Why are there so many ancaps on this board?

It seems like Sup Forums has gradually become a hive of ancaps. Why? Their ideology (and any anarchist ideology, really) is so full of holes that it might as well be one, giant, fucking hole itself! The idea that private militaries would just uphold the NAP, even if they saw an opportunity to wipe out competition is a laughably bad assumption. The idea that we could somehow maintain formal identification in a society that is completely devoid of bureaucracy is also ridiculous, making law and order virtually impossible to properly enforce.

So why are there so many autists on here that believe this shit?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs&ab_channel=musiclover041591
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

There's nothing unreasonable about not pretending only certain super special people have a magical metaphysical monopoly on the legitimate utilization of aggressive violence.

No such magic exists.

The Anarcho-Right is reddit-tiet faggotry. The Lolbertarians literally radicalized after Ron Paul lost and are now all about muh Anarchy muh smallest minority. I laugh so hard when they shit on le constitution. Arguing with them is toppest of Keks. Their belief system is predicated entirely on fallacious argumentation and they are as bad as the left when it comes to b-but muh feels.

>Government Law Enforcement = bad
>For-profit PMC Law Enforcement = good
>le Constitution c-couldnt stop what happened
>muh smallest minority
>muh NAP

Faggot Degenerates. All of them.

>making law and order virtually impossible to properly enforce
>implying virtue can be enforced
>implying virtue needs to be enforced
>fallacious argumentation
>b-but muh feels
Your entire post is just that

Shoo shoo, statists
.

BTFO Anarchist scum.

Please explain how the NAP works in practice. Anarchism, even if effectively implemented, is a degeneracy force multiplier.

You don't use violence against people who haven't themselves used violence against anyone.
You know.
Like every day of your life.

But what constitutes violence? Does fraud?

Gradually?

YOU ARE THE TOURIST HERE

As stupid as the ideology is sometimes, Sup Forums has been a hive and magnet for libertarians and other weirdos since it's conception. Its only been recently it has been flooded with reddit normies.

Do you shower?
Even in a police state such as America no state official (unless you're employed by one) will punish you for having bad hygiene.
But people shower nevertheless because good hygienic standards are beneficial for functioning society.
NAP is the same except it's about moral standards.

defraud me and i'll fucking kill you. Well, you could pay me back triple, and I wont.

Define, "violence" in the Anarcho-Right milieu.

If my neighbor erects a 50' statue of two homos playing in out in his front yard, how is that not an act of aggression, when I have children I don't want exposed to that? Where do individuals seek a redress of grievances? The local, for profit, courthouse?

But, in such circumstances, how could any system of private law justifiably act in your defense, if we can't define whether said defrauding constituted a violation of the NAP?

More importantly, without a centralized bureaucracy to define people's identity with certainty, how could we possibly attribute an identity to a fraudster who likely used a fake one? Would it even be possible?

'Gradually become a hive of ancaps'? You should have seen this board a few years ago. The majority of posters were libertarians/ancaps. These days the boards has a weird Americanised fascist bent.

Define fraud first - people use that term dramatically differently.
If you end up with a definition that essentially amounts to lying, then obviously lying isn't violent.

Our ancaps might be better classified as nice guy natsocs. Head over to leddits ancap board to see the truly degenerate ones

This. As I said, fascists have to fly from the helicopters before the communists. They are exactly the same, but the fascists have convinced some of us that they are different.

Physical contact intended to injure your body.

Lying in such a way that would constitute a deal done under false pretenses, ultimately causing one of the parties to lose and one of them to gain different to the amount agreed upon.

I think that'd function as a pretty good definition for it.

Libertarians and Ancaps are unironically anti-social and think everyone else doesn't operate through interacting to make the world work.

because it is bedtime in ancap and prime time in jpn now

>muh ancap strawmen thread
>muh gubberment
>muh roads

You don't think anyone is going to shoot you
>dindu nuffin
>wuz a good boy
You would get away with fraud, but I wouldn't get away with murder? very intredasting.

Yeah I think that definition is fine.
Lying isn't violence no matter how anyone spins it though - we can say fraud is unjust, but we can't say fraud is violence.

"Criminals don't exist guys"
Why does your system sounds an awful lot like another ideology that requires everyone peacefully submits to it to work ?

Because in the end, the only person you can rely on is yourself.

Neck yourself.

Marxism and Libertarianism are kissing fucking cousins Desu.

>be Marx. Think macro.
>be von Mises. Think micro.

When I was still Bluepilled I believed in the Lolbertarian fairy tale too. It's an idealogical dead end, that is ultimately intellectual fappery.

Did you know all ancaps are actually minors below the voting age?

It's true. Once they had to the age of majority the idea of anarchy leaves their head and they can be smart once again.

No, we need services and institutions. None of these an ape have ever lived without them, so their claims are audacious and poorly thought out.

Good thing one of these retards will never hold a place of power.

Then we can say that fraud is admissable under the NAP?

Not exactly sure what your point is. If you can't attribute such things as DNA evidence or fingerprints to a specific person, it may be incredibly difficult to catch repeat offenders, too.

The system would have difficulties at virtually everything in law enforcement. That's why it's a trade-off between security and liberty.

Jewish tricks are okay? wow, bizzaro pol

>t seems like Sup Forums has gradually become a hive of ancaps.
It isn't. What made you think it is? The only ancaps here are sheltered manchildren who never had a negative interaction with anybody.

>yay, we overthrew government!
>get taken over before you can actually do anything by an already very established nearby authority

>yay, we overthrew government!
>religious crazies start moving in to spread their beliefs and establish a theocracy

>yay, we overthrew government!
>people who weren't in favor of the revolution start forming political enclaves like monarchy and national socialism and expand their borders by buying land

>yay, we overthrew government!
>the entrepreneurial elite form a secret society and instead of using laws, they use propaganda à la Bernays to rule the masses through the tyranny of the majority

Face it, ancaps are dumb.

I'm communist

...

I don't care about the NAP. I'm an anarchist but that thing does nothing for my philosophy.

Other people who do care about the NAP will argue that fraud is theft and thus a form of aggression, but obviously it's not violence even for them.

Here's an excerpt from an article on fraud.

>The theory of contract espoused here demonstrates that fraud is properly viewed as a type of theft. Suppose Karen buys a bucket of apples from Ethan for $20. Ethan represents the things in the bucket as being apples, in fact, as apples of a certain nature, that is, as being fit for their normal purpose of being eaten. Karen conditions the transfer of title to her $20 on Ethan's not knowingly engaging in 'fraudulent' activities, like pawning off rotten apples. If the apples are indeed rotten and Ethan knows this, then he knows that he does not receive ownership of or permission to use the $20, because the condition 'no fraud' is not satisfied. He is knowingly in possession of Karen's $20 without her consent, and is, therefore, a thief.

>In other words, for the libertarian, fraud is a type of aggression (namely, theft), just because it is a means by which one party receives or uses or takes the property of someone else without their consent—and there is failure of consent because the first party's misrepresentation meant that one of the conditions to transfer of title was not satisfied.

Every once in a while theres a No Step On Snek general thread. All the Lolberts and Anarcho Adolescents generally stay in there for fear of brutal ridicule for espousing their views elsewhere.

There is a dire problem in Libertarian thinking, and you see it come to the surface every time they regurgitate their rhetoric. They love calling people collectivists. You make any pro government organization argument and you get a torrent of
>hurr you're a collectivist
>stop babysitting people
>hurr statism

These people are unironically suffering from an autism spectrum disorder. People are social animals. We're tribal animals, and in group preference is something all people feel. Its such a strong force that public schools have to spend a decade trying to train it out of kids with diversity and tolerance mantras.
We naturally act as groups for our collective interests. This is what our enemy does, and its why they're so successful in the face of totally fractured and disillusioned white populations. Whenever whites start advocating for group interests in political discussions you'll see these immature and ill educated Libertarian/AnCaps counter signal against it. In essence they are making an argument against themselves, against their own people, and for the enemy. They are arguing to keep whites fractured and weak.

They think they're superior, enlightened, better than the average man, and they couldn't possibly be more wrong. They're just socially retarded goyim who tacitly support getting cucked by Jews.

>unjust
>ok

Not being violence doesn't make something right.

Depends on the neighbours. If you live in a fag neighbourhood with your husband it's probably not gonna matter.
If you live in a normal neighbourhood then it could be an act of aggression.
The neighbour erecting the statue should consult the other residents in both situations.
If he doesn't and builds the statue anyway and somebody doesn't like it there isn't really anything the other guy can do. Except of course building a giant swastika in your backyard as a revenge.
>Marxism and Libertarianism are kissing fucking cousins Desu
Unlike fascism which is basically commie-light + nationalism?

>These people are unironically suffering from an autism spectrum disorder.
youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs&ab_channel=musiclover041591

You're more right than you think you are.

You asked how private law can handle it, I told you. I am my own private law enforcement or whatever word salad you want to call self-defense.
Two parties, resolving a dispute, is exactly what these things are. Third parties may or may not be needed.

Most services and institutions aren't government.

Fucking leafbro gets it. The Anarcho-Right ideologies are a sophomoric, infantile reaction to forces in society that upsets their feelings. It is the political equivalent of adolescence.

>be Anarcho-Right community of non-aggressing anti-statists
>be conquered and ground into nuggets by neighboring Islamic community for being infidels
>be conquered and skinned alive by neighboring tribal warlord who wants their Ancap wimmenz for sex slavery, and their Ancap chillinz for the work camps
>be conquered and used as slave labor in Mexican cartel drug factory

The Anarcho-Right fairy tale is fucking hilarious.

How can one assure, in such circumstances, that justice would be properly served? Justice is typically seen as being proportional to the crime, but this seems like you assume everyone will do that, because everyone is nice like that....

I get the feeling ancaps have a ridiculously rose tinted view of humanity. They forget that at any moment, people are willing to rip out another's throat if it means they get an absurd amount of reward for doing so.

Ok, explain how you handle jewish tricks then please sir.

>Federal government gets disbanded and no longer in power
>Those already in power in the states become their own nations
>???????

I don't understand how you can establish an ancap country. All you're doing to removing the federal government and just replacing self autonomous states. The government still exists, it's just extremely small now until they federalize again.

>It seems like Sup Forums has gradually become a hive of ancaps.
You haven't been here very long, have you?
I started coming here for the 2012 election, and there were a LOT more ancaps here then.

I don't care.
People's sins are their own problem that they're inevitably going to have to deal with.

>being a slave is ok as long my owner is called the state because i am useless and I just CANNOT take care of myself! I need my owner to
Statists are literally babies.

>people's sins are their own
>implying society can't be the victim of enough people fucking up as individuals

autism.

>defraud me and i'll fucking kill you. Well, you could pay me back triple, and I wont.
Come on chap, I opened up with that. Pay attention. I said I'd fucking kill you.
There's no rose tint here, only blood.
Unless you want to say I'm not an Ancap, which is probably totally fair.

So you'd go from a few people pretending to represents hundreds of millions of people while enforcing their arbitrary dictates on them to a few people pretending to represent far far fewer people and doing the same.

That's slightly less worse - I won't complain about things getting less worse.

Your first argument is a failure.

>unbridled liberty and individual property rights yay (terms and conditions may apply)

>Unlike fascism which is basically commie-light + nationalism?

That's where you're wrong, kiddo. Contemporary fascism is tribalism on Super Male Vitality.

An ancap world works, whereas natsoc would fall in 5 years.

the common man is a baby.

If Libertarianism was a correct ideology, than universal suffrage would be the most efficient way to get the least corrupt politicians in office.

If Libertarianism was a correct ideology, then Libertarianism would have already been voted into office (Ron Paul, etc.) because consumer demand, going by your logic, would get the best outcome.

People fuck with one another all the time.
Did you think you made a point with that post?

It probably would be fair, but what I want to know is what justice that is, if it isn't proportional? If it's not, then why would we want to live in that world?

Rate the dummies of Sup Forums

>High Tier
Radical humanists / Alt-Left
Third Way
Aryanists
True Left
Radical centrists

>Okay Tier
National socialists
Fascists
Transhumanists

>Mid Tier
Libertarians
Russiaboos
Traditionalists

>Shit Tier
Authoritarian capitalists
White nationalists
Democrats
Bolsheviks
Marxist Communists

>Bottom of the barrel
Neoconservatives / Trumpfags / Hillaryfags
AnCaps
Antifa / Left-anarchists
SJWs

Then he'll stop being a baby or die.

This is why retard natsocs hate ancap, they are weak.

High influx of gen z recently, don't worry they'll eventually become more authoritarian as time goes on

That's horrible logic.
Just because something is good or desirable doesn't mean people must pursue it or that it must happen or else it's not good or desirable.

>the common man will stop being a baby

You still didn't address my argument.

Libertaranism believes that consumer demand will get the best solutions to everything.

So why isn't it already voted in if we have every single chucklefuck able to vote in America?

Why isn't your logic working?!

Yeah, that's pretty much it. Maybe I'm wrong but is't that called Minarchism? Or at least a very extreme kind of libertarianism. I just don't see how Anarcho-capitalism can be established without killing large amounts of people. It's just Utopian like Anarcho-communism.

Why would a moral person want to violently control other people based on their own arbitrary whims?

Libertarianism and the edgelord equivalent Anarcho-Capitalism are the bastions of people who sought alternative views and stopped to stare at the first pebble on the ground. It is the ideology of entry level thinkers. Poorly formed, not thought to its logical conclusion, not taking human nature and social dynamics into account.
A society is not a collection of totally separate individuals, people inherently have collective tendencies. A society itself is by definition a collective. To think that every single person is an island unto himself, a Nietzschian super man, totally independent, and only voluntarily interacting with others is simply autistic delusion.

I've seen most of that before, and I've had the misfortune of attending a Libertarian conference back in 2008 when it was even more fringe. There were less 20 somethings and way more mustard stained 40-50 year olds who looked like they lived in group homes.

He's right. If AnCap ideas are so great, why do they continually fail in the marketplace of ideas?

It's like communism. The system falls apart if a few people fail to participate, making it astonishingly hard to defend.

Stop confusing ancap with libertarian.
Being libertarian is a nationalist movement in the US.
This website is based on the US, there's your answer.

>High Tier
Traditionalists
Monarchists


>Good Tier
Traditionalists
Fascists
Libertarian Fascists

>Mid Tier
Libertarians
Natsocs

>Shiet Tier
Ancap
Anarcho-anything
Communists
Resource Based Economy people
General bluepills

>Bottom of the barrel
Kekistanis
SJWs
Antifa
SJW

No, I mean ancap. I only used the pic because I didn't have any ancap balls on hand, unfortunately.

But yeah, when I said ancap, I meant ancap.

>terms and conditions may apply
Yes, voluntary ones. If you don't want giant dick statues build around your property make an agreement with your neighbours that they won't build them.
>Contemporary fascism is tribalism on Super Male Vitality
So it's a meme?

If there's government there's not anarchy, because governments consist in a people self-designated as a ruling class.

All it takes for anarchy is for people to not try to violently subjugate others, which is what you and almost everyone in the first world manages to successfully refrain from every day. If a single town of a couple thousand people stopped paying taxes tomorrow, nothing would happen to them.

Gospel, user.

I put it on the same level as SJW ideals in the ranking of childish philosophies.

>implying there is better justice now
it's not like this world is all that great guy. Don't walk on any bridges in london ok?
We can cut off the hands of thieves. we could remove their dicks, so they can't reproduce. We lock them up for a while now, on the taxpayers dime. Is that justice?
That sounds pretty jewish.

It's the easiest way to end any argument with an Ancap or Libertardian.

If their logic was so amazing, there already would be a Libertarian or Ancap place.

Communists think the same thing. People will eventually (it's guaranteed in their minds) rise up and everywhere will become Communist.

>Libertarian fascism
There's no such thing. If you're talking about Pinochet, he contradicts fascism on multiple fundamental beliefs and is rightfully despised by fascists. He wasn't a libertarian nor was he a fascist, and fascists are fundamentally anti-capitalism and anti-communism. You can't have fascism and capitalism.

What wouldn't sound Jewish?
Violently conscripting other people to go murder and be murdered for your arbitrary unimportant whims?

>The idea that private militaries would just uphold the NAP, even if they saw an opportunity to wipe out competition is a laughably bad assumption.
They probably shouldn't attack the people who pay their wages

Mate, nothing will be perfect, and it'd be unreasonable to ask for that. I think it'd be even more unreasonable to trust individuals to settle a case between them rationally, without one pursuing self interest beyond what they're owed.

Humans are cunts. Like sheep, they need to be guided to what is best for them, because they prove time and time again, through their bad decisions and their degeneracy that they can't make it on their own.

Gotcha. I know a lot of faggots try to place them in the same bucket.
I've always been for some government. Good to know you're not retarded.
Keep up the good fight user.

That's literally toddler logic dude.
It's not valid.

>in a book club
>reading the Prince
>we read the parts about using auxiliaries and mercenaries and how he hates them vs troops motivated by both money and nationalism
>we subsequently shit on Ancaps

feels good not to be a brainlet.

Riiiiiiiight right. "Voluntary" ones...

So, ultimately, the Anarcho-Right is a political system exactly like what we have now, only it's under the auspices of volunteerism, and you totally have maximum freedom and embrace the sanctity of private property rights, and that's what's so great about it, except that you don't have any of that because:

>have unlimited freedoms
>here sign this voluntary paper giving up all your unlimited freedoms

Kys

>this argument isn't valid just because I say so.
>whew... now I don't have to put forth an argument

I have you filtered for a reason. I had to open your post to actually see what you wrote.

I remember you genuinely being stupid in other threads. Not stupid as an insult but as a description.

>their bad decisions and their degeneracy that they can't make it on their own.
got it, we'll just take a few of those same people and put them in charge of everyone else. How could it go wrong?
A poster other than you.
>muh gorillion

>newfags from r_thedonald pretend pol hasnt been overwhelmingly libertarian until flooded by redditors

Sup Forums is shifting towards the 4th step of the redpill, which is traditionalism and monarchy.

It's not because I say so, it's because "people don't tend to x therefore x is bad" is logically invalid in form *PERIOD*.
Jesus Christ, what a dipshit random you are.

>not knowing ancap is impossible because any type of 'upholding/enforcing' is a government

>ancap is the government before there is a government, that's it, it cannot exist, any type of structure breaks it's philosphy

> NAP is created through government and generations of people following rules so it's hardwired in them. In a real ancap society no such thing as NAP, as a NAP would violate ANCAP

No, we take a few of them and put them in competition with one another to act as shills to the rest of us, for power. If they depend on us for their control, they appease the masses, and the checks and balances required to keep that machine turning keep things in check.

It's worked for both of our countries without fail. Or am I forgetting a radical dictator that controlled the US at any time?

it's like these guys don't even know what they're talking about.
No wait, that's exactly it.

Monarchy is indeed redpilled, im no longer a lolbertarian myself.

However, the way newfags itt pretend pol was always like this and that libertarians here are something new is truly depressing

>It's worked for both of our countries without fail.
oh you got me m8

You could say that about any party that doesn't get votes.
>here sign this voluntary paper giving up all your unlimited freedoms
Yes, which you're not forced to sign at a gunpoint.

*Analyses post
Warning: violation of NAP detected.
*Subroutine 5378 activated.

Be advised. Be advised

*deploy counter measures

OP is a faggoooooooootxa16^'shhhfcdrhvcf/^&*"#3dwdghbfra

*shuts down.

You really lack logic lmao

Libertards think that consumer demand in an unregulated free market will yield the highest quality results, right?


So if every citizen after 18 and with no felonies can vote in America, why haven't we voted in a Libertarian candidate?

Why are they just losing in the free market of ideas EVERY SINGLE TIME?

Maybe you should go back to playing your redpilled video games.

When you steal my TV and I take it back I don't become government.
Government is defined by people who claim legitimacy in demanding a monopoly on the use of aggressive violence.

>You could say that about any party that doesn't get votes.
Libertards believe every individual operates as an individual, and therefore should make the best educated vote.

Other parties believe once they just win the majority of the population, they'll use their government force to control everyone else, whether or not they voted them in.

Lolbert and AnCap economists have a lesson to learn therein about the economic value of abstract concepts. An existential threat can motivate a man to act equally or more so than coin. A man fighting for his homeland in face of an outside threat does not need to be paid.
A man fighting to protect his homeland, things he loves, who is also getting paid would be the most loyal man to fill your ranks.

In the free market you can always find men to hire as mercenaries. You however can not always find men who fight for facing an existential threat. Somethings with a value are impossible to find and trade in a market. Some things have a value to great.

An incompetent does not denote failure on the entire system, because the system has remained the same and still turns. You've got an incompetent in office now, but the US will still be there when he leaves office.

The only thing ANCAP ever gave us is funny memes.

You care about things you shouldn't care about.
Like your life, which is pretty worthless.