So /tg/, I've had an idea for a homebrew about space ancapitalism.

>>52775805
>Violate the nap
Someone takes their Sleepytime seriously. Is the siesta sacred?

>>52775805
Make it like FreeCities.
https://www.reddit.com/r/freecitiesgame/

>>52775805
>outrageous, over-the-top and insane
>NAP
The most wild and imaginative marketing campaign, leading to gleeful citizens voluntarily exchanging goods!

>>52775805
What does NAP stand for? In my country it means the normal sea level.

>>52775998
Non Agression Principle.

Of course, the definition of "Aggression" is nebulous and depends on the ancap in question.

>>52775998

The unspoken Non-Aggression Pact.

>>52775998
Non-aggression pact

Basically, under ancap rules, if you want to screw someone over, you just have to be as autistically passive-aggressive as possible.

Like buying the rights to the stairs they need in order to get down from their penthouse apartment and refusing to let them by.

Or inviting them to dinner and then declaring them to be trespassing immediately after it's finished (which means they broke the pact first so you can kill them)

Or loaning them a bunch of money while misleading them about the due date so that they default and you can enslave or kill them for it.

>>52775998
>>52775836
>>52775893
Well obviously it's not going to be a serious aspect. It just means that the party needs at least an extra loose reason to go murderhobo on some random dudes. Plus it would be funny watching them come up with obtuse justifications for their actions.

>>52775805
The Red Bear Syndicate.
They give no shits about the NAP and instead extort those within their territory, they are able to get away with this because as a conglomerate entity they are able to bring to bear more forces than any other organisation who in the spirit of freedom and independence refuse to sacrifice their own resources for others. All is not lost within RBS territory however, those who submit to their rule are able to stand and elect local officials to represent them on the RBS board of directors, all are provided basic amenities, and those who labour are able to retain a sizeable percentage of their product. The syndicate uses the extorted resources to invest into a professional military, infrastructure, law enforcement system and a network of subsidies that allows syndicate members to not only compete but often undercut competition from other sectors.

>>52775870
When is he going to make the post-apoc Mad Max game that he spent so much time hyping?

>>52775805
That's Eclipse Phase anon.

Space debris clearers, they however also own exclusive rights to most routes in open space where they operate. When areas are cleared out, they set an ridiculous tithe price to pass through their territory, shooting down any ships that refuse. When enough debris accumulate, they go back to clearing debris for a reasonable price.

>>52776081
but that's just anarchy. Like, straight up coercion by force

>>52776299
nah in an anarchy you cannot "own" shit, so the stairs and trespassing issues immediately fall away. Similarly money won't be a thing unless people band together and decide it will be but the lack of individually owned capital would make loans pretty redundant.

>>52776428
>tell everyone to convert their barter goods to a standardized system of currency
>control production of currency to devalue people's property and force them to sell it to you in order to afford food

am I doing this right?

>>52775805
Give them a galactic government to go up against that actually acts sane and rational but violates the NAP all the time.

File: iwantmyanarchoback.png (239KB, 1416x6944px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1416x6944px

Ancap you say?

Well if we're bringing in the An-cap we might as well bring in the other An-'s as well.

One idea I possibly have is cause the party to crash-land on this one planet. This planet is owned by a race of lizard-men that embrace anarcho-primitivism. (ideology that believes that advanced civilization and technology is the cause of all the wrongs in the world and that peace can only be achieved by living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. What's done to those who use this technology is left up to the primitivist in question, but in this case I think "greater than or equal to public stoning" will suffice.) Originally the race was actually quite advanced with technology such as robotic drones to work for them and self-driving vehicles, but eventually this ideology took hold and the race as a whole sacked their own cities and fled into the wilderness to form random assortments of tribes. The cities, now ruins and forbidden to enter by the tribes, still have automated drones and vehicles attempting to continue their previous functions, with some defense drones still active from the "sacking" phase of their history.

Once the party encounters the tribes they have to find a way to escape the world before the lizard-men kill them for having advanced technology.

>>52776220
This. Eclipse Phase already has space anarcho-capitalists. They're considered kinda crazy by both the commies and the normal capitalists but make good middle men between the New and Old economies.

>>52777095
anarchyball memes are weird

>>52779678

Inside jokes usually are.

>>52779727
No, no, I get what they're trying to say. "lel anarcho capitalsist aren't anarchists and anarcho pacifists aren't pacifists."
It's just presented in a... disconcerted manner.

>>52779773
*Disconcerting.
Also, it's just typical Polandball nonsense.

File: Anarcho-Capitalism in EVE Online.jpg (1MB, 3818x1034px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3818x1034px

>>52775805
Rip the names from corporations in EVE: Online. Any player who gets the references gets one reroll.

You should read this. Not exactly anarchist since the megacorps make the laws, but it is definitely ancap-y in the sense that people starve to death a week after being fired because no one will hire them and charity/government handouts are completely unheard of.

https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Caldari_State

File: 81KhjlXRi5L.jpg (313KB, 2560x1792px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 2560x1792px

>>52779678
This is a children's book about a bear that loses his hat.

>>52779773
It's made by a pinko Aka anarcho(((syndicalism))).

>WEZ ANARCH N SHIIIET
>except we want daddy commie state :)

>>52776428
You can't own shit in anarcho-capitalism anyways because they fail to deliniate between ownership and occupation. Ownership requires a state to enforce property rights. The minute you left your home in an ancap society, it's not yours, because someone can just roll in and take it and shoot you for trespassing when you come back.

Sure, you could hire private security to occupy the property for you, but that's still just occupation and not ownership.

Honestly tacking anything onto anarchy is just dumb. Anarchy isn't sustainable, it can never be more than temporary. Sooner or later a hierarchy always emerges.

>>52776081
Who do you buy the stairs from?

Who enforces the property laws?

Who makes sure they actually default and actually delineates the regulations concerning defaulting? What makes you think they'll let you enslave or kill them? Who prevents them from resisting it?

All your claims require the person you're attempting to screw over to be willing to bend over and present their butthole to you. Otherwise, since no rights exist to be enforced and there's no state to enforce these rights, it's all a matter of who shoots first.

the NAP is absurd.

Anything could be considered an act of aggression. Potentially any harm that comes to your person can be seen as violence.

I could tell you santa clause isn't real and it might shatter your world view and force you to retaliate against hallucinations of your uncle teabagging you during christmas whilst naked and singing "jingle balls, jingle balls"

>>52781183
Who determines what is harm and what isn't? Who determines what harm constitutes an act of violence and what doesn't?

>>52780964
What if like, you and other like minded people hire a company that will recognize, validate, regulate, and keep track of your property, and how it's traded, as well as having an armed branch that will protect the property of anyone who is a client.

Now obviously such a service would require a lot of people, labour hours, hardware and maintenance, more than anyone person could pay for. So every person pays a small percentage of the cost. Of course, people who have more will probably want the service more and so the company will charge based on demand, but everyone will pay roughly the same fraction of their property as a fee to this company on a regular basis.

Wouldn't that be neat?

>>52776049
>mfw a-capitalists argue there is no Social Contract
>then they say everyone has to follow an unspoken pact

File: turdburglar.jpg (70KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 600x500px

>>52781436
Forgot my picture. It's really quite important since laissez-faire/anarcho-capitalists are full of fucking shit and just want to tread on anyone else without repercussions.

A company that sells Alcohol, drugs, amd.Violent media targeted to kids and also.operates privatized prisons. Space prisons.


A company that conducts case control clinical quadruple blind trials to test the efficacy of any drug you want. It also happens to be secretly owned by the megaconglomerate that controls the entire Spyrius quadrant, and they randomly test the drugs on customers by contaminating breakfast cereal.

A coven of hasidic Jews is awoken from cryo-sleep and set loose on an unsuspecting galaxy...

>>52781513
>Private prisons
>Without government backing
Who's going to pay to imprison others unless they're obscenely wealthy and spiteful?

>>52781536
The prisons pay for themselves, dumbass. Slave labor.

>>52781536
Slave labor run by spiteful businessman.

>>52781553
But that's aggression.

>>52781568
The workers are just bad negotiators really.

>>52781568
The prisons only imprison violent criminals and thieves who already violated the NAP.

>>52781365
I see what you did there...

>>52781905
I could go on, but basically you end up with a sort of fascist syndicalism.

It would differ from current countries and governments in one key way though: participation would be entirely voluntary. Having claims only to protect the property of those who enrolled, it wouldn't have any specific territorial claims, and a person living inside a zone they nominally control could still opt out.

You know, until they decided otherwise. Which they probably would, quickly.

>>52781365
But it would have to be voluntary, you wouldn't be born as part of that system.
That's the whole crux of it, you're free on principle, you can bind yourself to anyone but on default you're beholden to noone.

>>52775805
EveOnline
Check it

File: IMG_0296.jpg (377KB, 500x6331px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 500x6331px

>>52780761
And a girl that loses her panties.

>>52782323
Indeed it's a near perfect system in principle. However the problem lies in people. There will always be people who are ambitious, greedy, power hungry, or all three.

>>52780964
>Ownership
>Occupation
>The difference matter !!

Anarcho capitalism just want people to live a happy life while being fully entitled to the fruit of their sweat, making sure it stays that way through a NAP, itself backed by private ownership of weapons.

Other political ideologies are concerned about semantics and other shit useless outside of debates.

Anarchocapitalists don't want to debate : they want to do their own shit and will blow your head if you tread on them.

>Anarchy isn't sustainable
Look at international politics : no clear world-wide hierarchy.
Yet we don't jump at each other's throats all guns blazing every time.

>inb4 muh UN

Nobody listen to them.
Powerful organizations use it to legitimize action but act as they please anyway if UN goes against them.
Powerless organizations use it as a shield to hire the might of powerful organizations.
And everyone else in between either ignore or openly shit on the UN.

>inb4 It's a gradual process !!
More like a cycle :

A organization emerges in a position of great influence over others in a general area.

Then it declines.

Then everyone struggle to be on top until something is so strong it starts lording over others but then it get weak then get ripped appart and then everyone struggle to be on top until...

>>52782432
And there will always be people stupid enough to give these ambitious ones power over others.
Hopefully, there will always be someone both courageous and stupid enough to shoot these bastards in the face.

>>52782558
Kek, yes hopefully, however I imagine most of human history would have gone much differently if such people were common.

File: ancap.jpg (159KB, 678x960px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 678x960px

Ancap thread?

>>52782536

>making sure it stays that way through a NAP, itself backed by private ownership of weapons.

And if someone is unable to access weapons or the other guy has more? The NAP has no enforcement of it's own and no one to oversee it being obeyed.

File: ancap and democrats.png (363KB, 1167x770px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1167x770px

>>52782602

File: ancap2.jpg (77KB, 600x699px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x699px

>>52782621

File: ancap3.jpg (50KB, 320x406px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 320x406px

>>52782632

quick reminder that ancap is not anarchy, it's ancap
also breaking a contract violates the nap

File: ancap4.jpg (127KB, 1403x1408px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1403x1408px

>>52782642

File: eve online.png (305KB, 909x491px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 909x491px

>>52782652
I wish I had more of these.
Well, I do, but they aren't ancap balls.

>>52781436
>mfw a-capitalists argue there is no Social Contract
>then they say everyone has to follow an unspoken pact

Principle.

Non-aggression principle.

No pacts are involved - I won't hurt you unless you hurt me, even if you don't subscribe to the same ideology.

>>52782613
If you got neighbours that ain't dicks or pussies and you ain't an asshole yourself, you'll get their help.

If it ain't enough, you can ask neighbouring communities, either appealing to :
- their generosity ("Helping people to keep their roof above their heads is the human thing to do")
- their sense of preservation ("also, if you allow them to violate the NAP in impunity, nobody will help you when they come for you next")
- their natural greed ("and if we are victorious, I'll be in your debt. Let's even put a number on how much in your debt I'll be").

NAP enforcement depends on people understanding that if they don't help to enforce it, they'll become victims soon or later.

At low-level, it means a bunch of neighbours keeping an eye out for each other.

At high-level, it means private security contractors paid by insurance firms to assist their clients into securing their assets world-wide so that the insurance doesn't have to pay their clients for the losses of insured assets.

Welp, this will probably kill the thread. Thanks /pol/ for less /tg/.

>>52781365
>So every person pays

Do you use violence to force them to deal with you, rather than your competitors?

Because until you use violence to force people to deal with you, you haven't recreated the experience yet.

File: snek on commies.jpg (160KB, 889x960px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 889x960px

>>52782717
What about commies tho?
They do not respect NAP.

>>52782742
>welcome to the my private property zone
>you are free to leave any time you like, outside is the mad max fuck you zone

>>52780814
Anarcho syndicalism:
>People should be free!
>Except not free to engage in voluntary trade!

>>52782720
Why would the insurance pay claims? There's nobody to force them too, they could simply collect your dues, hire a pmc, refuse to pay out if anybody tries to claim, and use their pmc to stop any retaliation and/or stop you from speaking out about their scam.

>>52780964
>Ownership requires a state to enforce property rights

It requires violence, but not necessarily a state to supply it.

Even simple animals understand property - wolves piss on trees to tell other wolves "No Trespassing."

>>52782613
>And if someone is unable to access weapons or the other guy has more? The NAP has no enforcement of it's own and no one to oversee it being obeyed.

Why the same thing that happens in our world today: You die.

>>52782760
First argument is at least an honest opinion
Second argument is good
Third argument is OK
Fourth argument is a bunch of bad sophistry.

I think that stupid politics still offend me more than bad politics. Like, I don't disagree too much with SJW ideas, but their arguments are so bad that I probably hate them more than an average Republican.

File: 1490814256599.jpg (63KB, 600x605px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x605px

Arachnocapitalists beGONE

>>52782761
I love it !!

But what if :
>Fuck you. I'll stay in that zone and won't pay your exorbitant fee !!
>I'll pay these three guys there instead. They ask for less and, given the few dangers around here, they are more than enough.

It's all about the fact that nobody will force a lethal force monopoly on others :
Anyone can lease himself as a security agent.
If people see him as competitive, they'll hire him.
If not, they hire someone else or even just rely on their collective vigilance.

>>52782832
SJW and the alt right are both bad because they are both literally just memes incarnate parroting things from image-based websites.

At least democrats and republicans are just hypocrites.

>>52782760

What's "they do not respect the NAP" got to do with anything. *I* respect the NAP.

I dont prevent nazis from speaking even though they would deny me free speech
I don't rule over monarchists even though they would rule over me
I don't steal from communists even though they would steal from me

You don't have to follow my ideology in order to make me believe in my ideology - I believe in it no matter what you do over there.I have a simple principle: I will not aggress.

>>52782761
>welcome to the my private property zone

Why would I ever go to your private property zone, it sucks balls.

>>52782536
>Look at international politics : no clear world-wide hierarchy.
>there isn't a clear hierarchy among competing nation states

Also the situation isn't sustainable, it's the reason world powers change so frequently. The rise and fall of empire is a perfect example of why this isn't sustainable. Hierarchies emerge, crumble, and emerge again.

>>52782774
Because once they don't pay up to one customer, mouth-to-ear goes around and other customers stop paying.
And if they start killing customers on a regular basis, word will get out that their security is inefficient.
People don't live in a bubble. They got a family, relatives, friends, coworkers, ect... with whom they interact.
Unless you monitor everyone 24/24, you can't prevent rumors from spreading.

So a insurance whose business model would be to promise LONG TERM membership in exchange for OCCASIONAL compensation and then to default on that promise would go backrupt quickly.

>>52782774
>Why would the insurance pay claims? There's nobody to force them too, they could simply collect your dues, hire a pmc, refuse to pay out if anybody tries to claim, and use their pmc to stop any retaliation and/or stop you from speaking out about their scam.

1) Obviously I picked an insurance company with a good reputation.

2) It is a lot cheaper to pay out my claim than to hire enough PMCs to prevent me from assassinating key corporate officers.

>>52782887
The empires themselves are not sustainable, but the system is.

>>52782720
God dammit. This whole ancap thing is really just nostalgic longing for a romanticized version of the pioneer days, isn't it?

>>52782887
>Hierarchies emerge, crumble, and emerge again.
So the default state is a lack of firm established hierarchy.

Anarchy isn't about being sustainable FOREVER in a frozen state of utopian bliss.

It's about trying to prevent the emergance of organizations so powerful and amoral that they can and will tread on individuals with impunity.
That doesn't mean some organizations won't emerge. It just means none should be powerful enough to force a monopoly in any given area.

>>52782910
Except it isn't? Systems of hierarchy emerge and crumble over century. Clear hierarchies have existed in the past. Today we exist in a stage where the hierarchy is establishing itself.

Previously there have been clear country dominate, religious dominance of continents, military dominance of continents, and more. These systems often last hundreds of years with nations controlling their sphere of influence to a point they essentially rule the world within their reach.

Controllers in the past have been The Catholic Church, France, The British Empire, China, and more recently the United States for a brief time.

File: Idi Amin and Muamar Gaddafi.jpg (16KB, 452x255px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 452x255px

>>52782849
>It's all about the fact that nobody will force a lethal force monopoly on others :
I know some people who would disagree

>>52782940
>It's about trying to prevent the emergance of organizations so powerful and amoral that they can and will tread on individuals with impunity.
This happens and has happened in international politics multiple times throughout history. The Catholic Church as an organization is a fantastic example of one that held complete power for centuries.

>>52782903
>use their pmc to stop any retaliation and/or stop you from speaking out about their scam.
Do you honestly expect everyone to have access to all the up-to-date information on the people/companies they hire? It's hard enough to do it now with the government requiring them to release information, think about how much harder it would be if they not only were not required to give us the information but were allowed to suppress it with force if it managed to get out?

>>52782896
>People don't live in a bubble. They got a family, relatives, friends, coworkers, ect... with whom they interact.
>Unless you monitor everyone 24/24, you can't prevent rumors from spreading.
So why that isn't enough to stop the government from taxing you? They're inefficient and have gained a lot of bad publicity by now.

>>52782896
>>52782903
It's like you people have never heard of protection rackets.
You send some representatives to prospective companies/clients offering protection. Protection from what? Why them if they don't pay obviously.

>>52782787
>It requires violence, but not necessarily a state to supply it.
Anything that provides a local/relevant monopoly on force is effectively a state.


Some mountain man in the backwoods is his own state.

>>52782978
Also this.

>>52782975
>Do you honestly expect everyone to have access to all the up-to-date information on the people/companies they hire? It's hard enough to do it now with the government requiring them to release information, think about how much harder it would be if they not only were not required to give us the information but were allowed to suppress it with force if it managed to get out?

Mate, they have an office.

This scenario you're positing is becoming more and more unhinged.

>>52782931
Some part is, yes.

The other part is simply decent morality (with a good dose of selfish pragmatism) :
- don't take your brother's stuff (so your brother will be less likely to take your stuff)
- don't harm others (so they will be less likely to harm you)
- help others against injustice when possible (so they'll help you against injustice if asked)
- if all fails, fight for what is yours

For all this to work, you need to prevent justice and violence to be the sole province of a single organization that give itself full authority over the land you live in and people you live with.
Dictatorships or democracies matter not if, in the end, you are but a slave at the mercy of the State's whims.

>>52775836
>Is the siesta sacred?
Yes. Only thing above siesta in the Spanish belief system is the holyness of Spanish food.

You better don't fuck with our tortilla de patatas.

>corporations fuck people up the ass now
>people except taking away the scaffolding will stop them fucking us up the ass
Shit it'd just get a fuck ton worse. Sure regulations now are fucked by corporate interest, but if they didn't even have to make a pretense of following/making the rules do people really expect corporations to suddenly grow a conscious?

Reminder that Dole Fruit company enforces it's low labor costs right now by hiring militants to butcher South American villages that try and negotiate for better pay.

>>52782978
>So why that isn't enough to stop the government from taxing you? They're inefficient and have gained a lot of bad publicity by now.

Because the government was established before high-power scoped rifles were commonly available, making the assassination of NAP-violators much harder. Now they have sufficient dominance that it is no longer easy to dislodge them.

>>52782931
>God dammit. This whole ancap thing is really just nostalgic longing for a romanticized version of the pioneer days, isn't it?

Now I finally understand why ancaps are pretty much always murrican.

>>52782960
Yep. And that's what anarchcap is about preventing.
While an omnipotent but benevolent organization can look like a good idea, never forget that the "benevolent" part can quickly go away...

>>52782996
And you're going to get into their office and assassinate people how? Shit man I'm not even seeing where you're trying to argue from. How do you know who to shoot? Are you just gonna toss you're life away because that's what happens if you're going up against a corp.

>>52783016
Soooo...sufficient dominance allows you to ignore NAP at will, is what you're saying then?

>>52783023
No I'm just saying that saying international politics is in a sustainable state of anarchy is asinine.

>>52782849
>I'll pay these three guys there instead.
They merged with my private property zone to fight the fucking lord humongous more effectively

You could travel a long distance to live in a different corporation where nobody speaks your language I guess

>>52782980
>It's like you people have never heard of protection rackets.
>You send some representatives to prospective companies/clients offering protection. Protection from what? Why them if they don't pay obviously.

Protection rackets only work in countries where the police will throw you in jail if you have people assassinate a Yakuza thug, but NOT stick around to protect you from a Yakuza thug.

In AnCapistan, I would tell the Yakuza salesman that just came to me that I am already happily contracted with the Triads and have no need of their services.

>>52783016
>Buy all the rifles.
>Offer a bounty, no questions asked, for anyone who brings in a rifle
>offer a reward for any information regarding the whereabouts/ ownership of any remaining rifles
Now you have all the rifles, have fun with that assassination plan.

>>52783016
And how are you going to control an organization with more resources/men than you? Or do you expect the masses to rise to try and kill NAP violatiors? How do they know who they are?

Shit man. Individuals don't have the resources to fight organizations in our world right now. Why would taking away regulatory bodies change that.

>>52783030
>Soooo...sufficient dominance allows you to ignore NAP at will, is what you're saying then?
Not him, but yes. That is litterally might makes right. Power through the sword.

The NAP doesn't "exist" as an actual thing, it's as non-existent as any other so-called natural law; it exists only so far as people are willing to use force to defend and ensure it as a law.

Those in power, supported and legitimized by their constituents (and their constituents as well) do not believe in the NAP, so they do not protect it. They're not ignoring it, it just doesn't exist.

>>52783030
Yes. That's always the case.
Might=Right.

>>52782978
Fact is, the government, as you say, is TAXING.
Which means using the threat of overwhelming force to take what it wants from individuals.

That doesn't mean a government cannot be toppled or changed.
Or even simply opposed !!
It just means that you got to do it smartly.

While going all guns blazing in a murder spree against a police station might look tempting, the smart thing might just be tax evasion right now.

>>52783048
>Protection rackets only work in countries where the police will throw you in jail if you have people assassinate a Yakuza thug, but NOT stick around to protect you from a Yakuza thug.
You don't actually believe this, do you? You realize protection rackets exist in modern day US.

>>52783066
>Which means using the threat of overwhelming force to take what it wants from individuals.
To take what it's due*
Don't live on the gubment's property if you don't want to pay your rent, ancappy-chan :^)

>>52783026
>And you're going to get into their office and assassinate people how? Shit man I'm not even seeing where you're trying to argue from. How do you know who to shoot? Are you just gonna toss you're life away because that's what happens if you're going up against a corp.

You shoot people who show up there every day for a week (they probably work there) and you do it from half a mile away with a scoped rifle. If they have PMCs out front to protect them, you shoot those guys first because they obviously work there.

>>52783048
>Protection rackets only work in countries where the police will throw you in jail if you have people assassinate a Yakuza thug,
... Are you retarded? The police are just the largest protection ring. It's literally no different than if there was no police, but the same number of people in a gang.
Whoever they side with, whoever they say owes who and how much, that's it, their word is law by way of superior firepower.
Your only hope is that the triads managed to recruit almost as many people and can back up their claim on you as their property.

>>52783066
You could simply stop making use of government services and leave the country. You are living on government owned land using government roads. Benefiting from government facilities.

You could head to a country without any of that (well it isn't much of a country). Let me point you to portions of subsaharan africa.

>>52775805
Actually, I've had an idea for an ancap xenos race once.

Slave-trader parasites. They buy the genome samples of other race and clone them to oblivion in organic cattle factories. They make extensive use of genetic modifications to turn their hosts into grotesque, living parody of themselves. But sometimes, cattle-people is not enough for them. Some of them enjoy the thrill of using a real person, a person who used to have memories and dreams. Sometimes, they send mercenaries to "collect" what they fancy. Everyone pretty much hate them, but they have such a strong hold on galactic trade, being older and more rich than humanity, that the ancap empire comply with them.

>>52783026
Not the anon you answered to but you don't have to assassinate anyone, here.
Just don't sign a contract with that company once you hear they ripped off your coworker's brother-in-law.

These guys might make a few bucks by ripping off a handfull of people of a few years of premium.
But I bet it costed them a lot more to hire those PMC as retainers all those years.

Really, a business model where a company get a profit by consistantly scaming people who voluntary asked for its services is bound to fail, simply because they'll eventually lack new customers to scam.
Especially in the insurance business where it's all about customer retention over long period.

>>52783030
>Soooo...sufficient dominance allows you to ignore NAP at will, is what you're saying then?

...yes? Have you not watched the history channel? LOTS of people don't follow the non-aggression principle, including people who really really should, like that dreadlock chick who got rocked on tv recently.

The NAP isn't for other people. It's for me, it's my promise to the world: I will not hurt you if you don't hurt me.

>>52783095
>dude the state is the mafia!
You've got it backwards; the Mafia is just an illegitimate state.

>>52783092
And you think you can put shoot/fight an entire organization of pmc? You staked out the place for a week good fucking luck not getting caught. Plus you're dying after they find you.

Plus you're a fucking retard who is VASTLY underestimating how difficult a shot from 1km away is. People who train for years can't do it reliably and work in teams to ensure a hit. I mean holy shit you're saying everyone should have a few decades of experience with a rifle to reliably make a shot from that distance? You're fucking retarded.

File: ai697.jpg (40KB, 528x640px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 528x640px

>>52782996
>This scenario you're positing is becoming more and more unhinged
This is why I got tired arguing a long time ago. For defending anarcho-capitalism you have to dissect the most silly made-up scenarios that will never happen in real life or depent on so many circumstances that arguing them without further explanation of how it exactly came to this is fruitless. I've seen no other ideology having to do this. Most of the time the solution is people voluntarily collaborate anyway and presenting a pre-made solution goes against this principle.
Well, and basically because I'm just a minarchist

>>52783076
>You don't actually believe this, do you?

Of course I do.

>You realize protection rackets exist in modern day US.

The fact that protection rackets exist in a country with a terrible police force is not actually evidence against my theory that protection rackets can only exist in countries with terrible police forces.

>>52780558
07

>>52783112
Well at least that makes sense.
If you want to abide by it, cool. If you want to be around/live with people who share a similar belief, cool.
It's people think they can somehow magically force it on the world and nobody will break it because reason that it gets more and ridiculous.

>>52783109
>These guys might make a few bucks by ripping off a handfull of people of a few years of premium.
>But I bet it costed them a lot more to hire those PMC as retainers all those years.
Let me point you to companies who right now do this shit. Dole Fruit company who you likely buy juice from has in the past attempted to overthrow sovereign nations and currently uses militants to butcher South Americans who try and negotiate for better pay.

They do this with regularity along with numerous other horrible things.

Have they gone out of business? No. But we have freedom of information, why do people buy from them?

It's the same fucking thing. Limiting resources keeps people from being able to fight against long organizations due to overwhelming force supplied by those the organizations pander to.

>>52783123
They're only illegitimate because a more powerful state says they are.
If they had no opposition, they would be the only authority, and thus, a legitimate state.

>>52783136
Name a nation in the world without protection rackets. It doesn't exist except for maybe Vatican City.

>>52783127
>And you think you can put shoot/fight an entire organization of pmc? You staked out the place for a week good fucking luck not getting caught. Plus you're dying after they find you.

I don't have to. I just have to kill enough that it would have been a better deal to pay out.

Except not even that - I just have to be willing to be expensive enough that it IS a better deal to pay out, preventing the entire mess to begin with.

>Plus you're a fucking retard who is VASTLY underestimating how difficult a shot from 1km away is. People who train for years can't do it reliably and work in teams to ensure a hit. I mean holy shit you're saying everyone should have a few decades of experience with a rifle to reliably make a shot from that distance? You're fucking retarded.

If you know a kilometer is a bad distance to shoot from, why did you pick a kilometer as the distance to shoot from? Are you just pretending to be retarded. In a built-up area with traffic, a few hundred yards should be fine, I can hit moving targets with iron sights at that range.

>>52783149
>It's people think they can somehow magically force it on the world and nobody will break it because reason that it gets more and ridiculous.
If people break it, the ones in charge punish them.
There's nothing magical about this, it's not going against any immutable natural order; it is an individual (or group of individuals) imposing their will on others and reality through (the threat of) force. And there is nothing wrong with this.

You are not owed to not be agressed against, there is no natural law that says that force ought not be used against you. It is only YOUR will, and YOUR use of force, to dissuade others from using force to coerce you.

If anything, the NAP is a disgusting attempt to mask natural power dynamics between individuals and groups as some magical inherent law.

>>52783156
Exactly, now you're getting it! The government proper is legitimate because people support it, and it has the force to ensure that support.

>>52783132
Here's the thing. The fact that there is people who already don't abide by laws against violence in a powerful organized stated proves that they wouldn't abide by the NAP.
The fact that there are people telling you that they wouldn't abide by it, proves it wouldn't work.
NAP only works if everyone, everywhere, agrees to abide by it, at all times. One dickhead with patience and good planning skills could wreck your utopia.

>>52783154
>Have they gone out of business? No. But we have freedom of information, why do people buy from them?

Because they don't scam their buyers. Obviously.

And the Dole Fruit Company is the kind of company that could not exist without a state to protect them. Right now, the people of America pay taxes to hire the police officers and FBI agents that prevent Dole's victims from just sending assassins after them. If Dole had to pay all their own security costs instead of forcing you to help pay for them, Dole would quickly go out of business if they kept making nation-state enemies.

>>52783171
>If people break it, the ones in charge punish them.
But that's not ancap anon...
>>52783179
>The government proper is legitimate because people support it, and it has the force to ensure that support.
Yes...

I think we actually are all in agreement here.

>>52783165
>I don't have to. I just have to kill enough that it would have been a better deal to pay out.
Shit man how you fucking explain organizations who currently use violence to suppress this sort of shit? Because it happens all the fucking time.

Their office is in a different country than you on private land they don't let people without identification access. You're acting like you're up against a corporation with like 50 people in it where large corporations have thousands upon thousands of individuals and span fucking continents.

>If you know a kilometer is a bad distance to shoot from, why did you pick a kilometer as the distance to shoot from? Are you just pretending to be retarded.
Your the one who brought up half a mile you fucking tard.

>In a built-up area with traffic, a few hundred yards should be fine, I can hit moving targets with iron sights at that range.
Try and stop bullshitting for two fucking seconds and read what you write. That would put you better than the vast majority of the US's elite military personnel. Fucking hell it's like I'm talking to a fucking child. I am starting to doubt you've ever fired a gun in your life.

>>52783162
>Name a nation in the world without protection rackets. It doesn't exist except for maybe Vatican City.

Anon I fucking hate to break this to you but your country is terrible, not all countries in the world have real protection rackets. The Scandinavian countries don't. Iceland doesn't. Switzerland doesn't.

(unless you're counting their governments, obviously).

With modern firearms, protection rackets only happen when you have police who stop you from stopping the protection racket, but no police who stop the protection racket.

>>52783076
And it works because :
- people can't just hire someone to kill the thugs, since the police would put that someone in jail along with the people who hired him.
- the police can't just arrest the thugs because it doesn't have prove that they did something wrong.
- people aren't willing to testify because the process of putting all the thugs in jail would take longer than it would take for thugs to retaliate.

Now take a setting where there's no police force to have the violence monopoly.

Thugs are still doing the racket thing but now, their victims are actively plotting to neutralize them.

First, there'll be ambushes :

Local thug get shot in the street. Nobody knows who shot him... or at least nobody is talking.
As thugs are identified and tracked back by their victims or whoever they hired to do it, retaliation escalate until the gang can't replace its losses or at least until the "business" isn't worth the risks.

The thugs can of course hit back against their "customers" but, not knowing which ones are responsible, they would effectively cripple their own revenue stream or even antagonise more people.

Protection racket only work as long as most of the people doing the racket are :
- anonymous themselves
- protected by the law from anymous retaliation
- numerous enough that they can afford the occasionnal losses of manpower

>>52783165
>If you know a kilometer is a bad distance to shoot from, why did you pick a kilometer as the distance to shoot from? Are you just pretending to be retarded. In a built-up area with traffic, a few hundred yards should be fine, I can hit moving targets with iron sights at that range.
>I can reliably hit a moving target with iron sights in a crowded street at a few hundred yards

I'm fucking laughing, next you'll tell me you graduated top of your class.

>>52783165
>I can hit moving targets with iron sights at that range.
Kek, no you can't.
A stationary target at 300 yards is a difficult shot to make with surety.

>>52783236
>The Scandinavian countries don't. Iceland doesn't. Switzerland doesn't.
Switzerland does, iceland doesn't have the population to support and, and Denmark is a Scandinavian country that does.

>>52783182
>NAP only works if everyone, everywhere, agrees to abide by it, at all times. One dickhead with patience and good planning skills could wreck your utopia.

Not everyone.

Just enough.

States came into being before modern rifles made it difficult to impose a state, and bootstrapped to a level where it is now difficult to dislodge a state.

>>52783238
How do you explain areas with no police where people are actively oppressed by militants. There is no monopoly violence in these areas, yet people are still oppressed in this manner.

Again I'm pointing down south to rubber tree workers and villages who are suppressed by hired militants when asking for higher wages.

>>52783236
>police who stop you from stopping the protection racket, but no police who stop the protection racket.
Why, what possible reason would they have to do this.
Christ your just a nutter who thinks there's a giant conspiracy to keep you down aren't you?

File: mxwbk_1-us.1490114394.jpg (17KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x400px

>>52783165
>Are you just pretending to be retarded. In a built-up area with traffic, a few hundred yards should be fine, I can hit moving targets with iron sights at that range.
So you're a national level competition shooter then? Nigga stop bullshitting.

>>52783221
>Your the one who brought up half a mile you fucking tard.

That's less than a kilometer mate.

>Try and stop bullshitting for two fucking seconds and read what you write. That would put you better than the vast majority of the US's elite military personnel. Fucking hell it's like I'm talking to a fucking child. I am starting to doubt you've ever fired a gun in your life.

Hitting moving targets while under fire is hard.

Hitting them with a scope from half a mile before they know shit is about to go down is not casual but it's not fucking hard mate.

>>52783221
>Shit man how you fucking explain organizations who currently use violence to suppress this sort of shit? Because it happens all the fucking time.

>Their office is in a different country than you on private land they don't let people without identification access. You're acting like you're up against a corporation with like 50 people in it where large corporations have thousands upon thousands of individuals and span fucking continents.

Did they get that big while having a reputation for fucking over their customers, without having a state to subsidize their defenses?

>>52783254
How do you propose people purchase/train with/maintain modern rifles?

Also how do you expect it not to simply dissolve into a state of wide spread violent oppression to keep the population under control via a violence monopoly by a powerful organization.

You're acting like no one but the government can possess overwhelming force when that just isn't true.

>>52783098
Or you could just find ways to live where you want, giving as little as possible of your revenues to the government while using said revenues to finance projects you deem worth the expense.

Everyone does that, the State eventually shrinks so much from lack of revenue that it will be minarchism.
One or two decades later, many individual local communities and private companies have more power than the official government.
First serious clash between these two sides and the government goes down.

Of course, it's wishful thinking and overly simplified but there you got the anarchcap agenda.

>>52782931
100%, yes. These latter-day pioneers of course completely ignore that the pioneers moved in on land that had been cleared of occupation by Washington's military, that they rights to land were (formally at least) guaranteed by Washington and that settlers recieved support from Washington to get them started.
The self-sufficient maymay is basically what they roll out whenever they're about to demand MORE free shit from Washington.

>>52783288
No, they get that big by offering legitimate services at competitive prices while constantly reinvesting their profits until they ave enough money to buy an army.
Then they fuck you over.

>>52783245
>Switzerland does, iceland doesn't have the population to support and, and Denmark is a Scandinavian country that does.

I've never heard of one in Switzerland but I'll concede the point because I don't have on the ground knowledge of Switzerland, maybe there's some fly-by-wire operation.

Denmark does not have any real protection rackets. Denmark has a few gangs that thought they were hard enough to try and they got shut the fuck down.

>>52783182
NAP doesn't work, it's not a magical force, it's a principle that people follow or not, and those that don't follow it will get slapped by those that follow it. The mere fact that ancaps promote this principle means that they acknowledge that violence will happen. But they see this as the most moral way to counter violence without imposing a state with all its unwelcome side effects.

The only people that believe ancaps want some peaceful utopia where never anything bad happens are anti ancaps. Ancaps acknowledge what bad things will happen and offer voluntary solutions, not an utopia.

>>52783278
>That's less than a kilometer mate.
Oh sorry me, .8km, jesus fuck.

>Hitting them with a scope from half a mile before they know shit is about to go down is not casual but it's not fucking hard mate.
Fuck you're retarded, at least try and research what you're talking about before making claims.

>>52783288
>Did they get that big while having a reputation for fucking over their customers, without having a state to subsidize their defenses?
Yes, Dole quite literally did this and still does this.

>>52783270
>Why, what possible reason would they have to do this.

They stop you because your actions would be illegal.

They don't stop the gangs because that would be dangerous to the police.

No conspiracy required.

>>52783254
You realize that all modern states came to being AFTER the invention of the rifle yes?

>>52783325
>Yes, Dole quite literally did this and still does this.

Why do their customers keep buying from them then?

(Hint: Because they're not screwing their customers. They're screwing their vendors.)

>>52783016
Government right now can afford to pay a couple of hundreds of people to kill a single person with a missile that costs enough to feed that person and his family for a couple of years. That missile was fired from an aircraft that required another couple of thousand people to develope and build.

Your own scoped rifles basically is a fetish-objects in that situation.

>>52783331
>You realize that all modern states came to being AFTER the invention of the rifle yes?

Yes, as successor states from before there were rifles.

>>52783154
Wrong exemple.

People buy from Dole Fruit because they like the juice.
They could buy from someone else and no customer is being openly ripped off here.

Only the workers are.
Even then, these workers aren't slaves.
They aren't forced to work for Dole Fruit and only for Dole Fruit.
They can have another job or even no job at all if they so wish (and can endure the lifestyle that goes with it...)

Now, if Dole Fruit was forcing you to buy their juice and only their juice while also sending death squad after you if you filed a customer complaint for a refund, that would be more like this anon :
>>52782774
>>52782975

>>52783325
>Yes, Dole quite literally did this and still does this.

Dole is in California mate, their defenses are state subsidized.

>>52783327
So according to you, the all powerful government/police, the only thing capable of stopping you from exacting your revenge on gangsters, actually faces a legitimate threat from those same gangsters.
If you could actually fight them, you could fight the police almost as easily. But you don't because you can't, and you know it.

I think as well as being a nostalgia fantasy there's a fair bit of power fantasy involved in this as well.

>>52783339
Ok, sure, but why should that matter? A company comes to your door and informs you that you work for them, if you refuse your house is burnt down. They only give you money to buy things from their company store, which doesn't include weaponry. You're not allowed off their land.

What means do you have to stop this? They're being supplied with funds from their customers they pander to.

You just happened to fall into their work force, bad luck eh?

>>52783348
>They can have another job or even no job at all if they so wish (and can endure the lifestyle that goes with it...)
Actually they can't, Dole has burnt villages to the grown because of production drops. If you refuse to work they'll likely kill you as an example to others.

After reading this thread I'm more and more convinced that AnCap is just some kind of power wank for those who don't like governments but dislike the open craziness of Mad Max. So it became this one half-assed attempt at anarchism.

>>52783363

Well if you already know that, then why did you bring this up in the hypothetical of an Ancapistan company screwing their customers? An Ancapistan company screwing their vendors is a different thing and takes an equally annoying long thread to hash out.

In an AnCap scenario how do you stop a large corporation from enforcing its will on you as an individual? If the company you've contracted with is small then you're simply fucked unless you're little rambo and are gonna kill their entire corporation yourself.

>>52783339
>Hint: Because they're not screwing their customers. They're screwing their vendors.

While that is a fair point, what's to stop a company from enslaving a bunch of people, putting them to work in a factory, and selling to the majority of people? The could claim vast swathes of land as private property, and make for themselves a vertical and lateral monopoly using slave labour.
What's to stop you from being one of the "vendors"? What assurance do you have that you will definitely remain on the demand side of the supply chain?

>>52783360
>So according to you, the all powerful government/police, the only thing capable of stopping you from exacting your revenge on gangsters, actually faces a legitimate threat from those same gangsters.

Individual police officers do, yes, and the overarching state hasn't the will to deal with that.

>If you could actually fight them, you could fight the police almost as easily. But you don't because you can't, and you know it.

No, because they have the will to deal with that.

>>52782767

Trade is pretty pointless when all is for all

>>52783386
>In an AnCap scenario how do you stop a large corporation from enforcing its will on you as an individual? If the company you've contracted with is small then you're simply fucked unless you're little rambo and are gonna kill their entire corporation yourself.

I, or by extension, my DRO, does not have to be strong enough to win.

We just have to be strong enough that it's too expensive to attack us.

>>52783383
Because screwing over their customers is just as likely because of the protection racket scenario.

The only way people have brought up "how do I stop a protection racket" is by killing thugs, which won't stop them, or by contracting with another protection racket.

Do people actually think killing thugs would stop them? Because when that is done to actual protection rackets they kill the person who did it as an example to others.

You're going after their leaders? How the fuck do you know who they are? You staked out their base? How the fuck do you know where it is? The thing is this all relies on every fucking person being on fucking seal team 6 to keep themselves safe with Mr. "Half mile moving target easy" shot.

How do you stop a company from coming and demanding payment?

>>52783406
And if it isn't? Because right now in countries that roughly simulate what you're talking about this happens all the fucking time.

>>52783260
If you mean Somalia, DRC and other shitholes : because these people either :
- don't have the guts to defend themselves ("what they take from us isn't worth dying for")
- don't have the smarts to defend themselves ("we can't think of what to do !!")
- don't have the strength to defend themselves ("there's only 10 of us and there's 100 of them...")
- don't have the cash to hire additionnal help ("nobody cares about us and we too poor")

All in all, the people preying on these areas are pretty miserable themselves and only do it because they are both too stupid and too lazy to do anything else.

If you mean workers asking for hire wages, you are just deluded :

These people aren't "suppressed".
They aren't slaves.
They aren't forced to work.
They aren't forced to live there.

They could simply stop working for a while.
And if nobody comes to take their place, that will be an objective signal to both them and their bosses that there's a need for higher wages.

If their bosses just have to go to the nearest town to find replacement workers overnigh, I would say the wages are obviously high enough.

If their bosses can afford for the work to stop long enough for these people to starve and get back to work because they need to be paid, that's an unhealthy relationship, I'll grant you that.

>>52783397
>because they have the will to deal with that
So do gangs you dense idiot.

>>52783406
>We just have to be strong enough that it's too expensive to attack us.

yeah I'd rather just live with a government, thanks

>>52783402
>Trade is pretty pointless when all is for all

Trust me, things I made myself with my own labor belong to me.

>>52783407
Uh, dude? He's super hardcore and can snipe a moving target from 300 m

>>52783424
>- don't have the guts to defend themselves ("what they take from us isn't worth dying for")
>- don't have the smarts to defend themselves ("we can't think of what to do !!")
>- don't have the strength to defend themselves ("there's only 10 of us and there's 100 of them...")
>- don't have the cash to hire additionnal help ("nobody cares about us and we too poor")
And why do you in this scenario have any of these? This entire scenario relies on you having the power to defy them when that is not only not a guarantee, but the chances of which are slim to none.

>If their bosses can afford for the work to stop long enough for these people to starve and get back to work because they need to be paid, that's an unhealthy relationship, I'll grant you that.
There exists right now where when a town stops working they burn it down as an example to others to not stop working. These people don't have access to guns or resources to hire help to defend themselves they don't have the resources to train and arm themselves. If you're going to "out think" a group of armed militants who outnumber you then be my guest.

You're assuming you have the resources to defend yourself in this scenarios. Why the fuck are you assuming that?

>>52783434
>yeah I'd rather just live with a government, thanks

Your current method of being too expensive to attack is much worse than the AnCap method of being too expensive to attack. Viz: It costs you more money, demands more stupid bullshit of you, and cannot be replaced with a better offer from a different company.

>>52783434
If it came this far, the government has already failed.

>>52783435

Didn't your parents ever teach you to share?

>>52783427
>So do gangs you dense idiot.

Gangs are not as powerful.

If gangs were as powerful, sure, it would be the same problem.

But the gang can't wiretap me, doesn't search me at the border to check I'm not bringing weapons, hasn't convinced my employer to tell them how much I earn, etc.

Sure, if you paper over every difference between a gang and a government, the fact that I don't attack my government is evidence I wouldn't attack a gang. But as soon as you actually look at the differences, my behavior towards the government tells you fuck-all about how I would deal with a gang.

>>52783461
>Your current method of being too expensive to attack is much worse than the AnCap method of being too expensive to attack. Viz: It costs you more money, demands more stupid bullshit of you, and cannot be replaced with a better offer from a different company.
What incentive do companies have at offering affordable prices? Competition? Because it's been shown time and again with regulation or no companies will side with each other to push prices as high as conceivably possible.

This is one of the reasons the current pharmaceutical industry is fucked, because they know they control the influx of who gets what drugs. Why do you think that large companies won't simply restrain what you can buy? What means do you have to stop them?

Because again this all requires reasonable competing companies when I see no reason they would exist.

>entertaining thread ruined by retards who think anarchy is a viable system in any way

Does this violate the NAP?

>>52783457
>These people don't have access to guns or resources to hire help to defend themselves they don't have the resources to train and arm themselves
So it isn't even a free-market scenario to begin with? Dropped.

>>52783470
>Didn't your parents ever teach you to share?

Didn't your parents ever teach you not to steal?

And, in fact, no, my parents did not teach me to share. They praised me when I shared, because it is admirable to help people, but they never punished me for not sharing. How fucked up would that be. Did yours?

>>52783482
>So it isn't even a free-market scenario to begin with? Dropped.
Who do you have to ensure that the scenario stays as a free market scenario without a regulatory force? Because companies left to their own devices will not give you a free market scenario.

>>52776189
So... they're a government?

>>52783488
>How fucked up would that be. Did yours?
Shit yeah they did all the time with me and my kid brother.

You were an only child I'm guessing.

>>52783477
>What incentive do companies have at offering affordable prices? Competition? Because it's been shown time and again with regulation or no companies will side with each other to push prices as high as conceivably possible.

What has actually been shown is that the more a field is regulated by government, the more expensive it is.

Chairs are cheap. Medicine is expensive. There is no chair cartel. There is definitely a government-enforced monopoly on medicine.

>>52783292

>Or you could just find ways to live where you want, giving as little as possible of your revenues to the government while using said revenues to finance projects you deem worth the expense.

At which point you are doing harm to the government. You are using their property without paying for it if you are using roads etc. You are in fact now the aggressor for stealing access to something the government paid to produce and defying their Lockean rights to benefit from their own work.

>>52783498
Basically yes, generally companies make for a lot less benevolent overlords than modern day western governments as can be seen in a lot of the world.

>>52783424
>- don't have the guts to defend themselves ("what they take from us isn't worth dying for")
>- don't have the smarts to defend themselves ("we can't think of what to do !!")
>- don't have the strength to defend themselves ("there's only 10 of us and there's 100 of them...")
>- don't have the cash to hire additionnal help ("nobody cares about us and we too poor")
All these apply to you, assuming you are ancap. Why don't you just overthrow th government, oh right because you are too cowardly, stupid, weak, and poor to do so. You are no different than they are, and would fall prey to the same forces as they do.

>These people aren't "suppressed".
>They aren't slaves.
>They aren't forced to work.
>They aren't forced to live there.
Except they totally are.

Try to quit? get shot.
Try to demand reform? get rounded up and burned to death.
Try to leave? have you an your family drawn and quartered as an example, your hands cut off and given to your neighbours who helped who you apart as currency for special favours for showing their loyalty to the company/warlord.

You obviously are extremely sheltered and don't know jack about violence, and how truly terrible people are capable of being to each other.

File: 1442497771937.png (43KB, 162x182px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 162x182px

>>52783495
>free market
>regulatory force
I need a sillier Marcille face, this isn't enough.

>>52783499
One of three siblings my man.

>>52783506

Yet the much higher regulated Australia has much cheaper medicine than the much less regulated american healthcare system.

>>52783506
>What has actually been shown is that the more a field is regulated by government, the more expensive it is.

Except this is not actually true in many regards. Let me point you to the early 1900s with the meat packing and steel industries. This was before regulation came along they fucked over literally everyone they could, particularly the american steel monopolies.

The reason there is no chair cartel because chairs are not a good that takes large amounts of research and funds to get an operation that can produce them up and running.

You're being a retard with your apples to oranges comparison.

>>52783506

>uses the word 'cartel' when arguing companies wouldn't collude

>>52783386
Short term, you are fucked.

But if a corporation is allowed by people to get big and ruthless enough to do that, there's a problem somewhere because it means :
- many people didn't contribute to the NAP by helping other people when being attacked.

- many people actively broke the NAP for various reasons, attacking other people and their properties

- many people did the two above and on top of it banded and organized together to do it very efficiently and sustainably to a lot more people.

It can and will happen, sure.

Long term, some people will get fed up with it.

This means first minor resistances against that corporation's agents, just to test how far they can go until the corporation retaliate hard.

Then it will be ambushes against the corporation's agents, such as boobytraps or anonymous shootings. This will means the corporation will have to increase security expanses, both in manpower and materials.

Then it will be raids on the company's properties.
Again, mounting costs for the company.

Said company at that point might decide to strike back.
It can do so through investigation to identify and then track back the insurgents.
Or it can go with the good old undescriminate payback against civilians in the general area.

The bottom line is as >>52783414 is asking :
- if it is financially and politically sustainable for the corporation to keep the fight AND oppression, then it will.
- if it is not, it will stop.

I said financially AND politically because said corporation doesn't live in a bubble.
It has workers, customers, shareholders, suppliers,...
If anyone among these is upset enough by the situation that it can impact the corporation's operations, then the corporation will change.

(cont)

>>52783518
So how do you maintain a free market?

>>52783520
And you were never told to share with a siblings.

Wait shit, you had AnCap parents, I gotcha.

>>52783523
>Yet the much higher regulated Australia has much cheaper medicine than the much less regulated american healthcare system.

"less" "regulated" "american"

ah ah ah it is to laugh.

The american health care system doesn't have price controls, this is true.

Price controls work to keep prices low, at the expense of causing other, bigger, harms elsewhere in the system.

>>52783539
(cont)

The worst scenario is a corporation with a handful of families as shareholder, controlling a large trust active in multiple economical sectors, dwarfing all competitors in each sectors, with enough automated operations that it needs only a handful of qualified, well-paid workers, fully loyal to the company because it made their lives great and cut them from any way to feel empathy for those they oppress.

Once the shareholders, customers and workers are entirely disconnected from each other, the company has effectively free reign.
If there's a clear divide between workers, it's even better for the corporation.

>>52783547

>at the expense of causing other, bigger, harms elsewhere in the system.

Such as?

>>52783473
>But the gang can't wiretap me, doesn't search me at the border to check I'm not bringing weapons, hasn't convinced my employer to tell them how much I earn, etc.

Gangs literally do all these things on a regular basis, and not just in third world shitholes either. Most gangs are basically just organized private military juntas operating under or against the laws of a more powerful state. The only thing stopping them from having a violence monopoly is the already existing, more powerful police fighting against them in what are basically turf wars. That's why you have neighbourhoods that are police no go zones, since they lost the turf war there, and in those places gangs do control just about every aspect of daily life.

Just go to chicago or detroit if you want to see entire cities that have basically lost the fight.

>>52783488

Who gives a shit about ownership when all is for all.

>>52783539
And these situations where it is sustainable for them to do it can exist for someone's entire lifetime, and has in the past.

All of your rainbow and glitter resistance scenario pales in what actually happens the majority of the time. The majority of the time those in power unless those oppressed are being funded by other powers with conflicting interest lose terribly.

Basically what I'm saying is if what you describe actually happened then sure, AnCap would work to some degree.

What I'm saying is that it doesn't and wouldn't.

File: Chaos Undivided.jpg (33KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 350x350px

>>52775805
A Chaos God of Ancapism

Those who nuke the Imperium for violating the NAP will ascend to Daemonhood.

>>52783481
Yes. Yes it does. The only solution: blow them away with your on-topic ideas.

>>52783544
>So how do you maintain a free market?
You don't maintain a free-market, the free-market is the natural state of human action. What has to be maintained is the control, subjugation and regulation of human action, by force, the threat of force or incentive to act otherwise.

You know, humans and their actions came before the state. Unthinkable, but true.

>>52783547
>medical price controls are BAAAD

the same fucking procedures can cost vastly different sums in different TOWNS, let alone different states. I'm all for free market but both the insurance companys and medical providers work to continue this clusterfuck so they can essentially violate the basic law of capitalism: supply and demand.

If a baseline could be established, that's all that necessary. But as it is, it's a purely predatory system meant to exploit whales to pay for the inefficiencies of the system and cover everyone else.

>>52783531
>Except this is not actually true in many regards. Let me point you to the early 1900s with the meat packing and steel industries. This was before regulation came along they fucked over literally everyone they could, particularly the american steel monopolies.

US Steel is a great example of an attempt at monopoly that was completely undercut by the market. They never managed to get more than ~70% market share because cheaper competitors kept springing up.

>>52783513
Sucks to be them, I guess ?

Also hard to believe that would be done on a large scale and with regularity without people at least attempting to rise up.
Care to give sources ?

>>52783488
Same.
Mine always taught me you should be nice, because that's how you make friends, but if you don't like somebody, fuck them, they can get their own stuff.

Sharing is something you do because you want to, not out of obligation. It wouldn't mean anything if it was just something you were expected to do.

>>52783577
>You don't maintain a free-market, the free-market is the natural state of human action.
Except that isn't true in any society with enough framework to allow for organizations to exist at all?

>>52783592

please refer to the entire history of feudal europe

>>52783580
70% of the market share was enough for it to be able to influence global politics and abuse both the worker and its customers.

>>52783592
Europe between the years of 600AD and 1700AD.

South American rubber industry right now.

>>52783513
>All these apply to you, assuming you are ancap. Why don't you just overthrow th government, oh right because you are too cowardly, stupid, weak, and poor to do so. You are no different than they are, and would fall prey to the same forces as they do.

I would. Never said I was better.
Still, never said these people should try to revolt human-wave style.
They should try to get more courageous, smarter, stronger and wealthier, even if by running away.

>>52783617
>They should try to get more courageous, smarter, stronger and wealthier, even if by running away.
And have 80% of them die?

Is this really somehow better than the state of affairs under a government when I'm not told if I stop working I'm gonna be shot as an example to others?

>>52783617

>They should try to get more courageous, smarter, stronger and wealthier, even if by running away.
are they running away down the yellow brick road now?

>>52783602
Here's your cue : it didn't last

>>52783617

>They should try to get more courageous, smarter, stronger and wealthier

And if they get all those things in cooperation with a government rather than opposition of it?

>>52783558

For control that keeps prices low:
>Inefficiently low production
>Inefficiently low quality.
>Inefficient allocation of resources

You see this with e.g. Nixon's price controls - people used oil in California to heat their swimming pools in winter while people in the north-east froze. Why would you spend money transporting your oil to the north-east where they needed oil when you wouldn't be allowed to charge extra in return for having transported the oil? Might as well sell it in California.

For controls that keep prices high:
>Inefficiently low production
>Inefficient allocation of resources
>inefficiently high quality.

Inefficiently high quality sounds like an oxymoron but it makes perfect sense. I'll provide an example if you need one.

>>52783629
>Here's your cue : it didn't last
After taft busted the monopoly when he became president.

>>52783629
When the government broke up their monopoly you mean?

>>52783617
>They should try to get more courageous, smarter, stronger and wealthier, even if by running away.
And we should all have butterfly wings and shoot lasers from our arses.

That's a nice thing to tell someone being gunned down. Jesus christ.

>>52783592
Any banana republic.
Panama, Ecuador, just about any latin america country really... Africa, South-East Asia, Dole, Haiti, Nike, shrimp industry that is almost entirely based off of slave labour, the list just goes on and on.

>>52783580
>cheaper competitors kept springing up

By exploiting workers in third world countries.

"Anarcho"-capitalism is basically just neo-feudalism.

>>52783457
>There exists right now where when a town stops working they burn it down as an example to others to not stop working.

Care to provide a source of a specific town being destroyed in the last 10 years because people just stopped working ?
Just curious, here.

>>52783592
The pineapple industry before Hawaii became a state.

>>52783639
>After taft busted the monopoly when he became president.

US Steel won their anti-trust case.

>>52781224
If it's not immediately obvious whether something is an aggression, like in >>52781183 , then a private arbiter or a private court.

>>52783653
>By exploiting workers in third world countries.

Bethlehem Steel wants a word

>>52783663
Why should someone listen to a private court? What authority do they have?

>>52783656
Having a hard time because the world 'militants' brings almost entirely information about the middle east no matter what other keywords you put with it.

>>52781553
You can't have slaves in ancap, though. Self-ownership.
Unless you're one of those propertarian of consequentialist libertarian types. In which case you're no better than a commie.

>>52783656
At best you will find some reports from some human rights activist/observation team that managed to observe it by som form of espionage.
Because most of those towns are company towns. They don't officially exist on any records except for the companies, and obviously they don't release those records to be read. Along with those towns not existing officially, neither do any of the people. For the most part they are not the citizens of any country, they are property of a company. As far as most governments are concerned those people are only what the companies report them as "farm equipment".
If they burn down a village and a few hundred people, they just claim it as a hardware failure on insurance.

>>52783457
>You're assuming you have the resources to defend yourself in this scenarios. Why the fuck are you assuming that?

Obviously, these companies have to hire these troops somewhere.
If it's from the local population, then retaliation against the homes of these troops is doable.
And so is even infiltrating said troops by applying for recruitment.
From there, a lot can be done.

>>52783689
>Obviously, these companies have to hire these troops somewhere.
Yes, likely from a pmc they contracted with that's based hundreds of miles away or father, like america does right now with its mercenaries in the middle east.

>If it's from the local population, then retaliation against the homes of these troops is doable.
And you're assuming this why? Because this a retarded this to assume.

File: 1481424337517.png (566KB, 412x1086px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 412x1086px

>>52783597
I started writing a post several times and deleted it, tried to tackle this question from a different angle. Then deleted it again because I anticipated what retarded argument I would get. All that's left is to rant.

Jesus fucking Christ, how many times a day do you enforce your will on other people with the thread of violence, or even with violence? Most people act voluntarily the whole day. Most people are already living the NAP in some way. Just look at how ordinary people do stuff most of the time. Do you really think that as soon as humans were able to walk, to speak, to use tools, to create things, they were already regulations set in stone to bother them to act like they wouldn't naturally? Since the fucking dawn of time? What distorted view on human interaction do people have?

Some of the organizations developed naturally, by voluntary actions and later on turned into an orginaztion that can be able to control human action and is acknowledged through culture, religion. For whatever reason, this is such a big topic that I don't even know where to start, probably should write a book about. A lot of this is clouded in history.

How do you imagine two people, alone on a single island, acting? That where never tarnished by statist education or grew up in a state. Do you really believe one of them will immediately set up a tax offcie, and get away with it? Do you think they will immediately decide on which one of them has to be king and tell the other guy what to do and how? Is this what you believe? What is this fucking skewed and misanthropic view on human action you have?

>>52783682
>You can't have slaves in ancap, though. Self-ownership.
I hold a gun to your head and tell you to work. I mean you could just choose to be shot.

How are you not a slave where no working is immediately met with violence. You work for free with no regulation.

>>52783710
>How do you imagine two people, alone on a single island, acting?
I don't really care because that's not the world we exist in or the society we exist in. Because I'm not seeing your argument as anything but "in my perfect rainbows and glitter scenario it'd be great" talk.

>>52783689

Why would they hire from local population? Why not hire them from elsewhere, comp them up to make sure they don't build loyalties with the local rabble, then deflect blame for any atrocities on those awful foreigners? It worked for the British, after all.

You can't just assume that corporations will only do retarded things.

>>52783682

And how is that enforced?

>>52783717
>violating the NAP to prove a point about anarcho-capitalism
I can just shoot a guy in a state, the law doesn't work.

>>52783689
>If it's from the local population, then retaliation against the homes of these troops is doable.
So you're assuming the corporation is run by retards?

>>52783738
The entire thread's point is that the NAP doesn't work because you can't get enough people to fall it by herd enforcement and that individuals and organizations can violate the NAP at their leisure and not face consequences, particularly organizations, when it is used against individuals.

>>52783710
>tarnished by statist education
You were so worried about other people making retarded arguments that you didn't stop to examine your own.

Do you actually believe that society works exactly the same way with two people as it does with two billion?

>>52783683
Being able to loose hundreds of people on a whim because they stopped working a few days suppose the ability to find hundreds of people on a whim.

Unless these companies also found a way to grow people faster than human demography allows, that means they have at least 100 times more "slaves" than the ones they kill.
So losing "a few hundred people" suppose there would be at least a few tens of thousands of "slaves".

Unless we are talking about thousands of small camps with less than a handful of families each, moving every month or so, the "towns" that are being burned must be visible from the sky.

We can safely assume they don't burn ALL towns on a regular basis.
And we now have google image and many other third-party satellite imagery.

I guess some of these towns should be visible, with no name written.
And I guess that, with that many human rights activists and observation teams doing "espionnage", they would resort to such images as an easy source of data.
So that shouldn't be too difficult to find if such "slave towns" exist.

>>52783730
Point me where I talked about perfect scenarios. Nobody in this thread that is an ancap ever talked about that it would be a perfect utopia. I already at some point in this thread talked about that ancap acknowledge violence to happen, this is exyctly why a principle like the NAP exists. What ancaps argue is that it would be the most moral and efficent way to deal with these things, without imposing a state that would lead to all kinds of unfavorable side effects. The island is a simplified scenario, because that is exactly what your brain needs. I guess your allmighty overlord of a state hasn't allowed you to think things just a bit through to see what a simplified scenario is for. And also thanks for ignoring all the other things I ranted about. I'm out.

>>52783752
It did a really bad job then. All it can do is create unreasonable scenarios that states would also have huge problems dealing with.

>>52783787
Because on both sides we had stupid fucking unrealistic scenarios like AnCap's side "half mile shot with iron sites"-kun.

>>52783776
>armed death squads with no accountability are "moral and efficent"
>the alternative involves "unfavorable side effects"
(You)

>>52783710
>Do you think they will immediately decide on which one of them has to be king and tell the other guy what to do and how
Yes because people in isolation have been observed to do exactly that. Human naturally form hierarchies. Without other factors, usually the biggest guy ends up on top, because he can just bully the other guy into doing what he's told.

>>52783802

>If the company opposes me I'll kill the entire PMC they send to stop me!

>>52783710
>How do you imagine two people, alone on a single island, acting? That where never tarnished by statist education or grew up in a state. Do you really believe one of them will immediately set up a tax offcie, and get away with it?
Yes, because that's a thing humans do.

>>52783765
>We can safely assume they don't burn ALL towns on a regular basis.
It happening even once is a horrific crime.
Plus you these companies have state sized plantations that are private property, including air-space rights. In usually jungle or otherwise hard to navigate terrain, with the only roads guarded by company security. It's pretty hard to get in and around them without them knowing exactly who you are, where you are going, and what you are up to.

>>52783809
A natural hierarchy based on voluntary decision is not the same as a faceless state making its people cower by the threat of thousand guns pointing at them. One is natural and moral, the other may be the progression from a natural tribe-society, but is not moral in itself.

>>52783787
Unreasonable scenarios, that actual companies have and continue to do.

You know, just as an ultimate example of how far corporate monopolies can go: East India Company.

>>52783710
>How do you imagine two people, alone on a single island, acting? That where never tarnished by statist education or grew up in a state. Do you really believe one of them will immediately set up a tax offcie, and get away with it? Do you think they will immediately decide on which one of them has to be king and tell the other guy what to do and how? Is this what you believe? What is this fucking skewed and misanthropic view on human action you have?

No as that's like saying you'll invent a car before you invent the wheel. Progression to that sort of government is a process.

They would however start doing stuff like organising who is hunting food and who is gathering and who is building. Then perhaps they would organise sharing food with those who don't gather it as they are doing other valuable things. However, that's taking food from the gatherers and hunters. The first tax.

As things get more complex, you'll need coordination and oversight to keep things flowing smoothly. Then you'll start seeing people who's entire job is to manage other people efficiently. Government.

>>52783765

Man, I'm not the guy you're arguing with, so I don't have sources, but I'll just throw in this: you've only gotta torch one village. The guy down the road got lippy, the Boss Man raped his children, raped his wife, burned his house down, salted the ashes, murdered his whole family then finally allowed him to die. Odds are, I'm gonna keep my fucking mouth shut.

>>52783855
>A natural hierarchy based on voluntary decision is not the same as a faceless state making its people cower by the threat of thousand guns pointing at them. One is natural and moral, the other may be the progression from a natural tribe-society, but is not moral in itself.
It's natural and morally for me to have a guy do my bidding and when he tries to argue I beat him?

So in the AnCap society if I take away you means to fight and tell you to begin digging a hole, and when you try to stop I beat you, is that moral?

>>52783855

>A natural hierarchy based on voluntary decision is not the same as a faceless state making its people cower by the threat of thousand guns pointing at them. One is natural and moral, the other may be the progression from a natural tribe-society, but is not moral in itself.

Then why don't you go find somewhere without a government and it's services and taxes?

>>52783673
>Why should someone listen to a private court? What authority do they have?

Private courts of no authority already exist as arbitrators right now mate. People listen to them because the alternative is that people learn you won't accept arbitration and negotiation, so they'll avoid you.

>>52783855
>A natural hierarchy based on voluntary decision
>Some guy pummels you until you do as he says
>voluntary
>moral

So basically you just hate the big bad government, and anything they do is bad, and anything anything that's not the government does is good? Do I understand you right?

>>52775805
yuck

>>52783876

>People listen to them because the alternative is that people learn you won't accept arbitration and negotiation, so they'll avoid you.

Or more generally 'If you don't accept it, they'll take it to a court that CAN force you'.

>>52783872
No, why would it ever be moral?

>>52783876
Generally that's not true, they do it and then threaten to take it to a court who can enforce it.

>>52783879
Can you point me to the post where I said exactly these things?

>>52782978
Currently it's more cost-efficient to evade the government and try to change it lawfully towards more decentralized, minarchist state when possible than to fight it.
Though a violent revolution against the blood-sucking scum and establishing own ancap micronations is fine by me.

>>52783887
We formed a hierarchy where I bullied you into doing work. You literally just said that was moral.

>>52783895
You replied to this post >>52783809 which said:
> usually the biggest guy ends up on top, because he can just bully the other guy into doing what he's told.

with >>52783855 saying:
>One is natural and moral

Therefore simply bullying someone into doing work is moral.

>>52783897

>Currently it's more cost-efficient to evade the government and try to change it lawfully

But it you are tax evading, you are already doing it unlawfully.

If you are tax evading AND using government services like roads you are violating the NAP because you are doing harm to the government in the form of theft of services.

The Locklean rights also include the right of the government to profit off things itself produced like roads.

>>52783701
>>52783736
>>52783741
So we got a company that :

- has vast plantations that need to be tended by a vast workforce
>Not strange, ok, keep going

- builds towns to accomodate the workers needed for the plantations
>Still ok : it's even smart

- hire thousands of workers that have no official existance in their home country and pay them close to nothing
>I can see why they would do it

- prevents said workers from leaving the towns forever without their families (parents, uncles, cousins,...) and friends ever raising the issue.
>A bit strange but let's say the families are afraid for the workers

- kills said workers if they escape, again without their relatives ever raising the issue.
>Okay, now that the workers are dead, why none of their relatives is saying anything ?

- burns down its own towns if the workers strike.
>Rather than, you know, hiring new workers and keeping the town ? They found volunteers the first time, shouldn't be hard to find more.

- burns down its own towns if production drops
>And have to build them back after to accomodate the same people after. I don't really follow how that will increase productivity.

- hire enough goons from other countries to keep thousands of people in line
>So we are talking enough dudes to prevent any of the tens of thousands of people to organize to just burn down the plantations.

- manage to pay off government officials to look the other way
>Believable... but not cheap.

- manage to fend off any attempt by human rights activists to document it
>Given how many evidences what's above would leave, I'm having a hard time understanding activists can't do more.

...and still manage to make a profit over rubber and fruit juice

I wonder how none of those thousands of unknown slaves forced to live in those invisible towns that are being burned down frequently by thousands of merciless goons ever manage to even inform a single member of their families so they could expose the bloody thing to the press.

>>52783926
>- hire thousands of workers that have no official existance in their home country and pay them close to nothing
Generally these folks weren't hired, they were brought in from either abroad or born there.

>- prevents said workers from leaving the towns forever without their families (parents, uncles, cousins,...) and friends ever raising the issue.
Because generally they are there with their families or their families have no idea where they are.

>- kills said workers if they escape, again without their relatives ever raising the issue.
See above

>- burns down its own towns if the workers strike.
Generally it's killing the strikers rather than burning the town.

>- burns down its own towns if production drops
Because generally even if they do burn down towns these places are shanty communities, not towns

>>52783923
>You are violating the NAP because you refuse to pay the mandatory subscription to a State-enforce monopoly

We don't have to respect the NAP if they break it first.

>>52783014
Corporations mainly increase their power through lobbying the government to grant them special privileges. When there is no centralized government, a corporation and all its competitors start from equal footing and only gain influence through giving their clients a better deal.

>>52783951
Or by eliminating the customer's ability to access competition.

>>52783950

How can you claim to be trying to change it legally if you are breaking the law to get there?

You could also move somewhere without a government if you want to not have them have control over you.

>>52783051
I make my own rifle. Or, I refuse to sell my rifle to you. What are you gonna do?

>>52783973
>make your own
I mean sure but it's not gonna be even remotely as dangerous as a commercial weapon

>refuse to sell
They take it by force or send others to

>>52783950

You are, however, engaging in theft. You can't really get around that even if you believe the government deserves no protection under the NAP.

>>52783923
>The Locklean rights also include....
Silly anon, ancaps can't into actual reading. They have no idea what you're talking about.

>>52783966
or by just eliminating the competition outright.

>>52783950

Wouldn't by that logic literally everyone break the NAP as children? As their existence isn't really voluntary.

>>52783950

Said subscription only starts being paid once you turn 18. You had plenty of time to leave if you didn't wish to break it.

>>52783926

>So we are talking enough dudes to prevent any of the tens of thousands of people to organize to just burn down the plantations.

You don't need enough to kill everyone at once. You need enough to kill one village, and do so with enough force and savagery that everyone else steps back into line.

It worked for the Brits, who shipped auxiliaries from one colony to another. It was clearly cost effective to send foreign auxiliaries and Tamil labourers to Sri Lanka, after all.

>>52783912
No, I don't agree with this point. Sorry for making this not more clear, put I thought it would be evident that there is a difference between a hierarchy that is moral and one that is not because it is based on force.

>>52783291
>How do you propose people purchase/train with/maintain modern rifles?
Supermarkets, shooting ranges (even in your own yard), supermarkets.

>>52783950
>We don't have to respect the NAP if they break it first.

WELL TECHNICALLY

It's not that you stop respecting the NAP, it's that defensive violence isn't a NAP violation.

>>52784051
oh yeah Sri Lanka, that belongs in the lists of examples.

>>52783946
Again, why don't they just run away ?

Fuck, the afro-american slaves did it all the time, to the point that laws were made to address the issue of escapees, freed slaves, ect...
And you didn't have plantation owners back then just killing whole villages to increase productivity.

So if there are that many people and the conditions are so bad, why don't they run ?

Even if we assume most of them fail, the few that managed to escape would testify.
The testimony of a few black slaves was a big thing back then, when we were a lot more tolerant about labor conditions and when slavery was a legal practice.

Imagine how noisy a human right activist could make his cause by compiling the stories of hundreds of Nicaragua escapees now living in Costa Rica ?

But as this anon said :

There's next to no trace of such testimony.
Or of such towns. Or of murders
Which doesn't mean they don't happen.
They are just happening at a much lower scale than what is exagerated here... and this make the situation a whole lot different :

Corporations hired workers and paid them shitty wages.
Workers went on strike.
Company said "Ok, no work, no money"
Workers went on riot. In the company's town. Which is in the plantations.
Company decided to save its assets and sent security forces.
People got hurt, maybe even killed.
Some workers went back to work, other were fired.
Replacement was easily found because the wages aren't that bad.

The end.

>>52783321
not only that, they acknowledge that violating the NAP is immoral. NAP isn't a magical force, it's a simple moral framework.

File: Lain is confused.gif (847KB, 500x357px) Image search: [Google]

847KB, 500x357px

>>52777095
What am I reading?

>>52784066
Except that it was pointed out specifically that baring all other influences or value systems, hierarchies com down to the biggest guy wins.
More sophisticated hierarchies have different priorities, so who is on top is determined differently, but almost always violence is used to keep the status quo.

>>52783051
>buy all the rifles
>all

Mate I don't think you understand how many rifles are floating around in the US. And the price will rise very very swiftly once people realize you're buying all the rifles. Entire factories would spring up around new rifle manufacture because gunsmiths have a guaranteed customer.

Here, try this on for size:

>Get elected
>Change the constitution
>ban government
>Now there's not government

That looks retarded, but it's the exact mirror to your argument.

>>52784116
>hierarchies com down to the biggest guy wins
Amoral hierarchies that every individual has the right to refuse tend to do. Which is the entire point of anarchism. No ancap has any problem with a hierarchy that forms voluntarily.

>>52783053
>Shit man. Individuals don't have the resources to fight organizations in our world right now. Why would taking away regulatory bodies change that.

The primary way organizations hurt people is through government force. Taking away the government would force those organizations to fund the oppression on their own, making oppression a much more expensive option for them.

>>52783363
That's slavery though and literally anyone that discovers you do this can retaliate against that company. Fucking drone enthusiast suddenly can change your client base into an angry mob.
In such situation, how economically efficient are slaves for this company against constant fear of being violently removed from the market?

>>52782667
Did this happen?

>>52784132

And how does an Ancap situation deal with Children? Or those without the mental capability for informed consent?

>>52784135

Of course, which is why Nestle has no marketshare, Unilever has no marketshare, Apple has no marketshare... need I go on?

>>52782870
>I don't rule over monarchists even though they would rule over me
Monarchists would have one person rule over you, chosen by a line hereditary succession, any monarchist group of more than 1 member can not all want to rule over you.

>>52783363
>What means do you have to stop this?

This thing that also happens under our current system? Mainly easier access to firearms.

But I'm not sure how you feel "this thing that currently happens is a big problem for your theory of how things would be better." Normally criticisms of ancap theories are more like "government is currently PREVENTING this one thing from happening, how would you deal?"

>>52784149
Probably exactly how people deal with it now. I'm not well-read enough to give an informed answer on this and will certainly not speculate.

>>52784088
>They are just happening at a much lower scale than what is exagerated here... and this make the situation a whole lot different :
Nobody said that and no it doesn't. Murder is murder, the numbers don't matter much. The fact of the matter is, you have companies, with no oversight, killing workers based on the companies value system, which the workers had no say in deciding. You see, the workers have no input on how the company is run, but are obligated to abide by their laws anyway. If they don't they will have violence, sometime to the point of murder, enacted on them.

That's what companies do when their is no one stopping them, and it's fucking wrong.

You making excuses for them or their actions is, frankly, disgusting and you are a terrible human being. I hope you go on some boat cruise or something someday an get captured by pirates and sold into slavery. See how you like it then. See you run, see you fight.

>>52784132
Problems obviously arise when that voluntary hierarchy decides that you're living on its property.

>>52784158
>Of course, which is why Nestle has no marketshare, Unilever has no marketshare, Apple has no marketshare... need I go on?

Are these all companies in Ancapistan, or real companies in the real world where the government pays for their defense, making it much more efficient for them to use strategies that require defense?

>>52784132

>Amoral hierarchies that every individual has the right to refuse tend to do.

You know people CAN renounce citizenship, right? Heck, you could do it between your 18th birthday and ever needing to pay a single dollar of taxes.

>>52784132
>Amoral hierarchies that every individual has the right to refuse tend to do.
Unless, you know, you get beaten into submission or killed.
If you'd take death before a loss of liberty, that's a fine thing to say. But I doubt you would, most people wouldn't. That's why it works.

>>52784178

If people are unwilling to even stop buying a product over abuses in far away places, why would they care enough to form a mob and burn their headquarters down? Is this more NAP magic?

>>52784178
Those companies pay taxes too, so they're not getting protection for free, though. And without government they could hire a PMC anyway, at competitive prices to boot.

>>52784163
>Normally criticisms of ancap theories are more like "government is currently PREVENTING this one thing from happening, how would you deal?"
Obviously they're not. That's just what you want them to be.

>>52783477
Price fixing is not sustainable in a free market. Just think about:
- suppose two giant companies, A and B, agree to keep the price of their miracle drug at X
- "but wait", thinks company A, "if I just broke that agreement and offered miracle drug at X-1, I would get more clients than B and could corner the market!" - and it does that
- "those motherfuckers!", thinks company B, "X-1, eh? let's see how they like X-2!" - and it does that
repeat until the price reaches minimum given by supply and demand

>>52782602
>Rich person has no family
>Small wealth person has two kids
>poor person has four kids
Really updates my journal

>>52784221
Then both companies loose money, and nobody wins. Do you even MAD?

>>52784221

So you have the Prisoner's Dilemma. The best situation for both companies is to stick with the price fixing as while breaking it first may give you a small advantage, you can't be sure you'll win if you break it.

>>52784190
What kind of argument is this even?
>1.
Oh wow, you are such a badass. Thanks for letting me know.
>2.
Yes, this is probably how this whole shit started. And? It's still amoral and this is what ancaps and anarchists argue about. What a are trying to tell me? What is the exact information I should gather from this? Fascism is great because you can beat me to accept it? What if I beat you to accept being an anarchist? You can still refuse, or accept it, it wouldn't make it moral, which is what I'm talking about.

>>52784243
>What if I beat you to accept being an anarchist
Then you wouldn't be an anarchist, you'd be a despot.

>>52784243

>What kind of argument is this even?

That engagement in a country and it's government is voluntary as they give you every ability to not be involved.

Nice space thread.

>>52784268
I'm on your side, but not really. Not reasonably anyway depending on where you live. It takes a lot of money to escape the to some third world shithole. I don't know how american public land laws work too well though, so if that's an option then yeah, they can just opt out.

>>52784278
OP pulled a bailey school kids.

>>52784217
>Obviously they're not. That's just what you want them to be.

I mean, I can't speak to what you normally do but typically when I talk with people they try to convince me that ancap would make things worse, not that ancap would maintain the status quo. That's novel.

>>52784308
I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread is pointing out that things would get worse, as it would just turn into who has the biggest private army/ unmitigated corporate shenanigans.

>>52783737
By the guy you enslave being lawfully allowed to kill you.

>>52784237
>So you have the Prisoner's Dilemma. The best situation for both companies is to stick with the price fixing as while breaking it first may give you a small advantage, you can't be sure you'll win if you break it.

Hi, I'm C. I used to be an engineer with A, but I realized that I can actually manufacture this product much cheaper than both A and B sell it for. I quit, and started C Holdings Ltd., and I'm currently undercutting both of them.

>>52784322
They have massive capital reserves built up from years of price fixing.
They undercut you long enough to bankrupt you, then adopt your manufacturing process, then jack the prices back up.
Cartels are pretty flexible and ruthless when it comes to dealing with interlopers and dissenters.

>>52784295

>Not reasonably anyway depending on where you live. It takes a lot of money to escape the to some third world shithole. I don't know how american public land laws work too well though, so if that's an option then yeah, they can just opt out.

The thing is, that's not really the government's obligation. They don't have an obligation to provide easy access to other options.

It's like a town with only one location a store could be built (I dunno, magic or something). Yes, it's not really possible to start up another store but the store has no obligation to provide you an alternative to buying from them. The government provided you the ability to not be a member. Beyond that, it's your responsibility.

It's the nature of limited resources (In the case, land). Voluntary is a complex thing as something can be voluntary without there being other alternatives. They have made it voluntary.

>>52784221
If corporations are so keen to undercut their competitors then why every product in the world doesn't already cost one cent, explain that wise guy?

>>52784339
>lawfully
not ancap.