Is AnCap good or bad?

File: Hoppe Quote BW 1.png (357KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1000x1000px

here we go again

>>134166599
before the civil rights act america was much more anarcho capitalist
you could literally have a business that truly served only who you wanted. a radical idea now

File: decentralization.png (503KB, 807x816px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 807x816px

>>134166799
thank you

I have immense respect for ancaps due to their adherence to principles, but they're just so laughably utopian.
Still better than any leftist though.

File: 1486049135651.png (53KB, 385x343px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 385x343px

it's full of contradictory beliefs, so it's a big meme.

almost all ancaps you will talk to will concede that government should be a role in some form or another

File: Hoppe 1.jpg (363KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1000x500px

>>134166859
not really utopian m8, we supported David Duke and right wing populists.

>>134166599
Ancaps are fucking retards

They're as bad as communists

>>134166599
Neither. It's just retarded and fanboys think that NAP is a magic wand that will solve all potential problems.

File: Hoppe 4.jpg (371KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1000x500px

>>134166924
>>134166938
both wrong

File: lrg vs lp.png (348KB, 1437x908px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1437x908px

there. I think I answered your question OP.

>>134166882
>it's full of contradictory beliefs

name one faggot

>>134166599

It's literally a utopian meme, like Communism. Simultaneously it shares the same fatal flaw: it can only exist in a world that doesn't have humans in it. If even 10% of the population doesn't want to live in an AnCap world/system, then that system/world cannot exist any more.

Authority is derived from strength, not morality.

>>134166977
You can hoppe all you want that NAP will solve everything but if we were to remove the state, police, courts and prisons you would see the true face of humanity. And you wouldn't like it.

>>134166599
Communism and Capitalism are both missing the mark.
Look up the economics of National Socialism. And no, it's not Marxist.

File: 1496367440399.gif (1MB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x225px

Capitalism is fundamentally about private ownership. Anarchists do not support this.

>>134166599
Isnt the ancap idea of property both what you own and can feasibly defend? Therefore you can have a plot of land so long as you can have some way to challenge anyone who wants to claim it. Basically the pic in the op ironically isn't contradictory but falls in line with ancap beliefs

>>134167132
>>134167296
didn't tag, sorry faggot

>>134166599
It doesnt exist, therefore it is neither.
>Its just another of a long line of forced memes here

>>134167278
defensive technology versus offensive technology
which way is the trend?

File: ancap reading.jpg (2MB, 2426x2676px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2426x2676px

>>134167278
Power =/ authority.

>>134167282
You retards think we want a Mad Max world with no courts and no police. Wrong, we simply want more competition, i.e. ending the state monopoly on courts and police so we can actually get a market incentive not to be fucked over with bureaucracy.

>>134167282
All it took was 16 hours in Toronto in the Murray Hill riots.

>>134166672
>we should voluntarily destroy our countries

>>134167468
>we must live under the same guardian as leftists and parasites because "stronger together" :^)

>>134166599
it's LARPing, so bad

File: 11418458447.png (114KB, 177x381px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 177x381px

>>134167296
>>134167337
I dont think anarchism has a head anarchist that decides shit like that
is this why there is no left equivalent of bitcoin? stuck in an appeal to history fallacy I guess

>>134166599
its bad. not as bad as communism, but it has the same issues as our current system, just in a more extreme manner.

there is nothing to stop someone who has already accrewed a fuck tonne of money from buying most, if not all, of the natural water reserves in the world. if that happens everyone has to pay that one person to live essentially, and if someone like that could buy all that, they could almost definitely buy "enforcers" to protect that one persons interest.
>but you can convert sea water into drinkable water
not if schlomo and his enforcers buy the land you plan to build that on, or buy a patent for water filtration.

ultimately under ancap, jews will still control the world, only it will be a singular jew, not a conglomerate of them.

>>134167437
So what happens when there is no recognized crime prevention unit? Forced gang formation in which vigilantes carry out crime prevention and even then they could abuse their power and when they grab a stranglehold of the power the people will be suppressed by fear.

>>134167546
>hehehe i have words at my disposal in the english language to precisely name my movement
>dude ur words are historically right but currently out of date

nice meme lad

Its threads like this that make me think that total regulation and control of the internet cannot come soon enough

File: 1499276157138.jpg (101KB, 1046x496px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1046x496px

>>134167468
there is no country that can overcome the law of pic related
you cannot leave open the possibility that they will just vote for more of your money (currently happening)

>>134166599
Ancap, Libertarianism, Communism, Socialism are all shit ideologies.

File: throwemout.png (1MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x800px

>>134167627
again, this is why there is no left equivalent of bitcoin
they are stuck in an appeal to history fallacy I guess

>>134167296
There is no private ownership. There is only power that can hold something.

File: warning.jpg (31KB, 350x252px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 350x252px

>>134167627
>no recognized crime prevention unit
Who the fuck said there wouldn't? Is there a recognized cellphone provider? Is there a recognized food provider? People open businesses that are in demand and provide services that people want. Having security and police to live in a nice city or neighborhood is a service in demand.

Jesus fucking Christ, do you even bother to even read just one (1) article about this kind of stuff before coming here asking basic bitch questions?

>>134167740
You can keep repeating yourself, it doesn't justify your unrealistic ideology one bit.

>>134167753
Chaos breeds uncertainty. Chaos must be contained by order or else it devolves into a primitive state held back by primitive things. This is why we have hierarchies of authority.

Ancaps are seriously just manchildren that don't want to adhere to unspoken moral rules in the world.

>>134167860
So who would be responsible for the well-being of the unit? The government? Or the people? Who is easily accountable?

>>134167925
What do you mean by "unit"?

>>134167925
There is no order without power that can project force to it. In the end, all ideologies boil down to MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.

>>134167437
>You retards think we want a Mad Max world with no courts and no police
No. I never stated that that is what you guys want. I do however state that that is what we would get in the end if ancaps got their way.

>>134168002
A term for a would-be police equivalent. You can employ security, but who would secure them? You get into this slippery slope of having so much freedom that you actually don't at all. The point of the current system is to surrender a small amount of freedom in order to have services that make it easier for you to live collectively.

Having a wild-west tavern style rulebook doesn't seem to hold up when paired with actual human desire and emotions

>>134168026
ordered chaos is still chaos

>>134166599
Neither. Best memes though.

>>134167627
>hehehe i have words at my disposal in the english language to precisely name my movement

You're ignoring the etymological origin of the word anarchy. It does not mean what you think it means.

You claimed before that almost all ancaps will concede that government should be a role, someone asked you an example and your example was that anarcho communists disagree with us?

Wow, such a contradictory belief.

>>134168230
The fuck do you mean? I said anarchists have varying views of what private property should mean. That in-of-itself is contradictory

>>134168132
Ever heard about Liechtenstein? Complete right of free association and dissociation between cantons. Almost exactly what ancaps want.

Prince wanted to go full ancap and allow it at a personal level but they settled with cantonal division.

Richest country in the world.

>>134168148
Who would secure them in what way? Do you mean, What if the police become abusive or mistreat their customers? In that case, the very word CUSTOMERS is important. A police agency that mistreated their customers by fucking up the patrolling would lose customers and revenue. Stores that have bitchy employees and dysfunctional business models go bankrupt. Simply put, order sells. Efficiency sells. Security sells. Chaos doesn't sell. Marauding doesn't sell either. We'd have a flourishing market of private defense agencies and police organizations, from big multinationals to local community watches to keep people safe. And the profit motive would make sure service would be fantastic.

Also, about the Wild West. It wasn't as wild as you were told:

https://mises.org/library/not-so-wild-wild-west

File: 1458004510221.png (205KB, 300x371px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 300x371px

>>134168459
Don't you realize that this will literally devolve (or evolve depending on your opinion about it) into governments? You're talking about a hierarchy of authority. I thought anarchists hated that?

Not to mention the glaring fact that capitalism almost INHERENTLY breeds an authority hierarchy. There is no way to escape a development of a hierarchy. Especially that of authority. That's why the biblical stories are so renowned. It is the most inherent human / animalistic to ever exist. It's so ingrained into the human brain.

>>134168339
You're not responding to a thread about all kinds anarchism, you're responding to a thread about
anarcho capitalism.

>>134166882

That is what you answered.

So you're telling me that if anarcho communists disagree with anarcho capitalists it means anarcho capitalism is full of contradictions? Or you just didn't read the OP?

“Naturally, an anarchist could claim that a monarch from a family that has reigned for centuries cannot possibly be in favour of abolishing the state. In response, I should like to note that the Princes of Liechtenstein are not paid for their duties as head of state by either the state or the taxpayer. The total cost of our monarchy, in contrast to almost all other monarchies, is covered by the Prince’s or the Princely House’s private funds.”
-HSH Sovereign Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, The State in the Third Millennium, Introduction p.3.

>>134168631
Anarchists should be a term that could be the same under ancap and ancom, you can't just play word police and switch it up because it deteriorates your 'brand'.

Grow up

>>134168342
>One tiny part of what should be Switzerland
A model for anything

>>134168624
Jesus fucking Christ, again with the "anti-authority" bullshit. We are not against authority, nor order, nor hierarchy. Hoppe even calls his AnCap style "NATURAL ORDER."

Ok, look, if you're anywhere interested in learning anything about this, read Anatomy of the State by Rothbard. It's short and to the point. Then go watch PFS lectures on YouTube and come back. You have no idea how clueless you are about this.

>>134166599
Delusional

Also, they kind of don't like the free market of the ideas, the result of which is countries with different governmental systems.

Go guess why.

>>134168822
You can play ideologue gymnastics all you want, but anarchism means a very clear thing. Why do all ancaps do this? Oh well THAT'S NOT THE TRUE MEANING OF IT, HERE READ SOMETHING THAT REAAAALLY EXPLAINS IT.

How about you explain it yourself rather than rely on your articles or book

>>134167670
>currently happening
Happening ever since women's suffrage in every goddamn country that went through with it.

>>134168961
I've already explained it to you, faggot. Go read a book or two if you want to stop being an idiot.

>>134168717
They make a misuse of the word so how is that our fault?

Anarchy means no archon, in ancient Greece, archon meant politician, they were the magistrates in city states.

It's not ancap's fault that from that origin, some self proclaimed anarchists decided that anarchy is against all kinds of hierarchies.

Notice how in ancient Greece a potter who had an apprentice was not an archon, a fisherman who had help in the boat wasn't an archon, only the forced hierarchies were considered archon.

Go to the nearest library and grab a couple of books because obviously you're out of your depth here.

>>134168729
The world we want would be full of tiny communities so why shouldn't we use them as example?

>>134168342
Liechtenstin is not a stateless society ruled by magic of NAP to which every person alive would magically adhere in order for the ancap utopia to exist.

File: lrg banner.png (63KB, 313x590px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 313x590px

>>134169138
https://anarchy.liberty.me/liberty-and-ae-in-the-principality-liechtenstein/

The King of Liechtenstein is a proponent of Austrian economics and pushed for the right of private individuals to secede from the country. The government settled with individual canton secession. Now go fuck yourself.

>>134169078
Ah, so you're an ideologue LARPer that reads his favorite bumfuck ideologue creator who can't even come to terms the universally defined definition of anarchism.

>>134169108
Politicians can be anyone though. That's the thing, the difference is they're usually oratory and good with reading crowds/people. It's not ancaps fault that most of your ideology relies on ditching primal feelings that humans have such as electing (whether spoken or unspoken) someone to go forth for them.

Greeks also used greek gods to explain their lives, which are; you guessed it, basic forms of hierarchies in which power is delegated to the most strong.

>>134169078
Yes go read a book by a Jew who advocates for child sex markets! Wonderful!
Your ideology is a pro slavery ideology and an insult to anyone who isn't retarded. You can't answer questions because you are an intellectual lightweight.

>>134169108
>The world we want would be full of tiny communities so why shouldn't we use them as example?
Because rich people only flock to Liechtenstein because there aren't very many "tiny communities". Many communities wouldn't survive and could easily be taken over by a stronger power for profit, which then makes the world back to how it was.

>>134169289
Ah, yes, the old child sex markets meme off a quote taken completely out of context.

>Your ideology is a pro slavery ideology and an insult to anyone who isn't retarded.
Sure thing then, don't forget to pay your 40/50/60% taxes for your "freedom" Mr. Bigshot. Also, good luck having your precious little state with millions of mongrels and illegals fucking up your democracy!

>>134169245
>The King of Liechtenstein

Hoppe was right indeed.

>>134169260
>It's not ancaps fault that most of your ideology relies on ditching primal feelings that humans have such as electing (whether spoken or unspoken) someone to go forth for them.

We're not against hierarchy moron, we're against forced hierarchy imposed by violence.

>>134167860

>People open businesses that are in demand and provide services that people want.

Let me put a little example: Dental services.
Right now in my city are dozens upon dozens of private practices and companies offering differing range of services.

Have you noticed that before any operation you are needed to sign a little waiver that says that there is no responsibility of the clinic if shit goes wrong?

Do you know, how many businesses offer to sign that waiver? ALL OF THEM. Even though there would be demand for stomatologists that would actually have responsibility for the shit they do.

You know why there is no "le incentivized businesses that would offer services that people want?"

Because it's PEOPLE who need their services. Not vice versa. Therefore, they can get away with pretty much everything and people still will be forced to go to them.

Same will be with the police. Want to use the service - sign up a little waiver that you don't mind if policemen (((accidentally))) will beat the shit out of you and will be servile, humble, and will obey their commands without any protest.

>>134169383
You think in the era of internet, someone would take over peaceful countries and this would end up well for them?

You think the remaining city states would not be worried who will be next and act accordingly?

You're assuming a primitive state of affairs, in the past this ended with states emerging but we're in the future now and the paradigm has changed.

>>134167468
In a sphere only populated by Europeans and some East Asians, that sort of setup would be ideal. Smaller government is always less wasteful and more free.

But I'm not ancap or libertarian because I think it's completely untenable to transform global society into that form and not be preyed upon by another America or China.

>>134169426
Which is most likely the scenario if a bunch of blubbering idiots yelling about "fuck authoritarian hierarchies" while also being authoritarian with resources and capital gains, but god forbid it happens in a hierarchy. And god forbid it happens violently (It ALWAYS will).

I wish I lived life in rose tinted sunglasses to see everything as so stark and completely disregard any concept of cause and effect.
>>134169413
Having trouble seeing how advocating for child sex markets can be taken out of context, and also why is it taken out of context when it has a terrible connotation such as child sex markets, but when it's your shambled idea of a theory, it's completely in context?

>>134169426

>we're against forced hierarchy imposed by violence on us.

FTFY.

File: Hoppe Quote.jpg (297KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1280x720px

>>134169484
Mmmm... Yes, I'm sure all customers would flock to those businesses for seconds when the first time went so well.

>>134169419
Pearls before swine anon...

>>134169484
>Do you know, how many businesses offer to sign that waiver? ALL OF THEM

So what you're saying is that there's a market void that could be exploited?

Offering "insurance" in case of something going wrong?

File: hoppe absolutely based.png (1MB, 920x1250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 920x1250px

>>134169572
Rothbard never advocated for child sex markets you fucking liar.

>>134169574
What did you smoke today?

>>134169540
Do you think in the era of the atomic bomb, someone wouldn't take over other countries if given an opportunity? Even with the internet, censorship and propaganda are both possible and widespread.

>>134169690
>getting his ideology from a glorified bill clinton

it's time to stop posting and go wipe your ass with the NAP

>>134169728
Precisely the atomic bombs is what keeps people in check.

It creates a status of balance in power which leads to peace.

>>134166874
Based on my encounters with ancaps on the internet a large amount of them are furries who say "The left are the real Fascists!"

File: 1776.jpg (92KB, 840x420px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 840x420px

>>134166599
They're headed in the right direction, but they're still a meme. I'd gladly fight, kill, and die for liberty alongside them, but I wouldn't expect an anarcho-capitalist society to be created after the war.

>>134169750
"glorified bill clinton"... Now I've heard it all. You're truly retarded and clueless.

>>134169540

>You think in the era of internet, someone would take over peaceful countries and this would end up well for them?

Like cockholes did with Donbass and Luhansk?
Or like USA does with numerous (((spontaneous))) revolution that are all done by the same scheme in a countries that, coincidentally, are not best buds of the most democratic country in the world?

>You think the remaining city states would not be worried who will be next and act accordingly?

And how that acting accordingly played out for US and Israel? Are they in smoking ruins for creating Islamic Terrorism? Are they forced to pay reparations for various "color revolutions"?

>paradigm has changed.

Paradigm has not changed. Emerging of states is a logical result of anarcho-capitalism and it's endgame.

File: 1500293080862.jpg (65KB, 845x845px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 845x845px

>>134168230
>anarcho communists disagree with us?
I don't know the discussion, and I can't be arsed to read the rest of the thread because my cellphone battery dies, but if it helps, the anarcho-communists disagreement with Ancaps is over private property (land, resources, means of production like farms and factories). Mostly us ancoms believe that private property will necessarily lead to violence and hierarchy to enforce property rights. The best way I can simplify is that ancoms advocate returning to primitive villages, ancaps seem to advocate what will amount to fuedalism, with lands held in tension. Ancaps can answer better for their own beliefs, though.

>>134169825
Maybe when the next revolutionary MMO comes out you can RP your world as the cutting-edge ancap paradise you so claim, but in the real world you got no marbles buddy

>>134169660

>Offering (((insurance)))

People don't want (((insurance))) they want their fucking service done without falling apart next year.

>>134169874
And we believe private property prevents conflicts.

I know the differences, I'm just stating that ours is way more compatible with the etymological origin of the word anarchy.

>>134169773
Will every community have an arsenal? Will every group be immune to political subversion? What if a few communities decide that it would be best for them to become a single, larger community? Is there a guarantee that anarcho capitalism can hold itself up without crashing?

>>134169694

Don't like the truth?
Or you think that the current system is not the result of the free market of ideologies? With governments being the market players that already achieved success?

>>134169584
>Mmmm... Yes, I'm sure all customers would flock to those businesses for seconds when the first time went so well.

"Where will you escape out of the submarine?"(c) old anecdote.

File: ancapprodegenracy.png (135KB, 709x742px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 709x742px

>>134169794
>pic related

>>134169245
>King
That's some ancap.
>go fuck yourself
likewise
Also, not an argument

>>134166941
>>134166919
>>134166847

Hoppe is brilliant most of the time, but here we can see where he jumps the shark and conflates intolerance for straight up fascism.

Realistically his christian utopian society would lose in a free trade competition to one that embraces alternatives and allows them to prove their own worth.

I personally won't voluntarily enter into any social covenant that violates others' NAP based on the discriminatory pre-supposition that they will violate mine.

>>134170001
>And we believe private property prevents conflicts.
I wish Reccetear: An Item Shop's Tale was true, too, friend, but I the real world, resources aren't limited. When you fence off your 1000 acres of land from the rest of your neighbors and enforce it with the friendly "this is mine, take it and die" NAP, hierarchy is established and the seeds of government are sewn. It's better to just stick with personal property rights "this is my house, this is my car" etc. You can still have small trading without tyranny.

>>134170386
I'd rather live in a conservative society away from degenerates, even with a lower living standard, than living in their midst.

>>134170316
The King concedes secession rights to the cantons and wanted for people to be able to individually secede. That's ancap alright.

>>134169933
People don't want insurance because 99.9% of the cases nothing goes wrong.

Change that % around and you will see bigger demand for insurances.

>>134170035
Balance in power between those who think invading peaceful people is wrong and those who think invading peaceful people is fun is required. If those who think invading others is fun are more, then absolutely no ideology will be able to prevent this.

>>134170043
So you actually think we want to impose our ideology through violence upon those non willing?

You understand that you could have a world with every single ideology under the sun and still be ancap, as the only thing we actually require is voluntary interactions?

>Realistically his christian utopian society would lose in a free trade competition to one that embraces alternatives and allows them to prove their own worth.

This is an utilitarian argument. You are claiming that value is objective, that wealth is more valuable than tradition.

You're wrong, it might be for you, but that scale of value does not apply to everyone.

>>134170511
In the real world, resources aren't unlimited**
Fuckin ell.

>>134170511
Precisely because resources aren't unlimited we need property rights. If resources weren't unlimited we wouldn't need property rights, you get that apple, I get the one growing 0.1 seconds after you take yours.

What happens when two people want to use the same scarce resource at the same time? Conflict, thus property rights are needed to establish a right of use. Lockean appropriation is the one that makes the most sense if we want peaceful interactions.

>>134170514
>That's ancap
Ahem.
>stateless society
>king

>>134170516
Problem with the balance of power is that human nature is too diverse. If one political thinks that domination is good, and the (theoretical) populace of an area agrees then the whole world falls apart. The system counts on people being content with it, but has no way to make sure that it can provide.

>>134170701
>If resources weren't unlimited

*If resources were unlimited

I'm more of a minarchist with Ron Paul's views, but I don't see how ancap can't work once the memers get told. Roads would still be a thing, and there would be technological innovations around things like roads. Nuke control would be limited by the fact you have to understand how to create a nuke to use it unless you're in a voluntary hierarchy which will control nukes anyways. Besides, by the time nukes are made society is ready to hit space and control more than a planet, and hence more than one environment that nukes would have a tough time destroying.

>>134170760
King is nothing but a land owner who wears a crown.

>>134166672
That wouldn't last for 24 hours before someone raised an army and started conquering those little independent free cities. Hoppe is a legit retard and good goy frontman for (((Rothbard))) and (((Von Mises))).

>>134170514
>I'd rather live in a conservative society away from degenerates, even with a lower living standard, than living in their midst.

Well you and Hoppe are both ignoring history on this one.

Austria and Hungary have both physically removed Jews from their society multiple times for being subversive alternativists.

Each time, the economy took a nosedive and they begged the Jews to come back.

I don't know what makes you think it will happen any differently now.

>>134166599
the access to shota will be good, the general state bad though

>>134170386
>>Realistically his christian utopian society would lose in a free trade competition to one that embraces alternatives and allows them to prove their own worth.

This is an utilitarian argument, and as an ancap you should hate utilitarianism.

You are claiming that value is objective, that wealth is more valuable than tradition or culture.

It might be for you, but that scale of value does not apply to everyone.

Its a classic meme form of government like a nap flavored piece of communist icecream

It would immediatelly collapse to a military dictatorship when the group woth most guns realizes no one can stop them

>>134170701
>What happens when two people want to use the same scarce resource at the same time? Conflict, thus property rights are needed to establish a right of use.
You're not avoiding conflict, just justifying it. This assumes the other person yields to property rights like it was some kind of sacred law between good ancaps. If he doesn't, which would be a financial consideration on his part, there's still violence in it's resolution, or worse, systematic protection, which leads to law.

..Er, anyway, 4% battery, so...

>>134171011
Thanks for the always valuable and indispensable input, UN.

>>134170993
A King is a ruler and lays down the law. King is also, most commonly, God's representative on Earth.

File: ancap andy.png (85KB, 801x765px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 801x765px

>>134171017
Yes lad

>>134171317
Actually the pope would be god's representative as head of his church.

>>134171217
The one who yields property rights is the one who mixed labor with the resource first. Who would have a better claim over a scarce resource than him? The people arriving after he's collected the apples?

How do you avoid conflict in your society if a group of people with the same size as yours wants to enter and consume the resources you've gathered?

You don't set some kind of order of use? That's property rights. Even Marx advocates for property rights, to each according his need etc. For that you need property rights.

>>134166599
it's neither, it's natural and inevitable once the time comes to do away with commieshits, moralfags and all other authoritarians

>>134171438
The guy with the gun

>>134171317
>A King is a ruler and lays down the law
Good kings enforce natural law, they don't "make" law out of thin air.

>>134171317
A landlord is a ruler and lays down the law too. He tells you you cannot smoke in his property, he tells you you cannot make building modifications, he requires monthly payment for services offered.

Absolutely compatible with a private property society such as the one we want.

>>134171496
What if I associate with lots of people who agree in resolving conflicts over scarce resources peacefully and we pool part of those resources into making sure the one with the gun does not have a better claim?

>>134171624
What if those guys just take your stuff or stuff of someone else because that is greatest profit with least effort
Or what if someone just kills you regardles of some meme association

>>134167296
While an anarchist wants no one to own anything.

An anarcho-capitalist wants everyone to own that which they have the power and organizational structure to defend.

We speculate less war because a private army does not want to die for their countrymen, they would much rather make shows of force with subsequent negotiation

>>134171624
Then you just reverted to the time from which nation states arose with all their rules and regulations and would, naturally, progress to the nation state.

You know, after thinking a bit. The voluntary hierarchies in ancap world would resemble micronations living in harmony kind of like the HRE without the overarching empire. The size of the micronation would be normalized to its capability of controlling a region effectively, which would be a small hierarchy in most cases without computerized aid in the form of digital bureaucracy. Without computers and especially artificial intelligence, even a human genius can't manage regions too big for his own good without the risk of revolt and secession.

File: hoppe thumbs up.png (172KB, 377x626px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 377x626px

>>134172029
That is a very good and straightforward way of putting things in perspective. Great post, my man.

>>134171749
Why would I be interested in living within a property that did not have some sort of guarantee that people are not going to take my stuff?

I'm not particularly skilled with guns and I'm not particularly interested in killing others, it would make sense for me to find a place that had this all already provisioned.

Currently we have states, Syria has a state, and I don't think I will spend time in there this summer.

I tend to avoid places where laws are not respected or where laws are not to my liking, and I would do the same in an anarcho capitalist country.

People against anarcho capitalism seem obsessed with order yet unable to grasp the idea.

They fail to realise that people with naturally self organize without continent wide tyrannies. What are companies, teams, and clubs but examples of self organized individuals?

In a free world, indiduals who tend towards or create chaos will die out. How do you think our capacity to create order evolved in the first place?

>>134172029
Except history proves otherwise as all major nations started as feudal micronations and absorbed all their neighbors.
You will just have preussensburg micro nation subjugate your shit micronation

File: ancaps 1.jpg (116KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 640x640px

I was friends with an ancap IRL once. Used to be one myself at the time. I found out that he only wanted the freedom aspect of it until he made enough money to become the next George Soros. He said so himself. That was the point at which I realized that /pol/ was right as usual and that ancap is degenerate shit and whoever ends up making the most profit will inevitably become the next totalitarian ruler just like the Rothschilds/Rockefellers/Duponts/etc.
Not to mention that there are so many glaring issues that ancaps don't have any way of solving. Their answer to every questions is just "MUH NAP! MUH NAP MUGFUGGA!!1". Well, what if a large part of your local community just decides to ignore the NAP? What if ISIS shows up in force? They sure as hell aint gonna respect the NAP. How you gonna deal with those eventualities without any sort of law enforcement or army? Just having guns won't necessarily sort it out if you don't have training and good communication if you're invaded by a foreign army.

TL;DR ancaps a shit.

>>134172230
Well leaving the ancap state and moving to a real country is always an alyernative as you say
That of course works for the locao militia as ultimately they just want your stuff

Or maybe they would just kill or nale you a slave your opinioms would be irrelevant them

>>134172458
I wouldn't need to leave the ancap country, multiple of land owners would be interested in offering safe private cities with private security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb8nJauOq_8

After some time in an AnCap system the state reemerges, you will always have people that want to live together under a common set of values.
The state's existence is inevitable, but what we can do is limit the amount of power the state has.

>>134172574
>you will always have people that want to live together under a common set of values.

And that's totally fine. The problem is when someone forces you to live with someone who doesn't share those values.

>>134172564
Which would all take your stuff or get conquered by the ruthless neighbor

>>134172294
Which is why I said they normalize towards micronations. Name one non-micronation that didn't have revolts? Today's world is different than the past's (except for regressives like Muslims) where big nations respect sovereignty and have movements of decolonization because of SJW guilt. And anyways computerization of bureaucracy will outdate small hierarchies.

>>134166599
death to all ancaps

>>134172655
No ideology prevents you from getting conquered by the ruthless neighbor if you're not properly prepared to deter him.

This is not a problem exclusive to anarcho capitalism.

>>134172655
Liechtenstein is still up. Neither Hitler not Napoleon wanted it. Napoleon actually took out Liechtenstein from the Confederation states he was demanding to receive because of the King's diplomacy. Same thing for San Marino, Andorra, Singapore, etc. It's all about diplomacy, international PR, etc.

>>134172698
Yes usa has had revolts and yet trump is still the presodent of united states of america
All revolts are eother pointless, get supressed, lead to a lost civil war or to a new regime

No government = no counrty
Country needs the three powers, a political system, an army, education system, social security and so on
Name one country in history that is not and island of filthy rich people that ever had a system that resembles to ancap

Filthy billionaire jews can mess up entire countries' econmies with a well regulated system imagine what this filthy jews can do with no regulations
True ancaps are the Soros, the Rockefellers, the Roschilds...

>>134169690
I find it funny that Hoppe's whole ideaology is literally just really what we already have

>dude let's return to anarchy
>people will then form cultural enclaves
*cough cough* city-state
>they will then spread
*cough cough* countries!

>>134172879
Lichtensteins is a country woth a government and taxea its just small and pnly exists because real countries let ot

>>134172655
yeah thats why america spent trillions on those goatfarmers and won that big war in the desert

>>134172373
what was his name, y'know since he just admitted to premeditated jewry

>>134173055
America isnt in afganistan for stuff they havent got
If yoi actually think the people who
decide arent making a profit here i can see why you would fall for amcap meme

>>134172574
Which is why leftists constantly say that anarcho-capitalism is not anarchic. Which is completely correct. Anarcho-capitalism is not against leadership, hierarchy or governance. The only thing that it actually advocates is non-aggression. It has nothing to do with scrapping government. It's a transition from coercive government to voluntary governance.

>>134172805
>>What is nationalism?
Strong nationalists populations are very hard to conquer, mantaining them subjugated when people have a distinct and clear national sentiment, will make any empire crumble.
Napoleonic France in Spain,
Britain in India
Spain in the Netherlands
Colonies in the Americas...

>>134172939
The problem is that humans prefer safety and security to freedom and will back tyrants when it means a slightly better life compared to revolting and having an even better life over time. If it didn't take more than a generation of successful revolt to see the fruits of your labor, more people would be willing to fight for their rights. But since we trend towards bigger hierarchies even when we're not handled to control them properly, it means we desperately struggle for benevolent overlords to manage our lives even when they don't exist. We're truly lucky to be living in a time where that can be achieved, but even in today's age a 'benevolent' AI can turn malevolent pretty quickly if media is anything to go by.

>>134173338
You already can opt out of any western governemnt as they all have freedom of emigration

>>134166599
It's bad it's pretty much the Jews biggest dream.

Do ancaps really believe they will have superior armies and military alliances?

>>134166599
What I dont get is
If I leave my house or car unlocked it's almost 100% garanteee a Mexican wil break into it
How is this ok to n ancap?

>>134173586
But the problem is finding land to run your life by yourself. The principality of Sealand commandeered an oil rig no one cared about, but making an artificial island is the next step which could've happened for us if kekistanis made it so, even if they're cringe lords.

>>134173726
Siberia has a ton of land no one gives a shit about just move there and you can live yoir life without seeing another humam

>>134166599
Basically any ideology that starts with anarcho is bullshit.
Idealistic circlejerk, 0 touch with reality.
>>134173726
want a piece of land? just buy a chunk from Canada or Australia
If Las Vegas can be the fastest growing city, in the middle of the dessert...

>>134173948
It's still owned by Russia. The minute a precious resource is discovered you can bet they'll kill whoever is there for it. Plus it's too cold. C'mon, try harder.

>>134174015
I hope that's cheaper than an artificial island.

>>134174082
You just have to tryharder to defend it
Its not my problem if a country does something you dont like on their private property

>>134174212
The point is I'm not going to piss off a larger state that doesn't want me there, if I buy territory from a state that's better because it's like the difference between someone licensing in GPL because they have to versus someone licensing in GPL while having a supporting mission statement.

>>134174457
Dont break the NAP if you dont want the CLAP

File: 1444044098401.png (132KB, 554x439px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 554x439px

I guess my main concern is this:
>How do you own the land?
If you came out of your mother's womb clutching it, that would be one thing, but you don't.
If your answer is anything but "I don't", then you've seen the seeds for hierarchy and government, congratulations.

>>134173586
That doesn't make coercive central government better than voluntary decentralised governance. Also, you're kind of arguing for the other side by proposing free association and dissociation. That's fundamental to anarcho-capitalist theory. Why don't you believe in fully free association? Why don't we have hundreds of sovereign states instead of a few monopolistic democratic governments? We would be able to separate ourselves from liberal society. Why is 50% of the population fighting the other 50% of the population when they could both just leave each other alone?

>>134174186
keep an eye on Madagascar too, it is filled with stupid niggers (iq under 65), they are about to fuck all the forests and die in the next famine
I give it 8-12 years
http://www.wildmadagascar.org/conservation/threats.html

>>134174581
That's what should be said about micronations trying to outgrow themselves. The best defense against that are mutual defense pacts between peaceful micronations. It kept most of Europe in a confederative state until Napoleon came and shook that up.

>>134174653
Humm how about you buy a big piece of land, with investors money, fraction it in certain amount of pieces, set a fixed price, no rentals payed upfront, if you buy it you must use it, no speculation allowed

File: 1493660519278.png (288KB, 1572x1576px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1572x1576px

>>134166599
AnCap in the actual meaning, which means a thoroughly decentralized state with power beginning on the individual level in which individuals are in free association with 'governmental' institutions, is A-OK in my books.
the 'AnCap' bullshit which is spread by awful threads like /lrg/ and the general /pol/ libertarian community is fucking retarded, doesnt work, and is culturally devoid. the 'AnCaps' that we have here on /pol/ are quite literally the worst posters on here, they are the most autistic when it comes to debate, they cant stand their ideas being challenged and resort to 'le physical removal' meme, and other cancerous memes. As people, they are stagnant both ideologically and physically, all the ancaps i have met are autistic spergs who cant think for themselves. theres been maybe one or two smart ones i have met, but they have both been the actual meaning of ancap

>>134167373
>>134167373
>>134167373
>>134167373

>>134173486
Plenty of nationalist countries got conquered as counter example. Nationalism by itself does not guarantee resistance against a stronger enemy.

Those weren't conquered, not because of nationalism, but because the invading force wasn't strong enough to overpower them on their own turf. Balance of power.

File: 1499532010209.jpg (103KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 640x640px

>>134166599
bad

detroit is a good example, only more niggers

>>134172029
>ancap world would resemble micronations living in harmony kind of like the HRE without the overarching empire.
>HRE
>living in harmony

Back to history class with you if you think HRE was harmonious society in any way. HRE was subject to constant internal strive and microwars between regional power players. What we are trying to get across to you AnCap retards and lobertarians is that before centralized nation states there was feudalism and constant war between warlords. Now these warlords will have machine guns, tanks and fighter jets which means in a few years or a decade max! A new empire with centralized authoritarian state would emerge victorious and only thing you've managed to achieve is getting countless masses of people killed for your utopian bullshit.

You're like communists but even more clueless about history.

>>134175513
But as I've said, we also have technology to manage bigger regions now too, so successful big hierarchies without risk of revolt are more possible now (granted that's why I'm not an anarchist).

>>134175513
Why do you think our world is more peaceful now than before?

Precisely because people have access to mass killing weapons and because we now have way more to lose than before. Only piss-poor people are interested in a war that could reach their own territory.

History is not to be ignored, but you have decontextualized it.

>>134174801
Because current countries work unlike their inefficient ancestrors

>>134175123
That assumes someone owns it in the first place. Fuedalism never went away, it just exists with a larger king. We're all still serfs given permission to stay on the government's land and any violation will be met with force. Start disrespecting people's "private land" and you'd be a career criminal, not fit for our modern societies. Ancaps just want more of the same.

>>134167437
>ending the state monopoly on courts and police
Private courts and private police are utter perversions which would only serve the interest of the rich. If you leave justice to the market, it would completely fall by the wayside because the market doesn't give a shit about justice. The market only cares about profits. How would courts and police turn a profit? By siding with the richest motherfuckers in town every single time. Uncle Moneybags could literally shoot a man on time square in broad daylight and he wouldn't even get investigated as long as siding with him promises the biggest paycheck for the private court and police, which he probably owns anyway.

Imagine a world where the court and police everywhere are in the pocket of the mafia and nobody can do anything about it. In effect that's the world ancaps are aiming for. Doing justice will never properly work as a for-profit business. And if you turn it into one anyway, you will abandon justice in the pursuit of profit. It's that simple. Anybody with the faintest shred of empathy for, y'know, regular people who aren't super rich, can easily tell ancap philosophy for the amoral abomination it is. Muh NAP means jack shit if you got any sociopath millionaire running around. Heck, Coca Cola is murdering people right fucking now in countries where the state is weak and the police/courts are easily bought by cartels and corporations alike. And yet you faggots act all surprised the avarage people see your vision of the future as the gross dystopia it would be.

>>134175903
How do you avoid conflict in your society if a group of people with the same size as yours wants to enter and consume the resources you've gathered?

You don't set some kind of order of use? That's property rights. Even Marx advocates for property rights, "to each according his need" assumes property rights.

>>134175791
Control of information. Our democracies de-evolved back to robber-baron crooked capitalism due (((corporate))) control of information. They started to lose control of information flow due to internet and this is why the status quo of net neutrality got in (((their))) sights. Government regulations as distasteful as they may seem to us are currently the only thing standing between them regaining total control over us and us being to even able to discuss these things online.

>>134175986
To be fair courts and police would be better to be financed by third parties not involved in a related conflict. If there's still corruption you can take justice into your own hands if it didn't go well for you, which deincentivizes the bigger guy from being all-corrupt. If saving money on corrupt litigation is nullified by money and manpower lost by a revolt, why be corrupt?

>>134175881
There isn't any less wars and killing now than there was during middle ages. 3.rd world shithole militia groups use those mass killing weapons quite succesfully on each other and innocent civilian populations as we speak. You just think we have less wars than ever before because massive centralized super states haven't had a direct armed conflict with each other in a while.

>>134176413
The third party judhe would just rule agains you because ypu are paying him less followed by third party militia executing you and taking your stuff

>>134175986
>Private courts and private police are utter perversions which would only serve the interest of the rich

Why would the middle class expose themselves to being arbitrated by unfair judges?

The richest people in the world, the companies with the most resources are not that serve the rich, they're the ones that serve everyone equally.

A fair private court and private police would be way wealthier than any rich-oriented force.

>>134176541
Exactly, poor shitholes keep warring against each other fighting for scraps, because they're too dumb to know about commerce, and they're too poor to care about losing their lives.

Once your population becomes wealthy and has something to lose, commerce becomes a way better method for acquiring resources than war.

>>134176591
In the worst case I'm sure there would be charities for public goods funded voluntarily.

>>134176689
>because they're too dumb to know about commerce

They fight mostly over the rights to resources so that they could do commerce.

>>134176689
The richer and stronger side would always choose to use a court where justice can be bought
The poorer and weaker side must accept else it goes directly to the hired thugs where the poorer side would lose

>>134176051
First, you don't in a society the size of ours. Big nations are a mistake. It's better to have smaller communities with face-to-face democracy. Secondly, there's a difference between private and personal property. Private is the land, it's resources, and community-utilized projects like roads and large scale cooperative farms. Taking any of this as your exclusive property is a problem for society as it requires rights above and over other people and defending then by force. Personal property is the affects you need to live, your house, car, etc. These are owned without problems.

Conflict and war itself is not a problem you can solve. But in smaller communities, you could work it out more easily as a small, tight-knit group of families and friends.

>>134176689
>the companies with the most resources are not that serve the rich, they're the ones that serve everyone equally
Its like this faggot has never heard of a bank before.

File: IMG_3234.png (872KB, 1280x808px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 1280x808px

>>134166599
AnCap is just an overused meme, always has been and always will be
It should die off with the weak

>>134177284
Or oil comapanies which are notorious for their fair treatmemt of locals in shitholes over the rich and state protected american consumer

>>134176924
I'm not talking about a toothbrush here, my argument is not fallacious.

I'm talking about thousands of people arriving to your commune and deciding they want to use the means of production at the same time you're using them.

You obviously need to set limits to the usage of the means of production in order to avoid conflict. Two people wanting to be on the same spot at the same time creates conflict, two thousands people creates wars.

Those limits of usage in order to avoid conflicts over scarce resources are called property rights.

>>134176898
>The richer and stronger side would always choose to use a court where justice can be bought

So nobody would interact with them? Or engage in contractual obligations?

That's not how you become rich.

File: 1490438813370.png (328KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1000x800px

>>134177308
nah senpai

>>134177284
Pretty sure banks don't treat me unfairly for being poor. They give me less services, but in case of a transfer going by error to the account of someone rich they would side with me.

When was the last time a bank made you enter in conflict with someone rich because of something they did?

>>134177499
Every conflict has the party that is willing to pay more to get the issue solved in their favor which means every case goes to corrupt judges

>>134177499
>That's not how you become rich.

Exactly. The quickest way to become rich is to murder or enslave every one who stands in your way. Take good look to the South of you borders and see AnCap free drug markets in action.

>>134177624
You think an arbitration insurance would become wealthy by being perceived as unfair?

You think I would be a person to do business with if I wiped my ass with contracts and never agreed to fair arbitration?

Seriously man, you're not considering the implications of what you're arguing for here. I can already tell you'll never amount to anything with that mindset.

File: IMG_3074.gif (948KB, 155x173px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 155x173px

>>134177533
Pathetic.

>>134177798
>The quickest way to become rich is to murder or enslave every one who stands in your way

The richest people I know didn't become rich this way. They must be masochists who like to take the longest way...

File: a.jpg (67KB, 914x613px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 914x613px

>>134166599
Ancap and ancom aren't Anarchy.

If it's Anarcho-Capitalysm, it's either 1 or other, sice without goverment there's no telling how much do money (the capital) are worth.

Only true anarcy is either Anprim or Antrans.

>>134177860
?
Yes taking the stuff you want dorectöy trough the use of force is the fastest way of becoming rich

>>134177499
>I'm not talking about a toothbrush here, my argument is not fallacious.
>I'm talking about thousands of people arriving to your commune and deciding they want to use the means of production at the same time you're using them.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

Intercommunity disputes:
Handled as a community, everyone together. It's really up to the community to figure how they want to work it out.

For problems between communities,:
Confederacies with your surrounding communities to settle disputes and problems face-to-face and work on larger projects like shared cities. These confederations spiral out fractally with no set limits. Native Americans handled their problems this way.

And as I said, war is not a problem that could go away with any societal system.

>>134177988
Because they live in funtioning countries where that doesnt work
Closest poace to an amcap society is somalia and i bet the riches guy there also happens to own most guns

File: commies get OUT.png (758KB, 771x715px) Image search: [Google]

758KB, 771x715px

>>134177870
:^)

>>134177615
Way to completely avoid my point, and what the fuck are you talking about.

You stated the companies with most resources are the ones that serve everyone equally. Banks gain resources by having as much of peoples funds to loan/invest/line pockets, so its a direct correlation between Bank size & customer wealth.

>Pretty sure banks don't treat me unfairly for being poor.
Thats because Banks have to follow an absolute fuckload of government regulations, like in your example, they would investigate a discrepancy and side with whoever was in the right. Without regulations they would just side with the rich EVERY time because they are worth 100x more as a customer. With Ancap you would be retarded to serve customers that didnt maximize your profit. An entire industry thats essential for basic business would change immediately to only serve 5% of the country. Free market couldnt fix it because premise you stated:
>the companies with the most resources are not that serve the rich, they're the ones that serve everyone equally
Is simply not true. The only type of financial institutions that would exist for the lower class would be exploitative loan shark operations because anything else wouldnt be profitable.

>>134178039
Pretty sure the owner of McDonalds is millions of times wealthier than the king of vikings ever was.

Pillaging is not the key of building sustainable wealth, a world of pillaging is a world where nobody produces anything and there's nothing to pillage.

>>134178092
So you want property rights, as you're limiting the usage over the means of production to a specific commune.

>>134178190
Closest place to ancap society is Liechtenstein and the richest guy there is the one who creates the most wealth.

>>134178426
Yes people in modern countries are richer than in ancap utopias
Somalia is an ancap utopia and its riches guy is most likely the local warlord that might change on monthly basis

>>134178383
>Without regulations they would just side with the rich EVERY time because they are worth 100x more as a customer.

And I wouldn't use them then. Neither would the rich, as there's always someone richer. Why would I put 3B in a bank if I knew they will side with the guy who put 4B?

It's in their own interest to be fair, you think the big money is in a couple of wealthy guys?

You'll never become rich if you limit your clientele.

>>134178635
There is no other option because all banks will side who ever has the best private military
How many functioning banks somalia has?

>>134178426
>Pillaging is not the key of building sustainable wealth

Were not talking about pillaging here. We're talking about corporate terror states that will murder any and all opposition to them. Imagine Pol Pot or Stalin but as a corporate CEO instead of state (although what the institution calls itself is pretty much irrelevant once they've established absolute authority in a given area).

>>134178615
Somalia is a country where people average 70IQ in constant state of war due to a failed socialist state.

You want to be fallacious, be my guest. I don't need to convince you, but I certainly will convince the skeptics if you just give up intellectually.

>>134176898
This. The middle class/poor party to the conflict would simply have no leverage and no other recourse. Maybe your private police and courts might be somewhat fair if it's just Poor vs Poor or Middle Class vs Middle Class or Obscenely Rich vs Obscenely Rich. And then they could use those cases where they had nothing to gain by being corrupt as evidence of their fair minded practices for PR. But any substantial wealth imbalance would immediately tip the scales, since that is how best to turn a profit from your well-to-do clients.

>>134177499
>So nobody would interact with them?
But that's not how it works. If you're a wealthy asshole, people won't stop interacting with you because you're an asshole. They suck it up, because they want something of that sweet wealth pie. Ancap would only serve to put this behaviour into overdrive since wealth will become the one and only measure of power. Again, we can observe this behaviour right NOW already whereever the gov't is weak and decides to turn a blind eye to corporate misbehaviour. Rich corps will pollute your environment and make you die of cancer and nobody gives a shit unless there is a strong state to punish them for it. Rich corps will shoot you in the neck for fighting for higher wages and la policía will look the other way if they surrendered their services to the highest bidder. Being corrupt assholes does not negatively affect big corporations' and rich peoples' bottom line in this real world of ours, why the hell would it in ancapistan where there is no one at all to reign them in? Wishful thinking is what it is.

>>134178426
>So you want property rights, as you're limiting the usage over the means of production to a specific commune.
Not necessarily. This sort of thing needs to be worked out on a case by case basis. If we're talking about a means of production like a farm, if a farm could support two communes and both help in the growth, or support two communes and one helps in the growth while the other supplies something else, that's ideal. If other people suddenly disrupt the process and there's not enough for everyone, things have to be worked out between people. I don't think you need government or land ownership to do that.

>>134178814
Yeah, none of that makes you rich.

Rich people don't want chaos, they want order and plenty of other wealthy people to do business with.

Why aren't rich people going en masse to lawless third world shitholes if they want to conquer? Why would they voluntarily expose themselves to a strong state of law, if you were actually right?

>>134178275
>pinochet
>literal CIA shill
you are the cancer

>>134178883
>They suck it up, because they want something of that sweet wealth pie

This implies that they are sure they will be getting something. Some sort of respect for commerce or contracts.

What you previously stated is that the rich can do whatever the fuck they want, you're moving the goalpost so I assume you've acknowledged my point.

>>134178975
Rich arent retarded ancaps and realize modern countries are the foundation of wealth
+ pretty much every major corporation that has opearations in shitholes uses corrupt principles for profit as there is no state to stop them

>>134166599
My biggest problem I have with AnCap is that much like communism it does not acknowledge human nature.

While it does sound great in theory, there's a difference between theory and practice.

Communism was seen as a way to create a stateless society where everyone is equal and everyone has their basic needs meet. Everyone had food, housing and other shit and the workers would use the means of production to help themselves. But in practice we've seen many times that every time communism was put into use it always degenerates to a dictatorship where one asshole rules all and everyone else is screwed regardless.

We've also seen how laissez faire capitalism put into practice before and the result was inhumane worker conditions, exploitation of children in labor and a ton of other shit that eventually resulted in western governments taking action to put an end to these practices which is why we now have mixed economies over a total free market.

To put it another way, AnCaps are just basically wannabe medieval noblemen that chances are they will become the thing they will hate the most and turn their so called "utopia" into a hellhole much like the communist dictatorships of the past.

>>134178956
Your "not necessarily" provision simply assumes no conflicts and is idealistic as hell.

It is necessary. Limits to property usage are completely necessary. You cannot extrapolate the situation with native americans who had way more resources that they could ever need, we're in a world of 6B people and growing.

>>134179217
>+ pretty much every major corporation that has opearations in shitholes uses corrupt principles for profit as there is no state to stop them

Example?

File: 1500365502195.png (157KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 500x500px

>>134178426
At any rate, you're not OP, but you've made this thread, so good job. I have some things to consider. Like... mainly could this all just devolve into land ownership when the communes run out of room with each other.

...maybe the transhumanists are right and we should pursue technology at all costs to conquer some more planets and stuff.

Have a good one and don't get too frustrated with discussing politics.

File: smug hoppe.png (122KB, 853x1025px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 853x1025px

>>134179020
Left Chile richer than it was before he got there. How did Uncle Addy leave the glorious Reich after his little power trip ended?

>>134179250
Working conditions were shit before, capitalism didn't cause that but it did fix it with increased wealth. Most of the laws the govt passed were useless as the problems were solved by then you dumb nigger.

>>134179107
>This implies that they are sure they will be getting something.
Not, it only implies people have a tendency to be opportunistic lickspittles in the face of wealth. And just because you hope to get something out of being an opportunistic coward does not guarantee in any way it will happen or that it's even reasonable to assume so. How you arrive from "People would still interact with rich assholes despite their terrible actions and it would not affect their bottom line" at "So you agree with me that ancapistan works totally fine? ;^)" is beyond me.

File: 41etrAVObZL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (18KB, 231x346px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 231x346px

>>134179250
>We've also seen how laissez faire capitalism put into practice before and the result was inhumane worker conditions, exploitation of children in labor and a ton of other shit that eventually resulted in western governments taking action to put an end to these practices which is why we now have mixed economies over a total free market.
Lies, lies, and lies. See "Excuse Me Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism" by Lawrence Reed. Those inhumane working conditions of sweatshops were/are a natural step in the process of civilization. Those countries that have them will eventually better themselves with time. It's the normal transition from agriculture to first world status. Regarding the exploitation of children in labor — no parent wants to see his child have to work in the mines. Once again, child labor was popular during the transition era of economies. If child labor laws were abolished today, parents wouldn't send their kids to the mines.

Also, we very much account for human nature. Von Mises even wrote an entire tome about it, "Human Action," which is the magnum opus of the Austrian school.

ancap is neither good nor bad. it's just retarded

>>134179257
>You cannot extrapolate the situation with native americans who had way more resources that they could ever need, we're in a world of 6B people and growing.

I think the growth is always capped by it's sustainability. I would agree with eco-anarchists that some level of degrowth is needed to bring the system back down to sustainability. We don't need to push so hard for excess, we just need to use technology more smartly. A few people could harvest a few farms all by themselves, and most people need not bother strive so hard for necessities. It's better than living like slaves in our modern world. You either have to play the money system or live on the streets and face society's punishment.

>>134179827
Bring your point of view.

Goodnight, thread.

>>134179587
I'm not going to pretend that life before the idea of capitalism was any better.

Before capitalism obviously life in ancient times was shit and there weren't that many opportunities presented to people before capitalism took over the world by storm.

However this doesn't change the fact that capitalism would eventually lead to a hierarchy as seen with shitheads like John D. Rockefeller taking advantage of capitalism for their own gains.

And no things didn't got better because 'muh free market'. They only got better when the people wanted their respective governments to intervene to put an end to said issues at the time.

>>134179250
Also I might add that in the US you had very popular health insurance pools where hundreds of even thousands of people contributed just a DAY'S PAY every year and everyone was covered. And it was particularly popular within poor and minority communities. Then doctors, dentists and bureaucrats pushed for regulation because medicine was so cheap that you created the American Medical Association and fucked over the medical industry forever.

Here's an animated video on that:

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

>>134178975
>Why aren't rich people going en masse to lawless third world shitholes if they want to conquer?

Because most of them are decent people who like to live in peace and quiet just like most of us. The problem is that it takes only one rich asshole to make his power grab through violence and terror. Rich people are protecting themselves against this by demanding governments provide them with more security than the average citizen. Have you ever wondered through a rich neighborhood at night wearing a hoodie? Even in Finland where there isn't that much income inequality the cops were there in minutes to ask me what I was doing there even though the nearest station was ten miles away and the average response time for block next to the station was the same as for this affluent neighborhood. Same story everywhere you go.

Now if you replace state police with private one that inequality of service gets even worse and now you have a police force that isn't interested in protecting and serving but rather interested about your ability to cough up more and more money for their ever increasing fees because profit incentives. You criticize states acting like mafias but don't realize that private security forces without and sometimes even with state control are literally protection fee rackets.

Money is power and power is money. When you allow someone power over you even by hiring a service you are giving them power over you in that particular aspect of you life.

Only way to be truly Anarchistic and free of states or state like entities (f.ex corporations and organized crime) is to live somewhere there is practically no other humans around.

>>134180037
>Also I might add that in the US you had very popular health insurance pools where hundreds of even thousands of people contributed just a DAY'S PAY every year and everyone was covered. And it was particularly popular within poor and minority communities.

> Then doctors, dentists and bureaucrats pushed for regulation because medicine was so cheap that you created the American Medical Association and fucked over the medical industry forever.

Congrats.
You just proved why AnCap is bullshit.
I mean when these so called "benevolent" capitalists want a state to pass laws so they can have more money and power then you know your ideology is bullshit.

>>134179603
>Not, it only implies people have a tendency to be opportunistic lickspittles in the face of wealth

Because they think they will get something out of it. And this belief only applies when the person with wealth is not known for doing whatever the fuck he wants and wipes contracts with his ass.

However, you're reducing your potential for business immensely by being a scumbag with a low rate of fairness in partnership.

This weekend I wanted to rent a scooter here in Malta, I went to a place, they explained me they deal with X company, I asked them to wait, checked facebook and saw they had 3 stars and lots of people complaining. This company could become wealthy but instead decided to be scummy and settle for the low hanging fruit. They will never become rich like that.

There must be some sort of accountability in order to make business and there must be business in order to become wealthy. Accountability and wealth are interdependent.

Superb meme material

>>134179374
Just off the top of my head:
Coca Cola is infamous for hiring thugs to kill union organizers in Columbia, an infamously weak state. This practice didn't make Coca Cola or any of its major shareholders any less filthy rich.

More well documented and more recent: Over a thousand workers died because various textile companies let them work in a substandard building in Bangladesh (violating reasonable state regulations) and despite warning signs of impending collapse. This put none of the involved companies out of business or even into red ink, and some families have been not compensated for their loss at all. India is a weak state so it was easy for them to get away with it.

If you really went digging, there would turn up countless examples of corps doing disgustingly immoral shit because the profit motive urged them to do it - and getting away with it because there was no strong enough state to stop them.

>>134180265
I proved the contrary, but you're too retarded to realize it. I won't bother arguing with you anymore. Clearly you have the intellect of an ape.

>>134180403
We'll I'm not going to take advice from some redneck with a confederate flag that thinks they can see Mexico from Alabama.

>>134166672
Is this supposed to mean something? Why must we do this? Why do meaningless quotes that are based on political ideals always start with "we must"? Is this priming because the idea cant stand on its own merit?

>>134166599
And then comes time when someone owns everything, the unborn also since so many shekels.

>>134180741
It's taken from an interview. I'd link it but I'm guessing you have the attention span of a mouse.

File: 1487165381849.jpg (220KB, 736x1060px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 736x1060px

>anarchy
Dropped. Anything on the principle of liberalism is shit.

>>134180402
The suits happened in Miami, not in Colombia. And they didn't lose money because they we not condemned.

They have a bottler in Colombia but the actual company is voluntarily exposed to the US justice which is known for being fair.

Further proof that, as I stated, rich people want order and expose themselves to strong states of law for their own interest.

>>134179470
for one, chile was not at war with almost all of the world,
secondly, chile (during pinochet) got heaps of money from the US through the banks, his economy was built off debt (ie not real economic growth)
and also, before the war, germany's economy was fucking impeccable, much better than chile's economy ever was

looks like its just another autistic ancap though
>>134175147

>>134180306
>this belief only applies when the person with wealth is not known for doing whatever the fuck he wants
All you need is to own a media company or PR firm to spread some propaganda and the problem goes away. If scummy information warfare is even a little more profitable than being fair, then the scumbags win out every time in ancapistan. The only mistake of your scooter company was its failure to hire some college student to boost its internet ratings.

But I guess I can concede one point: Of course, a rich person cannot do whatever the fuck he wants. He still has to respect other rich people, because those can bite back. So he really can only be a douche to some 95 % of society, give or take. But then again, my original point was that privatized courts would fuck over regular people and not the rich. It's estimated that a couple houndred people currently hold as much wealth as the poorest 50 % of the entire world population. So those couple hundred people are the ones you want to be nice to if you're part of the club. Any individuum from those other 3 or 4 billion people you can treat as dirt however much you like if you lived in ancapistan. And you can do so even now wherever the state is weakest. Hence why there will never be any incentive for the vast majority of the population to support your ancap pipe dream.

>>134181361
>All you need is to own a media company or PR firm to spread some propaganda and the problem goes away.

So, a company does whatever the fuck they want, never expose themselves to fair judgement, if you want to deal with them you will have to go through biased arbitration, has plenty of people suing them, has tons of PR campaigns to save face, absolutely no reputable judge has cleared them, yet somehow they still manage to make business?

Lol.

>>134181944
They can always just force people to comply with their private military

Thats the ancap dream for you

>>134182047
Let's sum up the conditions required for this hypothesis.

a) A company has their own security firm which doesn't agree or fulfills with the responsibility to settle conflicts in a peaceful manner through third party arbitration.

b) This company is able to out-spend and out-maneuver the rest of security/law firms, being able to withstand war ad infinitum.

c) Somehow all the resources wasted in security from this company doesn't affect their sales and ability to control the market, profits keep coming in at a regular rate.

d) Somehow the rest of the population is not able to gather enough strength to defeat this company even through militia action.

e) Somehow no businessman can see this massive waste of resources from this company and decide to enter the same market while spending 1/100th in security compared to the company of the hypothesis.

I would call that quite a stretch. But even if all that was possible, then no state in the world would be able to defeat said company. Congratulations, world fucking domination, but the problem you stated would never be exclusive to anarcho-capitalism.

>>134181944
You are deliberately misrepresenting my statements with your hyperbole. Just because you pretty much can act immoral at your leisure, it obviously doesn't mean you will do so all the time and entangle yourself in a million unresolved conflicts.

It simply means: When a conflict does come up, the rich can buy the police and the judge since you have subjected those institutions to your holy profit motive instead of having them do what's just and right. If most of the time a company's business works quietly as intended but every once in a while they could buy themselves out of literal murder, that is still inacceptable and immoral. Only the Average Joe would be at the receiving end of those ancap injustices, and since Average Joe is not completely brain dead yet, he rejects this dystopia where wealth amounts to law. Even if you desperately try to pull wool over his or my eyes with your hyperboles.

>>134182249
Except mafias work just like that even in in countries with relatively high protection by law

You only have to be biggest military force around and the protection racket will male massive money

>>134166599
it's neutral, it's the state we will be in when the government collapses

>>134182649
And this is in a society where mafias figth the government police and law
In ancp they would be the police and law

>>134175147
>the actual meaning
That no AnCap has ever meant by anarcho-capitalism.

>>134166599
bad

>>134182800
>>134183399
>>134184555
nice digits

>>134175147
>>134184555
except for the fact that the meaning i gave is 99% what ancap utopia looks like
decentralized governance, ie power from the people upward, is the foundation of all types of anarchist thinking, in the specific brand anarcho-capitalism the logical result of 'anarchy' is the establishment of a vast amount of micro-states, in turn these microstates establish small unions, and these unions form more unions on top which end up at a 'federal' government
in that image, replace 'government' with 'gated community' if it so triggers your conscience

>>134182800
>>134183399
>>134185888
>>134184555
holy shit, the trips train has left the fucking station

>>134185888
>micro-states
What fucking part of "Anarcho" do you not understand?

>replace 'government' with 'gated community'
So you can play fast and loose with definitions to argue AnCap is just a centralized state anyway.

>>134175147
>He thinks physical removal is a meme.
Read a fucking book. No, your attention span is to short. Just Google Hoppe's quotes on physical removal. Nothing advocated by the good folks of /lrg/ is inconsistent with property rights and non aggression. We are the "real meaning" of AnCap.

>>134186637
>Nothing advocated by the good folks of /lrg/ is inconsistent with property rights and non aggression.
why did you feel the need to say this? i did not say anything to the contrary, and in fact did not mention anything about that at all.
also
>being too autistic to realize i was talking about the 'physical removal' meme not the aspect of hoppe libertarianism where undesirables are purged from society.

>>134186556
>What fucking part of "Anarcho" do you not understand?
what fucking part of decentralized governance do you not understand?
all of it, as evidenced by your absolutely retarded post.
>So you can play fast and loose with definitions to argue AnCap is just a centralized state anyway.
holy fuck you dont believe the words that are coming out of your mouth do you, i hope not.
how can you be SO FUCKING DUMB to misinterpret what im saying that fucking bad.
i am saying that a privately owned gated community is functionally parallel to a government.
how could you even THINK that i could potentially mean ANARCHO CAPITALISM to mean a CENTRALIZED STATE

hahaha holy fuck these ancaps should start a comedy show i mean serious political talk show.

>>134166599
In a free society, borders are immoral. With a welfare state, borders yield better results. Most ancap people recognize this and support borders in the presence of a welfare state. You're misrepresenting what most ancaps think.

File: curb-larry.jpg (21KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 300x300px

>>134187258
>how could you even THINK that i could potentially mean ANARCHO CAPITALISM to mean a CENTRALIZED STATE
Let's see, shit for brains:
>>134185888
>amount of micro-states, in turn these microstates establish small unions, and these unions form more unions on top which end up at a 'federal' government
Yeah, micro-states, never used by AnCaps to describe AnCaptopia, is just supposed to mean voluntary assiosations of private parties, sure.

>>134187258
>/Lrg/ and physical removal memers aren't real AnCaps
>I didn't say anything like that.
You didn't say anything. You said we're fake Ancaps and can't argue or think for ourselves without any support for that claim. You're right I'm sorry i bothered replying to your nonsense. You're fake news.

>>134166599
It is a meme larp ideology dominated by fedora larpers and gods chosen people

>>134166722
Its like he's playing Risk in his head but with real places. There's no grounding in reality.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-05 at 5.56.28 PM.png (1MB, 1370x970px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1370x970px

>>134167054
>let me choose how you should live
>give up many of your choices
wait why is everybody not in on this?

Guy looks like a huge fucking sperg and you are too if you worship him.

>Anything capitalist
Into the trash it goes.

Theres no denying Hoppe is a very smart man with intriguing ideas but i don't understand why he isn't simply a traditionalist or natsoc? He knows the evil of modernity, he could just advocate for a natsoc state

>>134167599
Generally correct, but you can't use patents as an argument against ancaps because their general response would be something to the effect of patents being government maintained and as such not a thing in ancapopolis

File: Degeneracy.png (2MB, 800x1975px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 800x1975px

>>134189860
the fault is with state morality. When the state is above the individual the state is also above the family and the values created by the family unit. It is impossible to subjugate the family and be working in their interests at the same time.

Hoppeans generally reject the idea that traditionalism is a result of a totalitarian state. Family values come from the individuals dependence on their family. It is only when socialism and welfare are introduced that the individuals in the family unit no longer need to rely on each other. As always the state corrupts rather than conserving. Pic semi related.

>>134166672
>>134166695
>>134166722
>>134166744
>>134166765
>>134166782
DESTROY
YOUR
COUNTRIES
GOYIM

Being a kike ideology, I'm not surprised

>>134190374
Your problem is power, not the state. If there is any concentration of it, such a media conglomerate, you will have the left and the right trying to take it over. It will always be political in the end.

>>134192776
Right, so the optimal system is decentralized, do you agree?

>>134192954
No, as centralization always ensues. You'd actively promoting the destruction of institutions for ideological reasons. Institutions are the accumulated capital of a people and they do not come free. That's how Africa works.

>>134193335
Power is bad, so give one guy all the power? Is your ideology just the search for the most ideal human to rule you?

File: 1497908671257.png (41KB, 1790x1640px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 1790x1640px

>>134166599
Bad because its a utopia that doesnt work. Its against human nature.

>>134193616
I did not say power is bad. I said that's your problem.

>>134193828
It is my understanding that coercion theft and violence is the major illness of society. Power when justly acquired is no problem at all as it is based in mutually beneficial relationships. Power alone is a problem for the communists who care about that. That's not Capitalisms issue.

>>134194227
Power exists as soon there is concentration. Ancap does nothing to prevent such concentration. And there is no guarantee people with power in that system will fuck you over besides bullshit assuming superhuman capabilities.

>>134195281
And what is your solution to make those in power incorruptible? How do you ensure Hitler or Stalin is loyal? Statism also fails to address this. I take that back your answer is to bow to the will of those in power.

>>134195281
>power
That's vague as fuck. What power? The worst you can insinuate is they can act like a state does, but fuck, good thing there's a market for police and courts. Having a state just guarantees you have a state. Great fucking idea, institutional use of the initiation of force, dumbass.

>>134196268
You want to kill politics but it will never die. There is no such utopia.

>>134196781
A major example is controlling the flow of information.

>>134166599
Its fucking Homo. Better than antifa if that makes you feel better OP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcf9CLMQuRQ

>>134197090
>controlling the flow
By using their property just as much as I can use mine. There's no "power" over me.

>>134197090
So you're in agreement that your answer is to suck the dick of the strongest guy in town? Do you have a solution, or do you embrace corruption?

>>134197571
The answer is to accept the solution which brings out a stable arrangement for a group of people, not being a clueless revolutionary.

>>134197521
You are very naive. You are on a site which has turned to the right thanks to a concentrated raiding effort by far-right people. The media is to the left thanks to a concentrated effort by the left. The academia is far-left thanks to a concentrated effort by the far-left. Keep on dreaming. Controlling the channels of information is key.

>>134197964
>The answer is to do whatever is best.
Nice mysticism. Could you be more vague? Maybe propose a way to move towards a "stable arrangement".

>>134197964
They can't control whether or not I visit /pol/ or watch CNN. There's more "power" in compulsion than CNN in a waiting room.

>>134198318
It evolves organically, through trial and error. There is no magic solution here but slowly building the institutions required to make it stable, through the contribution of each individual. That's what we've always done throughout history. That is, until a bunch of retards started thinking that social engineering, whether continuously (like commies) or ex-ante (like you), is a good idea. You only end up destroying (partially or completely) the stable institutions which took thousands of years to build.

File: 3fdv7xeUK_49lm2VeZXcxwW91UthYi0SIvvNXf9dNUZHrwDCSm5rVShijafEIslbrXjiEgp4gw03vfUtz1V0yv9DX4GyYAdhMvPA1w=w250-h211-nc.png (33KB, 250x211px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 250x211px

LESLIE IS A CUTE !!!
CUTE !

>>134198786
So what? You still need some means of acquiring information, so there is some media you'll be listening to and that media immediately starts changing who you are, what you think and what you do.

The thing is that nogs don't care about your NAP. I mean sure you could have your white gated community but in a sea of shitskins good luck keeping them out

>>134166599
I don't know, I mean I like it better than ancom, ancom is literally nigger-tier, but ancap lets you become the jew if you can outjew the powerful jews. Sounds hard to do that though

>>134198788
So do you have any opinions at all on what should be done with state policy? Do you have any ideas that could better us? Your solution is to passively watch what happens and accept the outcome?

>>134199351
We've trained with the Jews. We can tell you their secrets.

>>134199241
Stop exploiting me with your power! This "power" shit is just bullshit spinning in the mud. How much more removed from the influence of media than it not being compulsory? You want to be a hermit, you can.

>>134199736
I do, but they do not evolve some great bullshit plan based on some grand bullshit principles which would "make everything better for everyone". It's casuistic and always attempting to work through the existing institutions. You are exactly like the commies on this regard. And the Nazis, for instance, are way less extreme than you, as their transition to power is just like changing governments in a typical democracy.

>>134200037
I'm not saying it is a problem. You are.

Power is the ability to affect decision under the state of ambiguity/exception. When there are no clear rules, those with power decide what the rules are.

>>134200103
involve*

>>134200358

>>134192776
Dumbass.

>>134200918
Explain yourself.

>>134200918
When I said "your problem" I literally meant "your problem".

>>134200989
>>134201058

>>134195281
Dumbass. So power isn't a problem, except people with power will fuck you over.

>>134201245
That's what I said, yes. Politics will never die. There will always be an ideological war between humans. You must have power yourself, and ally yourself with those who do, to mitigate the effects of the outgroup or change towards your interests.

This is history 101.

>>134201409
https://philpapers.org/archive/SHATVO-2.pdf

>>134201552
This is not post-modernism but pre-Enlightenment thinking lol

The only thing in common between the two is they are against the Enlightenment.