Ancap is Truth

>find out about ancap on Sup Forums
>laugh at the memes
>start reading about it
>it actually kinda makes sense
>now seriously consider myself an anarcho-capitalist

Did this happen to anyone else?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ptw41GUKLpc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Australia
libertarianism.org/blog/non-agression-principle-cant-be-salvaged-isnt-even-principle
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

hmm leaf

yeah but then I became a NatSoc in 2013

congrats you're the one leaf on here that isn't a retarded statist cuck
I went from conservative to libertarian to full on ancap in a matter of three weeks
I was always right leaning but when I got involved in politics the change was insanely fast

yes

Yup. Thought it was meme tier, then started reading hoppe. A robust ideology which avoids being a bootlicker...

Same as him

Well, I became ancap due to understanding to make socialdemocracy work is imposible

And I tried, out of good will, ingenuinity and curiosity, not really because wanting to parasite, so I was humble enought to step out and realice my idiocy.

I was a socialist once, now I defend to helicopter ride people like my past self.

Why, because ingenuinity can't be tolerated if it's cancer. If the cancer is so subborn to violate the NAP, then it's legitimate to throw them off an helicopter.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ptw41GUKLpc

2nd part

then I found out libertarian movement, the minarchists, lolbertarians and ancaps differences, and found myself on the ancap category since the beginning

thx to 2008 crisis that I got interested into monetarism

>being an anarchist
's'where you fucked up, rubes

why's that

I am a latino cancap in SA the only thing that works is near anaap states of nature people are too savage
Es la cultura de los paises latinos cualquiera con algo de roma ha visto como en ellos la unica opcion es el pinochetismo o la libertad total

implying you can enginer your way to understand a misunderstanding

Give it six months. You'll be far-right in no time, that's how I started.

No the exact opposite. The more the ancaps speak the more retarded they sound

It's not for my understanding of his reasoning - it's to point out what I expect to be massive gaps in justifications for his own belief sets that I bothered to ask the question.

Do you really think I expect randoms on Sup Forums to have sophisticated belief sets?

you can't move anywhere else when being an ancap, it's like growing out of believing in thoot fairies, there's no way back, you're out of that belief system

the personal criterias about where to push society are voluntarly and subjective, and they no longer displays in a political opinion range, but a different one

ancap and kissing in public; being open to it, or against it it's no longer a political matter, but a private concern of those who own legitimated rights to rule over their property

you've never trully understood anarchocapitalism, pleb

The first thing I'd do if anarchy were instated is build a GovCo and ask if anybody didn't want to get in on this Governing and Being Governed stuff we're doing over at GovCo, pay's not the best, but you get lifetime security and we'll cover a lot of your housing costs.

And a lot of families would buy right in because the dumb cucks, lol, all want a secure future for their children.

I'm the pleb? How exactly do you expect a society based on such to work when you're surrounded by non-whites who don't value the same things.

But hey, at least you got your freedumbs!

>and ask
Doesn't sound like a government if you're not simply imposing yourself on others.
Governments are unique only in that they impose themselves on others and pretend to be legitimate in doing so.

you can't trully replicate the "business" of a government from a private sector

to put it simply, you can't cheat/fraud/abuse your clients and get away with it

self ownership can't be traded trought private contracts

The opposite,read about it say to yourself damn thats retarded and moved on.

I have trouble taking it seriously because I think of how quickly ancaps would get divided and conquered by a state... and how the best way to counter this would be forming their own state, not fucking private militaries... which would also turn into states.

Ancaps have way too much faith in peoples rationality and the free market to deal with shit like a private military starting to build up arms and effectively forming a state. They're right that states make their citizens into slaves, but it's awfully hard to beat somebody that has slaves without your own slaves, states allow a few intelligent rational actors to control a literal army of slaves.

Public roads are far superior to dealing with tolls and easements. There's nothing that can stop "private millitaries" and "private courts" from forming monopolies, and when you have a monopoly on law and the military, you have a fucking lolbertarian state...

if you don't know, why don't you ask before judging? are you retarded?

phisical removal
phisical isolation
private interests are saved with phisical action against action that violates the NAP

Is the average Canadian interested in picking up guns and trying to invade and slaughter people in Michigan if tomorrow people in Michigan no longer accepted the facade of being "governed" by people hundreds of miles away that have nothing to do with them?

You can leave. There's a desert right there, a few jungles, a few subcontinental hell-holes. Ain't the species' fault that it near-unanimously wants to participate in GovCo, while you don't.

You mean you can't join a decent corporation that won't make you pay taxes? Again - ain't the species' fault that all its corporations weigh being involved with GovCo as a better deal than not being.

I mean, you like freedom, right? Can't corporations do what they want, sign on with whomever they want?

How do you get around the fact that we don't have free will? It's not like you can actually blame some one for their situation?

Or, alternatively, those people who are violently imposing themselves on me with no moral justification can stop.

It seems pretty blatantly obvious that the moral burden of justifying aggressive action is on the aggressor and not on the target of that aggression.

Ancaps have absolutely no way to stop "private mlitiaries" from forming monopolies and becoming a new state.

Their entire solution to not getting conquered by a state will inevitably lead to a state because they don't believe in stopping monopolization and states are essentially places where there is a regional monopoly on military power.

After this monopoly forms, what stops this military with a monopoly from acting like a state and enslaving its citizens? Jack shit.

Ancaps are right about the relationship between states and their citizens, but ultimately, they can't actually form a society that can beat states and/or prevent one from forming.

They also seem to ignore that people have free will and can form non ancap societies within an ancap society because stopping said society from forming would break the NAP.

There's so many flaws I don't know where to start. I don't really understand how low IQ you have to be to understand it can't work. Obviously states are flawed, but the alternative ancaps propose is so dramatically more flawed, it doesn't matter. They have zero effective way to deal with monopolization, and states are just monopolies essentially...

>people hundreds of miles away that have nothing to do with them?
You kidding me? The average Canadian (like the average Westerner generally) thinks ~everyone~ has something to do with them. If anything even remotely comparable to slavery started occurring in Michigan (which it would, though that's not necessarily a criticism) you can bet it'd be pretty easy to get Canadians armed and marching. All it would take is a bit of lying on the part of a media with vested interests. Easy done, really.

>how quickly ancaps would get divided and conquered by a state..

You're missing how quickly they will become a super power

Singapores got from shithole to 1/4 of my whole country GDP in three decades, and it's just a single city mate.

Then, it's just about building defences

Look at swiss, they all have weapons and military training, that's what makes them hard as fuck to conquer.

And you can always develope recreative nukes TM.

This.

It's really easy to point out to people that things actually have no impact on them. That's a very easy conversation point even with loony leftists.

It's why secessionism is such an easy sell of an argument. It's so blatantly obviously beneficial and can be explained in pure baby terms so succinctly that even mouthbreathing retards can't turn their brain off quickly enough to not understand it.

Implying you know the natural conditions behind any form of monoply
>you don't
>the anwser it's statism, government policies and laws

I honestly can't tell if people here are parodying ancaps or if they're actually this retarded.

>"if you got rid of a state, I think you'd eventually have another state come round again"
Do you actually think this is a substantive counterargument to anarchism?
"Evil will probably happen at some point in the future, therefore don't try to fight evil."
Are you retarded?

states aren't monopolies in an ancap world, they're contracts people buy into in exchange for services. An Ancap world with a state is just Minarchy

There's an important point I've seen numerous theorists make now and again, which is that when you get to the point in your political theory of requiring that people stop doing something, of e.g. 'if people would just...' - then it's time to scrap those ideas and start again. Because at that point you're tipping into scifi writing. Who cares who's right or wrong, dude?

What matters is what will happen, not what should; might makes right; etc.

Ancrap makes sense if you ignore all of human history pointing out that in the absence of an iron fist, humans quickly degenerate to absolute barbarianism and faggotry followed by a period of feudal warlords, followed by statism.

If it's so easy to sell why's no one sold it? Why hasn't Cali already seceded?

even ignoring the obvious issues with protecting an ancap society. How do you stop monopolies in core services completely fucking up your society? With no government to regulate the finance sector, water, power, telecommunications etc. why wouldn't these monopoly corporations take everyone for a ride? How do you stop them?

100% ancapias cannot start from democracies nor past states, but from new grouds where there's no corruption

Liberland is an example of an ancap project, it's core values are settled by its founders and cannot be corrupted

that's a pivotal/centralized keypoint that has nothing to do with political centralization of randomly renderized abuse in real time TM

CHRIS KORDA

Ok so none of those countries you listed are remotely ancap. They are right wing but not ancap. Singapore for starters is extremely authoritarian and you will get caned for graffiti and sometimes for chewing gum.

Just like Pinochet wasn't either.

Stop appropriating stuff that isn't part of ancap.

>You're all pedophiles
>You're all mass murderers
>This is stupid
>You are a retard

With counter arguments this strong I don't understand why ancapism is still around.

>You're all pedophiles
>You're all mass murderers
>This is stupid
>You are a retard

With counter arguments this strong I don't understand why ISLAM is still around.

this

...

minarchies aren't trully ancap, minarchies are just the most efficient form of colectivism

don't get hijacked by them, anything that happens in an ancapia isn't related to states nor politics, it's just different

You don't call politics to what happens inside and between corporations or businesses, do you?

So anarchists are more about just fucking up a system so it will be temporarily set back?

If people think something should happen, they're more likely to foster an atmosphere in which that something does happen.
That's incredibly intuitively basic.

A very small number of people are even bothering to make the pitch. The number is growing fairly rapidly though - a testament to the strength of the argument. Though not as quickly as is warranted, which is a testament to the crippling dipshittery that is public education nonsense about "one nation" and fabrication of historical events.

I read hoppe too, but it's only robust if you leave out the enourmous stupidity of some people.

I'm not saying they are ancap, they're just what an ancap state becomes if a government forms, which is what Nozick told Rothbard because he didn't think anarchy could exist for a while before developing some form of government.

I'm a minarchist though

Harsh punishments do not equal authoritarianism.

The dumb is, the NAP part. That is the most retarded part of the whole thing. They have to hope and pray that everyone creates an NAP that allows for killing communists. What they somehow don't realize is that the majority of voters in America this last election voted for a communist in the popular vote so their NAP is going to say "we kill all right wingers" and literally it's just tribal warfare destroyed state.

And then hopefully China and Russia don't seize the opportunity to invade then and demolish us because they will be 1000 times more organized through having a strong unifying government.


This is literally the party of 13 year olds and I am so fucking sick of it. I want to see these teens create a country using this and watch how fast it crashes and burns.

anarcho capitalism is a democrat slur of capitalism
youtube yaron brook
there is no X capitalism
there is just capitalism
trying to link anarchy to capitalism is as stupid as trying to link cronyism to capitalism
capitalism is property adn unregulated production and trade, real free markets

I'm interested in doing my duty to oppose and decry evil. Do you really expect all anarchists to have uniform motivations though? I can assure you hardly anyone who is nevertheless an anarchist shares mine.

>Ancaps become superpower
>they pay private militaries for defense
>Private militaries combine in accordance with the NAP naturally over time until there are fewer and fewer players
>Military eventually has a monopoly
>Military monopoly takes over country and exploits them for all they're worth

Look you're back where you started.

It's so trivial to break ancaps society it's hilarious.

States themselves are essentially organizations that have a monopoly on violence. We didn't start out with states, so they managed to gain these monopolies out of nothing. A lot of states started out when various tribes got united under one mighty leader.

Ancaps understand literally zero about how power works. They understand nothing about how monopolization works. You have to be absurdly blind to reality to think ancap society is even plausible on a significant scale.

I absolutely am making the argument that the evil of states is inevitable. I absolutely am making the argument monopolization of violence is inevitable.

Revolutions happen all the time and states get overthrown and countries are plunged into anarchy. Usually when order is restored, you end up with a pathological state that abuses everybody. When you have a state, giving you some representation, that seems comparatively not so bad, you should stick with the devil you know.

Ancaps believe they can enter a stateless utopia but they can't. Regardless of how functional a state is, they propose overthrowing it, and going into anarchy, despite the fact a new state will form that will usually be more pathological than the old one.

Throwing society into anarchy is good situationally. Venezeula is probably better off with anarchy at the moment the state is so fucking pathological, and because any new state that forms will likely not be as bad as the current one.

Ancaps are just extremely naive. They're redpilled that states are evil, but their solution is completely naive.

>ancapistan will immediately get conquered!

...you do realize with that logic plenty of modern states would get instantly conquered because they have far weaker militaries than their neighbors, right? I could argue that multiple states could not exist because as long one is stronger it will conquer all the rest and lead to world hegemony. Something like Swizerland is obviously a fantasy that cannot exist.

please read an economics textbook. you understand nothing about how monopolies work.

They don't equal ancap either that states everyone can do whatever they want. Not everything is a private force in singapore or switzerland.

They also don't run around with NAPs which anyone can follow or not follow based upon who has the most people that agree with it. Man what could possibly go wrong in that system?

So mister ancap, tell me how ancap regulates protection in real life and how it differs from mafia protection money.

>I absolutely am making the argument that the evil of states is inevitable
>I absolutely am making the argument monopolization of violence is inevitable
Alright. So?
I could also argue that the dissolution of states is also inevitable. What's the substantive weight to that? Why do I care?

>Ancaps believe they can enter a stateless utopia
Hello? I'm over here dude. That thing you're talking at is a man made of straw.

I understand the intention. I just don't see how people latch on to ancap for anything other than meme reasons.
Are you an ancap?

Personally I identify more with Anprim; getting rid of big gov for big tech won't solve anything. Gotta bring back big nature.

dont have a fucking state that makes a law forcing you to be with browns, and then when bad shit happens raise your taxes to pay for it!

If you measure in ancaps terms these examples, they're the best resemblances of what an ancap society is

A 1 Land owner that rents and set his very own rules of conduct and so on
B Heterodox ownership of the land and resources, rules iterate between properties and asociations

Both are ancapias, ancapias isn't about being in god mode and breaking everything at will, it's about eliminating political power, because it's ilegitimate coercion.

Legitimate coercion is completly fine.

Being nude deosn't phisically hurt property or any person, but it might break the modesty rules of my property. This is the key point retards don't understand about anarchocapitalism; private ruling systems, freedom and not politics.

You should go freelance and make your own contracts to start learn what civilzation is about.

>what is the Globalist agenda

>ancap being anything other than a meme-tier political philosophy
>literally wanting a post-apocalyptic mad max society
I grew out of ancap when I hit 14 and stopped being a retarded idealist.

>They are right wing but not ancap.
They are among the most economically free in the planet. They have the smaller governments in this planet.

At least they have a military. Ancappers would be arguing over who's military has authority constantly.

And Switzerland has a strong military and is not remotely ancap. It has loose financial regulations but it is not completely privately controlled nor do the citizens argue about whose tribe is right on any given day.

>they don't believe in stopping monopolization
you mean you dont

Libertarian?! LOL, no retard, it is a NatSoc board

I'm a anarchist. I don't care so much how people organize themselves so long as they do so voluntarily.

>anprim
I have literally zero interest in living in a world wherein people waste their time doing things they'd rather not do when they could live in a world in which they're able to choose alternatives that they prefer over those other things. If you can convince everyone to live a shittier life for the sake of.... whatever you think you gain, more power to you.

if you accept that morality exists, then the consistent allplication of the NAP is the only moral theory that is consistent.

"Argument from effect": Not an argument.
Ad hominem: Not an argument.

Also I wonder why you try to start a discussion about ancap on a board full of national socialist conspiracy theorists. What did you expect?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Australia
lol I sure love the state and being a droolin drongo

Yeah, I found those crazy ball memes a great thing because they could bring more people to actually look up what private law societies and ancap are.

I even made a few myself lmao.

libertarianism.org/blog/non-agression-principle-cant-be-salvaged-isnt-even-principle

Use something else. The NAP is fine but root it in something. For me the essence of the NAP is easily derived from God's commandments.

>100% ancapias cannot start from democracies nor past states, but from new grouds where there's no corruption
So you are 100% delusional right?

Ancap is more practical than communism, but still prone to devolving (or maybe evolving) into aggregations of power that will be capable of coercive force on a suburb, then town, then city, then state level.
There is no way of guaranteeing the long term existence and stability of an ancap state.

No they aren't ancapias at all. Something that has a strong free market system doesn't make it ancapia.

In Singapore, the people consent to having a strong unified single police system that is paid for by the government through taxes. They also consent to universal laws and controls.

In ancapais you have the NAP system which is the primary downfall of it because everyone doesn't have to consent to a single NAP. Nor do they have to consent to universal laws. So what happens is you have different rules for everything which just creates chaos and confusion and nobody can get anything done.

You are also spouting random stuff about property. I don't think you're even addressing the actual governments at all.

This post kind of demonstrates that you never understood anarcho capitalism to begin with.

How can you tell people they will grow out of something you don't understand?

How can you be surrounded by people who don't value the same things when the market can (and would) offer you solutions?

Don't you think that the moment some people realize democracy is preventing them from being free, they will look to purchase property somewhere else where this freedom is protected, for example, a community where democracy is heavily limited by contract?

Don't you think that the most prosperous business owners will, like they do today, live and have their business there where democracy has limits so they don't need to fear random expropriations or totally unreasonable taxes?

If you're following me thus far, wouldn't it be logical to believe that even the leftists will have to surrender their love for democracy the moment they realize that they need jobs, and that the jobs are in the communities with no democracy allowed?

Same goes for non-whites, the market will offer that option, and if it is the option that brings the good amounts of prosperity and therefore good amounts of demand, it will be emulated.

You were pretty eloquent around the start, but a lot of this 'a testament to the crippling dipshittery that is public education nonsense'-style complaining is just ringing again and again of 'if only it weren't so'. I do think California might secede (not today, but someday), but California has a quite specific reason for secession, as I'd say does Scotland, but why would Michigan secede? Why would a state that voted for Trump and now has their chosen rep vote to leave that country? Or even a state whose near-majority, at least, voted for Trump (which is close to having one's rep in power).

No one's gonna budge. For most folks in most states, it's not worth the effort.

>If people think something should happen
Right, but they don't. At this point, all you've got is: they ~should~ think it ~should~.

Won't a free market simply lead to transhumanism though?

If you can get a surgical IQ enhancement, you will dominate. Your children will dominate. Designer babies will be a thing.
In short order humanity will be eliminated for superior post-human life forms

Why is this a future I'm supposed to want?

The NAP is a secular alternative for people who don't believe in gods. It comes from First Principles and is logically consistent, thus it presents a very strong argument - if you understand it. If you don't, well - look at most of the comments to this thread.

How do you define voluntary?
If there is only one factory in your town and your choice is either to die, or work for food, is that voluntary? Like it or not, even if you brought every world government to its knees, anarchy would not reign. Someone would take its place by abusing powerful technology. This is NOT the case with Anprim. If the world were to go Anprim, you would only be beholden to yourself. You are your own master

You reallly think you have any control over your life? You can't fight evil by "breaking your chains" when someone else will give you a shiny new pair.

If you don't destroy the system that propagates slavery, then you're just wasting your time.

economically free does not equal ancap in the slightest.

If you deregulated all economics in the United States, it would still not be ancap.

>post-apocalyptic mad max society
whew you sure dodged a bullet there. those grenade attacks in malmo are definetily ancaps

>States themselves are essentially organizations that have a monopoly on violence. We didn't start out with states, so they managed to gain these monopolies out of nothing. A lot of states started out when various tribes got united under one mighty leader.

Ancaps understand literally zero about how power works. They understand nothing about how monopolization works. You have to be absurdly blind to reality to think ancap society is even plausible on a significant scale.

you still can't explain monopolies, I do, and it involves your perspectives as direct responsible
ironic isn't it?

Tell me how governments fix the problems of your neightbour community if you live in a flat

It's up to you the neighbours, and people do it with no problem, when there's money and common interests involved, everyone behaves smart, and if they don't, they set a bad example for the rest

The centralization of power into fewer and fewer states has absolutely happened over time. The ability of a state to expand past a certain size is limited by the inefficiency of centralization, and states that get sufficiently large can get wiped out by changes in the environment.

Empires have gotten to absurdly large sizes only to collapse. They've falled into anarchy, but they reform into states, because people organized into states will beat those organized by anarchy eventually. The state will then become inflexible and inefficient, and things descend into anarchy again.

Please pick up a history textbook, you know nothing about how monopolies work. The fact you think economics is the most relevant thing to read, and not history, is why you're an ancap. You have to look for confirmation of your bullshit in the wrong places to sustain your belief, knowledge causes ancap beliefs to collapse. History will give you countless examples of why anarchism fails, economics focuses like a laser on the inefficiency of states, and it implies without a state everybody would be better, but economics is blind to how anarchism can't be sustained.

You should care because anarchy is being proposed as a magic solution to all the problems caused by states. It's one solution to dealing with exceptionally pathological states.

The dissolution of states and the return to anarchy is inevitable, but the ending of anarchy is also inevitable, this has happened throughout history, but ancaps are retards that believe anarchy can be sustained because they've never picked up a history textbook in their damn life.

Anarchists have ALWAYS gotten BTFO, ALWAYS. Anarchy always returns, but anarchy is unsustainable in the face of statism, although states themselves are unsustainable, they are also inevitable.

The only thing that will bring most of the world under anarchism is bombing ourselves back to the stone age.

You know who else gets people to work "voluntarily"?

Communists.

You imply that everyone is a rational actor with perfect knowledge.

Pro tip they aren't.

Not to myself, but it did happen to many of my friends.
Now they understand why I unironically supported Trump.

bitcoin was delusional at 1 dollar
now the ancaps get to call state money deluded

>everyone doesn't have to consent to a single NAP.
source?

We have some unusual laws that are nonetheless susceptible to reform, if a majority so decides. Of course the best solution to that is to overthrow the government and, if people ~still~ don't want to be called rude words, let them settle such matters with unlicensed guns in Coke-sponsored street duels. (Don't flip about the hyperbole, Ancaps. I'm obv joking.)

it wasn't Sup Forums but that's exactly what happened to me.

>You imply that everyone is a rational actor with perfect knowledg

No, and that is the difference between ancap and libertarianism. Ancap recognizes that there are bad people in the world, therefore we can't allow a state. State is free evil, a heaven for evil people who like to control others as human livestock.

Libertarians aren't against cancer in principle, they are perfectly fine with small tumors.

It goes further than that

Most people are not designed to be twisting in the winds of the market place. They are designed to be part of a unified national order. The literally NEED someone to tell them what to buy, what to watch, how to live. They crave it.

Only few people rise through the ranks of society to become a fully self-actualized person able to make their own way in the world. They are the leaders, the others are the followers.

This is the way we evolved. To be part of a tribal structure. Not everyone is supposed to be super independent Mr. Free Market man

Yes, it does. More economically free resembles ancap more than non economically free countries. It's pure logic and common sense.

Also, the state cannot exist without a monopolistic control of currency and many other similar economic freedom restricting policies.

>If there is only one factory in your town and your choice is either to die, or work for food, is that voluntary?
yes