![dont-tread-on-me-meaning[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/7k9MAFJ.jpg "dont-tread-on-me-meaning[1].jpg")
Why arent you an anarcho capitalist?
>>77733870
I don't know why anymore
Because I (Don't) Embrace the N.A.P.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcUZrDX5P7A
Because I'm not a classcuck and want to abolish private property.
>>77733870
wtf is an anarcho capitalist?
>>77733870
because it all turns into corporate feudalism.
also how do we stop them from selling crack to 5 year old in such a system?
>>77733870
I need the initiation of force to remove kebab
Because without government a can of corn will cost $30
>>77734123
thats the dumbest shit i ever read in my entire life LMAO
>>77734074
shooting them
>Live in an anarcho-capitalist habitat built on Oberon
>Go to work after breakfast
>Workplace is a dairy farm
>Gotta earn dem creds m80
>Airlock cycles
>It's a cubicle farm
>Pic related appears from one of the cubicles
>Her boobs sway ponderously left and right
>They boom against the cubicle walls as she talks
>"Anon, my mammary glands are nearly at their bursting point!"
>She motions toward her cubicle
>"We've got twenty gallons to massage out of these things for our buyers on Titania, now come with me!"
>She stops short
>Collide with her butt, causing it to ripple back and forth
>"Also, Lucrezia and Emma will need help after me."
>Such is life in an anarcho-capitalist society
>No gods, no kings, only boobies
>>77734068
It makes no sense. The state and capitalism developed together and rely on each for support. The state bails out capitalism when it inevitably falls into a crisis.
living under the central banks control and the Rothschilds haven't been bad so far
but getting rid of them doesn't seem like a bad idea, little to no taxes at the very least
>>77734413
>>77734413
but that contradicts the NAP and your protection company will drop you as a client for breaking the contract
>>77734538
shooting someone that's causing harm doesn't violate NAP, stop being a cuck
>>77734538
The NAP is an untenable moral precept.
>>77734627
you can't just shoot people for selling items to consenting buyers
where is your sense of anarchy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OOsmJSPsdU
You know it makes sense.
>>77734347
Do explain me why that could not happen?
>>77735022
it could happen, but if you are going to make a claim you need to back it up with a theory atleast
>>77735022
well not even the free breadsticks they are giving out for free are free in an economic sense hehe
hes right about it .. doesnt make his rant less autistic though!
let me explain to you why there would be no $30 corn in a free market
Since corn is so easy to produce and has a super high demand people would undercut themselves
there would be no monopolies btw ... also it makes no sense to make the price so high because nobody could effort what you are selling and you most likely are not using your resources efficient enough because you have so much space for so much corn to grow but you are only selling a bit of it for a high price .. why owuld you ever do that?
The reality is that corn is more expensive because of the government .. so is milk. Taxes + all the benefits the farmers get from other state funded bullshit programs.
Thats how germany does it aswell. We subsidize our farmers to BTFO farmers elsewhere in the EU. Its a big mess and the interference by the government is bad for the consumer in the end. Ofc its protectionist to take care of your own economy .. stil lviolates the free market though and if liberals & leftists "good" they would be al for a free market because that would mean free global competition. Since all races are the same niggers shouldnt have a disadvantage in that scenario right? They could just outcompete everyone else :PPP
Because I'm not a retard.... Pretty simple really.
>>77733870
I am, huebro.
>>77735631
>let me explain to you why there would be no $30 corn in a free market
I already heard all your explains.
But they always fail to give a good eason why wouldn't the main suppliers fix the prices.
>>77733870
I am senpai
>>77733870
It's a bit too materialistic for me. Same problem with Marxism/Communism.
There are other things in the world that have value for me and are completely immaterial. Things that get conflated with the term "Social Capital" for example.
>>77733870
Because might makes right and the NAP is for weak faggots
>>77734034
Why don't you have a right to fire somebody for any reason if you own a factory or farm?
>>77733870
>Anarchism can be attached to anything
This board is 18 plus kid.
>>77736196
reported for underage. Enjoy ban
>>77734817
we'll see how the market reacts
cause its a corrupt idea that leads to nowhere
>>77736367
>might makes right
OOGA BOOGA as fuck
>>77736391
To prevent abuses.
When people are poor and hungry they get mad. And they get epecially mad when they see rich people.
>>77736593
So you are above the rules of society and social interaction?
>>77733870
I'm a minarchist
>>77735968
>why wouldn't the main suppliers fix the prices.
Because of competition. The minute one undercuts the rest, he gets all of their business. It doesn't take much effort for retailers to change suppliers.
Plus, small competitors outside the cartel will compete as well, and quickly stop being small.
>>77736788
>Because of competition.
So in the event of the main suppliers fixing the price amoung themselves, i would have to wait for a eventual competition to come here and play honest? What if the good was water, or electricity? we can't live without them and we need to have them, almost no matter the price.
>small competitors outside the cartel will compete as well, and quickly stop being small.
Any real life example?
>>77736593
Might makes Right on an anarchistic stage*, such as international relations.
Within a state or jurisdiction, right is whatever people decide through civility and the laws of that nation*
Better?
>>77736267
>not initiating force
>too materialistic
Literally has nothing to do with materialism
>>77733870
Too busy being detained.
>>77737054
>right is whatever people decide through civility and the laws of that nation*
Nope, also might makes right. It's literally encoded in human beings. we follow the strong
Because it refuses to take any stand against moral degeneracy, and neglects the family unit in favor of maximizing profit.
Why aren't you a fascist?
>>77737141
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCozh_vbYdM
So much keks were had
>>77737178
Correct, and the state is the mightiest within the nation, thus our actions and what is right is through that law.
>>77736595
>to prevent abuses
I have an idea. To prevent abuses how about you quit and get your own fucking company started? Why do leftcucks feel entitled to other peoples stuff god damn kys my man
>>77733870
Because I don't sit in boxes you design
>>77737017
>i would have to wait for a eventual competition to come here and play honest?
You could also encourage consumers to take action, which is popular t>>77737017
>i would have to wait for a eventual competition to come here and play honest?
You could also encourage consumers to take action, which is both popular and easy to do these days through social media. You could also start a business and compete yourself, instead of sitting back and demanding someone else cater to your desires.
>What if the good was water
To obtain water, you need only a shovel and arms to use it. Aquifers are literally everywhere. If you want nice treated water piped directly to your faucets, you're going to have to pay, because somebody took the time and effort to build that shit.
>electricity
Generators, solar, windmills, etc. You can create your own power no problem, and in your outlandish scenario where the price of power is so expensive that you can barely afford it, these alternative methods rapidly become economical.
>any real life example
Literally every company that made it big did it (to a large degree, if we ignore government aid through regulation and whatnot) by being better and/or cheaper than the rest.
>>77737810
Shitty phone fucked up my formatting
>>77733870
>anarcho capitalist
That sounds like some shit a dumb teenager would come up with. Are you a dumb teenager, OP?
>>77733870
>Why arent you an anarcho capitalist?+ 0 post omitted.
Because I'm an anarcho-communist :^)
>>77737098
but it argues that everything good that's achieved by following the NAP is of material nature. It's all the time about how much better off we were if we let people produce and consume freely and how much more people would be charital.
The only ancap I know who looks beyond these elementary needs is Hans-Hermann Hoppe with his private cities and so on.
>>77734034
This
>>77737581
>To prevent abuses how about you quit and get your own fucking company started?
pic related
>Why do leftcucks feel entitled to other peoples stuff god damn kys my man
>Why do corporations feel entitled to my nation educated workforce? Let them educate their own workers! Corporates are so greedy and entitled!!
>Why do corporations feel entitled to my nation police?!?!?!? OMG stop being so entitled!!! PAy for your own god damn protection!!!
>Why do banks feel entitled to my nation money?! Damn this millenials with their entitlements. Banks need to pull their own bootstraps.
>>77733870
Anarcho anything opens itself up to subversion by atheism, nihilism, and lefty tricks
libertarians are alright however
>>77735231
Call it Taoism?
Call it Coolidgeism?
Call it not prepared for you to try to define it because you are still too small minded to understandism?
Just don't call it late for dinner!
>>77733870
I've passed puberty.
>>77734464
Sure
>>77738150
I cant tell if this is meant to mock ancaps or people who mock ancaps or the whole thing in general
>>77733870
Because nuking the MidEast and Africa is the only option if we're to achieve world peace. Fuck the NAP
>>77737265
>that two-handed window yank
I only pray that someday I get to do something so badass.
>>77733870
I used to be. Until fairly recently, actually.
But if the past few months have taught me anything, it's that borders are important.
If only white people existed I would still be an ancap, but that's not our reality.
>>77737810
>You could also encourage consumers to take action, which is both popular and easy to do these days through social media.
Now you will name me a sucessful boycot started spontaniously.
>You could also start a business and compete yourself
>So 2 or 3 com panies control all the water supplies in town. I know, i will create a bussiness that sells water from i don't know how, and using the pipes the companies i am trying to put out of bussiness control. Genious. After all, we all are potential bussiness owners, right? RIGHT?!?!?!??!?!??!
>you're going to have to pay
And nobody denies it.
>Generators, solar, windmills, etc. You can create your own power no problem
I can, and i can also do a backflip if i try enough times. The thing is i don't wan't to be responible to harness my own electricity, water....
>Literally every company that made it big did it
But do you know anyone that managed to brake trough a monopoly or oligopoly by it's own shrewdness? That was my original question
>>77737581
Workers are entitled to better work conditions because they are the ones that fucking work, with this mindset the 8 hours law wouldn't exist.
>>77738192
And what would be wrong with private security and private education? We already have that.
This is why you are a failed state, Moortugal.
>>77738781
You should actually go to college. I don't usually pass out that particular advice.
>>77733870
The intellectual foundations of collectivism:
As many people have realized (such as Stefan Molyneux), opening your borders to all comers, far from being an economic boon, actually can have disastrous consequences for the quality of life, security, and prosperity of the people of a nation. This has been a great "redpill" moment in history for a lot of libertarians, who see their idealistic views failing miserably in real time.
So why shouldn't society be constructed around the individual? Are we not all individual entities with our own minds, our own conscience, our own personalities?
True, but if you take an individual out of his environment, he is the lesser. For example, take a salmon out of a stream in California, and dump him in the Hudson River. As he dodges floating sewage, ask yourself: is he the lesser? For one thing he'll have a hell of a time reproducing with no other salmon around. He'll have no more contact with any other fish like him. The water is different, the seasons are different, the other fish are different....nothing is like his home. Do you think a fish is capable of loneliness?
The truth is that we are not totally free floating, independent entities. We exist in the context of our environment. A person is most happy and most free when he can be among people that are like himself, members of his own tribe so to speak. Birds of a feather flock together.
Blacks like being around other blacks. Whites like being around other whites. Engineers like being around other engineers. Sophisticates like being around other sophisticates. We are all tribal, we all form clubs and groups and communities. For only then can we spread our wings and reach our true potential.
"The most precious possession you have in the world is your own people."
---Adolf Hitler
>>77738192
How can one person be so ignorant on how markets work?
>>Why do corporations feel entitled to my nation educated workforce? Let them educate their own workers! Corporates are so greedy and entitled!!
Workers choose to go there voluntarily.
>>Why do corporations feel entitled to my nation police?!?!?!? OMG stop being so entitled!!! PAy for your own god damn protection!!!
There's either protection for everyone or protection for none. If their property rights weren't protected like other citizens, what would even be the point of accumulating wealth?
>>Why do banks feel entitled to my nation money?! Damn this millenials with their entitlements. Banks need to pull their own bootstraps.
Blame the Keynesians. I find it ironic how keynesian policies are attributed to free market economics.
Because unless the government is completely hostile towards their own population or attempts to build some larpy fantasy land society, there is nothing wrong with having a state to serve as the last instance to solve disputes.
>>77733870
Because:
>1 post by this ID
Really dude? How stupid do you think we are?
>>77738601
What a tough motherfucker that guy must be.
>>77738963
>private education
Heavily state funded bro.
And those 3 were just examples. I could state the roads, stability, trade agreements, state spending...
>>77738885
>Now you will name me a sucessful boycot started spontaniously.
Boycott on Chick-Fil-A
>The thing is i don't wan't to be responible
Sums up your entire ideology
>But do you know anyone that managed to brake trough a monopoly or oligopoly by it's own shrewdness?
Monopolies exist only through government. Natural monopolies do not exist in a free market. Competition assures this and the best way to get rid of competition is to interfere in the market and create barriers of entry into industries.
>>77739059
>Workers choose to go there voluntarily.
But they were payed for and educated by the state. Why shouldn't the company pay to use them?
>There's either protection for everyone or protection for none. If their property rights weren't protected like other citizens, what would even be the point of accumulating wealth?
And they should pay for it
>Blame the Keynesians.
You mean bank deregulation?
Because a working society is built upon state control. Because western, free-market capitalism leads to social degeneracy. Because security and infrastructure are a top priority. Because unproductive individualism and materialism doesnt benefit society.
>>77736391
Because private ownership of the means of production leads to insane distortions of wealth and goods, the threat of unemployment and poverty for the mass of people, who have nothing to sell but their labour power, whether physical or mental. The masses are exploited.
Workers cannot start companies in most cases because they lack the capital to compete with the capitalists who control the land and factories. Thus the need (and inevitability of) for socialism.
>>77739747
>But they were payed for and educated by the state. Why shouldn't the company pay to use them?
The company should pay to use them. If workers were not getting paid why would they bother working there? Public education is shit compared to private education anyways,
>And they should pay for it
They do through taxation
>You mean bank deregulation?
No, it was government action that bailed out the banks.
Oh but I am.
>>77739676
>Chick-Fil-A
I don't see any of it as spontanious and effective. It was just some politicians using it as a way to garner support
>Sums up your entire ideology
>pic related
>Monopolies exist only through government.
Capitalism exists only trough government
>Natural monopolies do not exist in a free market.
And a free market doesn't exist in the real world
>>77740193
>Public education is shit compared to private education anyways,
In my country it's the contrary. Private education is worse in prtty much all aspects
>The company should pay to use them.
Then we agree.
>>77740435
It's only worse because government has a monopoly on education and prevents competition by making public schools """free""".
Is there an appreciable difference between "libertarianism" and "anarcho-capitalism"?
If not, then why did libertarianism feel the need to rebrand itself?
>>77733870
Because I'm not down with roving bands of warlords.
>>77739952
This an incorrect perspective imo, rooted deeply in Marxism
A libertarian will eat your lunch if you advance these arguments.
The true failing of libertarianism is not the market economy, it's the weak social structure.
In order for society to properly function, there needs to be strong institutions of marriage, family, respect and brotherhood.
One thing you'll notice about women who buy into libertarianism, very few of them want children (it might impact their careers). No matter how you slice it, children are a drag on a person's life. The childish laughter can't make up for the million dollar price tag. And yet if society is to promulgate itself, it must produce children. Those children must have the proper family structure to complement their development. They must have a safe environment and a strong sense of community.
There needs to be a community structure. Where genetically, and culturally similar people can congregate with each other. This of course means that you need some sort of boundary to keep other people out. You also need some community standards for those who you allow to stay. And before you know it, you've got yourself a little nation-state.
>>77740539
>has a monopoly on education
No it doesn't. Private schools exist.
And they are crying and sending thier students to protest becasue they will loose their gibs from the state, lol
Also our private schools are shitty, only the catholic ones do any good.
>>77740590
Libertarianism is just the middle ground fallacy
>>77740807
>No it doesn't. Private schools exist.
He's saying that public education being free has a crowding out affect on private schooling. They can't compete for profit because public schools are free. When there is no competition, there is no advancement. The situation is opposite in the US though, private schools out perform public schools in everything.
>>77741187
>He's saying that public education being free has a crowding out affect on private schooling
Competition bro. Let the private schools outdo pblic. I thought free market could fix everything? They can't beat the corrupt, inefficient government?
>>77738885
>The thing is i don't wan't to be responible to harness my own electricity, water....
This sums up your entire ideology. You want the fruits of someone else's labor, but when they dare to ask for more compensation than you've decided they deserve, you cry that they're oppressing you and they should be dismantled by force. It's a worldview of pure entitlement.
>>77733870
What does anarcho-capitalism have to offer to me?
>>77734068
A meme.
>>77740807
By providing public education under the false premise that it is free they are essentially removing competition. We live in a country that worships the State's cock (think Uber and the taxi niggers) and absolutely hates the free market.
I'm against PPPs, but you can't seriously say that government doesn't have a monopoly on education.
>>77741372
>Competition bro. Let the private schools outdo pblic. I thought free market could fix everything? They can't beat the corrupt, inefficient government?
The market isn't free though
>>77741372
>They can't beat the corrupt, inefficient government?
Hard to beat an opponent fairly when they get guaranteed income at gunpoint every year, while you have to convince those customers who have already been robbed to spend what money they have left for a duplicate, if better, service.
>>77733870
Anarchy cannot work. Especially in a country with so many niggers
>>77741187
One things libertarians tend to miss is that there are all kinds of social benefits to having an educated populace.
The market might not necessarily demand that every single individual learn to read. However there are tons of social benefits to having a literate populace. The same could be said of mathematics, or history.
These extraneous benefits are not necessarily measured in terms of each individual, but rather the change in the behavior of the group as a whole. This is why things such as public schools exist. People are less likely to commit crimes, more likely to create and discover and invent, they will be more sociable with their neighbors and more friendly for the shared schooling experience.
Because an individual is paying for the education in the market economy, the market economy delivers an education tailored to that individual's needs. However, that individual also exists among a group. Therefore there are certain things he must learn in order to be a compatible member of society.
Group intelligence is far superior to individual intelligence. Ask anyone involved in R&D
>>77741745
>Taxes are theft
>>77741830
On the contrary, you'll find that your nigger problem still exists precisely because of government. If not for dem programs, they'd have had to turn into productive and self sufficient members of society, or die.
>>77741505
>You want the fruits of someone else's labor, but when they dare to ask for more compensation than you've decided they deserve, you cry that they're oppressing you and they should be dismantled by force.
Source? I said i didn't to colect those things myself. I didn't said i don't want to pay for them.
Take it easy with the strawman, buddies
>>77741628
> false premise that it is free
Only autistic kids think like that. Everyone knows it's payed with tax money, you retard. I knew it when i was 10 ffs
>but you can't seriously say that government doesn't have a monopoly on education.
Private schools exist, even though it hurts your fee fees. You could argue the state as a monopoly in education curriculum
>>77741745
>they get guaranteed income at gunpoint every year
You are free to leave bro. I heard that in Somalia the gov is non existent. It might suit you
>>77742113
> If not for dem programs, they'd have had to turn into productive and self sufficient members of society
Or they would just resort to crime and gang up, like they do today
>>77742030
>Money taken through the threat of violence in exchange for services not demanded isn't theft
You're right, it's a combination of robbery and protection racket.
>>77742113
Actually if the free market has it's way, in the future the only humans that survive are the ones who merge with machines to increase their productivity.
Is this really the future you want?
If your answer is yes, then enjoy watching humanity disappear.
If your answer is no, then maybe you should reconsider the idea that a human only exists as an economic animal
>>77733870
Good job getting people to purchase your shit when anarchy just entices them to fucking steal or kill without consequence.
>>77742289
A civilized society cannot function without tax.
>>77734464
Fucking hyperfags.
>>77742015
>One things libertarians tend to miss is that there are all kinds of social benefits to having an educated populace.
But I agree with you. I just believe that private education works more effectively at providing higher quality education to the greatest amount of people.
>The market might not necessarily demand that every single individual learn to read. However there are tons of social benefits to having a literate populace. The same could be said of mathematics, or history.
Why wouldn't the markets demand literacy in some form? It's not like public schools have been very keen at doing this anyways. It doesn't take 12 years to learn how to read an write efficiently.
>People are less likely to commit crimes, more likely to create and discover and invent, they will be more sociable with their neighbors and more friendly for the shared schooling experience.
You're implying this can't be achieved by private schooling, which on average are much more conservative than public schools. Niggers commit crime regardless.
>Group intelligence is far superior to individual intelligence. Ask anyone involved in R&D
I don't even disagree with this or most of your post. It's just that I think "group intelligence" can best be created by private education. I wouldn't call the US population intelligent.
>>77742195
>didn't said i don't want to pay for them
You only want to pay what you think is acceptable. That's fine, that's what happens in every market. The problem is that you think you're entitled to something you don't want to pay for.
>free to leave
I'm going to come to your house and take your shit at the end of every month. If you don't like it, you're free to leave, because I've declared that everything you think you own is actually mine, and I'll shoot you if you disagree.
>>77742250
They resort to drug crime. There's a very easy solution to that. Stolen televisions and jewelry are not a lucrative criminal venture, and cannot sustain nearly as large a population of useless niggers. Especially when they get shot.
>>77742289
What you should actually do is function on the important questions.
How would money function in an anarchy?
How would law?
How would the military?
How would roads, schools and other essential infrastructure?
Who would regulate pollution, acceptable standards for food, water, dangerous chemicals, etc?
>>77742615
>I just believe that private education works more effectively at providing higher quality education to the greatest amount of people.
Source other then your fee fees?
Pragmatism, embracing the NAP is unhealthy. Further more I believe science should be applied to the human race, what this means is Darwinism and forcing things on people.
Economically i'm liberal/libertarian for the most part. I agree more or less with Hayek or friedman on most economic matters.
However I'm a fascist when it comes to state power, I also believe Atavism and then progressivism is needed.
Further I believe certain industries and markets shouldn't exist. prostitution should be banned, Tabacco should be banned, there should be no recreational drugs. So on and so forth.
The State should exist and should have all power, but there should be local bodies and vice agents. Local small government headed by a strong dictator with full absolute power and lower agents believe him and channels to influence the people and for the people to influence the state is best. This is the value of corporatism/fascist syndicalism. (Not to mention the effiency of it.)
>>77742326
>enjoy watching humanity disappear.
It is. Define humanity, and justify why that particular formulation of "humanity" is desirable over all others.
>>77742506
So sayeth anon, knower of what is necessary for a civilized society.
>>77733870
I belive in small government but anarchism is just irrational
>>77742615
Private schools would be a choice.
A parent could choose to not send their kids to school because it would be too expensive or maybe they want them to work at their farm.
Way less people would be educated and that would create an aristocracy in the end that would end up accomplishing way less.
>>77742758
>You only want to pay what you think is acceptable.
Of course.
>that's what happens in every market.
Like the pharmaceutics?
>inb4 muh r&d
>The problem is that you think you're entitled to something you don't want to pay for.
Source? You can read trough the interweebs and directly into my head?
>I'm going to come to your house and take your shit at the end of every month.
But the thing is that the state provides numerous srvices that you probably never refuse.
But i am arguing with a fucking kid..
>They resort to drug crime.
Not just
>>77742326
Fascism has the answer, we unite central planning with the free market capitalism via the corporate syndicates.
Yes taylorism is the answer, yes transhumanism is inevitable as is full automation of all physical labor. and these should be looked at as positive things.
Man is more than an economic animal, but the economy surely has an influence.
>>77738150
Lmao
I actually can't tell who this is trying to make fun of
>>77743214
>we unite central planning with the free market capitalism
wat?
This thread is triggering me
you are violating the NAP
>>77738098
All this strawmaning...
>>77742763
These issues are on the forefront of anarchist scholarship, because they're the objections that immediately come to mind and as such need some practical solutions (though any proposed solutions are just that, since it is entirely un-anarchist to dictate what should happen, and there may well be solutions that nobody has yet thought of). A brief outline:
-privately issued currency, likely hard but possibly fiat
-competing courts and security services attempting to attract the largest client base and tailoring their laws to that end
-PMCs, possibly community initiatives for common defense
- private and competing "essential" services, like exist now
- private testing agencies, like UL and others
>>77742820
Competition. Private schools would compete for more students with lower prices and better quality creating accessibility for even the most poor.
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/yes-private-schools-beat-public-schools
>A parent could choose to not send their kids to school
This already happens though. You can just pretend you're homeschooling your child. Public education has failed the US. If it was successful we would not need to go to college just to get anywhere in life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aeH4vB37l0
>>77733870
>AnCap society
>Commies, Stormfags and Muslims by up a bunch of private armies
>Use them to institute states and go to war with each other
How do you avoid this from happening?
>>77742195
Mata-te seu cabrão de merda.
I am because it's the most smug ideology
>>77743670
you can't
>>77743657
>Competition
And why is competition a good thing no matter what?
>Private schools would compete for more students with lower prices and better quality creating accessibility for even the most poor.
And why aren't they doing this nowadays?
>This already happens though.
But not often. Only very sparsingly. And most of the tims the kid is either a retard or a autist.
>Public education has failed the US. If it was successful we would not need to go to college just to get anywhere in life.
Literall a kid or a high school dropout.
>>77743774
>mad
Pic related
>>77743974
It's anarchism. You can't dictate what i do with other consensual people in my own private property. What are you, a commie?
>>77743323
The corporate syndicates (corporate meaning guilds more or less, not corporations) are built up of the workers+the business owners. These two groups peacefully come up with industrial policies, plans and the like.
The state is the referee.
Basically ownership and the like is still private, however the corporations can decide when the nation begins to industrialize, mechanize, become automated and so on and so forth.
They also agree on where to buy, what groupings of private bodies create the best synergy for the entire nation and so on and so forth.
Basically class collaboration is used, the benefit and efficient aspect of central planning is that singular tasks can be done very efficiently due to it being planned out and commanded.
The weakness of central planning is that it doesn't have the capability for perpetual and daily growth and the efficient allocation of resources that capitalism has.
By giving the corporate syndicates power you get the efficiency of both, because ownership is still private. It should also be mentioned that this allows true meritocracy. Actual work will enable you to gain more money. No longer will you compete in an unfair global market.
Further more the corporate syndicates will assist in hands on education and will be a great source for finding jobs to who ever seeks them out. There shall be a corporate syndicate for each profession, each job.
In this is also efficient regulation.
>>77743183
>Source
Your problem with free markets.
>state provides numerous srvices that you probably never refuse
Suppose you go into a shop for milk, and the shopkeeper puts a milk carton in your basket and informs you that if you do not buy this milk (and only this one, not any other that might be in the store), he will use violence against you. This is a voluntary exchange in your eyes?
>>77736595
>trespassing should be legal because "abuses"
>>77744082
>And why is competition a good thing no matter what?
Because without competition there would be no reason to lower prices. If McDonalds doesn't have to compete for better employees by giving them more wages or benefits, then they never will.
>And why aren't they doing this nowadays?
Because it's very hard to compete when the government is taxing you and offering free schooling.
>But not often. Only very sparsingly. And most of the tims the kid is either a retard or a autist.
Making it illegal to send your child to school is hardly enforceable.
>Literall a kid or a high school dropout.
Not an argument
>>77743586
>-privately issued currency, likely hard but possibly fiat
There would be a million different currencies that are not stable in any way.
>-competing courts and security services attempting to attract the largest client base and tailoring their laws to that end
Laws need to be the same for everyone in a community, otherwise it just wouldn't work and everyone would end up doing what they want.
>-PMCs, possibly community initiatives for common defense
Most people probably would not pay for a PMC because war is very expensive and today people in rich countries don't really see it as a constant danger, the PMC would end up being small and unable to compete with actual government armies.
>- private and competing "essential" services, like exist now
Schools need to be mandatory, they wouldn't be if all of them were private and there were no laws to enforce it. There are some infrastructure people simply don't care enough about like dams, ports, etc. If someone in a community decided not to pay to maintain a dam that prevents a flood, what could you do to force them?
>- private testing agencies, like UL and others
What's to stop companies from bribing or just not using those private testing agencies. Also monopolies.
>>77734478
>>77744171
I'm not an anarcho-capitalist. The fact that Russia could buy a bunch of private armies in an anarchist society and become the de facto government is one of the biggest flaws of anarcho-capitalism.
>>77743586
I can build a state out of anarchist principles
For example: everyone has the right to freedom of association. Let's say a group of people like being around each other, and choose to go off and live together independently, building a wall to keep everyone else they don't like out. Is this acceptable? Yes it is.
Living together, there are many things that they can't do individually, and so they cede to a larger organization. The upkeep of the roadways. The control of pests such as mosquitos. The control over who gets let into the community. Since these issues affect everyone, there needs to be some adjudication such that everybody gets a voice and a vote in their resolution.
So you see, these people have formed on their own a rudimentary "nation". They have a government, they have borders, they have law and order. And yet they haven't violated any libertarian principles.
As you explore further, you will keep adding on to the powers that the community needs to cede to the central authority. For example, the defense of the borders against aggression. There also needs to be standards of public decency and conduct so that children can be safely raised in the community.
There are also economic concerns that are better managed by the government. For example, it's inefficient to have a different plumbing company build it's own system of pipes to each house. Therefore the community needs to come together and decide which company will provide water to their houses, and what standards this company will be held to.
This is about the time you wake up and learn that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the concept of a government.
>>77735022
>sir, this is an olive garden
Gets me every time. Monarchy and syndicates are best. Old ways.
>>77744821
My friend, don't despair
WW3 will change a lot of things
>>77744821
The republic divides us, the monarchy would unite us.
>>77744240
>Your problem with free markets.
So we have a internet psychologist, who can red inbetwenn the lines
Yes i have a problem with utopias.
>Suppose
But i don't need to suppose. You use the benefit of state funded healthcare, safe, police patrolled streets, nice roads, education.
But you don't want to pay for it. Tells quite perfectly who is the gibs me dat
>>77744295
By the time those people startd to trespass it would be too late
>>77744465
>Because without competition there would be no reason to lower prices.
People are happy with low prices bro. Happy people like the gov. People who like the gov do not want to kill them, and pardon their transgressions. There is always reason to make things cheaper.
>Because it's very hard to compete when the government is taxing you and offering free schooling.
The gov is also funding private schools heavily bro
>>77744495
>million different currencies that are not stable in any way.
This was not an issue in the past, before legal tender laws were created. Would you use a currency nobody else used? Do you use Dogecoin right now to pay for shit? Why not? Also, with hard currency, it doesn't really matter what the picture on the note is, so long as it's redeemable in specie.
>everyone would end up doing what they want
How many people support murder? How many international legal systems (which are not centrally governed, recall) allow theft and rape?
>compete with actual government armies
Neither Liechtenstein nor Costa Rica have armies. How do they compete?
>Schools need to be mandatory
What kind, and why?
>What's to stop companies from bribing
What's to stop them bribing governments?
>or just not using those private testing agencies
Consumers who don't like poison in their food or their houses collapsing.
>>77744821
I never got the joke, but americans like this. Could you explain me?
>>77745298
>Neither Liechtenstein nor Costa Rica
They are irrelevant and suck major power cocks. America could not afford that
>>77745321
>like this
I mean the olive garden comic
>>77744512
What's the conversion rate from internets to (you)s? Are internets even legal tender anymore?
>>77745321
Olive Garden is an Italian restaurant chain. They offer "free" and "unlimited" breadsticks with entree orders. The joke is that libertarians are so autistic, they conflate marketing with socialism.
Human beings are not fundamentally individuals
Human beings are tribes. If you take an individual out of his tribe, he will be despondent. He won't be able to reproduce with someone who shares his gene pool. He won't be able to live in a cultural setting which complements his genes or his upbringing. He will be living a life alone amongst strangers.
Take a German accountant and plop him in ancient Egypt. He will be the lesser, like a bicycle without wheels, like a head without a body. A piece separated from the whole.
Unlike an individual, a tribe is able to reproduce. A tribe is able to grow and expand and become infinitely powerful. A tribe is able to defend itself against the overwhelming might of other tribes.
Libertarians just don't understand human beings
All politics are racial. All politics are tribal
>>77733870
It has been put forth by many theorists that classical liberalism in all its doctrine is indeed, the only moral sort of ideology to exist. And while the respect of property rights and the non agression principle are and will be for a very long time, staples of what keeps our civilization together, there are factors that are indeed not taken care of. What are these factors? The easily distinguishable factor of the social happiness and identity as a means to judge the success or failure of a state or nation. Happiness is a subjective term, and classical liberalism and libertarianism alike claim that it is the duty of each individual to seek what happiness is for him, This is where I digress.
Libertarianism allows for all cultural forms of expression, and beliefs, as long as they have been sanctioned to respect the before mentioned NAP and property rights. This is mistaken. First of all, in a utopic anarchic or libertarian social order where there are those whose mere political existence is to destroy private property through expropriation, violating the natural property laws held sacrosaint by libertarians (communists and moslems).
The second is of course, that those who pertain to religions where it is supreme doctrine of their gods and messiahs to go against the very meaning and significance of a libertarian social order, that these cannot co exist. Libertarians argue that there can be no steps to stop these festering ideas of degeneracy with state sanctioned forcé, nor can there be any attempts against their property or their physical well being. Whilst these other groups share a core belief and cultural, spiritual, and kin like relationships (communists in their communist manifestó, moslems in their quoran), their growth in numbers will significantly increase, and their natural group think methods of reaction will one day be too much to contain, should they rebel against the basic laws of a libertarian social order.
>>77745869
this
>>77746035
This is the folly of libertarians, as when there is nothing other then language and their own individualistic pursuits of happiness for citizens to share, they are unable to cooperate voluntarily in a deeper manner then just reaching agreements through contracts. They become cold, numb, distant, separated and without a sense of unity nor pride.
Organizations and religions whose main objective is to destroy a libertarian social order simply cannot co exist within a free society. The same is not true of Christian or mormons, as these religions have a history in the modern world to not violate property rights or to go against the freedom of others. They have a history of disagreeing of course, and passing legislation that would indeed inhibit certain groups from some individual liberties, but they do not have any discernible history in the modern west of committing acts of terrorism or violent damages to property rights, as communists and moslems have. So how can a libertarian social order compete or even co exist in the long run with groups of individuals whose sole purpose is to destroy everything the libertarian social order has tried to preserve? It cannot. A people with no spirit, with no common belief or identity to bind them, will fall to those who do, thus rendering property rights and the non agression principle, useless.
Because capitalism is a meme.
>>77745514
>They are irrelevant and suck major power cocks.
So why does nobody invade them and take their shit? After all, any land without military defense must necessarily be invaded according to statists.
>>77746405
Becasue there is nothing to take that they aren't already taking. Liechstein is a small city, ffs.
Costa Rica is basically a american protectorate
Because anarchist societies always fall to those with hierarchies.
>>77744512
wow i've not seen that file before
thanks anon, pretty hot
here, take this (You) in exchange
>>77745518
those images have files in them you doofus
>>77733870
Because I want to have a wife and kids.
>>77745298
>This was not an issue in the past, before legal tender laws were created. Would you use a currency nobody else used? Do you use Dogecoin right now to pay for shit? Why not? Also, with hard currency, it doesn't really matter what the picture on the note is, so long as it's redeemable in specie.
Topkek, money was always backed by a state. Hard money is not ideal, it can be manipulated very easily and poses several problems, including unpredictable inflation or deflation. This is the main problem with an ancap society.
Money.
>How many people support murder? How many international legal systems (which are not centrally governed, recall) allow theft and rape?
Those are very general issues. Law needs to be very specific. Is a company allowed to sell unsafe cars? Is a person allowed to play loud music at night? Things that aren't obvious. What happens when 2 popular security companies in 1 city have a minor difference in laws?
>Neither Liechtenstein nor Costa Rica have armies. How do they compete?
They are very small countries that aren't worth the diplomatic repercussions to invade.
>What kind, and why?
>>77742015
>What's to stop them bribing governments?
Laws, bribery is not as common as you think in 1st world countries. Also not an argument.
>Consumers who don't like poison in their food or their houses collapsing.
Most consumers aren't smart.
Any anarchist society would end up with a government, be it a corporation, a private army, a community council or anything else.
>>77746862
>bribery is not as common as you think in 1st world countries.
Says the leaf living above a country who does so through companies "assisting" presidential campaigns.
>>77746862
well said. Bumping to see the answer to this
>>77747646
>I don't know how to answer, so i will just insult his country, HAHA, that will show him, even thou i have glass roofs
>>77747646
It exists it is just not as common as in 2nd or 3rd world countries or as it would be in a society where it is no law.
The problem with the US and most other modern countries is the private control of the money system.
Whoever controls the creation of money in a society effectively controls that society.
>>77745174
>People are happy with low prices bro. Happy people like the gov. People who like the gov do not want to kill them, and pardon their transgressions. There is always reason to make things cheaper.
You're assuming competition extends only into goods and services. Competition also entails employment. Businesses compete to get employees. The businesses that offer higher wages and benefits are more appealing to workers. So if another business wants employment as well, they would have to compete in what they offer to employees.
>The gov is also funding private schools heavily bro
Which is wrong.
>>77747903
>I don't know jack shit about what was said, but feel the need to argue.
I like some of your posts Lefty /pol/, but that one's just sad. I was saying the leaf is idiotic because the US uses bribery EVERY FUCKING ELECTION.
>>77748119
>Whoever controls the creation of money in a society effectively controls that society.
That is a true statement, but these countries also typically have some form of democracy. With democracy comes new leaders who will do a lot of shady shit to control a nation. Now, with great power comes great responsibility, and major companies have a lot of power through currency, and can shape politicians to their whim, causing these politicians to push to assist these companies in every way possible.
>>77748119
>Whoever controls the creation of money in a society effectively controls that society.
I agree, which is why we need to abolish the Fed
>>77746552
>Liechstein is a small city, ffs.
And as a yuropoor, you know how valuable land is there.
>protectorate
You're just dancing around the issue. Tell me why heavily armed nations do not conquer defenceless ones, when they would face literally no resistance. They're already paying for their militaries, so there would be no loss for these countries.
>>77746862
>>77746862
>Hard money is not ideal, it can be manipulated very easily and poses several problems, including unpredictable inflation or deflation.
This is the exact opposite of what happens. Gold is difficult to manipulate because it's a physical and scarce good. It is difficult to deflate or inflate because it is a physical and scarce good. It is precisely with fiat money that you have the problems you mention.
>always backed by a state
When it was redeemable in specie, paper was irrelevant because it had fixed exchange rates. And when coinage was still being used, foreign coins were readily exchanged with no issue, because gold is gold regarsless of whose face was on the back.
>What happens when 2 popular security companies in 1 city have a minor difference in laws?
They will likely negotiate and compromise, because going to war over a trifling thing is bad for business.
>aren't worth the diplomatic repercussions to invade
Why would these repercussions disappear when it's a small anarchist society?
>bribery is not as common as you think in 1st world countries
Why do you think it would suddenly be common in a 1st world anarchist society? It is absolutely an argument, since we are comparing anarchism to statism, so it one is not better than the other in a certain regard, we must look at other regards to see which is superior.
>would end up with a government
Anarchist societies are built on the rejection of states. The only way your scenario would happen is if it was not populated by anarchists.
>>77749310
It's not bribery because it's legal. When it0s legal its called a voluntary transaction amoung 2 consenting partners
>>77749105
> So if another business wants employment as well, they would have to compete in what they offer to employees.
Or they expand their labour pool, like they are doing now
>Which is wrong.
Maybe in your country
>>77750238
Nigga, you ain't even trying.
>>77750160
>Tell me why heavily armed nations do not conquer defenceless ones, when they would face literally no resistance.
They would, occupation is no small task.
Also it's called international preassure. There would be absolutely no reason to allow such a break in international treaties just to get a worthless piece of land.
Also There was never a war betwenn 2 modern democracies.
>>77733870
Because we need rich people to create jobs and the wealth will trickle down
>>77750600
So wage is bribery?
>Try harder bro
>>77733870
Because I'm not 16
>>77751071
Congrats on turning 17
>>77750840
They're bribing politicians out of political interest. That's not wage in the slightest. The "transactions" between companies and politicians have very substantial impacts and really only play to that company's interests.
>>77750657
And so we come to the answer. Everything you said applies in the case of an anarchist society in the same geopolitical context, but doubly so because anarchist societies can pose no threats and can therefore never be responsible for international disputes that lead to war.
>>77749908
Basically.
It is not however just any large company it is the banks and the Fed which control the money.
>>77750160
Gold is very easy to manipulate.
All you have to do is control the quantity of it. Allow gold to circulate when you want money to be cheap. Stockpile gold when you want money to be expensive. Also gold is used for industry and other things. Not ideal.
>When it was redeemable in specie, paper was irrelevant because it had fixed exchange rates.
Paper was rarely redeemed. It was only convertible on paper and for political reasons.
>And when coinage was still being used, foreign coins were readily exchanged with no issue, because gold is gold regarsless of whose face was on the back.
No. Gold money made out of the same amount of gold that its face value was extremely rare.
>They will likely negotiate and compromise, because going to war over a trifling thing is bad for business.
What if it was a major conflict? Wouldn't it upset the customers?
>Why would these repercussions disappear when it's a small anarchist society?
There would not be a major military or economic force to stop anyone from invading. Costa Rica would be most likely defended by the US. Liechtenstein would most likely be defended by the EU. Also it is would be very difficult to invade without the EU assistance because logistics.
>>77751504
True, that is why companies should not be allowed to fund politician campaigns imho
>>77751804
> Everything you said applies in the case of an anarchist society in the same geopolitical context
No it does not. USA is not a "worthless piece of land". It's by far the richest place on earth. It's coveted by the rest of the world.
And if america retreated from the world stage, international treaties would almost be void, since the balance of power would suddenly change.
>anarchist societies can pose no threats
That is not how it works. You take what you can bro.
>can therefore never be responsible for international disputes that lead to war.
>he thinks war justifications ae the reasons nations involve in war
So you also believe the poles were genociding Germans before Hitler demaded Danzing?
>>77733870
It is not suitable in the current political climate.
>>77734023
Bumping Uncuck.
>>77750160
>Why do you think it would suddenly be common in a 1st world anarchist society? It is absolutely an argument, since we are comparing anarchism to statism, so it one is not better than the other in a certain regard, we must look at other regards to see which is superior.
Ok. Corruption in an anarchist society would be legal. Therefore it would be likely worse than any 1st or 2nd world countries. There is nothing stopping a company from running a completely legal monopoly enforced by military force or a protection racket, or extortion. It would be legal to steal people's money you just have to have a bigger force than the local law enforcement agency.
>Anarchist societies are built on the rejection of states. The only way your scenario would happen is if it was not populated by anarchists.
So your society would require a complete reeducation of the entire world population so not a single community ends up with different morals.
The problem of schools comes in again. You would have to have schools to educate every single person that way or your anarchist society wouldn't last a generation. And even then some people would end up being against anarchism. How do you stop that?
>>77744821
>monarchies
>ancaps
>fascist
Whats up with virgins and these memepolitics?
>>77750904
As opposed to what?
Do you think things were better before the industrial revolution?
Capitalism indisputably provided massive improvements to quality of life.
>>77752902
No, technological improvement did.
Capitalism only provided a superior quality of life to the masses once welfare was massively expanded, after ww2
>>77752567
People think changing the type of government will change things. Democracy works relatively well if it has power. Currently it does not because money creation and control is in private hands. Monarchists and fascists believe that centralizing power will bring improvements which it might because it will nationalize money creation. Ancaps believe that the free market will fix everything because the current government is too restrictive.
>>77752348
Without government, this wouldn't be a problem.
>>77752324
>Allow gold to circulate when you want money to be cheap. Stockpile gold when you want money to be expensive
This was only done by governments.
Regular people (and firms) cannot "allow" gold to circulate because any gold that is mined must be spent in order to recoup the expenses incurred. There is no incentive to stockpile (recall that investment is not stockpiling), and every incentive to spend. Also, its uses in industry affect the price accordingly. Those uses are relatively minor compared to the amount of gold used as currency, however.
>Paper was rarely redeemed
At first, it was. Eventually and unfortunately, yes. It certainly didn't help that laws passed to forbid the redemption of paper. This is hardly a testament to the utility of governments.
>face value
I was talking about actual quantity of gold in the coin. Face value was as irrelevant as country of origin, exchange rates accounted for this as the true mass of gold was the real measure of a coin's relative worth.
>What if it was a major conflict?
Then they would fight, just like governments but for better reasons. It is incredibly unlikely that it would come to this.
>defended
Why, for both countries? Why would those defenders not invade too? Why is it a certainty that the US and EU would invade our anarchist society in the same scenario?
>>77752348
>. USA is not a "worthless piece of land"
I made no claims that anarchism would work flawlessly and in every corner of the world.
>You take what you can bro.
And yet in the same breath, you say that some don't take even though they can.
>>77752324
I'm not saying that it's one large company, I'm just avoiding using plural adjectives to simplify things. You that banks are businesses though, right?
>>77752547
>It would be legal to steal people's money you just have to have a bigger force than the local law enforcement agency.
This is the case right now. What's your point?
>schools
You do not need schools to teach children not to murder or steal, that is achievable through very basic parenting.
>>77753150
You can't distinguish the two. Capitalism and free enterprise allowed for said technological improvement.
Things like Bessemer steel, cheap kerosene, gasoline, automobile, electric lighting, and countless other inventions were marketed and implemented due to the freedom allowed to market forces.
If you can't see that, you're simply blind.
Quality of life was improved for the masses decades prior to World War II.
What's more is the welfare programs you applaud are deeply flawed
They fail to raise the impoverished out of poverty, totally ineffective.
More pertinent, however, is the political capital that comes with the program.
With the power of welfare programs, bureaucrats have a tool with which they guarantee votes from those who have become dependent on the entitlements.
It's a destructive force, entrenching poverty as well as the status of political elites.
You're an idealist, and a historically retarded one at that.
I just feel like ANCAP is this new "hottest" meme that millennials got into
>hehe free market Xd I'am so above any of those trashes that don't understand ANCAP
>It's not like its totally fucking dumb idea and will never be implemented in any relevant country in real world.
>>77733870
Fake ideal, it becomes an oligarchy the moment someone gets more capital than others
>>77754141
>you say that some don't take even though they can.
In my country we have a saying that oportinity makes a thief. Most people don't steal and such because they fear the consequences of getting caught
>>77753927
>Regular people (and firms) cannot "allow" gold to circulate because any gold that is mined must be spent in order to recoup the expenses incurred. There is no incentive to stockpile (recall that investment is not stockpiling), and every incentive to spend. Also, its uses in industry affect the price accordingly. Those uses are relatively minor compared to the amount of gold used as currency, however.
Banks can stockpile gold to change the value of money. This makes them the ruler of your ancap society.
>I was talking about actual quantity of gold in the coin. Face value was as irrelevant as country of origin, exchange rates accounted for this as the true mass of gold was the real measure of a coin's relative worth.
No it was not. The value of a currency is what you can purchase with it.
>Then they would fight, just like governments but for better reasons. It is incredibly unlikely that it would come to this.
Sure.
>Why, for both countries? Why would those defenders not invade too? Why is it a certainty that the US and EU would invade our anarchist society in the same scenario?
It is not a certainty, however if the anarchist society became large enough and rich enough and had no reasonable defensive mechanisms it would end up being conquered.
>>77754182
I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just that there is a difference between companies that actually produce things and banks that mostly just leech from the wealth of a society.
>>77754476
>You can't distinguish the two
Yes you can bro. USSR was not capitalism, at least western style, and it saw major technological improvements
>Quality of life was improved for the masses decades prior to World War II.
Again, due to tecnhological advances, not capitalism.
>What's more is the welfare programs you applaud are deeply flawed
They are what separate many families from hunger.
>They fail to raise the impoverished out of poverty
Welfare is meant to keep the people who are having a bad time from falling in outright poverty, and to keep the poor from starving. It's the way our capitalist society found to redistribute wealth.
>With the power of welfare programs, bureaucrats have a tool with which they guarantee votes from those who have become dependent on the entitlements.
Source to this
>inb4 democrats and niggers
>>77739952
>REAL socialism (never yet existed)
kek
>>77754466
>This is the case right now. What's your point?
Muh taxes are theft meme again.
>You do not need schools to teach children not to murder or steal, that is achievable through very basic parenting.
A political and economical ideology is not a basic thing. You are still not explaining how your anarchist society would enforce the absence of government. Eventually a government would form. It could be the corporation that supplies all the food and water. It could be the bank creating all your money. It could be the private schools teaching all your children.
>>77733870
Because I don't want to be an unwashed sperglord wearing torn up rock-n-rollish jackets with pins on them
>>77733870
>>77755184
Marxist socialism never existed, only some nations relatively close, like USSR, Tito yuguslavia, Cuba...
>>77750361
But the "protection" exhibited here is a voluntary agreement. What stops them from cutting the deal
>>77755134
>stealing from law-abiding citizens is more moral than letting people who can't afford to live die naturally
wew
>>77736402
>typical statist
I dont agree with it, let's ban it
>>77755337
>national socialism
>economical system
And they call me the historical retard
>>77755508
>people will just lie down and die
Well, you guys are sheltered autists...
>>77755605
>doesn't understand a bad joke
>>77755675
So you think that stealing money to appease people who can't or won't provide their own living, because you're afraid of them becoming rowdy, is moral?
W E W
E E E
W E W
>>77733870
Because I'm neither a retard, autist or sociopath.
>>77754906
I get what you were saying now.
>>77733870
Fuck that. I guess, if we lived in a truly utopian society I would be an anarcho-socialist- but I understand that anarchism is general doesn't particularly work becuase that the idea that we can all get along without force is an inherently flawed idea. When it comes down to it I'm a democratic-socialist, we need some force to stop people from being abused and taken advantage of.
>>77755134
>USSR was not capitalism, at least western style, and it saw major technological improvements
And it had enormous infrastructural and logistical difficulties implementing those advances and providing consumers a market to utilize them.
Not to mention any of their technology was impactful on the scope which American inventions were, that's a fact.
Did the USSR have anything comparable to the automobile? Or electric lighting? Of course not, quit your delusion.
>Again, due to technological advances, not capitalism.
You cannot assert this without addressing all of the revolutionary technology introduced by industrialists.
>They are what separate many families from hunger.
It keeps them in destitution and generates a culture of entitlement.
>Welfare is meant to keep the people who are having a bad time from falling in outright poverty, and to keep the poor from starving.
I don't give a damn what it's "meant" to do, I care about the tangible effect that it's had which is undoubtedly a net negative.
This point only serves to prove you're an idealist.
>Source to this
>inb4 democrats and niggers
Those are both perfectly valid examples, and your inb4 doesn't negate that, sorry to say.
The African American demographic is arguably the best example.
After sixty years of affirmative action being expanded, their culture is still plagued with poverty and crime. The program has been totally ineffective.
Why? Because by creating a society dependent on entitlements, they are guaranteed votes for those who vow to continue and expand upon them.
It's quite simple, really. You're willfully ignorant if you can't see it.
>>77755675
>things that trigger statists
>>77755460
The army that the king bought with their money.
>>77755786
>who can't or won't provide their own living
Not exactly. Sometimes people are just born disadvantaged. They are still my countrymen. I don't have no problem to part myself with some of my money to pay so that those countrymen who are disadvantaged do not starve, and do not resort to crime, wich would endanger me. I am a pragmatic, not a muh fee feez
>is moral
Is it moral to let people die of hunger, while possessing so much?
>>77733870
Anarchy isn't a system, it's merely the point between 2 actual systems.
>>77756769
>I don't have no problem to part myself with some of my money to pay
And because you personally are fine with that, you believe it's okay to steal from those who disagree?
>Is it moral to let people die of hunger, while possessing so much?
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything, in this scenario. Conversely, stealing that person's wealth to forcibly give it to someone else is, clearly, coercive.
So, which is worse: No coercion, or coercion? If you didn't answer 'coercion,' there is no point for us to talk, as we have incompatible views on morality and how it relates to these scenarios.
You're also only addressing people who 'have so much,' when in reality, everyone pays some form of tax.
>>77756268
>And it had enormous infrastructural and logistical difficulties implementing those advances
Because it was fucking Russia, a backwards country, that experienced a bloddy civil war, followed by a war in it's own soil that killed tens of millions of it's citizens.
>providing consumers a market to utilize them.
Becasue it was virtually embargoed my most of the world
> revolutionary technology introduced by industrialists.
You can present a handfull, but most was researched by state funding. A good example is computers
>It keeps them in destitution and generates a culture of entitlement.
>muh fee feez
Any kind of source for this?
>which is undoubtedly a net negative.
Source? What would happen if tomorrow welfare was abolished in our western world?
>Those are both perfectly valid examples
They aren't. Whites are the largest welfare users in America
>>77756334
>What Churchil says about socialism is meaningfull in any way
>>77757142
>you believe it's okay to steal from those who disagree?
>steal
>muh trigger word
Our society functions this way. You part with some of your income, and you get perks in return. I know the likes of you. You want the perks without paying for them. If tomorrow you are fired for bullshit by your boss, you will apply for unemployment subsides.
If you don't want to pay taxes, then you can't use any of the state services and infrastructure. Go live to Somalia.
>muh coercion
My morals are still derived from Christianity, not some lone wolf autistic shit
>>77757647
>If you don't want to pay taxes, then you can't use any of the state services and infrastructure
I would never work another day in my life at a 'real job' if I didn't have to pay property tax. I don't 'want the benefits' of taxation, I want to be left alone.
>My morals are still derived from Christianity
You must've missed the 'thou shalt not steal' part, then, dingus.
>>77738192
>Why do corporations feel entitled to my nation educated workforce? Let them educate their own workers!
The vast majority of corporate jobs do train their own workers; education rarely prepares people to work a specific job these days.
>>77733870
Well... On one hand I fantasize about working as a Shadow Runner mercenary for a corporate army, but on the other hand, I'd rather not live in Somalia 2.0
>>77757266
>Because it was fucking Russia, a backwards country, that experienced a bloddy civil war, followed by a war in it's own soil that killed tens of millions of it's citizens.
Notice how the socialist quickly moves the goalpoast after his point is refuted; a common tactic.
The USA was largely undeveloped and had experienced a devastating civil war of its own. A culmination of factors provided by laissez faire allowed for population growth and technological advancement.
>Becasue it was virtually embargoed my most of the world
Ah, even more goalpost moving. So you concede that quality of life in socialist USSR was paltry relative to western nations.
Do we need to get into why those embargoes were in place? Delve into the atrocities sustained under socialist regimes?
I'm sure you can find an excuse for that too.
>You can present a handfull, but most was researched by state funding. A good example is computers
If you want to reduce the most consequential inventions of human history to "a handful" you're not only wrong but pathetically stupid.
Inventions like electric lighting, steamboat transport, automobiles, and Bessemer steel received ZERO state funding and changed the in ways never imagined.
You're really grasping at straws at this point.
>Any kind of source for this?
My eyes, you should start using yours
By no metric has welfare been a success. And you conveniently ignored the point regarding political capital.
Can't bullshit an excuse, so better ignore it I suppose.
>They aren't. Whites are the largest welfare users in America
>What is proportion
You've ousted yourself as an even bigger retard than I gave you credit for.
Of course a demographic making >60% of the population will have more gross beneficiaries than one making ~13%
However, a much greater percentage of the black population receives welfare than their white counterparts.
I can't believe I had to spell that out for you. You're totally incapable of independent thought, aren't you?
>>77758582
You cannot be seriously comparing the russian revolution and WWII after it to the american civil war.
>>77758582
>Do we need to get into why those embargoes were in place? Delve into the atrocities sustained under socialist regimes?
Geopolitics.
>>77757923
Having a house with water connection, electricity, roads at the door, police protection is using state apparatus
>I want to be left alone.
Then stop posting here and go live innawoods. Nobody will bother you there if you go deep enough, and the big bad wolf gov will not bother you.
>thou shalt not steal
Taxation is not theft "Give to Ceaser what is due to Ceaser, and to God what is due to God".
It's called the social contract
>bu-but i didn't sign any paper
Tacit approve
>>77757958
> education rarely prepares people to work a specific job these days.
So Microsoft teaches people how to read, do math accounts? Do they also train their workers from scratch?
>education rarely prepares people to work a specific job these days
Only manual jobs, and not even all of them
>>77758656
That's fair, they are qualitatively different.
The point still stands, however, that the US experienced an incredible explosion of population and technological growth as a result of laissez faire and free trade policies following the Civil War.
>>77758741
Vague and oversimplified. This means nothing.
>>77759039
Technological and economic growth happened during and after WW2 after record government spending. Even more so than during the 1890's. But that is because technological growth is exponential regardless.
>>77758951
>>77758951
>water connection
I have a well.
>electricity
I have solar.
>roads at the door
Unincorporated.
>police protection
Not my choice. If it was, I'd choose not to pay and to defend myself, since police don't do a good job at all.
'Render unto Caesar' being taken out of context, the perfect cop-out for the Christian statist cuck. The point of the passage is to not become violent over taxation alone, which you'd know if you actually read it.
What is theft? Define it for me, and then define how taxation isn't theft, assuming the taxpayer is not wanting to give willingly.
>>77758582
>The USA was largely undeveloped and had experienced a devastating civil war of its own.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Imagine Civ 5. Every perk, every good tile of lan, every advantage a civ could have? That is america.
You guys talk about America but you fail to understand that America had everything a nation could have. Even ancap would flourish in USA. America had huge, almost imcomparable, amount of natural resources, a vast unocupied land, tame neighboors, 2 oceans in it's shores. No war in it's soil, except for some minor wars and the civil one. A huge population and constantly growing...
>devastating civil war of its own
>comparing first half of the century Russia with USA civil war
>american education
>quality of life in socialist USSR was paltry relative to western nations.
The most advanced, yes.
>Delve into the atrocities sustained under socialist regimes?
I can start with capitalist ones: NAzi Germany
>I'm sure you can find an excuse for that too.
mad leaders will do mad things.
> electric lighting, steamboat transport, automobiles, and Bessemer steel
There you go, a handfull. And you already repeated them
>My eyes
My eyes tell me that if not for welfare many of my neighboors would have been starving
>By no metric has welfare been a success
It destroyed socialism
>>What is proportion
I know about proportion, but by numbers, whites are the highest consumers of welfare. And if welfare changed voting patterns, more white would vote democrat, even thou it not true. Also pic related. the gibs me dat states are the republican ones. Explain
>>77759305
And what about money? Do you use it? That is using state apparatus
>If it was
It is. You can leave.
>What is theft?
Taking something witouth you approval.
>and then define how taxation isn't theft
Because people approve it, with the exception of the autists
>>77759039
It means a lot.
If the US did not embargo the USSR and did not oppose it in the cold war the USSR, not the US would be the world power right now.
>>77759705
>Nazi Germany
>capitalist
>The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for foodstuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism.
Nice capitalist example you've got there.
>>77760035
>And what about money? Do you use it? That is using state apparatus
I am forced to use money to pay taxes. If I don't, I can be imprisoned. If I resist arrest, I'll be killed. Sounds moral to me :^)
>Because people approve it
You mean to say that everyone approves taxation? Or that theft is okay as long as a majority wants it? Because if that's the case, then other things that are 'normally' immoral have to be okay when the majority desires them, as well. If not, your beliefs are inconsistent.
>>77760035
>It is. You can leave.
That doesn't free an American from owing the U.S. taxes. The U.S. government applies citizenship tax regardless of where the income is derived.
>>77760272
I theory your taxes pay to not be molest by Chinese and North Korean soldiers.
I suppose you can take out a few soldiers with an AR 15, but what good will that do against tanks and air strikes.
>>77760272
>>77760498
You, an American, are arguing that a populace of well-armed civilians cannot resist a foreign government.
Did you know that the ships and canons used in the revolutionary war were privately owned? In the absence of a coercive government, if it became necessary, what makes you think history wouldn't repeat itself? The militia would have planes, tanks, bombs, and anything else it wanted or needed.
The idea that national defense can only be conducted with money forcefully taken from civilians is a logical fallacy.
>>77760240
>Nazi Germany
>capitalist
Explain me in waht way wasnt nazi germany capitalist?
>>The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for foodstuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism.
That is because they were gearing up for war, retard. Meanwhile the means of production where privately owned, capital was accumulated, private property existed... Nazi germany is capitalist by every standard bro
>>77760272
>I am forced to use money to pay taxes.
You are not forced to pay taxes bro. You can go live innawoodsand away fro everything. Don't worry that the irs won't appear to collect a tax on picked wild fruit ;)
>If I don't, I can be imprisoned
Of course, because you are using the perks of being a USA citizen without paying for it, i.e. being a freeloader
>If I resist arrest, I'll be killed.
You won't, but whatever...
>Sounds moral to me
>muh morals
I am a pragmatic. I won't change status quo just becasue it hurts muh feelz
>You mean to say that everyone approves taxation?
Tacit approval.
You approve them by paying them.
Same reason I'm not a delinquent.
Maybe I should be.
Fuck marality!!!!
>>77760775
>Nazi germany is capitalist by every standard
https://mises.org/library/vampire-economy
>>77760759
>You, an American, are arguing that a populace of well-armed civilians cannot resist a foreign government.
Depends on the foreign gov.
>>77760910
>discussing ancap
>using mises as a source
So when we are discussing communism i will use Pravda as a source, is that ok?
>>77760775
>Of course, because you are using the perks of being a USA citizen without paying for it, i.e. being a freeloader
What perks am I receiving? And, even if I am, it's against my will. That's like saying you should be able to hold someone at gunpoint, give them a massage, and then charge them for it.
>You are not forced to pay taxes bro.
Squatting in a national forest is definitely illegal, yes. Not sure if you're an idiot or trolling.
>You won't, but whatever...
Do you not know how it works, here? If I refused to pay any taxes, and police came to arrest me, and I told them I wouldn't go with them and I'd violently resist if they tried to force me to... yes, I'd be killed.
> I won't change status quo just becasue it hurts muh feelz
Then you're not a Christian, you're a hypocrite, and you know it.
>You approve them by paying them.
If you give a mugger your wallet, you consent to being mugged.
>>77760759
>You, an American, are arguing that a populace of well-armed civilians cannot resist a foreign government.
>Did you know that the ships and canons used in the revolutionary war were privately owned? In the absence of a coercive government, if it became necessary, what makes you think history wouldn't repeat itself? The militia would have planes, tanks, bombs, and anything else it wanted or needed.
>The idea that national defense can only be conducted with money forcefully taken from civilians is a logical fallacy.
Yes. I am realist. The uprising of Poland was very well armed, but the Germany army put down the Poles with a vengeance.
Soviets were winning in Afghanistan until the Americans started selling the Muslims stinger missiles.
So unless you can make your own anti-air missiles or get them imported by an industrial nation that is not being bombed, then well... Resistance is futile.
>>77759705
See
>>77759039
>I can start with capitalist ones: NAzi Germany
>National SOCIALIST Germany
And you say I have a poor education? Jesus Christ, man.
>mad leaders will do mad things.
Which is why we should implement a system which doesn't allow the state to exercise such authority.
>There you go, a handfull. And you already repeated them
You're only testifying to your ignorance. The impact of these inventions are unparalleled, that cannot be understated.
The fact that you're so dismissive is, I reiterate, a testament to your ignorance.
But if you're not satisfied, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions_(before_1890)#Gilded_Age_.281878.E2.80.931889.29
>My eyes tell me that if not for welfare many of my neighboors would have been starving
If not for socialist policies most of the factors contributing to their impoverishment would not be present.
>I know about proportion, but by numbers, whites are the highest consumers of welfare.
Gross recipiency isn't the main point of contention in this case. The point on subsistence still remains in the case of African Americans.
If a lower proportion of whites receive, then obviously the voting pattern is not as observable as a demographic rendered almost unanimously dependent on entitlements.
This should be obvious.
>And if welfare changed voting patterns, more white would vote democrat, even thou it not true. Also pic related. the gibs me dat states are the republican ones. Explain
That's federal spending, retard. All federal spending, not just entitlements. Using an aggregate stat like that is useless in this argument.
The principles I've stated are simple, observable truths. The amount of mental gymnastics you employ to avoid confronting them is baffling.
Open your eyes, it's plain to see that socialism is bunk.
>>77761187
Manhattan Project.
>>77761089
You're confusing two concepts, now.
1) Civil war would never be conducted conventionally, in America. When would they even use tanks or planes? It'll be like Afghanistan, but worse. They have no idea who is or isn't a rebel, and the gov't loses their subjects if they just destroy towns and cities. If anything, the vehicles would mostly be a drain on resources since they'd have almost no practical use in a rebellion.
2) As I was speaking about, privatized defense forces would exist in the absence of a military and coercive government. This has almost nothing to do with the civil war described above.
>>77760759
UK did not commit a lot of resources to take back america and the US has an extremely well defendable geographical position.
There is also a major difference between today's technology and 200 years ago. The militia would need billions of dollars in funding each year to keep up in technology with other countries.
>>77761345
What?
>>77753920
leftypol is finally rekt
>>77761372
What. I never said anything about a civil war. I'm talking about foreign powers that actually have military industrial complexes backed by governments.
That is why anarcho-capitalism fails. It fails when it gets invaded and can't produce modern equipment to defend itself.
You cannot defend a nation without taxes.
Even Thomas Jefferson knew this.
>>77761531
>You cannot defend a nation without taxes.
You're free to believe what you like. I respectfully disagree.
