What are /lgbt/ and other sexual deviants' thoughts on Steve

>>7716129
>fat
>neckbeard
>looks unhygenic
>shit fashion sense
>alt-right sympathizer
he's literally what i think of when i hear the word chaser

File: If you thought Nazis were bad.png (117KB, 513x928px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 513x928px

>>7716129

>>7716158
Christ I sure hope that libtard is full of it. Ancaps can fuck right off. I just assumed he was some sorta noncucked conservative nationalist.

>>7716227
What have you got against ancaps?

I'd still keep an eye on him.
Goes for any of these alt-righters and those associated with them.

>>7716290
I don't believe in regulation free capitalism and societies. Too much power and wealth in to few hands. I've seen some ancap memes and it does not sound like a nice world.

>>7716325
Government and monopolies, which only exist when government stamps out competition, concentrate power in few hands.

What memes sounded nasty?

>>7716336
I've heard that before, I think it goes both ways, government can end up creating monopolies or they can form on their own in a winner take all situation. Can't believe you haven't seen those zany /pol ancap memes hahaha too bad I don't have any saved.

I'd say a nationalistic populism is best, but thats hard to pull off it seems. You want to avoid the wealthy privatizing profits and socializing costs.

>openly pro-Russia
>conspiritard
>even more delusional than a nazi
>wants to destroy the state
>looks like a sweaty unkempt fatty

He's probably the most dangerous man on Earth right now.

>>7716152
t.non-conical bone structure male

>>7716397
I've seen the memes, I just wondered which you took seriously and put you off ancapism.

>>7716336
>monopolies, which only exist when government stamps out competition

lol

>>7716415
I view those memes as a worst case scenario. In a very high trust friendly ancap society things would probably work out ok. But in a "fuck you I got mine don't tread on me" ancap society things could get dystopian.

>>7716442
Not an argument.

>>7716451
The memes are parodies. "Who will build the roads?" tier.

Ancapism relies on rational self-interest, not trust. Statism relies on trusting politicians to do the right thing. You can imagine how good that idea is.

File: 1343704745861.gif (7KB, 273x537px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 273x537px

>>7716290
>>7716415
Not that anon, but just for starters
>Applying our theory to parents and children, this means that a parent does not have the right to aggress against his children, but also that the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.2 The law, therefore, may not properly compel the parent to feed a child or to keep it alive.

-Murray N. Rothbard, "The Ethics of Liberty"
Shockingly, those of us who aren't complete sociopaths don't think that a parent has the right to let their children starve to death. Most of ancap "philosophy" is basically crap along the same lines.

>>7716410
ftm so yes

>>7716469
Humans can be quite irrational and people can have competing rational self interests. Politicians can be problematic definitly. They need to be kept on a short leash.

>>7716537
Yep thats the problem with too much ancap. Eventually you'd get a highly collectivist faction forming which would wage war against the wealthier sociopathic ancaps who commit atrocities.

>>7716579
>>7716537
>Applying our theory to parents and children
That's not a logical extension of the philosophy. If it was I could equally say democracy is stupid because children could outvote parents.

>>7716548
>Humans can be quite irrational
Democracy empowers their irrationality by letting them elect equally bad people. In ancapism power goes to those who do good.

>and people can have competing rational self interests.
Which is what leads to unjust situations like Peter voting for a share of Paul's earnings, in democracy. This kind of injustice is eliminated in ancap society.

>>7716290

Fundamentally they are retarded "people" with a retarded "philosophy."

>>7716599
There's no such thing as anarcho-capitalism, only virgin edgelords who think it's cool to be anarchist. Anarchists will fuck your shit up and prevent the violence inherent in your rotten belief system.

Anarchia si.

He is based.

>>7718436
Fucking kill yourself, I mean maybe you can be gay and support Trump but Bannon? Get fucked.

>>7716599
>power goes to those who do good.
Anarchism is in itself a rejection of centralizing power or use of force to coerce, and necessarily those who are considered "good" and "righteous" self-organize into monarchist style legacy factions who are purely anti-capitalist. In ancap efficient vacuums, capital will eventually flow towards those who can direct its propserity and efficiency to the best outcome. Just like evolutionary progress, it doesn't guarantee any "moral" growth inherent to the system. The system doesn't exponentially improve and refine over time: capital just accumulates in certain ways to those who are good at making money. There is no consideration for social/cultural progress or any externalities to market economics. The only morality is a simulacrum of libertarianism that can be- somehow- assured through absolute market freedom.

>This kind of injustice is eliminated in ancap society.
Only when we speak of a pure anarchism where communism/socialism/capitalism and other lesser systems work all in the same place self-segregated into their own preferential communities within a greater anarchist federation. If only ancaps exist, there is no guarantee of moral respect for the conditions set out in the formation of this non-state. This non-state lapses back into statehood the moment capital is gathered in one family line or group or corporate entity: at that point, there arises charismatic and greedy leadership and the cycle of warring to erase another state begins. The ancaps ultimate goal of pure free market without any force involved to check it inevitably leaves a power vacuum. The only solution is diversity of market types that disintegrate lines of power and what types of engagement humans within the society can have with each other. Another end point is that some of the populace willingly splits off into a socialist anarchist group or other system; if ancaps don't believe in force, how do they respond to the split?

>>7718503
This.

>>7718503
>There is no consideration for social/cultural progress or any externalities to market economics.
There doesn't need to be. By definition the system produces moral growth.

>This non-state lapses back into statehood the moment capital is gathered in one family line or group or corporate entity
There must be a permanent non-state, sustainable and eternal.

>Another end point is that some of the populace willingly splits off into a socialist anarchist group or other system; if ancaps don't believe in force, how do they respond to the split?
All other systems can exist, but force is legitimate if needed.

>>7716158

Why do people do this shit? If you want to write a paragraph, publish it literally anywhere but fucking Twitter, I'm not reading this shit.

>>7716409
You liberals really need a "most dangerous man on Earth right now" all the time, don't you.

Too bad Dick Cheney didn't run for president.

Trump's not a nazi. I don't like him but he's not.
Bannon is a bona fide white supremacist.

>>7716129
2/10 not very attractive

>>7718548
>All other systems can exist, but force is legitimate if needed.
The natural "force" in ancap is compulsory property hierarchies. There can't be permanent anarchism under pure libertarian free markets. It would always centralize power eventually in those who have capital and use it to gain more.

There's a reason anarchists are mostly anti-property rights in the way that you see them. Owning land, as a basic commodity, being considered a "right" under ancap dogma, makes things like controlling/restricting water access under a corporate entity possible and pollution something that gets to go unchecked because controlling it is "inefficiency." Such beliefs are fundamental denial of what anarchism was founded on: rejection of broad compulsory rights. It is part of the immorality of the state and in emulating it, ancaps are advocating temporary solutions that lapse back into the old system by their very nature.

If you cannot confront that with anything more than claiming it produces moral growth (how? there is no incentive to encourage education for the very sake of development but only for markets to be improved), and you also believe that ancap can be sustained on its own.

I don't so much see ancaps as being troublesome in anarchism without labels, but ancaps would probably produce the first real threats to that anarchism by the very nature of the functional necessities of growth to use force to control or compel others into paying tolls or taxes and deny people any sort of squatter's rights or right of free passage. Eventually the power centralizes in those who have capital--- the solution is not just "free markets" but external belief in social responsibility and denial of the structure that creates power. In other words, there would be conflicts if you tried to enforce on others the value of your currencies rather than accepting the terms of exchanging currencies with your neighboring anarchists of other market systems.

>>7716158
Sounds fucking based

>>7719425
Nice to see the typical benign lack of substance from the "you liberals" populist crowd.

>>7719601
Figures. Most of the people on 4chan want to be culled anyway.

>>7716336
>Government and monopolies, which only exist when government stamps out competition, concentrate power in few hands.
But that's a meme. Plenty of industries lend themselves naturally to monopolies, especially those with a high entry cost, or those that depend on a very limited natural resource.

>>7716469
>Ancapism relies on rational self-interest, not trust. Statism relies on trusting politicians to do the right thing.
The flaw is in assuming that rational self-interest will lead to a positive outcome. And politicians are incentivized to do the right thing because (in a democracy at least) they will lose power if they don't.

>>7718548
>There must be a permanent non-state, sustainable and eternal.
The existence of a state is something natural, in the absence of a state one will form. If a libertarian/ancap society has some form of police force to enforce even basic things like non-violence and property rights, the entity that controls such a police force is the state. If you don't even have that, eventually some people will take that role themselves, and become the de facto state.