Why does Sup Forums hate anarchy so much?
>inb4 hurr if you want anarchy go to detroit
Anarchy =/= lawlessness
There will still be laws. Your community will still punish you if you did shit.
The only difference is that everything will be decentralized and everyone will control everyone so it stays that way. If a community starts invading others, all others will ally and defeat it.
There will be no government, no crime, no mass media, no taxes, no homelessness. Everyone will have their own land.
>Your community will still punish you if you did shit.
Yeah, mob rule sounds especially nice.
>If a community starts invading others, all others will ally and defeat it.
Will they now?
If you want anarchy legit go to south america
In countries like Peru they'll just get a mob to kill supposed rapists and murders, like the mudslimes except without the Islam
because anarchists are mostly violent progtards
anarchists and communists are a similar variety of vermin that run together when the situation is dire enough that they manifest openly and can actually take control
then they turn on each other
My town does a trillion times better than state cronies. And several trillion times better than federal thugs.
The closer to the chest you can keep people, the better they act. You have no influence over some sociopathic nutjob when he's on a list in which thousands and thousands and thousands of people check a box, whereas if your mayor does stupid shit you can go right to his damn door. Yet rather than support localism, you want some freaks hundreds of miles away from you making rules about how you're gonna live your life (or else).
You're completely out of whack.
Soooo.... tribalism?
Anarchists literally cannot get their shit together. This headline reminded me of when they had an international congress that broke out in butthurt when they were obviously reminded that organizing was against their philosophy.
It's mob rule for edgy faggots, I got into punk in 1978 when I was 11, by 14 I had rejected "anarchy" as the pipe-dream of the deluded. Utopias exist nowhere save in the pages of fiction, you won't be able to show me any successful "anarchist" state, the best you will be able to do here is say"LOOOK! Comrade Jerkoffski (or some other bearded Russian) said in a 19th century pamphlet blahblahblah..." - which is resorting to printed fictions again. If you got your wishes, the purple-haired mob would be raped to death by the dusky dindu mob.
If some crazy nutjob came into my neighbor hood and started shooting people on the street, id be the last person to help anyone, and i am not the only person that thinks this way. People walk by people in trouble or hardship every day non stop. I find it highly unlikely that you will be able to find enough people to protect others, and even then, there would be more criminals than militias simply because criminals have more motivation, because they no longer fight a huge mass of police officers, they fight a handful of random number of volunteers.
How would payments work? Who would distribute the money? How would you trade with other countries?
...
>you're completely out of whack
No, that's you. You're all anarchy is local level laws, but for some reason not a states rights conservative. My mayor and city council make local laws and my local police and/or sheriffs enforce them. The US is already run by local democracy, everything higher than state level is purely for trade, interstate and mutual defense purposes.
you see özgür, anarchy is a concept which only appeals to teenagers and dumb people.
Statism is a concept that only appeals to thieves and murderers.
We already live in a state of anarchy user, the government is just the strongest mob with the most powerful narrative.
The State locks up thieves and murderers
"Anarchos" get raped and murdered by rapists and murderers, or become as they are.
Anarchy is comunism with high heals and skirt
Mostly because anarchists are retarded as fuck.
If you posted an ancap flag in the OP-pic, you'd get different responses, I GUARANTEE YOU THAT. Because people know what ancaps want.
"the state" also locks up perpetrators of victimless crimes, steals your money, and murders others.
As predicted, printed fictions are used to justify the wishful thinking of the deluded.
Only two words are needed to blow this crap the fuck out:
GENERAL FRANCO.
I wouldnt consider it stealing if in return they provide hospitals schools stores and protection from the police.
Who would be distributing money in an anarchist government? Theres already an issue with creating jobs and thats with all the jobs in places owned by the government and that serve a purpose for the government only, remove the government and you also lose jobs. What are those people gonna do?
How will your country trade?
>How will your country trade?
individuals trade, not countries. Countries are concepts, they cannot act in physical reality.
>I wouldnt consider it stealing if in return they provide hospitals schools stores and protection from the police.
So why threaten my with a gun instead of sending me a bill?
>Who would be distributing money in an anarchist government?
anarchist government? Think again about what you just wrote
Anarchists are perfectly willing to divide themselves so they can be conquered by a more organized force.
You mean the guy who betrayed his race when he allowed Moors to murder and rape the only part of Spain that was never conquered by Moors. The man that invited foreigners to bomb his countrymen?
>hospitals schools stores
Nobody needs all that gay crap.
Logical argument:
1) The initiation of the use of force is immoral
2) The state is an agency of coercion
---> Thus the state is immoral
You: "epik BTFO lel franco deluded kek lolol"
who says those things won't exist in anarchism?
it's like saying that love-making will cease to exist when we stop forcing people to rape each other
nah, we love anarchy
If you rape commies, YOU win. Because they cease to be commies.
Franco did nothing wrong.
Why are germans allways drawn to weird beliefs like anarchy and communism?
ancap is indeed the only consistent moral theory.
Hey, I never said he was perfect, but do you see any "anarchy" in Spain since Franco? Nope.
It should coerce this likes of you to get a shower, to cut off your hippy dreadlocks, and stop being a juvenile cocksucker.
>forcing people to rape each other
er... what?
you faggots are scared to ask a girl out, what fucking anarchy you're even talking about
Ugh pardon me, anarchist society.
And countries do act in physical reality, if you want to get into semantics, lets not say country lets say the government, the free trade deals are made by governments, and not having them could fuck with the economy of your society.
Because if you are not paying the bill you are effectively stealing, and thieves would be punished even in your utopia.
Would the hospitals then be privately owned? What stops some autistic owner to just decline service to someone? Would you threaten him with violence?
>weird beliefs like anarchy
I find it more disturbing that you find it "normal" to think that violence and slavery are ok in principle and that freedom is "weird".
Lack of a father figure leads them to seek out bearded demagogues to replace what they never had.
>violence
>not ok
>freedom
>ok
I've got cogintive dissonance from your post. Go spread your ass for a turk or something. That's if you meant selfdefence can't be justified.
>Why does Sup Forums hate anarchy so much?
>
>>inb4 hurr if you want anarchy go to detroit
>Anarchy =/= lawlessness
>
>There will still be laws. Your community will still punish you if you did shit.
>
>The only difference is that everything will be decentralized and everyone will control everyone so it stays that way. If a community starts invading others, all others will ally and defeat it.
>
>There will be no government, no crime, no mass media, no taxes, no homelessness. Everyone will have their own land.
So anarchy is somesort of auto-fascisme?
Go to Somalia if you want anarchy you fucking faggot
No, anarchists doesn't listen to gurus or any intellectual/political/religious authority. That's the whole point.
>And countries do act in physical reality, if you want to get into semantics
No they don't. If you can't differentiate between a concept and a thing, step away from a coversation like this.
>Would the hospitals then be privately owned? What stops some autistic owner to just decline service to someone? Would you threaten him with violence?
Greed. No.
>There will still be laws. Your community will still punish you if you did shit.
then that's not anarchy anymore you fucking moron
You're wrong.
Some cunt will always mention that Bakunin guy - might as well base your worldview on Jonathan Swift, or Hans Christian Andersen.
self-defense is perfectly ok, and furthermore if you are being threatened or aggressed against, there is no morality. You just do what is necessary.
Morality is "you should", not "you MUST"
>then that's not anarchy anymore you fucking moron
Well yes because there is a difference between institutionalized violence and social/economic ostracism.
The real redpill is that we already live in anarchy and everyone is able to do what ever he wants and its just because we got tricked in to believin into the social construct of the government and think its a legit institution that we abide to those peoples rules instead of our own. If people would stop falling for the government meme the government would lose all power
it's overall pretty funny to discuss anarchism with National Socialists on an imageboard run by a samoan waterboarding enthusiats..
>economic ostracism
What will you use for money? CDs of bongo and bohdran music? Woven macrame friendship bands? Patchouli oil? Coconuts? A pint of best nigger's spunk? Your children's arses?
Greed. So we the hospital is owned by a flawed individual, what if one day he decides that poor people should die, because they disgust his richness, and makes the cost of services high enough so that the less fortunate can get treatment?
That's right.
> There will still be laws. Your community will still punish you if you did shit.
Wait, who makes laws and who enforces them? And how? With weapons? Will there be prisons or will they just kill you for a minor offense?
>everyone will control everyone
Yea, no, people with sticks can't control people with guns.
Whoa the Knight of Sophistry strikes back! How will I recover??
So what if the guy who did shit then recruits some people to form his own warband and then overwhelm the community?
>muh oversimplfications
teenager detected
How about addressing the issue.
Everyone would have a gun buddy. See Switzerland
>ea, no, people with sticks can't control people with guns.
correct, that's why everyone should have a gun.
>Wait, who makes laws and who enforces them? And how? With weapons? Will there be prisons or will they just kill you for a minor offense?
I don't care, and nobody ciould know that.
b-but if we abandon slavery, who will pick the cotton? Whaaaat, you're telling me that there will be giant machines in the future that will pick the cotton? Fucking retarded right!?
this is next level fedora. You don't stop believing in weird sky man, you stop believing in actual people with actual guns.
>muh 'muh arguments'
statist detected
Of course the state locks up criminals, it wants a monopoly on robbing people. What other institution gets away with forcefully taking people's money and funneling it to a rich elite?
wow living like they do on the walking dead sounds legit.... fak off m8
mafia
checked btw
What does anarchism say about things like false advertising? Am I stepping on your freedoms of I tell you you can't sell dog meat under the pretence that it is beef?
What about child prostitution? Does a ten year old have the right to sell her body?
great come back knödelboy, normal people grow out of believing in dumb concepts like anarchism when their brains are fully developed, usually when they're around 25yo. deal with it.
Anarchy beats full authoritarianism.
I'll tell you why you'll give it up someday politically. Anarchy is an ideology like an illusive religion. It's for aspiration. Anarchy will never exist in a physical world beyond natural chaos. You'll understand why anarchy is unfulfilling as a political quest once you witness human nature kicking in the doors of people you care about just like big government but with more force. You'll see how precious a set of standards in defining judge, jury, and executioners will be when you and innocents are targeted by mobs under false accusations or barbarity. You should fight big government. Fight for limited government. That's noble. In doing so, you might realize that having some modicum of "democratic" influence over common standards in the law process, as opposed to none, is probably preferable, and that's where cultural cohesion comes into play. You'll want more people around you with values of liberty who thus make the composition of an electorate.
"Anarchy Light" works on a small basis where it's easier to escape your surroundings and seek refuge from hordes. Today almost all land is conquered and claimed. The nature of the beast of mankind is that power and intelligence ultimately determine ownership. Defensive force prevents slaughter and genocide of your people and other people if it's in good hands, and thus a check to contain is government to manage resources and power, hopefully at a scale big or smart enough to protect your land from invasion.
Full anarchy would be pure survival in between the cracks of other people and societies potentially imprisoning, raping, enslaving, or murdering you. Voluntary communities you build yourself within may someday turn on you and you'll be disillusioned in anarchy's indifference, that you could've spent your time changing the practice of "justice" tangibly in your city and nation to reflect ethics you want to cultivate for the sake of the future while you still have time.
Switzerland is not anarchical. Also that means nothing when the other guy trumps your people 10:1. Even here in Cyprus every male has G3 in their homes because of compulsory army service but if Turkey were to invade we would lose because they're larger.
> I don't care, and nobody ciould know that.
> b-but if we abandon slavery, who will pick the cotton? Whaaaat, you're telling me that there will be giant machines in the future that will pick the cotton? Fucking retarded right!?
This is major cognitive dissonance. Slavery is not related to this anyhow and just because we solved one problem with machines doesn't mean we can solve another problem with machines.
What is the algorithm to make laws again? What is the mathematically perfect punishment for theft? And who keeps the machines running?
Get your arguments together, so they can hold up to specifics.
Yeaaaah maaan.
Seriously, you sound like a child
- "The big bad state dun it, that's we aren't all holding hands under a rainbow".
Anarchy will not work in modern times
Sup Forums is anarchy in denial
docs.google.com
great comeback Käsli! Please let me know when you understand the difference between theft and charity - and explain to me dummy how you justify monopolies on violence by using logic argumentation. You can't, that's why you resort to ad-hominem attacks. You just don't have any arguments, but you feel i'm somehow wrong and you'd rather I accepted your view.
I would, if I got arguments with solid premises.
So until you can provide those, kindly fuck off will ya?
(You)
>What is the algorithm to make laws again?
youtu.be
>This is major cognitive dissonance.
point it out please, because I suspect this statement is just a statement.
>Slavery is not related to this anyhow
Oh, so slavery (I master, you obey) is somehow different to statism (I state, you obey)?
>What is the mathematically perfect punishment for theft? And who keeps the machines running?
what? :D
How would a society operating under anarchy defend itself from foreign invaders? Volunteers? How will you assemble military force outside of numbers, which to begin with will be pathetic. How will a society like that get a hold of tanks armored vehicles airplanes and so on?
An imageboard is not a country.
and the only reason the people with guns enforce the government is because they bought the government meme and think its legit in some way and thus support it. there is nothing that keeps you from doing anything. you just have to live with the eventual consequences. thats what anarchy is. and as long as there is free will, anarchy will always be what is.
the memes are how the elite stayed in power. Since the pharaos and probably before the rulers memed how they are all powerfull with the might of god aiding them. For that reason they let themselves get carried around, built huge castles, have huge military parades, all to meme they have power to vanquish everything opposing them. That goes on until the invention of the nukes. From then on detterence became controll as the nuke, the ultimate deterrence, could be memed by the enemies too and not be surpassed so far. They now meme how they controll media, letteragencies, education, economy, when in reality its the memes upholding their power. There are only so few with actual ill intent, the rest just follow because the memes work and they feel like they cant change anything either way since they controll everything. If the memes stop working all of the establishment would collapse as even those inside of it mostly only support it out of lack of alternatives or obliviousness. What changed is that after millenia of the memewarfare we finaly learned how the war is fought and can fight back
war has changed
What if the whole community decided to punish you for shit you didn't do? Most people don't make the right decisions, that's why you need a government. You can't expect communities to always ally to stop an invading community as there will be hundreds of those. Better to just stick with Republicanism.
and anarchy is not utopia
How does the US military work? Right, people are being forced into service when they are eighteen, and there are government factories producing all those tanks, right?
Nah, US military is a mater of honor. Soldiers are being honored, they recieve massive social rewards for "following the call of duty".
>How will a society like that get a hold of tanks armored vehicles airplanes and so on?
By buying them...??
It's a utopian dream, and like all utopian dreams would be disastrous in practice.
"A child shall lead them"
This kinda sums it up. Listening to someone defending the utopian and unattainable concept of "anarchy" is like having a child - someone whose brain is not fully developed - telling us wolves & lions will get along just fine with calves and lambs and that everything would be just fine...
see
It's not as utopian as the globalist, politically correct, tolerant utopia that we have today.
If anything it is far closer to mans real nature. We aren't supposed to be used as bricks to build the tower of babel.
so the fact that states are responsible for the violent deaths of hundreds of millions of people in the last 200 years makes states more preferable than anarchism?
We are not talking about a "system" that could be "implemented" anyway. anarchism should emerge naturally after a libertarian society at some point in the distant future, and if it doesn't, tough luck.
The reason why discussion about the evil of statism and the moral justification for anarchism is important is simply that we want to make the world a better place by reducing suffering, which means in turn that its better to teach children the NAP and the argumentation behind it, than to teach children to decapitate infidels, or to steal from others and call it "solidarity".
They also get paid. Who will pay them?
Who is going to buy tanks? The honorable soldiers?
The cheapest tank i could find, which also happens to be russian, so you can expect some shipping fee perhaps, not an expert in tank trade,It would cost you 2.1 million dollars to aquire a T-72 B3, and then an extra 600.000 dollars to upgrade it to the B3M/B4 standard.
Most americans here complain about not being able to buy a house and pay it off in rates. How will the same person be able to afford a 2,1 mil tank? A more expensive one would be 8.5 mil or so, and thats actually just the cost of producing one, i imagine you wont be able to buy it for just 8.5 mil.
Cheap military aircraft 94 million, most expensive one 737 million.
Not an argument. Civilization was a dream.
And it's an ideal, not a dream.
People who believe anarchism is some sort of utopia are 14 year old delusional faggots.
this is a leftypol raid if you all didn't notice
didn't work out the way you hoped, did it?
>Republicans run all branches of govt.
>You want to overthrow this.
The interesting thing about dumb people is that they lack the ability to reflect upon their own mental capabilities. Humility is not a trait of the stupid, but the intelligent.
You know how nuclear weapons guarantee that you will never be attacked because of MAD? In anarchy it would be similar, only everyone would have a gun.
>There will still be laws.
if there's laws, there's no anarchy.
if by that you mean fewer laws, then that is jungle law and your refugees will kill you to extinction in few days.
Because many of us were anarchist at some point.
Sup Forums has an affinity for anarcho-captialism (the only sustainable, moral, and truly prosperous form of governance in my opinion), but mostly, it's all fascism.
>Sup Forums says the establishment and gubbmment is bad
>point it out
>the establishment and gubbment is good
>point it out
>repeat
why do you try to reason with senile old farts who belong in a mental asylum?
It's a trap : Every single "Anarchist" I have seen was a just a Communist with a taste for violence. They really want a system that regulates wealth distribution, abolishes private property, and makes everyone work for everyone as Bastiat said. But it doesn't really matter for them whether that system is based on voluntarily contribution (a.k.a Impossible) or a coercive State (a.k.a Communism).
Most Anarchists don't even have the political culture to understand what I've said, anyway.
so you're saying that a vast majority of people in anarchism would NOT want a large-scale conflict with other regions or "countries" because they would have to pay immense sums of money in order to do so.
Yeah that's the point. You only go to war if you don't have to pay for it. That means either 1) you violently can force others to pay for it, or 2) you pay by issuing government bonds which is enslavement of unborn future generations, 3) just by printing imaginary money and crashing your country in the log run etc etc
Your insight on this please.
>anarchist
>state
>anarchism unsuccessful
But in Catalonia their agriculture yields rose by 50% according to some sources.
RIght now in Rojava Anarchists are fighting ISIS and winning. Its the only secular area in the region What is the problem?
>anarchy could never wo-