It seems like The Right's version of the emotionally prone, logic-denying SJW is the Anarcho-Capitalist.
Are AnCaps developed and maintained as a dividing force of useful idiots by the Establishmentarian Right much as SJWs and other espousers of identity politics are developed and utilized by the Left?
>>73459491
You're thinking of AnComs and the left.
>>73459610
>You're thinking of AnComs and the left
Definitely not, AnComs are an extremely fringe group in the Left, while AnCaps make up a seemingly significant portion of the 'moderate' conservative base.
In terms of numbers and the ability to shit up discussions on a large and effective scale, AnCaps are much more similar to 'SJWs' and other leftist abusers of identity politics.
>>73459491
>>73460458
AnCap is just retarded man. It could work, but only in small communities and probably a different species.
I just hate how every AnCap I spoke to so far gives me an argument along the lines of "hurr durr state is immoral, but people are all moral and if you don't agree you're also immoral." No. People are fucking retarded, and the guys are the perfect example! They don't even realize that if we do as they say we'll be back to feudalism, 50 years later.
ancaps are good goy shills for the neolibs just like how the republicans are good goy shills for the neocons
it's a nice system they have going
>>73461806
Their ideology is dangerous.
>>73461327
Playing doubles advocado but...
If people are fucking retarded, why do you want them to rule over you?
>>73461806
Neocons are in no way limited to the GOP, they make up a large part of the Democratic leaderhip as well.
AnCaps are a protest bloc that splits and weakens the conservative support base, much like Libertarianism.
>>73462039
Cause it's better than nothing and because they are supposed to be the 'elite'.
>>73463119
So you'd rather there be a ruling class of retards than simply having the retards govern themselves?
>>73463247
In a non-hereditary government where rule requires some semblance of public approval, political power tends to be meritocratic.
>>73463338
Is that relevant to any of todays governments?
>>73463489
Considering that they don't last for long if everything goes to shit, yes.
It's people who ruin every goverment and revolution. Literally any government would work if people were different.
>>73463908
I'm saying none of todays governments are meritocratic because the premise for a meritocracy is not the same as the premise we have for governments anywhere today.
To give easy examples:
Why is Hillary a very popular presidential candidate?
Why is Trump a very popular presidential candidate?
>>73464081
Hillary is popular due to abuse of the meritocratic system through the expenditure of economic and propaganda power and influence.
Trump is a meritocrat in the truest sense, it is his success as a private citizen and orator that has propelled him forward, not corporate media or direct investors.
>>73464860
You're throwing around terms that have no meaning in this context.
Hillary is a popular presidential candidate because her hubby, for whatever reason, was a president.
Trump is a popular presidential candidate because he was on TV often and is generally well known. That's because he's rich. So indirectly, because he's rich. The same man who isn't rich and wasn't on TV as often as Trump would've never gotten as far.
>>73459491
Yes, refer to this image for more info.
In fact, this whole mess was started when we abandoned monarchy.
