>Libertarians unironically believe it should be legal to sell your daughter into sex slavery
Why are they so edgy and retarded lads?
>>74932933
DO YOU SUPPORT ME BEING SHOT?!
>>74932933
LIBERTARIANISM IS ANARCHISM BECAUSE I SAID SO the post
>>74932933
where did you draw that conclusion from?
>even the most extreme kind of libertarianism wouldn't condone any form of slavery, never mind slavery of someone that is not capable or given a choice in the matter
you'd have to go to anarcho-capitalism to even start prodding the idea of one sane and consenting adult selling himself into slavery to another, under no duress and in lucid mind
>>74932933
Why the pic of karl pilkington?
>>74933046
So are you saying libertarians don't believe that?
>>74933236
NO LIBERTARIAN IS ANARCHISM BECAUSE I SAID SO the post part II
>>74932933
But how would they get them to the slave market without roads?
>>74932968
so true, also funny
>>74932933
what is worse: this, or stirnerposting?
>Unironically believing in spooks
>>74932933
Yes selling your daughter off to a rich man when she's young is so much worse than letting her be a free independent spirit who is sexually liberated and gets to find who she should love, and consequently spends her entire early life getting fucked and passed around by whatever hot fun douchebag she's attracted to until she gets old and sees life isn't as easy as she thought it was and has to settle down with some poor loser as worthless as her own slutty ass
i was a card-carrying libertarian party libertarian. i got out because it was full of psychopaths. too many dipshits in there wanted not only freedom to sell snakeoil and other fraudulent products, but wanted to be able to sue the everliving shit out of people who reviewed their products as shit. and in their efforts to be big tent, reasonable people won't tell the psychos in the party to take a hike
>>74932933
>not mass producing daughters and training them all to perform all kinds of slave tasks
Stay pleb.
BUT HOW WILL WE BUILD ROADS?
I WILL JUST SHOOT YOU, HAHA NO POLICE!
BUT WE WILL NOT ADVANCE SCIENCE!
HOW WILL YOU GET MAIL?
Seriously the quality of bernout shitposting has declined in the past six months.
>>74932933
That would violate the NAP.
>>74932933
The natural law so clearly prohibits daughter prostitution that it undermines human dignity to list it in our human law.
>>74932968
I dont know if this is satire, but I laffed
>>74933603
>wanted to be able to sue the everliving shit out of people who reviewed their products as shit
But that isn't at all libertarian. Does the USA Libertarian Party contain many members who aren't actually libertarians then?
>>74932968
>importance of hierarchy
>advocating monarchies
I for one don't want to be a dirty peasant forced to bow to everyone of """"""""""noble"""""""""" birth
>>74933870
that faggot is a loyalist
people keep forgetting this flag means your " nobility " isn't welcome here
>>74932968
Shit, this is getting more realistic as time goes on, I already passed through every stage but the last... To think there was a time I was a leftist and believed communism wasn't that bad.
>>74933995
Minarchist
>>74933909
Maryland tried it early on. It didn't work out.
HEAR THIS, aforementioned faggot:
Anyone who wants to bring hereditary aristocracy to America should get back on the boat and go back to Europe, where they can be with people more suited to their "special" (read: cucked) mindset.
>>74934232
The European royals are moving to North America and soon, they want to create an elitist cult around them.
They seek social climbers and pseudo-intellectuals as useful idiots, always have.
>>74934232
This post has the official support of the real Americans
We hold onto our right to blow off anyone's head who threatens our way of life
>>74934516
Cool they can get drawn down on
autism
>>74933658
>natsocs are bernouts
die
>>74934736
I actually know one of these guys.
>>74934873
National socialists are pathetic.
Civic nationalists are the new thing. We're gonna have Jews and Slavs too, as long as they are utterly loyal.
>>74934919
>jews
>loyal
every time you type something you sound dumber
>>74934919
>Jews
>Loyal
Beautiful
>non libertarians want roads
Lol wtf
>>74934889
Good, you can deal with him to gain entry to the Murrikan Brotherhood
>>74932933
>Libertarians unironically believe it should be legal to sell your daughter into sex slavery
no they dont, your daughters not your property, you cant own people, that would be Islam your thinking of
>>74935005
who's going to stop them? The government?
>>74935032
Yes.
>>74934919
You say this until you run into the American national socialists
Who will come after you with their black friends
>>74934956
>hur dur ima shill for the nazis on a chink cartoon forum
Seriously, Nazism is dead. Move on or be left behind.
Anyway you are bernouts.
>>74935117
>hurr I'm gonna shill for feudalism and pretend it's "anarchy"
>>74935032
if you sincerely and honestly believe the only thing stopping fathers from selling their daughters into slavery is "the government" then you really sincerely and honestly hope you never have children
>>74934889
More details m80, interesting stuff
>>74935158
LIBERTARIANISM IS THE SAME AS FEUDALISM BECAUSE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EVIL
See you are a bernout.
>>74935181
>criminals don't exist in my magical pixie dust utopia
you are literally as deluded as the communists
>>74933320
wow its a strawman within a strawman thats pretty cool looking
>>74932933
The irony here is that British statists support pedophiles.
>>74935230
No "I" believe in property rights which is why I believe in a state.
you believe in feudalism because you are a fucking moron.
>>74934919
>jews
>loyal
>burger flag
this is a mighty top kek, cheers faggot.
>>74935195
We're members at the same club, he's got about a half dozen male beta orbiters that he's bestowed 'titles' upon and they all go drinking at his big house.
I've been up there too just for kicks, it's all pretty silly. Something creepy about this guy though.
I don't want to be too specific about much stuff but within those bounds, ask away.
>>74935322
The eternal libertarian never sleeps
>>74935246
i never implied crime wouldnt exist, im just not buying that "the government" is some sort of magical barrier and i i know its b8 but believing its "the government" thats the only thing stopping fathers selling their daughters is retarded
>>74935246
nice Jason and the Argonauts pic btw
>>74935017
I think you're forgetting someone.
>nationalist populist
>told big business' (who at the time abused the laborers) to fuck off and established basic workers rights
>broke up monopolies (trusts)
>negotiated the end of the Russo-Jap war
>introduced conservation policies, established federal parks and shit to preserve the beauty of our land
>pure food and drugs act so we didn't eat literal poison like we do today (he listened to mudrakers and actually got shit done)
>panama canal
>during McKinley administration was intrumental in getting us into the Spanish-American war, (which we won by a lot) but immediately resigned his post and went to go fight like a man
>cleaned up capitalism so it could keep going for the benefit of the country
>was an honest man in a time of incredible corruption
>>74935356
whats his name?
>>74935369
I like Jew tits, God help me.
>>74935356
>European royals are moving to North America
Please, go on.
>>74935371
>anarchy is better than the government because the government fails to stop crime sometimes
>better allow all crime to happen then
Like I said, autism
Ask away but I'm done writing blog entries for you guys.
>>74935369
>libertarianism
>ever
When will they grow up.
>>74935291
Do you even know what feudalism is? It's a pretty specific system of government.
>>74935443
I would never forget the bull moose. He was a true American badass. But I feel as if Old Hickory is forgotten.
>>74935489
no, believing "the government" is the only thing stopping fathers selling their daughters into slavery is autistic as hell and incredibly sociopathic
>>74935526
I'm convinced they're all 15 year olds who never opened a history book
we had libertarianism once it was called feudalism.
>>74935590
Whoever owns the land effectively owns and controls everyone on the land. Disagree? Too bad you're violating his private property.
>>74935371
I know that it might sound weird for someone who believes to live in a fairy land, but there are fathers who don't give a shit about their children. Selling daughters is as ancient as man and is still practiced by the vast majority of Muslims.
>>74935613
>criminals don't exist in my magic fantasy land
It's like we keep going in circles. Yes there are people who would do it, there are sick bastards out there.
Have you ever heard of murder and rape? Do you think those are just myths?
>>74935658
which is what i said in my very first post
>>74932933
No they don't, lol.
>>74933076
Libertarians welcomed anarchists into their party years ago mate. Most of the libertarian party leads are anarchists. Those few that aren't are jumping ship to the old Republican party.
Libertarianism is dead. You can either swing full anarchist or return to traditional authoritarian conservatism.
>>74935713
Then what would stop people from selling their daughters in a libertarian society?
>>74935705
i have never denied the existence of criminals,
i have made two points
1. "the government" isnt the only thing stopping fathers selling their daughters into slavery
2. Islam ( and by proxy law-religeons, inb4 le fedora) encourages the subjugation and slavery of women,
but the average man, is not, a sick austrian who locks his daughters in rape dungeons,
>>74935870
oh gee idunno, maeby the familial ties ALL normally function humans form with their children? oh gee what do you think would happen to a man who sold his daughters into slavery in a society where individual freedom and personal autonomy is held to the highest regard?
>>74935876
>"the government" isnt the only thing stopping fathers selling their daughters into slavery
But it is a hindrance just like with all crimes. Hence a system of law
>the average man, is not, a sick austrian who locks his daughters in rape dungeons
The point of the government is to stop criminals from running rampant and to have an organized society
you want anarchy where there is no organization, law, punishment, regulation, taxation, order, etc yet you live in a society where you benefit from all those things
That's why libertarians are autists they can't see the world directly in front of them. They live in the mystical fantasy land in their mind.
>>74935648
Then they should fuck off his land.
>>74936085
>violating muh property right
>attacking the land owner that has all the mercenaries working for him
peasant revolts didn't tend to work out for the peasants
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Peasants'_War
>>74935977
I also can't imagine it would settle well with the customers of a private security firm if their chosen firm didn't even attempt to rescue children who were being raped.
Also, why is this idiot posting Stirner/ancap images?
>>74935977
You really think a Jew wouldn't offer a million shekels for a shinksa? Especially a young pre teen aryan Danish shinksa?
>>74936014
>you want anarchy where there is no organization, law, punishment, regulation, taxation, order
nice strawman buddy, the only one of those that are even remotely relevant or an acurate protrail of the libertarian ideal is taxation, and the only issue with taxation is forced taxation,
am i, a Dane, living in a socialist shithole with a bloated decaying corpse of a government really arguing libertarianism with an American, just another day on /pol/ i swear
>>74936182
>We cant have a free society because the all powerful magic jew will buy our daughters
what the hell would he want my goy daughters for? shes not part of his desert cult,
we have literally arrived at the
>B-but the Juden!
"counter argument"
>>74936150
because libertarians/ancaps deserve to be mocked for their idiocy
>>74936188
>having any of those things without some formal system of order
kek nice try
in reality without a formalized state everyone would just declare themselves above the law.
Why would anyone pay taxes or obey the laws if they didn't "have" to?
Any group of guys with guns can take over whenever they feel like it
Of course since ancapistan is your maigcal fairyland that never happens in your mind.
>socialist shithole
>wahh I live in one of the wealthiest places on the planet pls save me
>>74936144
>attacking the land owner that has all the mercenaries working for him
You're conflating private land ownership with feudalism again. Why?
I didn't say rebel against a ruler, I said fuck off from a man's land. It only becomes feudalism when he starts hiring soldiers to keep slaves there to work it for him.
>>74935977
>ALL normally function humans form with their children
Holy shit you are deluded. Your only source for defining "normal" people are the people living in your own limited society which has harsh laws against selling daughters and other such things; Muslims are far from being the only ones willing to sell their daughters.
>what do you think would happen to a man who sold his daughters into slavery in a society where individual freedom and personal autonomy is held to the highest regard
Absolutely nothing. Everyone would look the other way since the daughters belong to him and live in his own private property.
>>74936300
>w-why would a jew want to molest children
ever heard of Hollywood you dumb fuck?
>>74936345
Land is a fixed good. Want to leave? Too bad you're just moving to someone else's kingdom to be a serf there.
welcome to classical economics 101
>>74932933
>it's a libertarians don't believe in having laws thread
>>74936339
>because libertarians/ancaps deserve to be mocked for their idiocy
So, this would be a response to my question, yes? Have you even read The Ego and Its Own? Where is the conflict between Stirner and ancap? That the NAP is a "spook"?
You are aware that private security firms would exist in ancapistan, right? I don't think you are since you repeatedly claim that there would be neither law nor punishment in ancapistan.
>>74932933
>Libertarians unironically believe it should be legal to sell your daughter into sex slavery
Thats jewish belief, which parallels liberarianism.
>>74936339
>Why would anyone pay taxes or obey the laws if they didn't "have" to?
oh gee billy, maeby they like the service provided? why would you buy a burger unless you were forced to?
>the wealthiest places on the planet
says the American, just cause a country living off past prosperity and using its last money reserves to feed a horribly money leaking system does not mean its a nice place to live, especially if your not a government loving socialist
>>74934811
Whoever made this is just as autistic as the people they are berating
>>74936434
>ever heard of Hollywood you dumb fuck?
so, the secret all powerful Juden wants to buy my daughters, to .. make movies? movies? really? is that the master plan?
>>74936434
There just need to be fewer people then. Everyone should be living on their own land, and if someone is too much of a failure in life to afford that, then it's their own fault.
>>74936014
Prostituting your daughter is against the NAP.
Once that is stablished, in an anarcho capitalist society, people would need to adhere to NAP based law frames voluntarily in order to not be labeled as outlaws. Outlaws expose themselves to crime without protection from society. If you made your daughter a prostitute is because of two reasons, because of sociopathy or extreme poverty forcing you to prostitute her because you have no alternative way to feed her, which is the case in third world countries.
In the second case, a free market where you can actually sell your children to other families gives you alternative, and even then, since you're a poor outlaw, it won't take long before you're not just stolen from, but someone will steal your daughter from you and what are you gonna do about it, given that you refused to adhere to the NAP?
In the first case, a rich sociopath who controls private security protecting him in order to keep being an outlaw, the amount of resources he has to control in order to keep the practice without suffering his neighbors outrage would be just surreal. And his lifestyle would be limited within his properties, which most likely would mean he wouldn't be able to do anything, and anyone collaborating with him would be subject to boycotting.
So, how exactly would you go about in order to prostitute your daughter in a way that you can't already do with a state?
>>74933995
haha yeah thats what would happen!
doesn't happen now under glorious statism
also we should give up our guns
>>74936485
>You are aware that private security firms would exist in ancapistan,
Or as the Romans called them "roving bands of barbarians"
Unless you're dumb enough to think a group of well armed men wouldn't take whatever the fuck they wanted
>>74936511
>maeby they like the service provided?
They have no reason to pay because they have no reason to follow any laws.
>using its last money reserves
>he thinks a government can that prints it's own money can run out of money
AHAHAHAHAH
libertarians are so fucking dumb
>>74936579
You don't pay attention to the news in the US at all do you?
>>74936562
cry more ancap
>>74936606
>Everyone should be living on their own land
Good luck keeping the roving bands of mercs from taking it
>>74936706
against the NAP
unenforceable
outside your autistic imagination that is.
>>74935590
I don't believe in feudalism, he says I believe in what he claims is feudalism.
He's just trying his taqiyya.
This is relevant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnTvFP1T0VM&index=18&list=PLC70DBDE7AFAC0366
>>74936796
>Good luck keeping the roving bands of mercs from taking it
That's what the government is for. Protecting its citizens from forceful coercion.
You thought I was an Ancap, didn't you?
>>74933564
>muh freedom
When you're selling your daughter you're limiting her choices at an age where she has no agency. Sell your ass if you need money, chump!
>>74936881
I didn't think any non ancap libertarians were left
>>74936796
>They have no reason to pay because they have no reason to follow any laws.
well the service pprovider has no incentive to provide the service to an individual why would refuse payment
>You don't pay attention to the news in the US at all do you?
why would i?
>>74936840
Makes perfect sense. It's dickish, sure, but logical.
Also,
>no child ever died of starvation and neglect under government current state, and CPS is a wonderful institution who sees everything and makes no mistake.
>>74936796
>against the NAP
>unenforceable
Because being an outlaw is so fun and safe! Without consequences!
You're fucking retarded.
>>74936962
>well the service pprovider has no incentive to provide the service to an individual
which is why there would be no services in a stateless society
outside your autistic imagination that is
>why would i?
It sort of debunks your "hollywood isn't full of jewish pedophiles" idea
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/elijah-wood-says-theres-secret-153514255.html
>>74937003
>the government isn't perfect let's abolish government
this is basically every ancap ever.
>>74937026
>outlaws and conquerors care about safety
ahh the mind of an autiste
>>74935794
So? Do you even know what anarchy is?
Anarchy is not a lack of rules, it's a lack of rulers. How can there he slaves when there are no rulers? Agree with anarchism or not, and I definitely understand if you don't, but you can't argue that slavery is a natural consequence under any circumstance.
Now, MAYBE it could happen under anarcho-capitalism, but anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron and isn't truly anarchy.
>>74937137
>voluntary cooperation
There's your problem
>>74937132
>Outlaws could thrive in the era of internet
ahh, the mind of a slave
>>74937132
>which is why there would be no services in a stateless society
so, because you dont buy macdonalds, macdonalds have no reason to try and sell burgers?
>It sort of debunks your "hollywood isn't full of jewish pedophiles" idea
by this "logic" we should embrace a stateless libertarian society because the British parlament is full of pedophiles , we should disband the catholic church because it holds its hand over pedophiles and protects them?
http://www.strawpoll.me/10297515
.....
>>74936840
haha yeah that would totally happen!
doesn't happen nowadays no sir
also we should give up our guns
>>74937132
>ancap might not be perfect lets keep being sopranos
(you)
>>74937132
i had the misfortune of reading through some of your dribble, americlap.
in anarcho capitalism not many things would change from what you see today.
this stupid notion that there is no "law" and no institution anywhere is beyond retarded.
take your military for example. your military is basically a private company funded by the taxpayers. that private company has contracts with other private companies, such as lockheed martin, and we see that the only difference between your current military and ancap private military company is the source of funding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38K9X5PMLRU
>>74937186
I agree, but I was only arguing what it is and what it isn't. I don't think it's a viable goal we would benefit from fighting for. Maybe in a perfect world.
>>74937137
>it's a lack of rulers
In other words it's a lack of rules
organization requires someone at the top to decide things
otherwise everyone goes there own ways to make their own system and you get perpetual conflict until someone finally established order (government) and rulers
>>74937246
>the internet will magically keep existing when people are allowed to steal and kill whoever they want without repercussion just to enrich themselves
such is the mind of autistic libertarians
>>74937332
>the government fails sometimes
>lets abolish all government
every time
>>74937298
>comparing law and order to burgers
like I said, autism
>we should embrace a stateless libertarian society
I was just stating a fact, hollywood is full of jewish pedophiles
Nothing prescriptive about stating a fact.
>>74937407
>my magical autistic fantasy is feasible trust me
>>74937439
>in anarcho capitalism not many things would change
In anarcho capitalism nothing would function
you'd get chaos for a while before everything was replaced by feudalism (rule by conquerors and landowners.
>>74937439
>we see that the only difference between your current military and ancap private military company is the source of funding
That's a huge fucking difference, the military is subservient to an elected government.
In the absence of the US to protect, who would build a military? Who could possibly have a motive to do such a thing? What could that motive be?
And because you're clearly mentally retarded, those were rhetorical questions. We all know a private military would serve itself.
>>74937518
>comparing law and order to burgers
not what im doing, i am trying my hardest to make you understand that the absence of a government, does not mean that services will no longer be provided
>>74937518
>People who want to break the law are somehow more protected with government police than with society who voluntarily adheres to law code in order not to be exposed to non punished crime
Lack of abstract thinking is a clear sign of autism. Statists are the autist ones mate ;)
>>74937581
Ancaps are literally to autistic to understand how society functions
they think everything just magically got this way without government order and law. It's embarrassing.
But it's no surprise because libertarianism=autism
http://reason.com/blog/2011/07/20/being-libertarian-may-cause-au
>>74937651
the absence of government, outside your autistic fantasies, would mean a collapse of order.
No one would have any reason to not simply take whatever they wanted.
>>74937677
you are clearly too autistic to understand the basic consequence of not having centralized law and order.
>>74937518
>In other words it's a lack of rules
>organization requires someone at the top to decide things
otherwise everyone goes there own ways to make their own system and you get perpetual conflict until someone finally established order (government) and rulers
Aye, but keep in mind that I've at no point argued for or against anarchy, I only said what it actually is. The anarchist viewpoint is that under the right circumstances, humans will naturally cooperate and establish rules that everyone adheres to, simply because it's what's best for everyone. I don't agree with that, I'm only saying that slavery wouldn't follow under what any anarchist would consider an anarchy, Ameribro.
>I'm a libertarian I think people are smart and rational enough to create a maintain that is totally free
and yet...
>FUCKING NIGGERS
>ABORTION SHOULDNT BE ALLOWED
>DEGENERATES SHOULD BE PURGED
Just lmao
>>74937581
>who would build a military?
oh gee i dunno, maybe people with military equipment manufacturing capabilities?
>Who could possibly have a motive to do such a thing?
oh gee i dunno maybe the same people right now who like and want a strong military to protect their nation? or are you freely and openly admitting the the military only exists to secure the existance of the state/government and not to ensure security of the people?
>And because you're clearly mentally retarded
> We all know a private military would serve itself.
so, a company can make money, protecting itself, and paying itself to be protected by itself,
no Anon, i think your the retarded one here
>>74937137
>Anarchy is not lawlessness
>Anarchy is based on the principle of self-ownership
>The idea that you are the exclusive controller of your own body and life
Kek, do you retards even read what you write? If you are the exclusive controller of your own body and life, that means no one can impose rules on you. No rulers = no rules, by definition. Children aren't biologically capable of controlling their own body and life, therefore they become property of whoever takes care of them, who can in turn use them however they want.
>>74937734
You're clearly too autistic to understand the basic consequence of being an outlaw in any kind of society and you'v enot provided a single argument about why it couldn't work other than ad-homs.
You're literal trash at debating, demonstrating low IQ in every single post, no wonder you can't begin to grasp libertarianism when your mind is so closed to the status quo because of your lack of abstract thinking.
Statists...
>>74937439
>your military is basically a private company funded by the taxpayers
This is true, but it also shows the fatal flaw of ancap, in this world we already live under the rules of ancap. Thus, government is a natural part of ancap.
>>74937518
i just set an example how your country would keep it's military infrastructure. the change would be people would pay directly to said company for protection instead of a group of people democratically chosen taking the money from you and being the middle man.
what ancap relies on is capitalism. what you are talking about is democracy. one has nothing to do with the other. our society works on a botched version of capitalism thanks to the government.
the police force is another example. if police force was needed or wanted, then it would be a business opportunity to create one, and receive payment from everyone wanting protection.
in the case of military, education, healthcare, police force, basically any entity that can be viewed as a private company with public funding taking orders from the government would remain in it's current form.
it is a basic principle of supply and demand, only in ancap version they would have to compete for the funding.
>>74937734
>No one would have any reason to not simply take whatever they wanted.
is it easier to try and take something by force from someone who is willing and able to protect his good by force, or just simply exchange something for the service/product?
>>74937847
>their nation
You mean the nation that doesn't exist?
A corporation large enough to handle the US military would be utterly soulless and you know it. As it is, there is oversight and a sense of duty. I would rather not see a US military with its primary motive being expansion and profit.
What happens when the CEO of this corporation realizes he's the one with all the power, and decides to just take everything over?
>>74937862
I think you're mistaken me for the other Danetard itt, if you read my posts you'll see that I at no point argued FOR anarchy, I just defined it.
>>74937916
Yeah and then the army takes you all over and creates a state that's worse than the one you "rebelled" from. The only way to prevent that is to have competing armies. The competing armies will take their own populations and create countries.
Wait a fucking second..
>>74938034
i dont think you get it my man
>>74937742
>The anarchist viewpoint is that under the right circumstances,
In other words in your magical fantasy land utopia with no basis in reality
In reality without law you just take whatever shit you want until you (or whoever is best at conquering) becomes the new king.
>>74937888
>consequence of being an outlaw
fighters don't care about dying they care about conquest. Do you think the Germans barbarians gave a fuck when they were taking over Rome? You are delusional as fuck.
The second you remove law we just o back to "whoever can fight well enough to become the new king" and the process starts over.
>>74937916
> people would pay directly
people don't pay for anything unless they're forced to
without a legal system no one has any reason to pay for anything you just rob and steal
>>74937919
>is it easier to try and take something by force from someone who is willing and able to protect his good by force
It requires far less effort to just take what you want with you and your buddies (army) then to work hard to get something
that's the nature of humanity.
By your """"""logic""""" any peasant could oppose any army and they would somehow "win"
Good luck seeing that work in real life and not your autistic fantasies
>>74937581
is that a joke?
so a warmonger can't be elected to pursue his own intentions?
your military isn't built by the government you blundering retard. what is lockheed martin? all your shitty government does is buy from privately funded companies.
motives are pure speculation, and thus a fallacy.
>>74938124
>In other words in your magical fantasy land utopia with no basis in reality
I've said multiple times now that I am not actually an anarchist. Hell, I even said "I don't agree with that" after what you just quoted me on having said.
Seriously, see >>74938093
Just how dense are you burgers?
>>74938112
No, I must not. So why don't you convert me by explaining what happens when the CEO decides to do whatever the hell he wants?
>>74938126
>the government outsources their production
No shit. But they control what is then done with the weapons, and the government is set up so as to prevent a single megalomaniac from wreaking havoc.
I recommend you purchase a mask, some tubing and a helium tank ASAP. I'll instruct you on what to do with them.
>>74938246
My answer stays the same
it's far easier to rob people than it is to put in the time and effort to produce things yourself
Why do you think Tyrone chooses to rob instead of work?
>>74938124
>fighters don't care about dying they care about conquest. Do you think the Germans barbarians gave a fuck when they were taking over Rome? You are delusional as fuck.
Why is society more protected against outlaws with government than with a society that, in order not to be branded as an outlaw and expose their life and property, needs to adhere to a frame of laws and subject themselves to the consequence of breaking them? Are you seriously arguing that people somehow turn retarded and stop needing protection, creating a business opportunity the moment we abolish the state? In the country where private militias was a thing for more than a century, back when societies weren't even half as capitalized as they are today?
>>74938316
>the government is set up so as to prevent a single megalomaniac from wreaking havoc.
I believe that you believe this
>It requires far less effort to just take what you want with you and your buddies (army) then to work hard to get something
you know what man, keep your fantasy that a libertarian society would be anarchy, keep telling yourself you would become lord humgous and go raid macdonald, keep thinking its easier to be a bandit then exchanging one thing for another,
your clearly not open to any actual discussion so, just, you do you man, keep living your dream
>>74937899
in a sense yes, what ancap strives for is cutting the middle man.
i live in a social democratic state. in such a state if you are part of the middle class (which i am), you are stripped from atleast 40% of your income, increasing proportionally with your income.
the guy who gives your salary before it even reaches your hand gives a portion of it to the state for the public healthcare, and another portion of it for the retirement fund. now what is left from your salary is taxed further when purchasing.
if you were to buy milk you pay the price of milk + 25%, eggs? original price + 25%, and in such manner for every product you wish to purchase.
what if i don't want to have a retirement fund?
what if i don't want the shitty public healthcare?
i don't have a choice, i am anyway stripped of my honest wage, and if i refuse to pay i am sentenced to prison.
>>74938356
>Are you seriously arguing that people somehow turn retarded
Conquerors and warriors aren't retarded they take what they want and subject everyone else to their whims.
Society can't oppose them unless society is organized, but guess what society can't organize because you abolished the fucking government.
>>74938407
>fantasy
you're the won operating in fantasy land
I live in the real world where states exist for obvious reasons.
>>74938353
And I agree with what you're saying, which is why I've repeatedly said that I do NOT support anarchy. Read any post following my first one. Once more: I only defined it, I don't think it's a viable goal.
>>74938105
there will be no countries, merely competing military companies, as you have competing supermarkets. just because you give them money in exchange for their services does not make you their subject.
>>74938358
>what are checks and balances
>I Didn't Pass 8th Grade: The Post
>>74938445
>VAT taxes are bad
>therefore all government is bad
Or you could just
you know just stop having a VAT tax which I support
VAT taxes are a retarded idea that shifts the tax burden from the upper class onto the working class.
>>74938536
>>74938536
Why would they not just take ALL of your money? You can't defend yourself.
>>74938590
this
This sandnigger croat faggot needs to die
>>74938536
Who is paying them? Would it be a few wealthy individuals, or many middle class individuals?
>>74938476
>but guess what society can't organize because you abolished the fucking government.
mcdonalds "organizes" on an order of magnitude larger than a small country, yet they don't demand tribute or force burgers on you
>>74938124
>people don't pay for anything unless they're forced to
people will be forced by knowing there are people who want to rob them or hurt them.
are you saying you wouldn't create a contract with a private security company that gives you protection?
i'm pretty sure you would also pay for the private firefighting company too, for the offchance you would need their services.
the use of a government is simply managing all the private companies they have contracts with.
government has nothing and owns nothing.
something needs built? they hire construction companies.
they are the middle man, and you don't need a middle man.
>>74938715
because they have nothing to do with law and order
they sell burgers
>>74932933
>Libertarians unironically believe it should be legal to sell your daughter into sex slavery
I'm a libertarian and I don't believe that.
>>74938731
>'m pretty sure you would also pay for the private firefighting company too, for the offchance you would need their services.
I can think of one great humanitarian who followed this business model and definitely didn't start the fires.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Licinius_Crassus#Rise_to_power_and_wealth
>>74934811
> That Psychology Today article.
Individualism is the means to a stable and uniform society not the end.
IIT: Strawmen everywhere
Do I detect a fellow Stirnerposter?
Greetings fellow voluntary egoist
>>74938731
>people will be forced
people will have no organization at all because anyone in their communities itself can rob them and steal and they can't do shit because there are no laws or organization
So no their society won't be able to function much less defend itself.
> create a contract with a private security company
The "security company" once they had weapons would just steal everything they wanted from everyone and declare themselves rules of the region
>government has nothing and owns nothing
The government has the monopoly on force the basis of fundamental human organization.
>>74938476
>Conquerors and warriors aren't retarded they take what they want and subject everyone else to their whims.
It has been a while since it's been demonstrated that voluntary trade is a superior way in order to create wealth, back in Roman times this wasn't so obvious.
>Society can't oppose them unless society is organized, but guess what society can't organize because you abolished the fucking government.
Societies can organize without government, a small country like the one I live in could probably have the same level of protection it currently has today without a state and nobody is invading us even though they probably could. The level of organization required to invade a society, specially a prosper one, makes it prohibitive and in the age of internet it makes it impossible to do it and not be heavily boycotted/grouped against. Conquerors are a boogeyman you're creating in your mind in order to justify being a slave.
>governments just magically appeared one day
>governments aren't infallible, that means they're bad
An-cap is literally autism made ideology.
Also, don't think majority of people are so dumb to not see what's behind your ideas. You seriously think you would take power in such social conditions.
But you wouldn't. If you were capable, you would exploit current framework, which is far easier to exploit.
You're failures. You're moral nihilists. You're worthless.
>>74938749
And companies would sell law in a stateless society.
>>74938316
> the government is set up so as to prevent a single megalomaniac from wreaking havoc
wow. simply wow. please explain how is this done.
not to mention your president can launch a nuke whenever he wants, or putin too. anyone for that matter.
why nobody has done this is because collateral damage would be too great. funny how you think if we were in ancapistan everyone would lose their mind, and nukes would start flying and we'd have a doomsday scenario on our hands.
>>74938887
>voluntary trade is a superior way in order to create wealth
Not if you want the maximum amount of loot with a minimal amount of effort (stealing)
>Societies can organize without government,
only in fantasies or very primitive tribes
In other words libertarians want us all to go back to living in the jungle.
>>74938932
people can just make up their own law or ignore it since they aren't a state
and any business promising protection can just take over society with a few guns and basic organization skills.
>>74935158
>>74935032
>>74934986
>>74934956
MAXIMUM Stirnerposting
>>74938588
what i am saying is government doesn't really have any use. they are simply managing the money they take. the idea that somehow democratically elected individuals have better idea than me how to spend my fucking money than me is purely absurd.
>>74938885
These people don't even present counterarguments, they spit out red herrings and change the subject to another pants-on-head retarded hypothetical. I can't take it anymore. I'm just going to start meming.
Case in point:
>>74938963
I would carefully explain the US constitution and how it prevents the military being used against its own people, but you were clearly dropped on your head as a child, so I'll just say that I'm gllad you're in that Balkan cesspool and not anywhere near me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vifYelSTlMo
>>74938858
Are you even a leftist.
>>74938857
Individualism is good as long as it aims bettering society
Libertarianism wants to destroy society with the fantasy goal of somehow "helping the individual"
>>74939076
>government doesn't really have any use
other than law, order, defense, public infrastructure, etc
Libertarians always remind me of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE
>>74938963
>not to mention your president can launch a nuke whenever he wants
Don't talk about things you don't understand.
And for start, that's why elections exist, so you don't elect an absolute lunatic to such a position.
>everyone would lose their mind
No, but sane majority would be more open to exploitation by a minority.
Look, understand this, you suffer from a form of autism. You're incapable of comprehending how society and people work, even the basics are out of your reach.
Libertarian, let alone an-cap society, will never come to exist, at least not in the foreseeable future.
For such a society to arise, you'd first need majority of people to support it. That will never happen, because as I told you, that is pure autism. Human nature is both collectivist and individualist. Best society is one that creates a balance.
And furthermore, even if you magically created such a society, human nature dictates that it would quickly collapse. Over time entities that are de facto states would appear.
An-capism is arguing against societal evolution.
>>74938590
they can already take all my money if they wanted to.
now to actually respond to your poorly thought of argument, it would be a bad business model.
we are talking about ancap, not anarchism. the current monetary system in place (capitalism) would still be in place.
that would probably happen in a stateless lawless scenario, and this is not it.
>>74938643
whoa there buddy, nice argumentation and articulation there.
>>74938707
anyone who would want their services. you can buy any military equipment you want nowadays.
hell you can even hire mercenaries.
nothing is stopping you from going to africa and recruiting boko haram.
>>74939152
>ideology
>left
>right
>>74938988
>Not if you want the maximum amount of loot with a minimal amount of effort (stealing)
Heavy consequences to be paid, it's just not worth it anymore in highly capitalized societies. Even Italian mafia is starting to go legit in Sicily other than with drugs, which would be legal in an ancap society anyway.
>only in fantasies or very primitive tribes
As other anon said, big companies are people organizing themselves in a superior way to the state. I'm sorry but yours is not an argument, there's no evidence that societies cannot organize and there are multiple historical examples of societies organizing without coercion.
>people can just make up their own law or ignore it since they aren't a state
You can voluntarily adhere to law frames and be protected by them. The base of Roman law is the non aggression principle if you narrow it down to its core and the proportional response to aggression.
I literally expose myself to privately dictated law every day by working under contracts and agreements.
>and any business promising protection can just take over society with a few guns and basic organization skills.
Again, which one is richer, McDonalds or the mafia of burgers that would force them to buy theirs? I'm richer than any criminal I know and I didn't have to steal a fucking cent in my life. Welcome to capitalism.
>>74939340
I.. I don't understand. Explain to me your wisdom, poster.
>>74937862
> they become property of whoever takes care of them
No. Hell no.
You can only own yourself. Your freedom stops on the edge of the freedom of others. A child (your progeny) has no freedom because she has no agency, but to limit her choices by using her in your benefit would be to REMOVE future freedom from her (and therefore prohibited by natural law)
>>74938715
This is what you guys don't seem to understand, businesses are in fact microcosms of governments. Just because they use currency to exact their will does not mean that they don't have a power structure similar to a government.
The 'tribute' or tax as you seem to mean is actually the profit that the company extracts from your labor. It's not explicit like taxes are, but it is there.
>>74938750
Yet would you interfere if someone was selling people in to slavery or was abusing/neglecting their own children?
If so why would you break NAP for your personal feelings of morality? Isn't NAP the holiest of principles?
>>74939082
whoa, so a piece of paper is preventing a world wide disaster, very interesting.
the fact that you think it is impossible for military to separate itself from the government is amusing.
in a hypothetical scenario of course, since those are all you can think of as counter arguments.
as i've said previously it is amusing that you think in ancapistan everyone suddenly becomes a violent psychopath with no regard for their well being and their family.
>>74939393
Read the Ego and its Own my property.
Max Stirner.
Take the pill.
>>74939365
>big companies are people organizing themselves in a superior way to the state
Big companies exist because of state. Without state to offer protection, big companies wouldn't exist.
Capitalism depends on powerful states to enforce the interests of their business.
''Free market'' and ''free trade'' are utopian ideas. They never existed. Learn fucking history. Start with British Empire.
>there's no evidence that societies cannot organize
They do. One of those organizations is called a state.
>You can voluntarily adhere to law frames
>The base of Roman law is the non aggression principle
Roman law had enforcement for the most capital crimes. Like killing a father.
Another enforcement was religious. Early Roman society was very religious and thus religious norms played a big part.
When that was gone, state slowly took over.
Humans can organize on their own, but that takes time.
In that time, many abuses can occur, inflicted by those humans who don't voluntarily adhere to law.
Your ideas would cause a mass suffering, all for nothing. In time, states would appear again.
States are natural product of societal evolution. This is a part you can't comprehend.
>>74939515
>in a hypothetical scenario of course, since those are all you can think of as counter arguments.
THAT'S ALL YOU DO
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN HYPOTHETICAL
HOLY SHIT ARE YOU TRYING TO BE STUPID
We fucking had exactly the situation you're trying to bring about, around 500 AD in Europe. Look what fucking happened you absolute mongoloid, you ottoman rape baby olive-nigger europoor RETARD
>>74938885
>people will have no organization at all because anyone in their communities itself can rob them and steal and they can't do shit because there are no laws or organization
you are thinking of anarchy, broski.
why do you think police force would dissolve with the removal of the state?
i've said previously only thing subject to change would be the funding. the government has no involvement with the police force or the military.
they have their own hierarchal setup that is independant of the state.
>steal everything they wanted from everyone and declare themselves rules of the region
again, the lawless and structureless scenarion, we are not talking about anarchy.
>The government has the monopoly on force the basis of fundamental human organization.
there is no monopoly if there ismore than one government, which seems to be the case.
and the notion that somehow if you democratically elect those individuals they get some divine powers.
they are just people.
>>74935870
The. Fucking. State.
>>74939174
please refer to my earlier posts, law order defense and infrastructure are independent of the government.
>>74939515
>everyone
Not everyone. Some. That's enough.
Some are always psychopaths. Like yourself. However, things like state prevent you from acting on your impulses.
>the fact that you think it is impossible for military to separate itself from the government is amusing
Military is formed by government.
Military without a government becomes a government.
You don't understand what military is. Military is an organization.
Mercenary band is not a military.
>>74939560
Well actually, I used to be a Stirnerite.. but now I understand this politics bullshit is nothing more but a spook anyways for the individual. So I think I'll come back to being a Stirnerite.
You have reconvinced me, sir.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6d1M0_0R1E
>>74939365
>Heavy consequences to be paid
Unless you attack a society with no organization (without a government society couldn't function anyway easy pickings)
>big companies are people organizing themselves
they exist is a state system
>You can voluntarily adhere to law frames and be protected by them
Or you can choose not to and rob and steal your way to the top because hey there are no laws.
>McDonalds or the mafia of burgers
>comparing burgers to law and order
autism
>>74939785
>>74939903
>why do you think police force would dissolve with the removal of the state?
because no one would pay for it (or follow any laws at all) and militia men would just take over society anyway forming their new feudalist order
>we are not talking about anarchy
chaos is all that happens when you remove the govt
>there is no monopoly if there ismore than one government,
It is a monopoly for a geographical area
>>74939903
> law order defense and infrastructure are independent of the government.
They're entirely dependent on government to function
nothing gets down without a monopoly of force or taxation.
>>74939785
>why do you think police force would dissolve with the removal of the state?
Because no one would pay them.
They would have to be paid by private individuals.
So either they're funded by individuals, or by collective voluntarily.
In first case you have a huge potential for abuse, in latter you have a form of taxation. Only it's ''voluntary''. Okay.
>they have their own hierarchal setup that is independant of the state.
They are controlled by the state. They are responsible to the state. They pledge to protect the state (and it's citizens).
>and the notion that somehow if you democratically elect those individuals they get some divine powers.
Are you autistic, serious question? Were you tested?
>>74939616
>Big companies exist because of state. Without state to offer protection, big companies wouldn't exist.
Sorry but I don't see how, saying something is X because you say so is not an argument.
>Capitalism depends on powerful states to enforce the interests of their business.
Again, not an argument
>''Free market'' and ''free trade'' are utopian ideas. They never existed. Learn fucking history. Start with British Empire.
Prior to the middle age slave-less societies were utopian ideas that never existed.
>They do. One of those organizations is called a state.
Does it need to be coercive?
>Roman law had enforcement for the most capital crimes. Like killing a father.
Another enforcement was religious. Early Roman society was very religious and thus religious norms played a big part.
Religion is a perfect example of a voluntary law frame that you can adhere to, initially conceived to make sure societies could prosper in peace.
>Humans can organize on their own, but that takes time.
Why do you think the transfer to an ancap society would be an overnight process? Nobody could realistically think that we can go from states taking 50% of our labor to 0% in a day.
Obviously the process towards anarcho capitalism takes time.
>States are natural product of societal evolution. This is a part you can't comprehend.
Again, so was slavery, we've overcome it and realized it wasn't necessary. In the future some society will shows us that the state is not necessary either.
>>74939205
pro tip: communism and onkel adolf were elected, well former was supported in overthrowing the leader.
the notion that no bad people can be elected is laughable.
ancap society can be brought to existence by a small minorty (refer to every revolution in history).
and you talking about human nature, i find it very ironic to be quite honest, because you are the one blind to the reality.
ancapistan is the logical next step from capitalism. and capitalism is the most successful economical system we've witnessed.
why? because it relies on people acting in their self interest, it doesn't care about right or wrong or morality, it cares about resources, it cares about what we can touch and hold and use.
human nature is best portrayed by capitalism, and it is only a matter of time when self interest will put ancap in motion.
>>74933325
kek
>>74940205
>Prior to the middle age slave-less societies were utopian ideas that never existed.
In the Middle Ages, indentured servers (peasants) were slaves in all but name.
>>74940330
Hey faggot. You think that government isn't necessary to prevent citizens from coercing each other because coercion is "bad for business," right?
Explain then why people still coerce each other. Is everyone in the world just not on par with your genius-level intellect? Or is coercion only a thing because evil governments exist?
Hard mode: answer without a single hypothetical, you goat-fucking, fake European kebab.
>>74939657
i am demonstrating that the current monetary system we have in place is capitalism.
ancap is capitalism in it's purest form.
the removal of the government will not result in removal of the police force, military force, education instituions, etc.
it is not hypothetical to say current infrastructure would be left intact.
>>74940205
>Sorry but I don't see how
Because you're uneducated or autistic. Yet you're also arrogant so you presume you know everything.
You know very little.
How? Because government protects property by monopoly of force.
Because government intervenes to open up foreign markets to their business.
Without government, business would form government, only a different form of course.
Current system is superior because it derives it's legitimacy from will of people.
But you always need an entity to regulate things. And entity formally detached from personal interests.
>Prior to the middle age slave-less societies were utopian ideas that never existed.
You don't understand what utopian means.
Slave-less societies are product of social evolution. In one part of world, in one culture. Christian culture.
Over time, that Christian culture imposed itself on other cultures.
>Does it need to be coercive?
Yes.
>Religion is a perfect example of a voluntary law frame that you can adhere to
But let me guess, you aren't religious?
>Obviously the process towards anarcho capitalism takes time.
And how do you start that process?
You don't understand, normal people see your ideas as inherently dehumanized and insane.
Rothbard was a fucking autistic Jew.
>In the future some society will shows us that the state is not necessary either.
Post-scarcity. No other way.
>>74940084
>Unless you attack a society with no organization (without a government society couldn't function anyway easy pickings)
How long before they realize the necessity to organize. There are thousands of examples of "easy pickings" nowadays, yet I don't see them exposed to barbarism. I doubt it would be hard for an US criminal organization to sack Liechtenstein, yet somehow they'd rather commerce with them.
>they exist is a state system
Nothing seems to point out they wouldn't exist in a stateless system. I'm all ears though.
>>McDonalds or the mafia of burgers
>>comparing burgers to law and order
It's called analogy but I'll make it easy for you.
What company would be richer, mafia with guns .inc, or pay-if-you-want-and-we'll-protect-you-and-treat-you-well associates?
The point that you've been arguing all along is that it's easy to be a criminal than to become a highly successful company, but criminals are small time and easily disarmed, being a successful behemoth criminal organization is MUCH harder than being a successful behemoth friendly corporation in capitalism.
>>74940569
>the current monetary system we have in place is capitalism
capitalism is the default situation. There was capital at the end of the Roman empire, therefore there was capitalism.
Too bad the result wasn't the paradise you say it would be.
>>74940512
I didn't say all societies were slave-less then, I said that prior to that age pretty much every society had slavery in some form or another, prior to that age humans didn't fathom an alternative.
>>74939921
> things like state prevent you from acting on your impulses.
oh really? it seems you don't understand the underlying concept. it's not the state, it's the threat of violence. the threat of incarceration.
what you are implying is that removal of the state is removal of the threat of violence, which is not true.
when you remove the state you merely remove the apex, not everything involved.
the notion that in ancapistan prisons would disappear, and no one would be able to imprison anyone is simply not true.
>>74940652
So if libertarians are retarded and anarchists even more so. Does that means a society were the government has absolute and utter control of every aspect of the citizen's life (where they live, what they eat, who they interact with, what they think, etc.) is the perfect society?
>>74940084
>because no one would pay for it
if they wanted protection they would. i choose to pay my car insurance, for the mere possibility of getting it damaged or stolen.
>chaos is all that happens when you remove the govt
police and military force are independent of the goverment, please refer to my earlier posts.
>nothing gets down without a monopoly of force or taxation.
monopolies can't exist in a completely free market, and people would willingly pay for the military and police force.
>>74940860
Usually absolute government control leads to oligarchy which is far from perfect since people have no say to it.
Democracy has been the most successful form of governing by far but now the rule of capital is shifting it again towards the rule of the elite. Introducing more democracy into the government would be for the best.
Direct democracy is the way to go. Down with the parliaments.
>>74940800
>it seems you don't understand the underlying concept. it's not the state, it's the threat of violence. the threat of incarceration.
This. We're not in barbarian times when dying raiding at 30 was the best alternative to prosper, we've advanced and capitalism offers a way of living which makes being an outlaw less and less worth it.
The threat of losing your freedom becomes scarier as the alternative ways of generating wealth becomes easier to achieve, and the threat of consequences is what deters crime.
>>74940330
Communism wasn't elected, you historical illiterate.
Nor was Hitler really elected. Both assumed power violently.
>the notion that no bad people can be elected is laughable.
Here he goes again. ''It's not perfect, so it's bad!''.
But there is no chance of anarcho-capitalist society not going the way you imagined it, right?
>ancap society can be brought to existence by a small minorty
So you wanna use violence to force people to accept your ideas? What about NAP?
>ancapistan is the logical next step from capitalism
Yeah just like communism was next logical step in Marx's ideology.
>and capitalism is the most successful economical system we've witnessed
Capitalism is a term so broad you should literally be shot for using it like that in your pathetic argument.
>because it relies on people acting in their self interest
>it doesn't care about right or wrong or morality
>it cares about resources
I'm glad you wrote that, because you finally condensed in few words what you people are.
Morally nihilist materialist spergs who hope to live out their autistic fantasies of power.
>>74932933
With a government, my daughter would just be sold into a black market for slavery. If the government got out of the way and let the free market take its course, then this would give my daughter value in the market and make bidders compete for the best offer to me.
>>74940121
>Because no one would pay them.
how can you say no one would pay them? i bet you pay car insurance, or house insurance, or health insurance, why? for the mere possibility of something going wrong. same principle applies to military and police.
>Only it's ''voluntary''. Okay.
the thing is it's about principle. people pay for most of the things unvolontarily whether they need them or not. you can't say you need to pay for this and don't need to pay for that, or only if you want to.
in ancapistan you are free to choose what you actually want to pay for, but somethings you would basically be obliged to pay for unless you want something bad to happen to you or your property.
>They are controlled by the state. They are responsible to the state. They pledge to protect the state (and it's citizens).
they are responisble to the state because the state pays them, that can be changed. and they are controlled by the one who pays them, which can also be changed.
>>74941017
>Police and military force are independent of the goverment, please refer to my earlier posts.
So, suppose a group of the richest people decide to completely buy out the police and military for their own purposes and told to collect money for protection from the rest of the population or face arrest. How exactly would that be different from a government?
>>74940800
>it's not the state, it's the threat of violence
Yes?
And state exists because of implicit consensus of a certain population.
Which gives it legitimacy.
>that removal of the state is removal of the threat of violence
Without state threat of violence becomes personal, instead of formally objective and depersonalized. Jesus Christ, it's like you don't understand the basics of how world works. No wonder you're an-cap.
>the notion that in ancapistan prisons would disappear, and no one would be able to imprison anyone is simply not true.
And what prevents someone from abusing those conditions?
What prevents someone from acquiring enough wealth and power that no one can oppose him?
Right, people will magically band together in a morally nihilist society that you propose to stop someone. And they will do so efficiently.
Your sick Jewish ideology is the most dehumanized extreme yet. It's even worse than communism, because communism at least formally puts human and society at the helm.
This is what happens when people forget God.
>>74941372
Without legitimacy to commit crimes, in present times it's easier to become really rich through voluntary transaction than by being a criminal force.
The state has the legitimacy to commit crimes, legitimacy given by the slave-minded society, mega-rich people wouldn't.
>>74933995
I doubt Pinochet's Regime was minarchist. It is true in the Economics area, but politically it was a Dictatorship.
DAILY REMINDER
that libertarianism is american made nonsense buzzword for classical liberalism and that by using it you succumb to BURGER JEW
>>74940560
coercion was a thing, is a thing and will always be a thing. i never claimed otherwise. government is not responsible for the police force or the enforcement of law, the police and military are, and they are so because the state pays them, no other reason. they are basically private companies that take money and orders from the state.
coercion is part of human nature and if you try to remove it by threat of violence you do not remove the problem itself, merely the manifestation.
>>74941521
Ah, but the rich wouldn't be committing crimes, they are paying for a legitimate service. The private military and police aren't committing crimes either since they represent the law itself.
>>74941351
>same principle applies to military and police
No it doesn't because military and police are organizations that can apply violence.
>people pay for most of the things unvolontarily
So they wouldn't have to do even worse things, involuntarily.
But do you seriously believe majority of people are opposed to taxation? Wake the fuck up. World is not like how you imagine it. Leave your fucking basement.
>they are responisble to the state because the state pays them
You don't understand it do you?
State is something above individual. State is an ideal, state has an ideology backing it, state is personification of a certain society in a way.
People believe in state. State can function badly, but concept is supported and was always supported.
State doesn't exist because of monopoly on violence, state exists because people want it.
So in case police or military don't obey state, people will rise up eventually to oppose them.
>b-but people will believe in NAP just like how they believe in state!
Yeah, no.
>>74941688
>they are basically private companies that take money and orders from the state.
But that's not true you fucking idiot.
They're paid by the state.
They're regulated by the state.
They can't exist without state, they have no legitimacy.
>coercion is part of human nature
So you suggest we remove entity that makes such coercion as humane as possible and replace it with a society where coercion is entirely personal?
Imagine I raped a 5 year old child and fed it to the dogs. I pay his family compensation. They're okay with.
According to you people, this is totally okay in an-cap society.
>>74941774
>The private military and police aren't committing crimes
>So, suppose a group of the richest people decide to completely buy out the police and military for their own purposes and told to collect money for protection from the rest of the population or face arrest
Pretty sure that's a crime without the "god given" legitimacy that the state takes from people.
Private companies will never have that legitimacy.
There is really not a single poltiical ideology that is more misunderstood than Libertarianism
also Classic Liberalism is not even known to the average burger anymore ... its actually right wing
>>74932933
idk about that we got this libertarian faggot who is trying to run as a 3rd party who will probably steal some votes from hillary who is 10000% for refugees like this guy will let them do anything
>>74936182
They already do that. There's hella sex slaves in Israel, mostly from Eastern Europe
>>74941476
>Nor was Hitler really elected. Both assumed power violently.
Thats not true retard
>>74941982
Luckily its like that only in america, and liberalism still means what it means in rest of the world.
Australian Liberal Party for example.
>>74941688
>government is not responsible for the police force or the enforcement of law, the police and military are, and they are so because the state pays them, no other reason.
>take money and orders from the state.
>orders from the state
Not only have you just contradicted yourself, you neglected the entire judicial system.
THIS MAN THINKS THAT MILITARIES AND POLICE FORCES OPERATE AUTONOMOUSLY
If anyone in this thread was taking you seriously, they're gone now. You've outed yourself too many times as having no knowledge of how the world works. Have a nice life.
>>74941982
Classical liberalism is quickly becoming a meme buzzword in the alt right, but it's still the best ideology. Jefferson was right damn it, and time hasn't changed it.
>>74941588
I believe it's a reference to the fact that many of Pinochet's economic advisers studied under Milton Friedman. They were basically using Chile as their economic sandbox.
>>74932968
>He realizes the West's entire trajectory for the past two centuries since the Masonic Revolt of 1789 has been disastrous.
But the West did extraordinarily well in the 19th century. There were fewer wars among the Western nations, and the Europeans split up Africa for themselves. They humiliated China and kept moving forward both scientifically and economically as the Muslim world stagnated.
>>74941937
>Imagine I raped a 5 year old child and fed it to the dogs. I pay his family compensation. They're okay with.
His family aren't the ones who have to be okay with it, a child is not property. This is breaking the law.
>>74941942
Their legitimacy comes from the overwhelming firepower in their possession.
Sure, people will probably rise up and form an organization to overthrow this power structure either succeeding or failing. If the formed organization succeeds then it will likely create rules and to prevent this from happening again and seek to enforce those rules.
>>74942114
So did Margaret Thatcher's Monetarists. Both experiments bombed SPECTACULARLY.
>>74941664
Of course. Libertarianism is Classical Liberalism 1:1. Unfortunately, the meaning of the term "Liberalism" was skewed in the U.S.A to match the definition of Democratic Socialism. What is increasingly bothering is that the european media do the same mistake that Americans do (i.e : calling supporters of Barack Obama "liberals").
>>74941155
>Communism wasn't elected, you historical illiterate
it was supported by the people, whether it is by fliers, ballots or other means, matters little.
hitler got into power through the system, then proceeded to strip the system of it's power.
>Here he goes again. ''It's not perfect, so it's bad!''
more along the lines democracy is not superior to any other form of government, therefore it can be replaced and eventually will be replaced.
>So you wanna use violence
not necessarily, more like give them only one option. is capitalism violence? if work is the only means of escaping starvation is it violent coercion?
>Yeah just like communism was next logical step in Marx's ideology.
except acting in oneself's best interest is not a pipedream. also even socialism doesn't work, but capitalism has changed the world.
>orally nihilist materialist spergs
ahahahahah, thank you for that laugh my friend.
>i am a moral authority, and my perspective is without fault.
>>74942334
I am not sure if it's happening here too.
While our self-proclaimed liberals are economically still righ wing (and are main opposition to social democrats), they are definitely on the SJW side when it comes to social stuff.
>>74942334
It's the other way around. The capitalists in Europe captured the term "liberalism" and made it their own. American liberalism is far closer to true liberalism. Liberalism has always been about human rights and equality.
>>74942494
Liberalism is about equality of opportunities, not results.
>>74942112
>THIS MAN THINKS THAT MILITARIES AND POLICE FORCES OPERATE AUTONOMOUSLY
You think without society to threaten consequences and their own moral code, military are subject to anyone or anything?
>Their legitimacy comes from the overwhelming firepower in their possession.
Again, it's just not worth it, the consequences of being overthrown and losing all their assets are superior to the benefits of having a society subject to your power. Nobody becomes a millionaire by terrorizing people, criminals are mostly small time, the real money is in serving society.
PS: Drug cartels, because I see it coming as a retort to my message, "serve" people's need for drugs, their wrong practices are just part of the problems of illegalization and them being forced to operate in the shadows.
>>74942617
that's what American liberalism is
>>74942617
>>74942494
Not to mention that primary notion of liberalism, as the name suggests, is liberty and freedom, both of which the american liebralism indirectly opposes by strenghtening rule of the state.
>>74941476
>formally objective
AHHAHAHAHAHAH
holy fuck, seriously. imprisoning people is bad. unless we all agree to do it.
>and what prevents someone from abusing those conditions?
what stops them now? there are numerous abuses of power i can even tell you some that have affected me or the people i know.
>What prevents someone from acquiring enough wealth and power that no one can oppose him?
you mean like america? and their warmongering?
those are things that are not preventable in any shape of form and even are taking place in this day and age.
>This is what happens when people forget God.
wow, should've expected that one.
>i am objective moral authority and my point of view is the right one.
you do realise your current religion is a mere product of chance?
>>74932968
This is accurate so far. I'm basically on stage 3 after going full an-cap for a while
>>74942676
>affirmative action
>>74942745
allows people of color who are systematically oppressed and would never have the opportunity to study at a good college otherwise
Second part of >>74942673 was meant for >>74942268
>>74942831
oh boy you got me there for a sec
good b8
>>74932933
Read sticky
>>74932933
If that was allowed I'd marry and breed like crazy.
>>74941790
>can apply violence
anyone can apply violence, democratic election does not make it more right.
>But do you seriously believe majority of people are opposed to taxation?
you do know the country i live in, right?
you do know every european country has taxes ranging from 40% upwards?
you do realise that taxation pays for the lowest of the low that can not even create enough value to support themselves?
taxation is parasitism. every middle class worker is stripped of a sizeable portion of the fruits of their labour. for what? seriously, for what?
>State is something above individual
there is nothing above individual, state is merely a group of them.
state has nothing to do with the culture, state is merely a hierarchal configuration that is supposed to manage the resources. that's it.
no progress has ever been produced by the "state". only individuals, every invention every product, everything is produced by the individual.
>>74942165
What law?
>>74942409
>it was supported by the people
Nope. Majority of people didn't support Bolsheviks. Not even other leftists and revolutionaries.
>democracy is not superior to any other form of government
Yes it is.
>more like give them only one option
How are you going to do that?
>except acting in oneself's best interest
People do that already. As I said, human (normal human, not autistic like yourself) is both collectivist and individualist.
>but capitalism has changed the world
You again use ''capitalism'' as an argument even though capitalism is a very broad term.
>i am a moral authority, and my perspective is without fault.
Not without fault, but superior to yours, by far.
>>74942716
>unless we all agree to do it
Exactly. And in ancap society, you don't even need agreement.
>what stops them now?
State. Society. Morals. And so on.
>those are things that are not preventable
They are containable.
>you do realise your current religion is a mere product of chance?
My religion?
You're a religious man, only you don't understand it. Your God is money.
>>74942044
He got in power via coalition and assumed power violently.
>>74941937
>But that's not true you fucking idiot.
only it is. state wants something built? they hire private construction company. they want armament they buy it. american government basically buys everything from privately funded companies, one of the biggest ones is lockheed martin.
everything is a company, in the case of the state, the schools, police, military they are only publicly funded. what's the difference between a private school and public one? or a police force and a private security organization. do you think all the rich people rely on the fucking police? they all pay private security companies for everything they need. government only takes the money from the tax payers and uses it as they see fit.
> they have no legitimacy.
something doesn't need to have legitimacy to exist. only thing needed is agency.
>as humane as possible
it's all right as long as it's humane.
>Imagine I raped a 5 year old child
actually yes.
>i need the state and god not to be a shitty human
>>74942673
Now, you could be right, maybe they wouldn't do that because they are thinking of the consequences, but it doesn't change the fact that the richest people would have an inordinate amount of power in society. They could decide to incrementally impose control on people starting with small things like access to toll roads only if you follow the rules of their organization etc. The idea is that they could do these things due to the power vacuum. They might not, but if they have eyes they could see that someone else might try to acquire that power for themselves.
>>74942112
>THIS MAN THINKS THAT MILITARIES AND POLICE FORCES OPERATE AUTONOMOUSLY
they have their infrastructure, independent of the state. the military merely coordinates their goal with the goal of the current government.
if the entire us government got killed and military would be unaffected.
because they still have their chain of command.
> you neglected the entire judicial system.
people employed by the state to enact it's will are somehow relevant here.
>>74936840
My sides are in fucking orbit holy shit
>>74943120
while I can't help but get the stink of edge, I do agree.
>>74933236
Ofcourse it's not what libertarians believe are you fucking clinically retarded? The line stops at when you are comitting violence towards someone else.
>>74943120
>anyone can apply violence
So?
>you do know the country i live in, right?
Yeah. Half of Croats are collectivist and nationalist, other half is collectivist and loves shit like Yugoslavia.
I dare say 99% of Croats would laugh at your ideas, and I'm being generous.
>you do realise that taxation pays for the lowest of the low
Among many other things. I generally disagree with that, and I'm a socialist.
For example, benefits for those who don't want to work. That is lunacy.
>taxation is parasitism
Taxation is pooling the resources of certain society so they could be used for the benefit of everyone by a formally objective authority, whose only goal is benefit of society.
>seriously, for what?
For many things. Among other things, those nice highways you have.
>there is nothing above individual
Only in your diseased mind.
>state is merely a group of them
State is simply a product of society. It's one aspect of society.
What I meant is that society is above individual, because individual can only exercise certain freedom and prosper in a society.
>only individuals, every invention every product, everything is produced by the individual
Individuals living in societies, who formed states.
States provided conditions that allowed those individuals to achieve something. How many inventors and great individuals do you see in Somalia?
>>74943602
But these small steps towards authoritarian behavior would have major backlash from society, today with internet and major media presence in our lives it's almost impossible to go unnoticed, we're way too informed.
VolksWagen suffered major losses after behaving in a way that society perceived as wrong, it wasn't because of fines, it was because media reported it and people reacted, and they were forced to sell a big quantity of assets because of this and suffered a major blow on their stock prices.
Free market is quite effective at punishing companies.
>there are people on /pol/ who believe in any form of Anarchy
>>74943520
>leftists
yeah, they were not up to par with the bolshevik standards.
also they managed to banish the whole royalty.
>Not without fault, but superior to yours, by far.
please enlighten me.
>Exactly. And in ancap society, you don't even need agreement.
you do see the double standard right?
nobody has moral authority.
>State. Society. Morals
society stops nothing, morals are restraints for the weak and state is only an instrument susceptible for use as the ruling see fit.
>Your God is money
well i can see that our definitions of god are different.
also i don't apply divine power to money, nor i use it to justify my actions are superior or moral.
>>74943571
>american government basically buys everything from privately funded companies
A terribly inefficient system. Russian dollar invested in their military industry buys them a lot more than American dollar invested in their military industry.
>what's the difference between a private school and public one?
Public one isn't designed around profit.
>they all pay private security companies for everything they need
Nope.
>something doesn't need to have legitimacy to exist
In long term, it does.
>it's all right as long as it's humane.
Yep.
>i need the state and god not to be a shitty human
Majority of people do.
>>74943520
>What law?
The non aggression principle, we're speaking about anarcho capitalism here, where NAP is the base of everything, right?
Read all my posts in this thread before asking who will enforce it. I explained it way too many times to bother. Click on my ID code.
>>74935181
What's to stop the people who would like to sell your daughters into slavery coming to you, killing you and taking your daughters?
>>74944158
>nobody has moral authority
That's your opinion.
>society stops nothing, morals are restraints for the weak and state is only an instrument susceptible for use as the ruling see fit.
Society and morals stop a lot. You're just too blind to see it.
>well i can see that our definitions of god are different.
>nor i use it to justify my actions are superior or moral
So why should anyone listen to you?
>m-muh self-interest
Self-interest is satisfied in societies under state authority too.
>i don't apply divine power to money
You simply don't understand. Anyway, why am I even wasting time.
Not only will your ideology never appeal to masses (and right now, we're seeing a slow reversal in social thought, and Jewish ideologies are starting to whither away), you will grow out of it.
>>74943905
>Half of Croats are collectivist and nationalist
only people like that are young ones that need a "cause" and don't have one
>collectivist and loves shit like Yugoslavia
that is the old part of population, socialists who like to suckle on the state teat.
but you forgot about a lot of people who dislike the both. people who fought for independent croatia.
> benefit of everyone by a formally objective authority, whose only goal is benefit of society
i really hope you don't believe that.
everyone is corruptible. our current government is a pure example of that. hell our former PM stole a shitload of money and even sold fucking INA.
nobodies goal is the benefit of society, except for a few idealistic souls.
> those nice highways you have
are you saying the state is responsible for that?
the only thing they did is chose the private construction company to build them.
not to mention those nice highways are in fucking debt. probably co funded too.
>>74944287
Okay, but I compensated the family.
And how is child not a property? You made it, didn't you?
You have to feed it and clothe it.
Could a child survive without you? No it couldn't.
So I guess child is a property, and for raping it and feeding it to the dogs, I pay a just compensation.
And if family agrees? What's the problem?
>>74944533
After scrolling through your discussion,i'm not fully sure what you're about?
Fascist?
One things for sure,arrogant.
>>74944744
>>74943905
>Only in your diseased mind
seriously now? every breakthrough, every achievement, every feat is the product of some individual, not the state, not the people, not the community. that's a simple fact.
>It's one aspect of society
it's the aspect with more power than it should hold.
>States provided conditions that allowed those individuals to achieve something
are you saying the state is responsible for the genius of the great people we owe our place to?
that is simply not the case. for all those people needed was their mind.
>>74933236
If you're not hurting anyone else and minding your own pursuit of happiness what the fuck do I care what you do? Don't expect me to embrace degenerate behavior, and don't expect me to pay for it either. Human trash wouldn't be embraced for the stupid shit they do if there wasn't money being wasted on them, and the people that fund it didn't have buyers remorse. It's all a game of justifying poor choices.
>>74944926
Yes, Einstein would've created STR in a tribal society. Just fuck off man.
No, what they really have a haed on for is you losing her to the free market due to defaulting on credit card debt
>>74945035
pommes frites suck without salt. add salt and theyre suddenly great. that doesnt mean that salt is the dinner, that salt makes the dinner on its own, or that pommes frites would be inedible without salt.
the state, just like the persons family, personality, ambitions, hopes, and fears, all have a part in what people are able to do. that does not mean that the state is responsible for it, it is created due to the state, nor that the state deserves the credit for it.
jesus christ, how old are you?
>>74944221
Public one isn't designed around profit.
that's the problem, isn't it?
the biggest profit goes to the best school, and the best school needs to beat the competition, which leads to best schools, correct?
public schools are held up to no standard, anyone can be employed, it has to follow the educational program set by the state (which is outdated and poorly written), and they are highly inefficient.
>Yep
there we go with the double standard again.
>Majority of people do.
that's not really an argument.
>>74944001
The threat of billions of dollars in state-issued fines and loss of license to sell cars or to keep old cars on the road had nothing to do with share losses.
Yeah, right.
Who makes up all these political view names?
>>74935977
But you don't have the right not to sell property or use income to feed livestock when you have contractual debt obligations. Lolbertarians love contracts. They think tgey qill be the ones with the upper hand. Kek
No, they don't. But you probably knew that.
>>74945161
I never said state did it. I just said state provided an ambient in which such people can create.
>>74945178
>that's the problem
Nope. And you're mistaking corruption for something that's impossible to solve.
>leads to best schools
Nope.
>that's not really an argument
In real life it is.
>>74944533
>That's your opinion
not really no. morality is simply a value system that attempts do define and weigh the value of life and liberties, and since the system is not quantifiable it's not objective.
>Society and morals stop a lot
tell that to africans or the middle east, just beacuse it's not happening in europe currently doesn't mean it won't.
>So why should anyone listen to you?
for the incentive. anyone who is dissatisfied with getting taxed the shit out of them have incentive to listen to me. self interest and all that.
>Not only will your ideology never appeal to masses
it doesn't have to. just to enough people to enact the system.
> Jewish ideologies are starting to whither away
that's optimistic
>you will grow out of it.
i don't think i will grow out of getting my income stripped away from me
>>74936706
But how else should a child feed herself?
>>74932933
Chinks and other SEAmonkeys did it before libertarians picked it up
>>74945479
and so do the family and just about everything else. but the state is not the single greatest factor in whether individuals are able to create great things or not, nor is it necessary. it sometimes aids the person if the state believe they can benefit from the invention, and that its realistic for it to be invented, but the state is not necessary to discover or make new and revolutinary stuff.
>>74945479
>>74945666
also, check em you deluded communist of a goatfucker.
>>74945035
einstein's work was based on other people's work. you are taking the work of other individuals and taking it away.
doesn't make it state's or societies work though.
what about internet? you can take and improve on anyone's work, does that make the people who power the internet responsible?
>>74932933
Except that it breaches the NAP senpai
>>74945505
>tell that to africans or the middle east
I don't care about that.
>for the incentive
What incentive?
As I said normal people both care for their own interest as well as the interest of their group.
>with getting taxed
And again, majority of people have no problems with getting taxed. Not even those where taxes are enormous, like in Sweden.
>just to enough people to enact the system
And why would ordinary people follow that system?
It has no legitimacy.
>that's optimistic
Nope. See support for Trump for example (not talking about Trump but motivations of his supporters), see Hungary, Poland, Russia, rise of right-wing in France, Netherlands, Germany, UK...things are changing, and they are changing in another direction.
>i don't think i will grow out of getting my income stripped away from me
Nothing prevents you from leaving Croatia.
>>74945479
>And you're mistaking corruption for something that's impossible to solve.
and what is that?
>Nope.
that's like saying the best people don't work in the best companies.
>In real life it is
in real life it's guided with incentivization and violence, those two still work very well in ancapistan.
because most of them are closet pedos
so they start advocating for pimping out their daughters and start spouting bullshit like incest and molestation has no effect on most girls
men are shallow and transparent for the most part and like to be hypocrites too. they don't want the government interfering with how they use their dicks, usually by putting them in their offspring
>>74945872
you keep saying this stuff about caring both for your own interest and that of the group, and that people do not have a problem with being taxed.
the thing about the group is only true when close to the group, which is very rare nowaday. where you have seen this incredible ''brotherhood'' i do not know, but i assure you that it is a rare thing in real life outside of friends for life and family.
as for the taxing point, everyone is sick and tired of it. it was less noticeable in scandinavia due to our welfare model satisfying us, but it is starting to fall apart now, and the complaints about taxes are getting louder than ever. outside of the socialist (succesful) countries, everyone has always had a problem with it.
do you even go outside?
>>74945666
>>74945714
>and so do the family and just about everything else.
Never disagreed with it.
>but the state is not the single greatest factor
Nope, but it's a very important factor.
Family, society, state, morals, religion, all that works in synergy to create a better society where individual can prosper. In ideal case of course.
>communist
See >>74944906
>>74945717
>does that make the people who power the internet responsible
In part, yes. Without internet you wouldn't be able to do it.
If you were fighting for mere survival, you wouldn't be able to do intellectual work, would you?
>>74935006
8 shades of retarded
>>74945872
I don't care about that.
you don't care about that because of two things.
one is double standard, and the other is that their society and their morals can't stop much of anything. which proves that just because it worked semi well for a group of people does not make it an universal solution.
>As I said normal people both care for their own interest as well as the interest of their group.
they care for one more than for the other, and i think we both know which one it is.
>Not even those where taxes are enormous, like in Sweden.
and sweden has it's own problems because of it.
not to mention that sweden is crumbling. a quick look to the crime rate and rape increasing, along with the dissatisfaction of the people.
>It has no legitimacy
people thought no system other than monarchy had any legitimacy, and look what happened.
legitimacy is just a point of view.
>>74946078
then the point remains. not only is it not the single greatest factor, it is not nearly as important as you say it is. people do great things without a stable family, without a state, without morals, and without religion. all of them do work in synergy, but you seem to think that the state is necessary for such things to happen, which it is not.
if we want to simplify it, what the state contributes is safety from bodily harm, which even horrible ''states'' grant you.
>>74946063
>which is very rare nowaday
Exactly.
That's why you are collapsing.
>outside of the socialist (succesful) countries, everyone has always had a problem with it.
People don't have a problem with taxation. People have problems when their money is used badly.
>>74932968
No. For me it was 1-4-3-2
>>74933688
People with debt would default and the creditors claims would preced the right of the parent to support their children who would be supported by rich perv molesters with likely a under the table payment as the pervs would be competing for fuck meat and the money would funnel their prey to them. The chilf has the choice to be molested or starve by one perv or another. Stayinh with the one qho bought her viluntariky would be their best choice bc the payment proves they are valued, by someone witg at least the means to support them. Also to anyone else they are damaged goods
>>74946078
>If you were fighting for mere survival, you wouldn't be able to do intellectual work, would you?
funny how that basically describes the history of europe.
>>74946197
>universal solution
It doesn't exist.
>they care for one more than for the other
That's why they are unhappy. Happiness is only found in the balance between collective and individual.
>not to mention that sweden is crumbling
Due to policies unrelated to my ideas, but very related to your ideas.
>legitimacy is just a point of view.
You don't understand. Your point of view is inherently foreign to normal people.
How are you going to make them accept your POV?
By force?
That's where you lose buddy, collective is always stronger than a bunch of individuals.
>people do great things without a stable family, without a state, without morals, and without religion
Yes, as we can see from examples of many great individuals from Somalia.
>what the state contributes is safety from bodily harm
Which is highly important.
>>74946249
to be precise, we are not collapsing due to lack of community and ''taking one for the group'', we are collapsing (''we'' implies scandinavia more so than denmark) because of the decision of politicians, and influence of the boogeymen.
until recent years, scandinavia was all about being together, a tight community (which still exists in denmark) because that that was the only way our welfare model could function. without our community we would not ''collapse'' we would just become less socialistic with the troubles they present. to add to that, denmark is far more nationalistic than many other european countries which are not currently collapsing. ''being away from the group'' does of course not aid us, but it is not (yet) nearly the problem you see it to be.
and i do not know where your belief in taxes comes from, but i can inform you that they are untrue. the masses rarely see what their money are being used for, and when they do, they still prefer to get their own money instead of a public project. this is a common concensus just about worldwide.
>>74946249
>People don't have a problem with taxation. People have problems when their money is used badly.
funnily enough only way to ensure that is to remove taxation.
>>74946346
>funny how that basically describes the history of europe
Only in your simplistic historically illiterate mind.
>>74946499
half of the message was to the wrong guy, al-andalus.
and, if we assume that your wonder formular of necessary things to do and create great things work, somalia has produced no great individuals due to lacking in ALL of them, not due to lacking in state. the state is not necessary if the other points are fulfilled, and at this point, countries like sweden would be better off without the state, and still manage to be a first world country, and a good place to be.
>>74946507
>because of the decision of politicians
Who were poisoned by -isms which are well seen in this thread.
So are people, who elect those politicians.
Denmark is just one step behind. You're also infected.
>>74946519
>funnily enough only way to ensure that is to remove taxation.
Nope. Strict control of spending, transparency and draconian punishments for corruption do the job, among other things.
Some waste is expected and tolerable. Much more would be wasted in your ideas.
>>74946653
>the state is not necessary
Can you point out any successful stateless society?
>That's why they are unhappy. Happiness is only found in the balance between collective and individual.
speculation. also not every person derives happiness as you do.
>but very related to your ideas
my ideas are opposite of a socialistic democracy with high taxation, and government interventionsm.
>collective is always stronger than a bunch of individuals
biggest proponents of that were communism and natsoc.
>Yes, as we can see from examples of many great individuals from Somalia.
most nobel prize winners are jewish and caucasian. which is indicative of a capacity of a group to produce great individuals. where are all the great scientists from other countries? your argument is the equivalent of saying i saw a tall chinese man.
>>74933105
htf do you know who Karl Pilkington is
>>74946588
>Only in your simplistic historically illiterate mind.
oh, so it's only in my mind that there were 2 world wars and numerous conflicts and wars throughout european history? hell, only croatia wen through bunch of shit ranging from giving up independancy for military aid, to relatively recent separation from yugoslavia.
the entire europe history is basically an encyclopedia of wars.
>>74946796
the entire world is ''infected.'' and the politicians were not ''poisoined'' they chose this of their free will, knowing what would happen. it is merely that they no longer care for their countries, not that the boogeyman called ''-isms'' have arrived to rape and pillage.
>>74946892
i cannot, they have all been destroyed in history back when it was focused more on warfare at home. a state was needed (usually) to keep a military. however, nowadays many minor nations (like those in scandinavia) do not need a military of their own to protect them. with that said, it is pretty unreasonable to think that a stateless society could survive nowaday, but the point is that a state does not produce great individuals, other individuals do.
>>74946796
> You're also infected.
loled heartily. every politician is acting in their self interest.
you are making a deluded assumption that everyone actually cares about other people to whom they are not related to.
>Strict control of spending, transparency and draconian punishments for corruption do the job, among other things.
ahahahaha.
where are you actually from? it can't be montenegro. you'd know better.
the system croatia tries to emulate is the european one, abiding by the EU regulations, and that has had literally 0 effect.
those measures accomplished little in stopping our PM selling our oil company and stealing a shitload of cash.
just as it stops no one in stealing money through "javna nabava" or in english putting up a request to which anyone can apply and through agreement they choose their buddies and overcharge everything.
>>74947715
i like you, slovakia
