The AnCap position is openly laughable.
Replacing government with a private entity that provides all of the same services, in a specific territorial region under which those that dwell in said area must abide by the specific contractual obligations of the private property holder.
Do you know what that is? A government, specifically the form of government known as feudalism.
>>72253860
OK Mojambo enough 4chan for you today
Ancaps are secret monarchists, I'm convinced of it
They all think they wuz Kangz
You obviously have never read any AnCap Literature, otherwise you would realize that this is not the system which AnCaps propose, try again dummy.
>>72254042
How is it wrong?
Ancaps want to replace an elected constitutional government with some random jackass who has supreme power over the land.
Might as well just name him King George and get swear fealty to him now.
>>72254274
.... No..... Literally no Ancap has ever proposed that, also, such a thing is economically unfeasible, if that were a profitable way of doing business people would be doing it today. The fact is that the only way such an institution can stay in power is throug h violence, so nobody would enter into such an agreement or live on that land
>>72253860
>Replacing government with a private entity
You're already wrong.
>>72254673
> so nobody would enter into such an agreement or live on that land
But they would because if all land is privately owned then they have no choice.
You effectively become a serf by default since you have zero bargaining power.
>>72253860
WE WANT TO REPLACE THE GOVERNMENT TO A PRIVATE ENTITY NAWWWWW
No hay pedo, estoy en una peda… bien pedo
>>72253860
No, that is a gated community.
National Syndicalism master race
all the best parts of Ancap and fascism combined.
>>72257059
>chomsky
Hope you are enjoying your intro Political Philosophy Class! You have a long way to go
>>72256652
So how did a small group of people come into owning ALL OF THE EARTH'S land exactly?
>>72257271
>ALL OF THE EARTH'S land
Just anywhere that's habitable.
>>72257628
How did it happen? Why can nobody employ land for productive purpose? Why can nobody buy and sell land? Please explain how this nonsensical impossible scenario either 1) comes about or 2) these feudal lords retain power without using violence despite the fact that feudalism is clearly not a sustainable business practice unless you can use violence against your serfs.
>>72257891
>Why can nobody employ land for productive purpose
You can, you just have to pay your feudal landlord all your surplus capital in the form of aristocratic taxation (tithes) for the "privilege" of using his land.
in other word you're a serf living on a subsistence basis
>>72258547
And why don't serfs ever buy land?
>>72258717
When you are taxed to the point all your excess capital is extracted via land rents and tithes you can't save up money. You are living on a subsistence basis making just enough food to survive and handing your surplus to the aristocratic landowners via rent and taxation.
Even if somehow they did save up enough money, they'd become the new landlord and everyone else would be their new serfs and the process starts over again.
>>72253860
>ancaps are so dumb
>they think that private contractors can do the job better than a government that uses private contractors to do the job
Oy vey, just pay your taxes, those freeloading black folk aren't just going to get money by themselves!
Besides, we've got more wars to fight for Israel... uh... I mean... freedom! Yeah!
>>72259111
The serfs stand to profit more if they bring their money together in order to purchase land and put it to some enterpreunerial practice instead of FUCKING FARMING. Literally the only feudal Lord serf relationship that makes sense is FARMING, and the reason. Rent would not be absurdly high is the same reason. Humans can afford apartment rent without spending 90% of their income. Because neighboring apartments are competing, and people will rent cheaper apartments, providing an incentive for someone to undercut the competition and sweep the market.
>>72259743
It's not about efficiency it's about the fact that is a corporation owns public goods it can charge a natural monopoly rate
Jews actually push privatization and neoliberalism.
>>72259803
>bring their money together
Which the sovereign landowner can just demand they give to him. See he's the sovereign and owns the land so whatever he says goes.
>Humans can afford apartment rent without spending 90% of their income.
Not if the land owner demands a 90% tax on their income for rent (tithes)
>neighboring apartments are competing,
what competition? The land owner has a natural land monopoly so there is no competition beyond him wanting as much profit as is feasibly possible and charging that amount in rents, which as I said is going to be the maximum possible up to subsistence (where his serfs can live off the land but otherwise have no savings)
>>72260256
You must be high or something. I can't respond to your points when you keep shifting the goalposts, and the thig you said in your most recent shift has made it clear that what you are describing is not AnarchoCapitalism but another state so I am done with your nonsense
>>72253860
>specifically the form of government known as feudalism.
Communism is modern fuedalism. your analogy sucks
i agree that ancaps are dumb tho
>>72261597
>not Anarcho Capitalism
But it is anarcho capitalism if you assume that under anarcho capitalism the land owner is the sovereign ruler of his territory (that is he owns it)
>>72262253
Yes. But individuals still own their bodies. Nobody can be forced to remain somewhere or to give up their money
>>72254673
>no ancap proposed feudalism because it's economically unfeasible, if it were people would be practicing feudalism in business today (??). Do you support me being shot? Statists aren't actually real anyway.
>>72262780
>individuals still own their bodies
Sure they can assuming they break some rule on someone else's property that land owner can do whatever he wants to them since he makes the laws.
There's no way to "stop" that land owner from making up and enforcing his own laws since there's no state (or public) apparatus to keep him in check and claim to have any authority over his actions.
>>72263506
No, that is not true, if someone is doing things you don't like on your property the next course of action is to forcibly remove them. You only use so much force insofar as to address the grievance. You can say "pay me or get off" but cannot declare "pay me and also you can't leave"
>>72263787
>the next course of action is to forcibly remove them
You can make up whatever law you want it's your property, you're the sovereign and you make the rules.
>>72264103
You are a moron and don't know what anarchism is, you are describing a state. I am done, please do 2 minutes of research before you argue.
>>72264256
Real ancap has never been tried.
>>72253860
>roads
For what purpose? We have a lot of vehicles that don't need them you know.
