Reminder that statism should always be fought against, no matter

>>133969006
Indeed. I don't think the market can handle every problem we have, but the state should be kept as minimal as absolutely possible.

Humans are naturally tribal and don't really have the capacity to care for more than the 100 or so people closest to them, so having a state that makes sure everyone has running water, basic food, basic default housing and access to treatment when sick is a good idea. Any other demands than that can and will be met by the free market.

Well, I guess we can't have law and police privatized. But if it's going to be state-driven, we will have to monitor it harshly to make sure it doesn't go awry.

>>133969586
You don't seem very convinced yet. What makes you believe that a state is requiered? It clearly isn't moral.

>>133969586
Why can't the things you mentioned be provided through free markets? Food is abundant where you have any sort of decent economy, and its not because somebody in a government bureau made it so.

>>133969586
Why not privatize the state and use private contract law and 3rd party arbitration to banish freeriders?

>>133970412
Without a state, you'd be crushed by those with a state.
Horses work better all pulling in one direction, after all.

File: 1390677657710.png (1MB, 1023x2805px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1023x2805px

>>133969006
Reminder that statism is civilization

>>133969006
So basically you want anarchy?
"Statism" is having a government.

File: IMG_1855.jpg (40KB, 400x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 400x450px

Good luck protecting your anarchist uptopia when the country that still utilizes a state and central authority invades.

Man is too stupid to be left to his own devices.

>>133973231
No you faggot
Statism is putting the state first and foremost.
Like European countries do

>>133973231
I just don't want the state sticking its nose in places it doesn't belong. The only function of the state should be the enforcement of the NAP and maybe protection of common resources.

>>133971878
lmao that would end badly

>>133972925
>>133973618
I don't think that would be the case if we are talking about an invasion.
Defending yourself is always cheaper than attacking someone so even if we only spend the same amount of money on defense we would have an advantage. A practical example for that would be that you can shoot down a 5mil $ helicoper with a 50k$ missle.
The second point is that people in an ancap society don't have to win, they just have to last longer. You can keep attacking from behind and putting up traps until the population that supports the state is nolonger willing to bare the cost.
A practical example for that would be vietnam. Despite much more funding and better technology the US had to pull out because they couldn't win and lost support of the people at home.

I see the bigger threat to a ancap society in the society itself. With great success comes decadence. People will be drawen to harmful ideas like democracy. This is why physically removing those people is very very important.

>>133972925
States don't create anything other than armies, which is their sole purpose and all they should ever do.

>>133974696
>>133974229

And how do you think it came to what we have now? That's what people want, the state is a reflection of its people. Either you cry against statism because you want to live in an anarchist shithole, or you cry against the majority that enabled a state you don't like. Just don't be hypocritical and start blaming "statism" if the latter.

>>133975410
We all know that democracy doesn't work.

>>133969006
Anarcho-capitalism: Ideas so edgy that people forget you're just a liberal.

>>133975514
Seems to be working better than anything else I've been shown

>>133975629
There's nothing wrong with classical liberalism.

>>133975671
Name one successful democracy that exists today.

>>133974960
for shitty people with low standards

>>133975804
Any western developped country. And if you throw at me the "they arent democracy because we dont directly vote for the president" then sorry but still a democracy to me.

>>133975706
Degeneracy, banality, moral relativism, anti-theological, crypto-statism/fake-ass people...
There's more than enough wrong with it as it is one of the worst political ideologies ever, if not the worst.

anarchy is a mental illness

>>133976044
Oh I'm sorry, I guess I can't argue against you if you just ignore everything that contradicts you personal made-up reality.

>>133969006
Agreed, comrade. Are you going to the march next month?

>>133976221
>degeneracy
destruction of individualism is degeneracy.
>banality
meaningless mud-slinging
>moral relativism
morals are relative, prove they're not.
>anti-theological
if you want to practice religion that's fine, just don't try to push your rules onto others like a sandnigger
>crypto-statism
false
>fake-ass people
those who lack the sense of self to become something other than a cog on a gear are the fake ones.

>>133976023
i.e. most people of the real world and not part of your idealist delusion

>>133976260
Lol sorry love, looks like you're stuck with my preferred political ideology :^)
Feel free to try and fuck off in a deserted place to create your utopia

>>133976044
Democracies constantly fail. They accumulate debt and the power of the government is ever increasing. Germany's first republic resulted in the biggest war mankind has ever seen. In venezuela people are starving as we speak and they voted for it. Also right now Turky is going from the only kinda secular muslim country to a totalitarian shithole (50000 people have already been locked up).
The "successful" democracies that you probably think of like the US Canada or the UK increasingly mess with their own citizens life. The US which statred probably as the most libertarian state ever is now 200 year later a beuracratic giant that feeds itself with stolen money.
The west is rich not because of democracy but despite it. There is still enough free market left to pay for all this nonsense.

>>133977354
That's a consequence of people's nature, take the government/state out and you've got a bunch of apes killing each other after famines and barbaric invasions. Oh yeah that sounds so much better I'm sorry

>>133969006
I agree, roads and borders are pretty good ideas.

>>133975410
>That's what people want
No, that's what the state wants.

>the state is a reflection of its people.
No, the state is a reflection of the state.

>or you cry against the majority that enabled a state you don't like
The state does not operate on the will of the people.

Stop shilling faggot.

>>133977581
The objection to a state is not that it regulates the interactions between humans but rather that it is mandatory.
Government isn't something people have brought upon themself but rather other people forced it upon them.

>>133974973
And what happens when you run out of missiles, bullets, and fuel? The non-Anarchist state will just call on reinforcements, and that's only if you survive the first stage.
Another thing: a state run by people with an IQ above room temperature would utilize missile systems to their advantage; blocking any form of congregation.
Would everyone know how to run a missile defense system?
Would everyone be self-sufficient?
If you don't want to go back to primitive living standards (which, funnily enough, might lead to a form of localized communism/communalism) than you would need everyone in your congregation to know how to be self-sufficient and have a rudimentary form of critical thought.
And lastly, it's in human nature to destroy things when it's held against them, so you would get fucking bombarded with small and large-scale nuclear weapons if you somehow destroyed all of the invading force's fortifications.

>>133969006
It's later than you think.

>>133977581
No one said take the state or government out, you tard. Having a state is not bad. Having a shitty manifestation is state is bad. Although the "alternative" you mentioned can be and are still be found in many countries having a state.

>>133969006
Reminder that statist is an ambiguous term that nobody identifies with.

Capitalist states get so goddamned rich they can buy superior defenses. Every goddamned time. How long will it take you people to realize that principle continues to infinity? Chase the invisible hand, for it is the hand of god! As regards the state's capacity to bring wealth, I tell you this: in nullius, infinity! Always the society with less theft wins over the one with more theft, for it is the society with less theft that is more nearly playing with its hands intact!

>>133980394
No need to be self sufficient you just trade with other people for whatever you desire just like you do now.

What is the point of nuking an ancap state rly? Yeah you won but there is nothing to gain after that.

>head of state
>IQ above room temperature

And again no need for a commune or whatever. The point of an ancap society is the voluntary exchange of goods and services. You can trade with whomever you like and yes even states.

>>133980643
The perfect example for this is when Ronald Regan outcompeted the Soviet Union in the armsrace and destroyed them without using force.