauded - as long as people know about it. Physical violence isn't tolerated also and will be frowned upon by people who didn't participate. And if everybody participates in a single mob - you've got yourself a new state.

The weakest point or libertarianism is that it assumes that the majority of people is smart enough to decide for themselves and see through blatant lies.

large minority of likeminded individuals got it into their head that their way is the path of good and all others is the path to evil and start dividing and conquering

wat do?

>>2849816
Congrats, it's called ancap

>>2849489
>The weakest point or libertarianism is that it assumes that the majority of people is smart enough to decide for themselves and see through blatant lies.
This assumes people put into authority by the majority are not only smart enough to do that themselves, but to do it for everyone else too.

>>2849826
No, your point assumes there is no minority with different views who are forced into something they don't want and also can't leave and that the majority agrees on every case, so the leader suits every single one (impossible). If that would be so, every small community or individual needed freedom to do their thing and choose their leader -> ancap.

>>2849856
This assumes that minorities don't have inalienable rights.

NAP doesn't really make any sense

In order to have a society based on NAP, you need an instutiton to enforce those laws and punish people who violate NAP.
To do that, that institution would need to collect taxes to finance itself. But since taxes are against NAP, such an institution is impossible and thus NAP can't be enforced.

>>2849899
Ez.

If you don't pay for it your property and health isnt covered by the NAP, it's just an insurance.

>>2849913
so people who don't pay for NAP insurance are basically outlaw, free to be killed or robbed by anybody?

>>2849928
I assume so, yes, I mean who's going to defend them otherwise?

>>2849932
ok, just to make it sure i got it straight:
so you have several competing NAP insurance companies (let's call them feudal lords), who provide you security in exchange for money.
You as a normal person have basically no way to enforce your rights agains those "feudal lords", since they have much more military power than you.
Also, those "feudal lords" tend to not get along well with each other, and there might be several wars going on between them.

Did I got it right?

>>2849952
Kind of like states, right?

>>2849956
except without all those pesky things like democracy or check and balance

If men are naturally in a state of war, why do they always carry arms and why do they have keys to lock their doors?

Covenants, without the sword, are but words and of no strength to secure a man at all.

Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan

"By the sword you did your work, and by the sword you die."

—Aeschylus's Agamemnon

>>2849928
If there is a free market for justice and security, these "outlaws" can just deal with other free subjects and services when you don't deem them trustworthy. NAP is for everyone, but violating it doesn't mean you are put to jail, you lose partners' trust and may be asked to pay for damages. To have your rights restored you go to a private court, that has it's reputation of not violating NAP. If you don't - farewell. I guess shooting would only occur when you attack somebody in person.

>>2849952
If there are was, there are public. Courts don't need any military power, that means they are trying to become a state. If they touch you - defend, if not - find a trustworthy court and pay them their fixed fine for services.

>>2849975
Isn't that the person who said everybody signed some contract and surrendered a lot of their rights for security? They were given no choice in the matter, and that's not voluntarism.

>>2849975
>when you tutour the son of a king whilst writing a book glorifying the kings reign but then make it ambiguous as they kill the king so it could be glorifying the new king

The public is a ferocious beast; one must either chain it or flee from it.

Voltaire

>>2849990
If courts have no military power, why should I accept their judgement, unless they ruled in my favour?
I can just look on the free market of justice for another court that is more likely to rule in my favour.

>>2850071
You both need to use the same court for it to qualify as a contract. Paying your fines will rid you of your crimes, be it murder, theft, rape, anything. As long as the victim sees the payment as reasonable.

Look how bitcoin works - why everything else wouldn't? You just need to make your every tiny fart public.

>>2850095
Ok, imagine this situation:
A family blames their babysitter, saying that he raped the child.
The babysitter said he did none such thing and has zero interest in appearing before court.
How would you solve that situation?

>>2850122
Firefight between family and babysitter, then the survivors go to court with the deceased's family.

>>2850122
What will they do to prove he committed rape? First of all, the company that employed the suspect chimes in to handle court action - they value their reputation. Then after the court the company either pays and fires the troublesome employee or tells parents to fuck off with their scam - up to court. Decision is made public.

>>2850151
>What will they do to prove he committed rape?
They want to take the case to court, but the babysitter doesn't agree to participate, saying nothing happend and there is no need for court

>First of all, the company that employed the suspect chimes in to handle court action - they value their reputation.
The babysitter is self-employed

>>2850151
>First of all, the company that employed the suspect chimes in to handle court action - they value their reputation.
Not that anon, but what if he was a freelancer? Or is freelance work effectively impossible under ancap, as no one would trust you?

>>2850165
>>2850171
>self-employed
Parents' problem. What would they do if their uncle did this? There is always need for court if you care about your reputation. Freelancer should have some sort of insurance as a failsafe. If he doesn't respond, contact his employer and tell them that this person is a known offender. If he is unemployed with no money he'll starve, unless there are people who are ok with raping children and they'll take him in. You see, fraud isn't tolerated, but there are a lot more stupid contract conditions you can agree to.

>>2850235
So would you argue that an ancap society strongly discourages freelancers and start-ups, due to lack of trust, thus making the perfect enviroment for monopolies?

>>2849074

the NAP is useless, it resolves literally nothing.
>Hey Mr Govt, get off muh land! You're violating the NAP!
>But Comrade AnCap, the land belongs to the people! It is YOU who are violating the NAP!

>>2850248
It's not only ancap, it's capitalism in general. If people can't offer something to compensate their lack of reputation (quality or cost) they will fail. The perfect environment for monopolies requires oppressive legislation. Monopolies without armies are not that threatening, with armies they become state.

>>2850255
>physically on my land and refuses to leave when warned
>*bang*
>come to court
>produce contracts on confirming my rights on that land, which were previously publicly distributed and accepted
>NAP violation confirmed
>go home to have a cold soda

>>2850298
>accepted

Sounds like they were not accepted.

>>2850298
And what prevents monopolies in an ancap society to gather armies and become states?

>>2850314
A person who uses expressions like "people's land" clearly doesn't agree with the main principles of Ancapistan and therefore is a threat and an unlikely partner. If he doesn't participate in nationalizing your butthole, leave him be.

>>2850329
Nothing, like nothing prevents tyrannical govt's taking over ours by force. We then try to work out of that shitty situation until Ancapistan is restored. It was achieved somehow in the first place, right?

>>2850339
>Nothing, like nothing prevents tyrannical govt's taking over ours by force.

Well, we have separation of power, check and balance, democracy.
All those things would miss in an ancap society

>It was achieved somehow in the first place, right?
I dont think an AnCap society ever existed

>>2850298
So if the company hired armies it would be a state (they've done so in the past, East India Trading company) your ideology is nonsensical and impossible

>>2850339
It's a point that property is not a real thing.

Who issued your contracts? What legitimises them if not the State? If your whole ideology is based on fetishising property how do you deal with the fact it has all been stolen before?

Fun fact the UK is an An-Cap society.

The landowner is just super lenient and let people form their own "laws" and lease a temporary right to the land.

>>2850357
If you ask me how it does its shit, we assume it exists. And yes, we have those separated, until some son of penis gathers enough money to buy all three.

>>2850362
>It's a point that property is not a real thing.
Are we going full philosophical? There aren't even things, just matter we separate into objects and forms with our brain.

>how do you deal with the fact it has all been stolen before?
Rothbard says that when the state is abolished you have to prove your right of ownership in court - it must contain something valuable and man-made. Empty land can be claimed like its 1700s again. Entrepreneurs keep their businesses and inhabitants - their houses. Hospitals and universities are privatized by their staff. Not too bright, but it's something. helps to form a basis for economy.

>Who issued your contracts?
Me and the previous owner. "What medium do we use to make them public" is a better question. I say it's by using public registry like with Bitcoin. Two people can't own the same item simultaneously under such protocols.

>>2850367
You mean Angsoc, I'm sure

File: 1470774516119.jpg (355KB, 1440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1440x1440px

>>2850397

>>2850416
>3 bitcoins
>$6477
Dropping one of the bombs seems more efficient, I would still have plenty to sell.

>>2850397
>some grand reset

Jesus Christ.

I can't think of a faster way to push the purge button.

>>2850502
If Recep Erdogan can trash democracy using democratic means, everything is possible

>>2850397
>Hospitals and universities are privatized by their staff.
>means of production are seized by the workers
what did he man by this.

>>2850594
No shit, that part is literally the same thing, but the functioning of such a society is much more developed imo, than this "according to needs" crap. It's called "anarcho" capitalism for a reason.

Why does that autist keep mentioning bitcoin?
It's a monopoly filled, broken, failed experiment that even some of their devs abandoned in shame
It's the ultimate proof market-warping oligopolies and abuse can form, even without the state;
https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7
>But it's worth so many dollars/coin atm;
Irrelevant to the point at hand.

>>2850658
>autist
That's what I fucking get for honestly trying to engage in discussion

>1MB artificial limit to the most important file that is supposed to hold everything ever
Literal fucking apes

>the mechanism that allows system to grow prevents it form growing
Chinese are doing shitty job of managing it and will probably strangle it. Are they oblivious of the profits they make or hateful to the whole concept? Who knows. It's important to understand, that they can do the same with almost any industry, we are all dependent on their labor.

The owners went full retard and the community doesn't care. It is selling high even having no future prospects. It will eventually get taken over by better owners or substituted with some new crap. While people want to buy their illegal shit, they will.