>it's a private company, they can censor who they want to
>it's a private company, they can spy on people if they want to
>it's a private company, they can cash in on my assets to make a profit
>it's a private company, they can fire everyone without a vote and replace them with robots so the big boss man can buy another yacht
Why do """"""""""libertarians"""""""""" hate freedom so much?
>Just described gov
Nice b8 m8
so stop using their services you fucking retard
because """"""""""libertarians"""""""""" are kikes user.
This.
Ah yes, I should stop going to one corporation and go to another (assuming there is another for a specific market) how foolish of me.
Make another you lazy fuck
Yes, that's how it works.
You realize that corporations have so much power because they work in tangent with the state, right?
That would be redundant. The company is different, the model is the same.
f-fascist!
>Censor you
Violates NAP
>Spy on you
Violates NAP
>Using your assets
Violates NAP
>Fire anyone
They can already do this
That's not always a practical option and you know it.
Why do you hate logic?
Just quoting libertarians for whenever a corporation fucks with people.
Entertain me, provide an example.
How am I a fascist? All I said was that corporations can invade our freedom because the state allow them to do so.
I was shitposting, user.
No harm done.
Shitposting violates the NAP.
ISPs
what company does all of this
you still attacked him, even if it was a shitpost
You can assume all these positions only under gold standard
>>it's a private company, they can censor who they want to
>>it's a private company, they can spy on people if they want to
>>it's a private company, they can cash in on my assets to make a profit
>>it's a private company, they can fire everyone without a vote and replace them with robots so the big boss man can buy another yacht
As long as you block certain practices like monopolies yes. Except the spying shit hang them for that.
The problem is right no the government and corporate tyranny is working together. Like when the telecommunication companies got caught spying for the government and the senate passed a law retroactively making them immune from lawsuits.
The problem with this is social contract. If you move into a suburb or something you might have to follow laws the local municipality has passed.
Id be interested in figuring out the line when a community is trying to absorb you. What mechanisms prevent them from doing it without your permission.
B-but I payed a private PR/body guard firm to neutralize any threats that may be turned back to me based on the things i anonymously post on this thai underwater basket weaving forum.
>censorship
Any company where you may not question a superior.
>spy
Better question is which companies don't do this.
>cash in on assets
Most recent example usatoday.com
>fire people and take the profits
Every company involved in the manufacturing industry for one.
Why do """"""""""liberals"""""""""" hate freedom so much?
Start your own. All they are is the last guy in line they buy bandwidth from the people running the main spine. Then they abuse the fuck out of the fact that they are the gatekeeper.
The real problem is laws made on their behalf allowing monopoly. We can fight it now and should but I see the death of ISPs on the horizon. They are trying not to invest in infrastructure while wireless technology gets better. The good thing is if wireless technology gets better then the infrastructure in place will no longer be an advantage. You will be able to get a tower put an antenna on it for like 10k and supply the town with wireless and decent speed.
>lol ill just get another job
There is a reason most lolbertarians are teenagers and 20 somethings who never experienced the work force.
Libertarianism only works with both (1) nearly infinite competition and nearly infinite ample acess to those destinations and (2) a hyperrational workforce and consumer base who is almost hivemind in its ability to flow to the better optimals with collective force.
Absent the hypotheticals, instead of just assuming there will be one business that isn't being a dick, just ban those businesses from being dicks.
>but muh nap, muh poor corporations have rights too
Stop being a litteral cuck.
Corporations are registered persons with the government that only exist with the government's petmission. An artificial entity cannot have rights. Lockean ethics do not apply to unnatural persons.
>Stop being a litteral cuck.
>the statist bootlicker calls someone else a cuck
Also learn to spell.
If your ISP did anything that you described in your OP, people would develop an alternative since none of those things are desirable.
"so stop using their services" says the american, whose country is plagued with monopolies :^)
Comcast has customers.
Walmart has employees.
Unions are a thing.
Unemployment is a thing.
The universe is finite.
>start your own
Are libertarians just Omega-boomers or something? Do you think you can pull at your bootstraps to become super saiyan? Do you even know how a corporation starts up?
He probably thinks its pretty easy to get a small loan of a million dollars.
>using statist as an epithet
Are you an anarchist or do you not realize all libertarians are, by definition, statists?
corporations are by definition government entities
ISPs are natural monopolies. Regulations written by corporations certainly don't help, but regulations such as those in South Korea led to them having the fastest speeds in the world.
>what is a monopoly
If you knew anything about ISPs you'd understand it's municipality zoning issues and not competition that creates the issue. Once again, the state causing problems.
any extreme, any polarized political opinion will look retarded from any point of view that isn't the one which formed it.
Polarized politics are a form of pandering to some brand of hate and frustration.
walk the center.
>It's okay for someone to tell me how to dress, how to style my hair, what to say, and if I don't do it I die.
>Poor brainwashed North Korean.
>North Korean? I just have a job.
>ISPs are natural monopolies
the public hardware infrastructure is a natural monopoly, however the management of said infrastructure visa routing software and corporate policy
IE an ISP is basically a public utility that gets paid for by granting a monopoly the power to own your data
>municipality zoning issues
>the issue
you're shifting issues, the issue is not the infrastructure itself, it's how that infrastructure is managed, also how dare people not want landfills and prisons built next to elementary schools
I said those regulations written by corporations aren't helping. The state shouldn't wield that power but the corporation shouldn't either is my point. They can create their own zones by buying up land permits, patenting hardware, and all kinds of schemey bullshit within the "free market."
Ancaps seem to think that they'll be the successful ones in the cyber-punk dystopia that they so desperately desire.
Which pretty much won't happen anyway because its fundamentally incompatible with human nature. Only autists think anarcho-capatialism can work.
>also how dare people not want landfills and prisons built next to elementary schools
To be fair, game theory handles this much better than central planning.
>They can create their own zones by buying up land permits, patenting hardware, and all kinds of schemey bullshit within the "free market."
this, corporations are states within states via their power of aggression and coercion via the legal system or private security
>"human nature" will survive biotech
>Has no argument
>L-L-Learn to spell
It's all subjective, user.
>Comcast has customers.
If it wasn't for things called bailouts, corporations like Comcast wouldn't exist. It isn't uncommon that entire industries would be saved by bailouts. Half of the auto industry would have been history if it wasn't for those. People can't choose from good companies if all the bad ones are being safe netted by the government.
>Walmart has employees.
Same thing.
>Unions are a thing.
Things that shouldn't exist but are protected by the state.
>Unemployment is a thing.
And it will still exist, regardless of government or lack there of. What is your point?
>The universe is finite.
Yet 91 billion light years across.
This is the most retarded argument I have seen in this site for a long time. I can barely call it an argument. It's more similar to a desperate attempt to be funny that fell flat on it's face.
Describe to me a system which is not a tyranny
Tyranny means control is exerted by threat of force
This is de facto always true, no true government exists whose authority is not based in monopoly of force. One group always eventually gains a monopoly on force in an anarchy as well, even if all individual's ability to exert force starts out truly equal.
But if the company is different in a way there is demand for (the reason you made it in the first place) then it will be successful.
>This is the most retarded argument I have seen in this site for a long time. I can barely call it an argument. It's more similar to a desperate attempt to be funny that fell flat on it's face.
How is it not an argument? Mandatory dress codes are okay just because why not?
>implying I won't be living in a self contained McDonaldTM compound with gold security subscription from Blackwater Security Firm.
>Libertarianism only works with both (1) nearly infinite competition and nearly infinite ample acess to those destinations and (2) a hyperrational workforce and consumer base who is almost hivemind in its ability to flow to the better optimals with collective force.
>Capitalism only works with both (1) nearly infinite competition and nearly infinite ample acess to those destinations and (2) a hyperrational workforce and consumer base who is almost hivemind in its ability to flow to the better optimals with collective force.
You sound retarded, don't you know? Libertainanism is just capitalism without the state, AKA the way capitalism is supposed to be.
>Corporations are registered persons with the government that only exist with the government's petmission.
Yes, you are catching on.
>An artificial entity cannot have rights.
Literally no one said they had rights. Ancaps only believe in the NAP as being the only right you'd ever need. If a corporation breaks the NAP (which most do), then what ever degree of action can and would be taken, whether it'd be not paying out of your pocket, or violence.
>Libertainanism is just capitalism without the state, AKA the way capitalism is supposed to be.
citation needed
Libertarians hate people, but want progress.
When you understand this, they will make more sense to you.
>Stephen Molymeme or Ayn Rand i imagine.
>Mandatory dress codes are okay just because why not?
Because the business is private property, therefore they would be allowed to make their own rules. Using your North Korea example, people are forced to have certain haircuts, even in public property. That would be a NAP breaking situation.
>How is it not an argument?
Never said it wasn't, just a retarded one.
So simple, but the normies can't grasp the concept. The difference between corporate power and government power is only one of them can write laws, come into your house, shoot your dog, and throw in a fucking cage. How much government dick can you put in your mouth? Pathetic excuse for a justification, regardless.
desu libertarianism could work if jews and nonwhites didnt exist. i mean it wouldnt be as good as natsoc but still
Take note of the "rather than by the state" bit. "Capitalism" today contradict this definition, because states aren't willing to give up any of their power in anything, so they meddle in something that shouldn't be meddled with. This faux capitalism is still better than any other economic system, but isn't as good as it should be.
>i mean it wouldnt be as good as natsoc but still
Except for the fact it is socialist.
>only one of them can write laws, come into your house, shoot your dog, and throw in a fucking cage
Ok what if you defaulted on your debt and the bank sends its security forces to appropriate your shit and put you into debt slavery. Your dog will still die either way.
>Ok what if you defaulted on your debt and the bank sends its security forces to appropriate your shit and put you into debt slavery.
Oh, it's another one of those strawmans again... The bank can't do shit that wouldn't break the NAP if the property you own isn't owned by them. Any bank like that would cause a community outrage, which wouldn't be good for business.
Now that's a strawman. It has more to do with the conflation of private enterprise and wealth/peace generation that makes it seem attractive. It's science that stopped witch trials, prevented crop failures for enough food, and naturally none of the nations that are on the ISS are in conflict with one another. Libertarian Capitalism just takes the progress made by science and treats it as its own counterfeit progress.
>muh NAP
That won't stop people from stealing from each other and imposing their will on others whenever they have the means to do so. You must be the biggest fucking autist if you think an absence of law a centralized authority will result in a stable society that works on pure anarchist capitalism. See Kill yourself you mongoloid fuck
>You sound retarded, don't you know?
Actually he makes a pretty sound argument. It turns out you were the retard all along user.
Private prisons, and private police nullify your entire argument.
Bank of America is alive and well.
>people would develop an alternative since none of those things are desirable.
This is the dumbest thing I've read on here today.
How does the distinction between private and public property change the ethics and lack of freedom felt by the individual. If North Korea was a corporation, it doesn't suddenly make the control it has on its people ethical. Similarly, if you need a job to survive and must follow similar rules to keep your job that is the same coercion under a different label.
It's pretty simple. It's because interactions with private companies are voluntary. Interactions with the government are generally not voluntary.
Under the work or die system, you obey a company's orders based on coercion not volunteerism.
>That won't stop people from stealing from each other and imposing their will on others whenever they have the means to do so.
What are guns. The police aren't magical sentries that only they can keep evil at bay.
>You must be the biggest fucking autist if you think an absence of law a centralized authority will result in a stable society that works on pure anarchist capitalism
You must be a humongous cuck to think that the law is the only thing that can do anything. The law isn't some holy entity free from flaw; it's full of people who's position can easily be replace by someone else.
So are you saying that capitalism doesn't work? If so you are fucking retarded just like him and should be physically removed.
>Private prisons, and private police nullify your entire argument.
They still have to abide by the nation's law, dipshit.
>Bank of America is alive and well.
Which is protected by the state.
>This is the dumbest thing I've read on here today.
People start businesses all the time.
>How does the distinction between private and public property change the ethics and lack of freedom felt by the individual.
Public """property""" is what ever the state claims to own, and is what ever people are forced to pay taxes for. People can't choose to pay for it, it's either pay it or get in prison.
>If North Korea was a corporation, it doesn't suddenly make the control it has on its people ethical.
This isn't a sound argument, because that would imply the former communist North Korea acts like a company and is a part of the market. Calling any organisation a corporation doesn't make it one.
Who gives a shit
t. Libertarian
So much autism. I can't even fathom it
Nice argument you have there.
I don't need one. Your bullshit has already been debunked by others in this thread.
Face it user, most humans aren't emotionless autistic retards like you and that's way your system will not work. The end.
>dickhole corporation buys out all competitors and has a monopoly on something
>"just use a competitor"
>just make your own corporation then
Yes sure people will just take out a small loan of $1 million dollars and do that..
You realize you need resources to start a business right?
>I don't need one.
Yes, you do.
>Your bullshit has already been debunked by others in this thread.
No, it hasn't.
>Face it user, most humans aren't emotionless autistic retards like you and that's way your system will not work.
>resorting to "muh emotion"
Kek.
Yes, that's how grown-ups deal with life in the real world.
Yeah and why is the cost of starting business so high? Government regulation that imposes millions of dollars of fees and the need for consultation that creates artificial barriers of entry for small businesses.
>being this dumb
even without regulations you need more resources than most people have to just up and start a business.
Citation needed. People literally make multi-million/billion businesses from literal nothingness. You just need enough demand for what you are making and the right know-how.
You're forgetting that competition between the corporations will mean that the one or multiple corporations that don't data mine will receive the most customers, financial inventive.
I should say "people have made".
wow user, are you some kind of fascist?
Sorry most people aren't wizards capable of conjuring consumer products out of thin air, they need raw materials and equipment in order to manufacture and likely, doing it themselves by hand isn't going to generate enough product to be successful, so they'll need to hire other workers, rent a workspace, and probably have machines to increase productivity to make it profitable.
After that you need a means of distribution whether it's a storefront or a website and the means to ship online orders.
you have to have initial resources to start a business, period.
^ this
There is more competition than ever right now.
The liberals back their own brand of corporations and use the government policies to crush competition through legislative.
It's how Amazon and Apple got so big so fast.
why does Sup Forums faggot mods archive my potential after-lsd-like-mindset thread?
if not for me maybe for others, i mean, wtf, how many threads here start on the correct path? context is all that matters you fuckin faggot ass mods, we gave you the political system and this is how you treat me in /pol?
>Youtube
>Twitter
>Twitch
>Facebook
>Google
>Amazon
Thats some competition you have here. But i bet thats the government's fault for overregulating the internet right?
>Steam
>Microsoft
>Apple
Don't you fucking lie to me that these aren't practically monopolies of their own supported by government regulation.
Money doesn't come out of thin air, stupid. These huge corporations had to start from somewhere, a lot a times out of garages. They weren't flowing with cash from the very beginning, able to get a workforce and workforce.
Don't believe me? Look at Apple, Amazon, Google, Disney, or other major corps.
Just because the average person is too retarded to create a business from scratch doesn't mean it can't be done with enough hard work.