https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhNtmI3PRzI
He's becoming increasingly redpilled. Why does /pol/ dislike him again?
nigger
>>68164928
ONE
bump
I watch all of his videos, and think he comes up with some really solid points.
What he doesn't seem to realize, though, is that his ideology is one that MUST rely on everyone else buying in. He wants anarcho/capitalism, and that may be the ideal, but it's an ideal that is totally unattainable.
I also don't know how he believes this at the same time as believing in things like racial identity. That seems to be in conflict.
>>68165296
If I lived in glorious ancapistan , I would totally mint all my gold coins with the one image with a dollar bill with a gun to Stefan's head in the middle .
>>68165602
Compare some of his older videos to the more recent ones and you'll see a notable change in opinion and how he approaches each topic. By that, isn't it safe to assume his ideals have, since then, also changed?
>>68164928
He's fucking borderline autistic.
Google up "de-fooing".
>>68166241
Yes, but he's still AC and he still advocates a semi-open border policy. He believes in a very optimistic ideology that exists without law and government.
I think he would do well to take a more realistic approach and work within the variables we are given rather than trying to create perfection out of the ether.
>>68166732
But then he won't get those nice shekles from the lolbetarian fanbase he has.
>>68167126
They're donations.
>>68167126
>implying other lolbergtarians don't have actual ads on their content
Kek
>>68164928
Stefan Molyneaux literally said that scientists are stupid and not doing something worthwhile because they aren't exploring how to make more money 24/7
Also
>anarcho crapitalism
>good no matter how "red pilled" it is
>>68167126
>lolbetarian fanbase
dying breed 2bh, Stefan took notice and is doing a soft transition towards the alt-right, seems to me that alot of that crowd are former libertarians
>>68164928
>indian/german accent
I like listening to Stefan demolish weak arguments as much as the next guy, but I can't listen to this one, that guy's voice sounds like a cat being swing around a room by its tail.
>>68164928
He's biased and claims to be a philosopher while spewing the, "OMG DON'T TRED ON ME RETARD" shit.
He's a contradiction to the core and is nothing more than the stereotypical /pol/ poster
>>68166732
He seems to have moved more toward acknowledging that, while AC is the most morally consistent philosophy in his mind, it cannot happen with open migration of low IQ foreigners into white countries.
>>68164928
>Muh Non-agression principle!
>Muh Philosophy!
>Muh IQ!
The guy is a goof
>>68164928
go away, nigger
Also, he begs for money 24/7
>>68169135
to be fair that has more to do with academia parasitism in general
>>68164928
NOT
>>68164928
JEW
E
W
>>68169274
Why doesn't he have a job?
>>68164928
Stefo always told all of us in the Lower Bay, someday he would Make it Big.
Of course, most of us are still waiting.
Of course, most of us are still waiting.
>Libertarianism
But he's improving lately, I find him becoming redpilled completely a possible outcome.
>>68169690
AN
>>68164928
He sounds like Kelsey Grammar; or however his name is spelled.
I don't know if Stefan is only pretending this ''free society'' utopia he talks about is realistic, or if he actually believes in it. He's intelligent enough to know it's not realistic, it's not achieveable. He evidently cares about white survival, so he must understand the merits of nationalistic autocratic systems, is the reason he doesn't advocate for that because he believes it would alienate his viewership? I have no idea.
The only thing we know is that he's intelligent enough to understand that whites are under assault, and someone as intelligent as him should understand what needs to be done to protect us.
>>68164928
Jokes aside. I like him. He's good at what he does and he seems to have fun doing it. Carry on Stefan.
>>68170195
higher res
>>68164928
>increasingly redpilled
When was he not?
Good goyim, bend down to the ceramic jew.
>>68170800
Thanks mate.
>>68168080
Yeah I can't understand what he even is saying. Honestly it sounds like the Indian is getting destroyed and can't back up his own shit.
Toilet fags will defend this and their ceramic jew master.
>>68170800
Wow that's really dark.
Daily reminder: this is the society toilet enabling faggots wants to see.
>>68164928
Athiest Darwinist Libertarian Non-aggression principle.
These things don't ideologically mesh well.
>>68164928
>>68170884
Yeah, he was always red pilled. He used to go on Joe Rogan's podcast until someone found out that hoax he was involved in and Rogan never had him on again.
>>68170800
Laughed harder than I should.
He advocates the producers of society to stand up for their rights. What could be better than that?
Who knows. I'm certainly "pretending" when I listen to him. I disagree with 9/10 of his opinions.
Still relaxing and informative in its own way though
>>68170628
He used to be a minarchist, but found the violation of the NAP to be philosophically contradictory so went full ancap.
>>68171273
What hoax?
god I fucking hate indians
>>68164928
stefan will finally turn his cult into a fight club and start a terrorist organization, mark my words
>>68164928
>i just came there to Germany ....to study ..... because India is great
>i won't contribute to Germany or India ... Shiva knows i am god's gift ... i am the best
>i don't know, but might stay there where it hits me, impregnate some other race in some country of money
RIP Germany and India
>>68173252
Nobody cares.
>>68173411
i know how many fucking times has he asked the question of money and got a rambling answer
>>68165093
NOT
>>68164928
This is why I can't stand Indians. They're arrogant as hell but they sound like broken toy robots. I've heard Amazonians speak English with a better accent and grammatic skill.
I fucking cannot stand Indians.
>>68174545
Sir please have understanding
India is now superopwer until 2030
Thank you for understanding sir
>>68173380
He's intelligent enough for that.
>>68174053
We can go about money, but actually it runs deeper. Not only Indians don't deserve education abroad, they should fix their country, they surely don't deserve money or jobs elsewhere and most importantly they going to fuck up whole gene pool of the world when there is nothing but gypsy, because robot learns whatever he sees, but robot to stupid to understand that bathing in shitty ganges is mentally insane. Are we really training these prehistoric people and make them believe they are smart? That's dangerous. Retarded cave people should be thinking they are smart, since if they get in charge of anything then we going to have even more shitty world than it already is.
>>68174545
they are gypsies m8 what do you expect.
>>68175252
No.
Gypsies have Indian roots.
Blame Persians for that. They came in and kicked out a bunch of Indians, who then finally settled in Romania.
Some came back to India after a brief stay in Egypt, hence the "gyp" term in gypsy.
I know poltards are dumb but come on.
Kek'd how he half blamed the jews for ww2.
Hi Stefan Molanew here from freedom rain radio , I hope you are all doing well XDDDDddd
Jk Stefan I love the show
Caste system=Varna system= COLOR system!
The Mahabharata, whose final version is estimated to have been completed by about 4th century CE, discusses the Varna system in section 12.181. It offers two models on Varna. The first model describes Varna as color-based system, through a character named Bhrigu, "Brahmins Varna was white, Kshtriyas was red, Vaishyas was yellow, and the Shudras' black".
His recent video about free will was garbage
Stefan knows full well that his Ancap theories are a load of useless codswallop in terms of applying them to the real world.
He is technically correct in that were we to abandon the welfare state it would of course result in less of a 'pull factor' for economic migrants, but of course you'd still need to defend your borders as you'd still be attractive to economic migrants as an economically successful society.
He's certainly becoming far more alt-right and more-or-less rationalising his real views with his commitment to anarchism, but I think his audience (to some extent myself included) are fairly sympathetic and will take a dose of realism wherever they find it.
>>68165602
He's arguing from the position opposite his ideology
>>68164928
Not an argument.
>>68164928
The problem is that the people who actually need to hear his ideas will never visit his channel. More often than not, he's "debating" a person that mostly agrees with him.
Imagine having him on an episode of BBC's Big Questions, for example.
Leave shitposting to us.
Varna (वर्ण) is a Sanskrit word which means color or class.[1][2] Ancient Hindu literature classified all humankind, and all created beings, in principle into four varnas:[1][3]
the Brahmins: priests, teachers and preachers.
the Kshatriyas: kings, governors, warriors and soldiers.
the Vaishyas: cattle herders, agriculturists, artisans[4] and merchants.[5]
the Shudras: laborers and service providers.
This quadruple division is an ancient stratification of society is not to be confused with the much more nuanced jati or "caste".[6]
The varna system is discussed in Hindu texts, and understood as idealised human callings.[7][8] The concept of Varna is generally traced to the Purusha Sukta verse of the Rig Veda, however modern scholarship believes that this verse was inserted at a later date, possibly to create a charter myth.[9]
The commentary on the Varna system in the Manusmriti is oft-cited.[10] Counter to these textual classifications, many Hindu texts and doctrines question and disagree with the Varna system of social classification.[11]
Recent scholarship suggests that the discussion of varna, as well as untouchable outcastes (people outside the varna system), in these texts does not resemble the modern era caste system in India. Patrick Olivelle, a professor of Sanskrit and Indian Religions and credited with modern translations of Vedic literature, Dharma-sutras and Dharma-sastras, states that ancient and medieval Indian texts do not support the ritual pollution, purity-impurity as the basis for varna system.[22] According to Olivelle, purity-impurity is discussed in the Dharma-sastra texts, but only in the context of the individual's moral, ritual and biological pollution (eating certain kinds of food such as meat, going to bathroom).[18] In his review of Dharma-sastras, Olivelle writes, "we see no instance when a term of pure/impure is used with reference to a group of individuals or a varna or caste".[22]
>>68175660
>Gypsies have Indian roots.
M8 they are exactly the same type of poo in loo, the indians just have russian know how to be a bit less poo in loo.
>>68176862
>The problem is that the people who actually need to hear his ideas will never visit his channel
Then spread it!
>>68165602
At what number of people does it become "unattainable", exactly? 5,000? 5,001? 5,002? 5,003?
stefanmolyneux
stefanmolyneux
>>68164928
Holy fuck, 45:43
SJW's B T F O
It was worth sitting through this parasite justifying his existence just for that.
>>68177442
You don't get it.
Imagine a nationalist revolution in Sweden tomorrow, all jews and anti-whites executed. And then suddenly they declare Stefan Molyneux the supreme leader for the next 24h, during these 24h Stefan creates his utopia society.
What happens next? NATO invades, kills all defenders, executes Stefan, reinstates globalist puppet regime.
That's what'll happen, and that's why his utopia is impossible until the entire NWO is defeated.
damn this pooinloo got throroughly btfo
>>68178003
You really think the anarchist position is "things can't happen"? Do you *really* think that's the anarchist position?
>>68178216
I'm not following what you mean.
All I meant to say is, his utopia society is literally impossible, because as long as the NWO exists, IT can't exist.
>>68177583
>>68178325
Any finite state of affairs is impossible for an indefinite amount of time extending toward infinity. Any and all of them.
>>68178188
>choose dumb person for video
>makes stephan look smart
>>68178463
You know exactly what I mean. Using fancy nonsense language doesn't change that. A militaristic, nationalist revolutionary government receiving political and military aid from Russia in Sweden is much more likely to resist subversion by the NWO for the forseeable future, than an anarcho-capitalist '' free '' society.
>>68178627
supposedly the guy was a top indian intellectual
if that guy is dumb then germany and other countries are importing worthless people
>>68178803
You're not getting the point. The point is that the "criticism" you're leveraging against anarchism can be leveraged against *ANYTHING ELSE*.
"We shouldn't have -insert ideology here- because it won't last forever."
It's not a significant point *at all* when you can apply it to every conceivable state of affairs.
>>68165093
ARGUMENT
>>68178870
The talents of STEM graduates more often than not completely fail to transfer to abstract critical thinking skills. They're austistic math-monkeys or rote learners incredibly often.
>>68165093
>>68165296
>>68165353
>>68165602
>>68165729
>>68166241
>>68166408
>>68166732
>>68167126
>>68167405
>>68167600
>>68167739
>>68168020
>>68168080
>>68168189
>>68168473
>>68168689
>>68169051
>>68169135
>>68169274
>>68169690
>>68169770
>>68169806
>>68169818
>>68169859
>>68170195
>>68170412
>>68170628
>>68170745
>>68170800
>>68170884
>>68171045
>>68171051
>>68171064
>>68171091
>>68171169
>>68171202
>>68171254
>>68171273
>>68171485
>>68171654
>>68171840
>>68172760
>>68172873
>>68173252
>>68173380
>>68173411
>>68173932
>>68174053
>>68174119
>>68174545
>>68174710
>>68174795
>>68175082
>>68175252
>>68175660
>>68176015
>>68176184
>>68176190
>>68176399
>>68176499
>>68176792
>>68176847
>>68176862
>>68177091
>>68177209
not an argument
>>68177442
>playing stupid
>>68178870
>indian intellectuals
>>68179387
>not answering a basic question
There's a meme going around that might be relevant to you.
>>68177209
ARGUMENT
>>68179363
Thanks for the (You)'s friendo but I did have an argument. That being Amazonians fresh from the stone age can speak better English than Indians and it is because Indians are subhuman. Prove me wrong.
>>68164928
>this guy can't even speak
>PHD
Fuck Indians they are almost as shit as the Chinese is actual practical scientific tasks.
>>68179415
that's the joke
>>68179249
Yes and the fact that he was there for "green energy" should lend more credence to the idea that the entire green lobby is a fucking joke
>>68178969
The argument isn't that a state should last forever. I'm arguing that it should be able to resist and outlast the current globalist, liberal capitalist system under which we live. If it can resist that system indefinetly, it can and will outlast it, as that system is on its death throes.
>>68179641
Children of Indian immigrants usually have perfect English.
Speaking a language you didn't learn during early childhood perfectly isn't a thing you ought to ever expect.
>>68179486
>give me the exact number of people at which anarcho capitalism becomes unattainable
>5000, 5001, 5002?
>basic question
If this is such a basic question why is it never asked?
Keep it up you fucking idiot
>>68179777
>a state (of affairs) should last forever
Says who? They objectively seem *not* to.
>>68179823
It's never asked because it's uncomfortable for people to answer, and violates people's preconceived notions about things they think are good or at least somehow necessary in the world, which is why you're not answering it.
>>68179917
not an argument
>>68179852
>>a state (of affairs) should last forever
That's precisely what I didn't say.
>>68179793
>Children of Indian immigrants usually have perfect English.
You've got to be fucking kidding me. Maybe you yanks got the ones with degrees and pedigree. In the UK they have their own dis n dat language and shit grammar and reduced set vocabulary. Like the guy in the vid.
>Speaking a language you didn't learn during early childhood perfectly isn't a thing you ought to ever expect.
Spoken like a truly lazy Indian coolie.
>>68179793
>Children of Indian immigrants usually have perfect English.
Wrong
>Speaking a language you didn't learn during early childhood perfectly isn't a thing you ought to ever expect.
Strawman
>>68179960
>It's never asked because it's uncomfortable for people to answer,
LOL
>uncomfortable questions are never asked
Bullshit through and through
>violates people's preconceived notions about things they think are good or at least somehow necessary in the world, which is why you're not answering it.
Strong esp you got there, and I'm the one with preconceived notions?
You're trying to be a smartass and it's much more fun not validating your logically invalid posts.
You really don't need me to explain why that question is just you playing dumb right? It's obvious to both you and me at this point.
>>68164928
he is red pilled, but extremely idealistic. also is a bit autistic at times (rude to guests, "not an argument," irrelevant titles, tax = murder, etc.)
>>68180140
So we're talking about something else completely off topic suddenly? I was talking about states of affairs, which encompass whatever you're talking about *in addition* to almost anything else. So if it's not a thing for something to last forever as a general rule for *anything*, how is it that you think a specific kind of state of affairs (the promulgation of the idea of government) is somehow magically possible to last for eternity? And you think anarchists are the delusional ones?
>>68180211
Ours are pretty nice and smart people. That's how they're viewed in the Mid-West anyway.
No it's just the case. You can't learn another language right now and be able to do the accent perfectly unless you're one out of a few hundred million rare cases that have a natural affinity for accomplishing that.
>>68180140
Don't mind it it's typical switch-bait wordcraft of the pseudo-intellectual brain.
>>68180447
stop tripcoding.
>>68180387
Strawman? What? It's a statement.
Also most immigrants in the U.S. have children who have perfect English accents - maybe not in the ethnic ghettos of your country where people don't assimilate though.
>>68180387
>uncomfortable questions are never asked
To imply I insinuated this means you think I thought I wasn't giving you the benefit of the doubt and thinking you were using "never" as an exaggeration of the idea that you don't hear it often, and instead that you meant "never" literally. Which would be utterly moronic, and I'd have to attribute to you a very low intelligence at this point.
Nothing in my posts constitute logically invalid arguments, and you won't quote me on any because there are none and you're spouting shit ;)
>>68180726
>Strawman? What? It's a statement.
Not mutually exclusive things
>Also most immigrants in the U.S. have children who have perfect English accents - maybe not in the ethnic ghettos of your country where people don't assimilate though.
Classic bullshit ad hominems and shitty grammar.
>U.S.
English accents
kill yourself.
>>68180680
Stop sucking dick and being completely unable to make a coherent argument ;)
>>68180980
It's a strawman if I misrepresent someone else's position. Saying something to someone that's not "x thinks y" where y is actually not something x thinks cannot be a strawman you fucking brainless leaf ;)
>>68165296
FUCKING (FECKING?)
>>68180447
>So we're talking about something else completely off topic suddenly?
No. I always posted about Stefans ''free society'' being completely incapable of upholding its own existence due to the circumstances in todays world, and said that a militaristic, nationalist revolutionary state on the other hand would have no problem upholding its own existence in the world we today find ourselves in. I simply stated that fact, nothing else.
And yes, you anarchists are delusional because ''anarchism'' is nothing but a meme.
>>68181251
>''free society'' being completely incapable of upholding its own existence
So we're back to my point then, which is that criticism can be leveraged against *anything*. Meaning it's *not a substantive criticism*.
>>68180954
>To imply I insinuated this
No faggot, i'm stating that you stated this.
>It's never asked because it's uncomfortable for people to answer
This DIRECTLY implies that uncomfortable questions for people are never asked. Look up logic 101.
>means you think
rest of the sentence discarded, you don't have esp.
>thinking you were using "never" as an exaggeration of the idea that you don't hear it often, and instead that you meant "never" literally.
>never can substitute for not often
You're unintelligent. That's like saying an absolute is also not absolute.
>Which would be utterly moronic, and I'd have to attribute to you a very low intelligence at this point.
Projection, bullshit ad hominem. here we go.
>Nothing in my posts constitute logically invalid arguments, and you won't quote me on any because there are none and you're spouting shit ;)
I've been quoting you this entire time you fucking idiot.
>>68181339
>which is that criticism can be leveraged against *anything*.
No it can't. Because we're talking about Stefans ''free society'' specifically being unable to uphold its own existence today in 2016. Not ''in general''. A militaristic nationalist revolutionary state would be able to uphold its own existence today in 2016.
I'm specifically talking about being able to resist attempts at subverting that society for as long as the liberal globalist capitalist system we currently live under continues to exist, do you understand that you fucking mouthbreathing retard?
>>68181384
So you *literally* meant "never" when you said that question is "never asked". Literally. Meaning when I asked it, I didn't actually ask it, since at that point it would've been a completely false statement by virtue merely of me asking it that one time. Otherwise you'd be full of shit ;)
You are one fucking *BRILLIANT* leaf, you know that? Does your mother praise you for your intelligence and reasoning skills?
>>68181022
>Stop sucking dick and being completely unable to make a coherent argument ;)
Ad hominem
>It's a strawman if I misrepresent someone else's position. Saying something to someone that's not "x thinks y" where y is actually not something x thinks cannot be a strawman you fucking brainless leaf ;)
By stating something to someone in rebuttal to their arguments that was not brought up in their original arguments and then discrediting that thing, you are making a strawman.
>Speaking a language you didn't learn during early childhood perfectly isn't a thing you ought to ever expect.
he didn't say this was true, yet you're rebutting it in response to his post. Strawman.
>>68181594
>insults are ad hominem
How many dicks have you sucked today?
And how many dicks are you sucking right now?
>>68181573
>So you *literally* meant "never" when you said that question is "never asked". Literally. Meaning when I asked it, I didn't actually ask it, since at that point it would've been a completely false statement by virtue merely of me asking it that one time. Otherwise you'd be full of shit ;)
I'm speaking of other than you asking it, you fucking idiot.
>>68181594
>By stating something to someone in rebuttal to their arguments that was not brought up in their original arguments and then discrediting that thing, you are making a strawman
So when I say "I like that dress by the way Ashley" while discussing something with her, I'm strawmanning.
A b s o l u t e l y
B r i l l i a n t
>>68181682
At this point you've completely descended into youtube comments tier. Start reading some actual books on the subjects you're talking about.
>>68181838
Oh look another strawman.
>>68181798
Oh are you? I wonder why I was asked the question before I ever came up with it then? Or why other people ask it all the time outside the snow-nigger colony?
>>68181909
>literally quote you
>strawman
>>68180614
>Ours are pretty nice and smart people
Pooinloo detected.
>You can't learn another language right now and be able to do the accent perfectly unless you're one out of a few hundred million rare cases
That's bullshit. An average actor can master an accent in a month.
I don't watch him nearly enough to know the meme.
Can someone explain why everyone spams "not an argument" in threads related to him?
>>68181971
>An average actor can master an accent in a month
Not for a language they didn't learn when they were a child. Try learning Mandarin and speaking it with a perfect accent. Or google how many people "do".
Indian accents are honestly the worst.
>>68181917
>personal anecdotes
It's statistically 0. It's not a basic question and not fundamental to any discussion.
People do not ask that question all the time, at least certainly not in any intellectual forum because it has obvious flaws in it.
>>68181951
The quote wasn't the strawman, it was your "rebuttal" of it. Implying i meant the quote is another strawman or you just don't know what a strawman is.
Name one book you've read in your life.
>>68182105
Again, nonsense. Just because you have no listening skill to pick up intonation, doesn't mean everyone else is a fuckwit.
>>68177442
Around 150.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
>>68182209
>"never" doesn't actually mean something never happens, only that people who I don't like who actually posit instances of refutation to that "never" don't actually have those instances count against my super-special "never"
K
E
K
>>68182209
>it has obvious flaws in it
K K K
E E E
K K K
YOU HAVEN'T NAMED ONE YOU FUCKING LEAF. AND YOU *WON'T*. L M A O
>>68164928
He's an idiot who believes /x/-tier shit, and thinks everything that goes against his wishes is not an argument. So fuck off with this Alex Jones 2.0, and start listening to some people who know what they're talking about.
>>68170800
lol
>>68182234
Do I need to spoonfeed you? Are you literally this obstinate about something you very obviously know *NOTHING* about?
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/23/from-brain-to-language-to-accent/
Go Mcfucking kill yourself.
>>68182312
So at 149 we're clear and it's totally possible?
>>68182384
>>"never" doesn't actually mean something never happens, only that people who I don't like who actually posit instances of refutation to that "never" don't actually have those instances count against my super-special "never"
>what are statistics
>>68182459
in the current universe it could be unattainable with any given number of people, you fucking mong
Implying that there is an exact number indicates that before that number the system is working perfectly and that one individual is the problem with it.
Unless you would refute that there are slightly non-working forms of ancap, in which case it's not ancapp.
Given that a single individual can be responsible for the failure of the system, that individual can be at any given number in the system.
Also the fact that people are not all the same and 5000 people is a meaningless statement.
5000 africans in sudan? 5000 indians? If you say no then you're controlling for factors which cause the unattainability of your system, which you can't do. I'd venture to say any given number of africans can't attain a perfect an cap society.
The question is also referring to a theoretical society but expecting a definite numerical calculation. Of human beings nonetheless. Human beings are unpredictable and you cannot accurately predict this question without first running experimentation, to my knowledge none of which has been conducted.
>>68182803
Depends on the community, but there's a gradual threshold somewhere between 100 and 250.
>>68183036
>"what are statistics"
So you have statistics for the frequency of when any and all particular questions are asked? HOOK ME UP LEAF! L M A O
>>68183089
So definitively 99 is possible, and 251 impossible, since you say 100 and 250.
>>68183185
What books on anarcho capitalism have you read? Answer the question directly or i wont discuss with you any further
>>68183036
>in the current universe it could be unattainable with any given number of people
*DING DING DING* WE HAVE A WINNER! YOU'VE ACTUALLY ANSWERED THE QUESTION - CONGRATULATIONS!
>>68183286
It's more of a gradual thing, but sure, why not. Generally once you get into the thousands you'll start to have people split into smaller groups, and those smaller groups will fight each other and try to steal each others' shit.
>>68175082
>if India gets in charge of anything then we are going to have a more shitty world
Hopefully they poo in the loo by then.
>>68183428
>but sure
Alright, so what are the circumstances that make a number of 99 or lower (still >0) completely possible, while above 250 definitively impossible? What are the factors by which you make this definitive claim?
>>68183404
>knew the answer to his own question
>painfully obvious because the question is retarded
>get called out for it
>Says he's not playing dumb... i-i-i-i-i-i swear
>then gets his shitty question btfo
>hehe i was rusing all along xd
Wow what a ruse haha you're such an epic trole xddddd sure foooled me !!
>>68183586
Have you read the article? The human brain can only maintain so many social connections. Once you have so many people that they all can't be stored in each others' brains, there will be in-groups and out-groups and they'll kill each other for their own benefit. At least they will until a few groups loosely unite under a leader and a common set of laws and assimilate or wreck all the non-united groups, at which point we've left anarchism and have entered some form of statism.
>>68183846
>>68183846
>asks a question to be answered multiple times
>it's rusing when you finally get a brainless leaf to answer it since he's so salty he had to, since it proves the initial point that saying anarchism is unattainable is moronic
You just keep on kekking, don't you?
DUDE ANARCHY LMAO
>>68183868
You don't have to know someone to interact with them peacefully. You don't see white people in the first world attacking each other in the mall because they're unfamiliar with one another.
>>68182777
>CNN
When you're a big girl you and go to college, you'll learn how to cite several sources of original research to back up a scientific claim.
Other than that, actors learn language and accents all the time. I could learn Mandarin in a week.
Also, you're a poolinloo. Always remember that.
>>68184241
Cite me a single source that says it's easy to pick up a foreign language and attain a perfect accent with it as an adult.
Just one, Mohammad.
Back in engineering school we had this nigerian retard in our group with a 70 iq. He literally dindu nothin the entire time and then took credit at the end and got a nice job out it, while I'm working for near minimum wage. Fuck this country.
>>68184149
>You don't see white people in the first world attacking each other in the mall because they're unfamiliar with one another.
Because first world countries have laws. Without enforced laws (the state) or enforced morality (the church), there would be nothing stopping people from stealing from each other, for example, which could easily escalate into violence.
>>68184047
>hasn't read a book on anarchism
>get called out for acting stupid on the first reply
>defends himself vigorously and gets butthurt despite everyone knowing he's not that smart
>still thinks he's a rusemaster xD!!
Saying anarchism is unattainable is not moronic, because it becomes exponentially more improbable with each added person. It's statistically unattainable.
>>68184595
You can have laws and law enforcement without government. The church isn't forced morality in any significant meaning of the term force.
>there would be nothing stopping people from stealing from each other
The very same things that stop people from raping and pillaging at this very moment exist without government. The same moral norms, the same physical facts and risks - everything. Government is not responsible or necessary for any of that.
>>68184316
Do you want a study showing you water is wet too? It's a self evident discipline. Get out of your basement and try it, tripfag.
>>68164928
I do like him but the anti-government thing is childish and he tends to use strawmen and cherrypick examples a lot because there's no one to call him out on it
>>68184625
>it becomes exponentially more improbable with each added person
*Really*. So we add me, and then we add me again, and then we add me once more let's say ad infinitum. Each instance of me added to the equation - a committed religious *zealout* of a pacifist and anarchist - magically exponentially makes it more probable that I'm going to rape, murder, and steal? By sheer virtue of another instance of me?
*B R I L L I A N T*
Give this leaf the golden medal of critical thinking! Make sure you put a leaf on it as a disclaimer though - they *are* held to a "special" standard.
>>68185047
>"it's self evident"
Do you know what else is "self-evident"? Your low IQ and poor gene pool, Mahmed.
>>68184899
Let me come up with an example you'll find reasonable. Persons A and B own land on a river. Person A is upstream from person B. Person A builds a dam, and fucks the river up for person B. If the two aren't in the same social group and person A isn't feeling generous, person B has no way to influence person A other than violence. Either against person A directly (chasing him off his property or killing him) or against his property (blowing up the dam). Please explain how this would be resolved.
>>68185185
>*Really*. So we add me, and then we add me again, and then we add me once more let's say ad infinitum. Each instance of me added to the equation - a committed religious *zealout* of a pacifist and anarchist - magically exponentially makes it more probable that I'm going to rape, murder, and steal? By sheer virtue of another instance of me?
only one of you exists.
>>68185386
That's called a negative externality in economics, and that's something A should apologize and pay grievance for to B if B is troubled by it. B has a justified claim in seeking damages (though he doesn't have to).
>>68185613
>that's something A should apologize and pay grievance for to B if B is troubled by it.
Why should he? He doesn't know B.
>>68185504
Not necessarily, and this is a hypothetical - you're positing people, but you're not restricting qualities of people else the hypothetical wouldn't mean anything as a generalized impossibility to begin with, since it's entirely conceivable that you could have a group of 9 billion committed anarchists, in which case you're not dealing with an unattainable *at all*.
>>68185703
Because he (wittingly or unwittingly) violated God's commandments in troubling another person by his deeds. If he doesn't he'll face divine justice upon justice when his mortal body inevitably fails him.
>>68185874
upon judgement*
>>68185874
Oh, so you're shitposting.
>>68186138
You asked for a reason. "Why should he?"
That's a reason.
>>68185767
>but you're not restricting qualities of people
In reality, people's qualities aren't restricted.
>>68186138
Yes he's shitposting but isn't smart enough to really outsmart anyone. He's actually tryharding and getting btfo
>>68186199
Alright, what if he's not religious? Why should he?
>>68186214
Right. So we can possibly have instances of people who are pacifistic anarchists in any number. Which means saying anarchism is unattainable is absurd.
>>68164928
>increasingly redpilled
Would the general population of the alt-right seriously be this fucking stupid, that you won't see through this disgusting snake after seeing a maximum of three of his videos?
His motives are clear.
The way he panders to his audience is absolutely obvious.
There literally couldn't be anything more transparent in this man and yet you fall for it.
Granted he has some interesting videos and he does well to bring brainwashable morons into the right, the whole picture is just ridiculous and absolutely repulsive.
>>68186309
It doesn't matter if he's religious if it's true. Someone can also not believe the police are coming after they've murdered someone. Either it is true or it isn't. If someone doesn't believe that some other person or being or matter is going to react to what they do, then they don't believe it - what else is there to say?
>>68186510
Laws work because the consequence is instant. You commit a crime and you get arrested *now*. If you got arrested 50 years after the fact, people would commit a lot more crimes. So even if hell is real, it's not a very good deterrent. This is why we need a government and laws.
>>68186325
It's exponentially more likely that you won't though. The fact that you can't see this is astonishing.
It's more likely that everyone will die tomorrow.
>>68186758
>consequence is instant
What? In what circumstances are the consequences of laws instant? Are people magically teleported to prison or instantanesouly shot when they commit crimes?
>>68186819
It's actually not any more or less likely than any other state of affairs. In the next 50 years, there could be a bio-attack that kills off all of humanity except some random people who happen to be anarchists and pacifists, and they clone themselves. What the possibility of something happening when it happens? 100%. Something is going to happen or be the case or it isn't - that's a priori true. Probability doesn't really exist in that regard.
>>68164928
I couldn't listen to this episode for more than 10 minutes. I always have to quit the video when it's a woman or someone who is a terrible speaker (so mostly the women). There is a surprisingly big amount of people who call him up but haven't really thought out how and what they'll say. Or an other reason is bad quality of the call.
Somebody tell me what's happened that suggests he got a big dose of red pill again? Told the guy the fuck off and don't be a parasite on the German people?
>>68165602
Agree.
He'll be the ultimate fascist in a year's time, around the time the race war hits begins.
>>68186850
The cops come and put you in cuffs and put you in a cell. Most people consider it a generally unpleasant experience.
>>68187172
That's not instant by any stretch of the imagination virtually ever.
Almost all law enforcement takes place after the law has already been broken - something very near 100%.
>>68164928
>Reply
Molyneux is a delusional fool. In b4 "Not an Argument."
>>68187321
>>68187272
Either way, it's far more immediate than any divine punishment, for which there is doubt about whether or not it will actually happen.
>>68187106
>It's actually not any more or less likely than any other state of affairs
False
>>68187464
People have doubt they'll get caught for most crimes they commit - it's usually one of the reasons they decide to commit the crime in the first place. They either don't think they'll face consequences, or they don't care if they face consequences.
That's just the case period.
>>68187527
Not false. Unless you've gotten around the problem of induction...?
>>68187697
Entropy, the complexity of the scenario, the natural occurrence of the factors necessary to create and sustain the scenario, human nature, the physical reality of human beings, total amount of anarcho-capitalists that are at the correct age/nationality/ability, ability of such individuals to adhere to the system, understanding of the system etc
These are just a small list of things which need to go into the equation, making the system more and more unlikely as new things are added.
>>68187697
Do you know what the problem of induction *is*?
>>68187611
I'd say people are more certain they'll be caught by the police than that they'll be punished by god. There's no observable evidence of anyone being punished after death, but there's plenty of people in prison.
>>68188195
Do you know what the real world is like? A nuclear explosion in which only fine prepped anarcho capitalists exist is much less likely to occur than not. Please explain how it isn't
>>68188386
I don't think that's the case. People don't base most of what they believe on "observable evidence" - they base their beliefs on hearsay and feelings, mostly. You've never observed an atom, but you believe they exist.
>>68188410
So the answer is "no". K. You should look it up, since it makes logically impossible probability claims.
>>68188536
So you're saying that most people don't commit crimes because they fear god, not because they fear getting arrested? And that we could get rid of all the laws and just have religious law, and that would be preferable?
>>68188593
So the answer is "no". K. You should look at it, since it puts a big dent in your inplausible scenario of an infiinite amount of equal clones of you existing in the world in an ancap society.
>>68165093
>>68165602
>>68165729
>>68166408
>>68166732
>>68167126
>>68167600
>>68167739
>>68168020
>>68168080
>>68168189
>>68168473
>>68168689
>>68169135
>>68169274
>>68169770
>>68169818
>>68169859
>>68170412
>>68170628
>>68170800
>>68170884
>>68171045
>>68171064
>>68171091
>>68171169
>>68171254
>>68171273
>>68171654
>>68171840
>>68172760
>>68173380
>>68173932
>>68174053
>>68174545
>>68174710
>>68175082
>>68175252
>>68176015
>>68176499
>>68176792
>>68176847
>>68177091
>>68177209
>>68177244
>>68177583
>>68177830
>>68178003
>>68178188
>>68178325
>>68178627
>>68178870
>>68179123
>>68179363
not an argument
>>68188659
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying I don't believe it's the case that people are "more certain they'll be caught by police than punished by God."
I think most people don't commit crimes because they don't believe it's in their own interest to do so - the factors that go into their utility calculation for choosing between possible courses of action are particular to individuals and circumstance. People who do commit crimes think it's in their interest to do so. That's the end of the story. Whether they turn out to regret their decisions or not has no impact on what choice they actually make. Hindsight is 20/20, future sight is 0/0.
>>68188958
>People who do commit crimes think it's in their interest to do so.
Alright, so in an anarchist society, what's going to stop these people?
>>68188748
I find it really funny that you've told me to "read a book" and "take logic 101" when you don't know one of the most obtrusive and historically huge uncovering in flaws of reasoning.
Goodnight, Gayleaf.
>>68178870
>>68178870
No, he wasn't. Top indian intellectuals go to North Carolina or Northern California (or San Diego) in the USA, or in Virginia.
Otherwise the indians abroad are fucking retarded
>>68189054
The same thing that "stops" them now. Themselves usually in having preferences for choosing other choices, and other people being usually the biggest factor in their decisions. I don't know why you'd ever believe anyone would be any less inclined to hunt for a murderer without a government than they are with one.
>>68189164
>probability doesn't exist
>it's a building block of logic, empiricism, science, philosophy, psychology, and everything else
You're not fooling anyone.
>>68189677
>logic and empiricism
>in the same sentence
Yep, you've never taken a course on logic in your life. Ja ne~
>>68189354
Okay, so you're saying that independent individuals will enforce laws (hunting for a murderer) as well as (or better than) a government. Am I correct?
He's starting to grow on me. I think it's just his delivery that's kind of off putting
>>68189975
"Governments" are made out of individuals. All groups of people are made out of individuals.
>>68164928
>4:45
HE NAMED THE JEW... KINDA
>>68189894
>A & B were said in the same sentence, therefore you've never taken a course on A in your life.
Objectively an irrational conclusion.
Fucking christ you're basically flawed in all your reasonings up to this point. Keep getting called out shitty tripfag
>>68190200
So fascism, democracy, communism, etc. are all just different forms of anarchy?
>>68190282
It's more that you have no idea what the problem of induction is, since it renders empiricism and logic 100% fundamentally incompatible, and is covered in logic 101 classes. Ergo, since you don't know that, you haven't taken a logic 101 class. Goodbye, stupid leaf~
>>68190200
Are you still an ancap? When will you grow out of it?
>"Governments" are made out of individuals. All groups of people are made out of individuals.
Yes. So?
>>68190405
The core of the objection is that you insinuated that governments somehow perform some special function individuals don't by your question. So I pointed out that that is fundamentally impossible, since governments are constituted in individuals. Ergo, governments can't, even in principle, enforce laws better or worse than individuals - you're always judging individuals.
>>68190528
So
>>68190613
You 3rd world incoherent nigger. Will you ever stop being stupid and yet interjecting yourself in conversations you can't participate in at *any* respectable level?
>>68190613
Alright, the government as an organizational structure vs. whatever organizational structure is present in an anarchist community, if there is any. Which structure enforces laws more efficiently. Christ you're pedantic.
>>68190421
Strawman as usual
Quote me directly where I said logic and empiricism are 100% fundamentally compatible, or insinuated that.
Holy shit you're bad at this. You're reaching too much.
>>68190729
They can be identical so long as they aren't forced on people. Forcing things on people is not an element of a "social structure", it's simply an element of a state of affairs in which we'd say a state exists vs. a state of affairs in which one doesn't.
>>68190613
the abstract concept of a governmental structure is entirely distinct from the individuals who operate within that structure
>>68190903
In what way.
>>68190613
> Ergo, governments can't, even in principle, enforce laws better or worse than individuals - you're always judging individuals.
They can you fucking retard. And they do. See how fair people justice is. Justice is built so that one man does not have unlimited power, and their decisions are not subject to temporary whims and personal views. How well this is put on practice is debateble
>>68190708
>You 3rd world incoherent nigger
>He his from a poor country, ergo he is stupid
>>68190528
praceteom hasn't made a single logical argument throughout this entire thread. It's funny he rants about ancap and hasn't read a single book on it, but will go on talking about his induction problem as if it adds any credibility to his claim that it's possible for an infinite number of self clones of his to exist and form an ancap society. Yes, this is what he's literally reduced to.
>>68190894
Laws are by nature forced on people. "Enforced", if you will. Anyway, you're saying an anarchist society can enforce laws just as well as, for example, a republic?
>>68191016
You are literally below engaging with. I've wasted so much time destroying your poorly constructed preconceptions of ethics and economics in the past - I'm not going to waste it going into the future. I'm glad you have a trip for that purpose, third-worlder.
>>68191052
Laws aren't by nature forced on people. Contract law is entered entirely by voluntary agreement of individuals between each other.
>>68164928
>Why does /pol/ dislike him again?
Because he poses as a philosopher and yet has little respect for the process of debate, interrupting people all the time and using posturing to manipulate his opponents, also _one_ _dollar_, also trying to make everyone cry about their childhoods as the answer to their questions, also basing his views on global warming on suspicion, also acting like a psychologist when he's not, also lying about the disciplinary actions against his wife by the psychological establishment in Canada, also getting YouTube criticism taken down.
It doesn't matter how much he believes that I also believe - lots of people do and not a lot of what he says that I agree with is all that original.
>>68191044
I already participated in some threads where he is. He probably is educated, but he probably thinks way to high off himself. He will never learn and never admitt defeat. It's like talking to a wall.
>>68191179
wew lad
And thank you for remembering me, mad my day. Here is a pic of a hot chick for you (don't have to be so salty).
>>68165602
Same thing applies to literally every ideology. Government only works when people recognize its authority. Even a despotic government needs to get more people to fight for them than against them.
>>68191245
And if one person violates the contract? What happens?
>>68191366
No salt, only utility assessments. Here is a much cuter girl for you.
>>68191384
Exactly what that one person signed up for.
>>68191456
So the other person enforces some punishment?
>>68191384
We politely, but firmly, ask them to do not do it again
>>68191433
>>68191456
>20 sec difference
did you buy one of those golden pass?
And kill yourself weeabo
>>68191522
Depends on what they signed up for. Maybe there's no punishment in the contract at all for breaching it - contracts don't necessarily carry punishments for violation.
>>68191589
>so poor he types captcha
Oh that's too funny.
>>68191626
And if there is no previous contract?
>>68166408
not an argument
>>68191626
So in what useful sense is it a law? Anyways, let's get back on topic. I'm not talking about contracts, I'm talking about things like theft and assault. How does an anarchist society stop those things more effectively than a hierarchical society?
not a single post in this thread is a fucking argument
>>68167739
He was talking about physicists that use tax dollars to play around with their mega expensive toys, he's against the structure of the funding not science you dishonest shitlord.
>>68164928
Because he's a psychopath and his shit is retarded. Stop shilling this "philosopher"
>>68191839
In every useful sense. Tell me - what is a law? Because the answer to that question has been answered completely and utterly differently by hundreds of thousands of people over the centuries. The most prominent view in philosophy of law nowadays is the legal positivist definition, which I hold is utterly vacuous.
>>68191988
No, how about we stop playing run-around and you answer my initial question. We both know what laws are.
If you nitpick the second sentence instead of addressing the first, I will leave the thread.
>>68191839
How do you stop theft and assault now? Usually you don't. It happens and then you try to remedy things. The same thing you'd do in an anarchist state of affairs - you help people in need and protect them. How you go about doing that is up to you. You can pay people for protection, you can have volunteers - all these things have been done for millennia. The *ONLY* difference is that you don't steal from people to fund them or force things on people who haven't already forced things on you.
>>68192108
>we both no what laws are
We actually don't. We're speaking colloquially, but neither of us knows what that actually breaks down to meaning.
If you're going to threaten to leave, please just do. That's so autistic as to be put-offingly annoying. If you're literally that petty, go suck off your boyfriend now ;)
>>68192258
That's close, but it wasn't my question. My question was how you deal with these crimes *more efficiently than* a hierarchical society.
>>68192258
>How do you stop theft and assault now?
We punish it, and give the would be robbers oppurtinities to succed in life without having to rob
>>68192390
Who ever said it's more efficient or less efficient?
>>68192379
I was giving you an opportunity to not be an egghead autist, but you couldn't resist. Later nerd.
>>68192379
hurrr in a hypothetical scenario empiricism cannot be introduced muh induction
>>68192459
Ja ne~
>>68169274
>scientific research
>academia parasitism
try again
>>68192379
>muh deconstruction to appear smart
>>68192443
In order to have a regime change, we normally want to improve our lives in some ways
>>68192486
I sincerely hope you have a fulfilling life outside of
>>68180211
In new york they all work at the liquor and convenience stores and dey al lyek do dak lyek dis berry goo mai fren yoo bai sumding? dat twety fiab dalla. Almost flipped out on one the other day kept following me around the store like a was a nigger about to steal some shit
>germans were afraid of jewish communists taking over germany
