So how is anarcho-capitalism not exactly 100% like feudalism?
>>72632335
I've been noticing a massive influx of /leftypol/ shitters as of recent.
What happened?- did your GamerGate-Chan board become abandoned like the rest of the site?
>>72632335
With feudalism you have to have a monarchy.
How they'd work would be pretty much the same though
Because it, by definition, wouldn't be feudalism?
>>72632459
They have to raid at least one /pol/, and the other one is to much of an echo chamber to tolerate them.
>>72632335
A modern feudal system, with out memes of equality and racial tolerance sounds pretty good.
>>72632335
>100% like feudalism?
You're thinking of communism friendo
>>72632459
Leaking of IP's
>>72632686
>he doesn't know that there's a stateless version of communism
>>72632686
Okay, how do you figure that?
>>72632606
It sounds like modern feudalism to be quite honest. What else do you call unrestricted rule by the landed class?
>>72632459
Based ameriturd dodging the question.
>>72632335
because it would be voluntary, and meritocratic.
>>72632732
Every version of communism is the stateless version of communism.
But because of dialectics communism is for the future, for now socialism is the best you can do.
>>72632732
>stateless version of communism
>By paying taxes
wat
>>72632335
The word to describe it has more syllables
>>72632732
Shhh. 99% of /pol/ just doesn't acknowledge the existence of non-totalitarian far leftism because it doesn't fit into their revisionist histories and political theories.
>>72632879
>Voluntary
Okay.
>Meritocratic
Would it?
As as I can see in anarcho-capitalism if you own the means of production you have it made, and so can pass this power on to whoever you like very probably your family members. It doesn't really seem very meritocratic at all.
>>72633033
>revisionist
top fucking delusion m8.
>>72632851
Anarcho-Capitalism isn't "unrestricted rule by the landed class", so your point is wrong. It could turn into that, but so could any system. Tyranny is always just around the corner.
>>72632335
Not an ancap but surely by Marxist definition it can't be feudalist. You'd have wage labour, a totally free market, voluntary exchange, flexible pricing, open borders etc. All hallmarks of capitalism. Yes, you'd have insane inequality but that doesn't make it feudalist.
>>72632335
feu·dal·ism
ˈfyo͞odlˌizəm/Submit
nounhistorical
the dominant social system in medieval Europe, in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection
DEFINITION of 'Anarcho-Capitalism' A term coined by Austrian-school economist Murray Rothbard to describe a market-based society with no government. Instead of government, all goods and services would be provided by private businesses.
feudalism >> democracy
ancap is a silly pipe dream, but it's one route back to traditional monarchy
It's neo fedualism, the landowner essentially become the sovereign and can tax/extract all of the people using his land of their entire surplus up until they are living a subsistence lifestyle and can barely survive.
That's what happens when all land is privately owned and people don't have any political representation.
Europeans realized this was an unproductive system because it reduced the productivity of the under class as they couldn't save money and had to give it all to the aristocracy. That's why they replaced that system with democracy so the working class could have political representation, so the government would provide public goods and services, and so the working class could save money.
But apparently Democracy and political representation was all a bad idea and everyone should go back to being serfs, at least according to ancaps.
>>72633176
How is it not?
All power comes from property in anarcho-capitalism, and no one can tell you what to do on your property nor is anyone supposed to break the NAP. It seems very simple as to why it's unrestricted rule by the landed class.
Because capitalism is based on the jew style cashmoneyz
feudalism is very different, based on land, more strict, class division, itsVERY different
Feudalism is, if u want a comparison ALMOST EXACTLY the same like mafia, gangster functioning
watch the godfather film feudalism works exactly likethat
>>72633302
>all goods and services would be provided by private businesses.
And since private business has a natural land monopoly they effectively control everything and can charge whatever they want as they're the sovereign
so yes it's exactly like feudalism.
>>72633306
>Being a monarcuck
>Not liking democracy
>>72633417
You control far more than the mafia when all land is privately owned
you essentially become a monarch and everyone who doesn't own land becomes a serf.
>>72633400
You don't get power from property, you get it from contract. Dispute resolution organizations would play the role of peacekeepers. People can tell you what to do on your property, I don't know where you got that from.
>>72632335
Anarcho-captialists are some of the most retarded people.
Supporting anarcho capitalism is supporting white genocide. Without borders, nothing is going to stop niggers from infesting the west.
>implying private property exists
>>72633588
Thats despotism, not feudalism
If u want to know how feudalism works wathc the godfather
>>72633635
>You don't get power from property.
Yes you do. Your property is what gives you any negotiating power, whether you have a farm, a block of flats, a factory, a gold mine what gives you power in anarcho-capitalism is having access to things that you can sell.
If you do not have productive property you have absolutely no power, no contracts on the planet can rectify this.
>People can tell you what to do on your property,
Okay, how does that work?
>>72633635
Owning land gives you unlimited bargaining power especially when land is all privately owned
you essentially become a monarch and people just have to do what you say or else you can expel, jail, or kill them for "trespassing" on your property.
In other words you're a serf who is tied to the land and has all of your surplus labor extracted by the monarch (landowner) who will spend it on his luxury goods
>>72633831
The mafia doesn't own a land monopoly it provides "protection (not killing you) by charging you a fee (rent, interest, etc) and also commits other crimes, (selling drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc)
It's not really the same as feudalism as the basis of feudalism is land monopoly.
>>72634040
Same principle,
charging "fees" LITERALLY the same thing how feudalism works
youre wrong
>>72634326
But the mafia doesn't have a land monopoly which is what makes it different from Feudalism
>>72634326
But in feudalism it's not the serf's land, it's the lord's land.
>>72633482
anon, I don't even support AnCap but holy fuck please read Rothbard before you jump over being this stupid.
Feudalism requires "the dominant social system , which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection"
AnCap theory is a bunch of private entities competing without any form of government at all. Monopolies are developed because a single company owns and hold special protection rights over a specific single product or source of production. The dictionary defines it as the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service. Exclusive control requires some style of legal entity preventing others from gaining a foothold. This doesn't exist in AnCap. The only "Legal entities" that are around are business districts of legal control to help support the ideal of contractual law.
In my eyes a completely private legal system is impossible to remain fair and unbias.
>>72634444
Only Not nominally
After all they are not official government
>>72634457
Actually its a bit more complicated
>>72633216
So Marxism is basically feudalism with forced equality?
>>72634481
It doesn't, you can form a monopoly simply by owning all the reserves of a given resource. Diamonds being a good example of this in practice.
Additionally that isn't what anon meant by a monopoly. He meant in the sense that in feudalism the lords had a monopoly on land, therein lies the connection likewise anarcho-capitalism would make landed gentry out of people with property and serfs out of those without since all negotiating power is backed by who owns the means of production.
Hence the feudalism of it all, if you aren't landed you are absolutely fucked. You cannot eat, be sheltered, or even drink water in some places without surrendering your labour to someone who is landed. You have no power to negotiate here.
>>72634481
>please read Rothbard
I'm an ex-Ancap so I've read plenty of Rothbard
>the dominant social system
Which arises from a land monopoly. And since private owners tend to maximize profit (through rent) everyone using land will be subject to monopoly fees and therefore all of their surplus labor will be extracted.
>AnCap theory is a bunch of private entities
Right and if they have a monopoly over land they inherently become the sovereigns who can control everything
>Monopolies are developed because a single company owns and hold special protection rights over a specific single product or source of production.
And since land is a natural monopoly they hold a monopoly
>Exclusive control requires some style of legal entity preventing others from gaining a foothold
Or ownership of something that can't be competed with (private ownership of land in a system where all land is privately owned)
> The only "Legal entities" that are around are business districts of legal control to help support the ideal of contractual law.
Every land owner can effectively make their own legal systems where they are in charge and make their own laws. It's effectively their kingdom.
>>72634635
But they own the land and have sole control over it.
>>72633900
>you essentially become a monarch and people just have to do what you say or else you can expel, jail, or kill them for "trespassing" on your property.
Are you an idiot? No defender of property rights has ever said that owning land allows you to shoot or jail anyone who so much as steps foot on your land. Trespassing is a crime, but the punishment must be proportional to the crime -- it can be acceptable to shoot trespassers if they broke into your house in the middle of the night and you could reasonably assume they would kill you but it is not acceptable to shoot a trespasser who broke a rule that you just made up like "No smoking". You could bar them from your property and get rough if they don't want to leave, but that's a far cry from the feudal society or modern state where, like you said, you will be jailed or killed.
>>72634777
No, Marxism is the total absence of private property (different from personal property), so in the absence of property and employment where the value created by the workers travels upwards rather the workers democratically agree on how to run the means of production and how the resources will be distributed.
>>72635095
Says who? There's no state and they violated the NAP.
>>72634777
Marxism exists explicitly to provide goods and services to the people through government ownership of the means of production while feudalism doesn't
However since people have no political representation and can't own property you can see very close similarities to serfdom. You are effectively slaves of the government and that's why Marxism doesn't work.
>>72634956
>ex-ancap
>still doesnt understand the price system
Fake and gay faggot
>>72635095
>No defender of property rights has ever said that owning land allows you to shoot or jail anyone who so much as steps foot on your land
The land owner decides the laws, and since forcing people to work the land at the highest level of tithes (taxation) will get him the most profit he will inevitably recreate feudalism
You can see this system everytime someone controls a public land or services monopoly
See: Carlos Slim owning all of Mexico's telecom industry, he overcharges Mexicans billions of dollars and they have no choice to comply.
http://www.cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/
This is what will happen when there is private ownership of all land.
>>72635170
I will not begin to argue that property rights will be perfectly enforced in an anarchist society, I am objecting to someone claiming that property rights automatically means I can do whatever I like to people if they're on my land.
If someone _can_ do whatever they like to anyone on their land, then it ceases to be an anarchist society -- they have obtained a monopoly of decision making over a given territory and have thus become a state. If you think that means anarchism is impossible, okay, but feudalism is not the equivalent of anarchism.
>>72635434
The price system doesn't matter when you have a land monopoly
when you have a monopoly there is no reason to lower prices. You can raise prices up until the serfs working your land will die if you raise prices anymore, that is they will have to live on a subsistence basis.
>>72635589
>I am objecting to someone claiming that property rights automatically means I can do whatever I like to people if they're on my land.
Assuming you own the land outright you can effectively do whatever you want you're the sovereign (ie.e law maker, ruler, etc)
You can make anything you want illegal there is no political body above you to tell you "no"
>>72635589
You can. It's your property and anyone violating your wishes on it becomes a trespasser and can be freely killed for violating the NAP.
>If someone _can_ do whatever they like to anyone on their land, then it ceases to be an anarchist society
Yes, hence why anarcho-capitalism isn't anarchism.
>>72635545
You claim to have read Rothbard, but you missed the entire chapter in Ethics of Liberty on what land owners can and can't do? If you get in a conflict with a land owner and the land owner is the ultimate judge in that conflict, then he has become a state.
>>72635835
>a land owner and the land owner is the ultimate judge in that conflict, then he has become a state.
And then is what naturally happens, you have essentially created a state with the land owner as the political ruler
You have no bargaining power and no way to enforce the "non aggression principle" assuming you don't own the land and can only use the land if you follow someone else's laws.
This will inevitably lead to the land owner maximizing profit through rent and taxation that will increase to the point of subsistence and you effectively become a serf.
>>72635764
>It's your property and anyone violating your wishes on it becomes a trespasser and can be freely killed for violating the NAP.
You are claiming that libertarians believe it is acceptable for me to invite someone into my house and then shoot them the moment they walk in the door for violating some rule that I made up.
Either you're making a serious misunderstanding of the anarchist position or every libertarian ever has missed something so glaringly obvious in their philosophy.
>>72636122
Acceptable? No, it's not acceptable to buy a truckload of puppies then unleash them in your forest so you can hunt them for sport either but it doesn't mean you couldn't do it.
But yes, you could kill people on your property for whatever arbitrary reason you like. And provided you have the wealth to overpower the lost-negotiating power for being a murderer you would totally get away with it scot free.
>>72636122
>libertarians believe it is acceptable
It doesn't matter what libertarians "believe" it matters who is in control when there is a land monopoly and since the land owner is effectively the sovereign he can make whatever rule he wants.
And since private ownership tends towards maximizing profits he will charge anyone who uses his land up until the point they they are living on a subsistence basis. All other surplus will be extracted or taxed.
This type of feudalism was the basis of all complex societies until the development of political representation in certain western states which ancaps seek to eliminate.
it's retarded. property rights can only exist under threat of law, same with any other "rights."
and i say this as a vehement lover of capitalism. kill yourselves pinkos
>>72636409
>And provided you have the wealth to overpower the lost-negotiating power for being a murderer you would totally get away with it scot free.
So you take something that occurs under every political philosophy and use it to attack capitalism in particular.
>Someone committed murder in the worker's commune, communism is flawed.
>>72636656
Except in the present day western world we have courts, prisons and laws that are universally applicable to everyone to deal with this sort of thing. If someone manages to buy their way out of it then that's a malfunction of the system, not everything going as designed.
>>Someone committed murder in the worker's commune, communism is flawed.
Communist societies, as in stateless communism, where there is no property or probably even prisons for that matter would probably just kill you without thinking twice for murdering someone.
>>72636656
communism is flawed because the government owns the means of production and people effectively have no political representation (the state is run by the party)
anarcho-capitalism is flawed because a landowners hold natural land monopolies and people have no political representation
The best system is a democracy with political representation and private ownership of property but where the government provides public goods and services and controls the law because the political representation of the people can check monopolies and exploitation that can exist under both Feudalism (anarcho capitalism) and communism.
>>72636995
both communism and anarcho capitalism are bad ideas in general
>>72633033
>revisitionist
Also fuck off /leftypol/
>>72638661
just having a government doesn't make you left wing
>>72632335
we dont get to carry baws swords and fight neighboring cities. :"fuck you lower east side you had this coming"~some guy in a better dimension
>all land owned by the crown
>anarcho-capitalist
>>72637170
The best system is where a democracy with political representation and private ownership of property but where the government doesn't provide public services and only controls the law.
You act like monopolies are common when they aren't. The only reason monopolies exist is because the government stops citizens from competing with large buy in prices through regulation.
>>72640516
you effectively become a sovereign when you have a land monopoly
>>72640963
>You act like monopolies are common when they aren't
land monopolies exist by nature, and when a private entity owns certain public goods you get a monopoly and price gouging.
see: Carlos Slim Telecom monopoly in Mexico where he destroys the rest of the economy by charging monopoly prices, but makes himself billions.
http://www.cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/
>>72632459
Reddit got red-pilled to Trump but the transformation wasn't complete so they flooded here and fucked this place up with their shit.
This is actually what happened.
>>72641404
And slim's monoply is only possible because of the state.
If other outside companies, like say rich American ones like AT&T or Verizon were allowed to enter into the market and compete, slim's monopoly would soon cease to exist.
