Are Anarcho-capitalists the most retarded?

Would you say anarcho-capitalists are one of the most retarded political groups?

Not even those dirty commies are as retarded. Hell, not even bloody anarcho-transhumanists are as retarded as these fellows.

Let me explain what is wrong with anarcho-capitalism:
They're a bunch of fucking nonces, as you can see by other threads, like the "10 years old? old enough" one. Basically, if your age is on the clock, you're going to have to sit on their miniscule cocks.

They're just corporatists in disguse. Anything pro-corp, is pro-them. They're as bad as the socialists living my my country. "hehe well the internet needs to be censored by government" "As an anarcho-capitalist, net neutrality is bad because it disallows corporations from extorting you and manipulating you to use their services by slowly choking out any competitors :(("

Oh yeah, that and the fact that they constantly contradict themselves. "jews wouldn't have any power in an ancap world", despite the fact that one of their main "leaders" is Rothberg. See anything wrong with that name? And also the fact that the majority of banks and corporations are owned by jews. Comcast, a company they want to hand the internet over to, has a jewish owner, a certain Brian L Roberts.

Here is some further hypocrisy on the side of ancaps. They also complain about how "A two choice system isn't voluntary" in the American government, yet they support the idea of an internet controlled by 3 or 4 isp's. "hmm yes you have a wide selection of 4 choices so it's voluntary, oh, yes, and they're PRIVATE, so that makes them more trustworthy because it's made by the people!"

So yeah, anarcho-capitalism is jewish and retarded.

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/6cxnb1/sorry_anarchocommunists_you_were_right/
unsafeschools.org/the-australian-safe-schools-program-la-trobe-university/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

You're not wrong, but Transhumanists are even more Jewish, and more dangerous.

Aaaaand, you forget the most important part where anybody would be able start an ISP and undercut all the shitty companies, then expand their superior service accordingly.

If Transhumanism is limited and always controlled,anyone will be capable to get a few things from it.
and
>implying any type of society can be a utopia
No it cant,every society has a possibility to contain corruption and elitists.

...

>then you get kneecapped
or the company just buys out everything that is advertised on your platform so you can't even advertise

You also ignore that if the service rendered is inadequate for the consumer, that the company will lose revenue. As such it is in their interest to meet the needs of their clientele. If their business model brings in negative revenue, they will lose their monetary influence to do those things.

the fuck is this true about rothbard?

Yes user, you're correct. They are infact the biggest retards on this board and an overall cancer to this website.

>its another statist showing his peanut brain episode

>ancaps
>more retarded than commies

If they're on of the only 3 services out there, people will still use them. Take Steam for example. They fuck wiht the trading system, the gift system, the grrenlight stuff. They get away with it, because they are better funded and are bigger than competitors. They can make a service that only they provide worse and worse for profit, and nothing can be done, because I'm pretty sure other platforms will be crushed if they try to provide the same services.

>You also ignore that if the service rendered is inadequate for the consumer, that the company will lose revenue.
>inadequate for the consumer
please explain your apparent illiteracy

>Hell, not even bloody anarcho-transhumanists are as retarded as these fellows.
What the heck is a "bloody anarcho-transhumanist"?

ANCAP is literally the most equal and free society.

the ultimate redpill

I'm still confused by the concept of an anarcho-capitalism. What's the difference between it and the capitalistic system that we have in America right now? And how the fuck can you have anarchy and capitalism at the same time?

Fuck off. We have never experienced true liberty because of faggots like you. Ancap works if everyone has similar values thus requiring smaller societies. You want to be ruled by some government who takes your shekels and lines their pockets.

People fucked up and now we don't have a chance.

>America
>Capitalist

Problems with ancaps is they take some high-level abstract concept like "property rights" and build an ideology out of it. It's fucking stupid, there is no property in nature; it is a literal social construct. "Private property" should arise as a result of ideology, not be the foundation of it. At least commies are motivated by an underlying hedonism or something.

They make some good points, but all anarchist movements are utopian and impractical.

Anarcho-transhumanists are people who think everyone should be cyborgs

Private property is a very natural, baseline concept that even small children grasp without aid.

they think social contract can exist when theres no state to enforce it

And you want to be ruled by some corporation that takes your shekels and extorts you to only use their services, because that's how any oppurtunistic large corporation works.

>wanting interaction to be voluntary and people to choose how they live their lives is retarded
Even though I could call myself an Ancap, I am okay with the fact that many people do not wish for everyone to self-govern. As long as you follow the logic you choose to use against voluntaryism. Once you go against it, theres no reason not to go full statist 1984 style authoritarianism. If ancaps are retarded, then the opposite must be the non-retarded ideology.

Aye that too

>We have never experienced true liberty
I'm curious about what you guys think of gommies who say we've never had true communism because blah blah blah

there's a reason why we haven't had true large scale system for either one because it's absolutely impossible. At least commies admit that you have to scramble and rearrange the brains of everyone in order for it to work but ancaps seem to think things will just naturally work out.

and in an ancap society, you'll make small children grasp your cock and get AIDS.

i too like the ancap memes

">wanting interaction to be voluntary and people to choose how they live their lives is retarded"
That's called mutualism, literally the only anarchist ideology that has any merit. Even then, it's very utopian and practically impossible to achieve

>social contract
If 2 parties voluntarily agree to a set of conditions, a failure to follow through on them would be very negative for their reputation. It is in their interests to uphold the contract regardless of the existence or absence of a state.

Well, legitimate communism hasn't been tried, every time a state claimed themselves communist they were actually acting as socialist dictatorships.

>And you want to be ruled by some corporation that takes your shekels and extorts you to only use their services
So a government? Remember, such an organization only has power behind a centralized military force. Why would anyone build the weapons or machinery for said corporation if they knew they would be used to coerce them?

That violates the children's rights and NAP.

You can't harm children, even if they're yours.

then they form a lynch mob and train themselves to use guns in secret, violate everyone's NAP and kill off the the untrained "armed populace", forming their own country with laws and police and they slowly fuck over the isolated anarcho-capitalist settlements

Small societies, similar values. I guess on a large scale the only thing that works best is Nat scoc, but with that you must submit to governments will.

Yes, large scale is impossible. For any system it's impossible. Our republic will fall, faster than usual because of Marxist filth, but it was always doomed.

Hard to maintain private property when there's no neutral agency to enforce the property laws. It'd be the strong devouring the weak.

if theres no-one to enforce any means to prevent a failure to follow it then any 'contract' held to try and stop it is useless, and before you start saying about how it damages their reputation hundreds of conglomerates have horrid reputations in our current society because of shit like that and they still in business

This.

They were BTFO as lolbertarians so now they are trying to rebrand themselves as minarchists and ancaps. Its all the same shades of retardedness. Just like how the american liberals were BTFO and rebranded themselves as progressives.

>Thinking capitalism requires a state

wew lad

With governments, you can always leave to another, better one, or try and get a private territory. And the government does not create services in the same way a corporation does.

You neglect to mention the governmental regulations that stymie all attempts at genuine competition.

And why would you consider the government a neutral agency?

yeah they're the "retarded" ones user

>pic related

Was to

that's exactly my point though
every time it's tried people inevitably have to take power, absolute equality goes out the window, and bourgeoisie class of party elites is that are even worse than capitalist are created

then whats stopping the large bodies in an AnCap society from steamrolling everything and introducing a 1984 life under their reign?

In order to prevent corporations abusing rtheir power, they must have restrictions put in place. For example, net neutrality.

They definitely are at least communism works in theory

You have to remember that people like aren't trying to create a healthier, more efficient, or more prosperous society. People like him actually have no grasp on the notion of "society", or "people", plural. They only believe in the individual, and the ideology is structured around that. They want the free market to function like Darwinism.
But the issue is that they're retarded and don't even understand the context their arguments are in: capitalism, wherein a company's power and success isn't judged by how good its service is, but by how much profit it makes.
They think those profits are linked to the quality of service because they believe everyone else is also an unevolved troglodyte who doesn't understand how society functions.

Everyone has access to weapons.

If someone threatens the principles of ANCAP by enforcing their will over others, then they've broken the NAP and they've got artillery incoming.

State cannot servive without people, so as well as protecting it's own interests, it will encourage the people to protect theirs. And it will protect the people's interets, such as Sup Forums.

The only thing that would stop such a scenario would be the pockets of the people. If the people continue supporting the company regardless their practice, then the company gets free reign to act as they see fit. This is justifiable you know, if the people wish for it then so it shall be. Money makes the world go round.

Net neutrality relies on the internet being seen as a utility, which is fair enough, but in a free market economy, surely it makes sense to remove regulations and allow the public to vote with their wallets

oooooh
Well, I'm going to at least try and redpill them into not being total faggots

who will fund or create those weapons then? those weapons will be in the hands of the giants that create them and band together to create a society where no-one can go against their will

>With governments, you can always leave
That is not a solution. The government doesnt own all of the land in my country. Theres no basis for it to tax or regulate how I run my own business/live on my own property.
>the government does not create services in the same way a corporation does
If a corporation creates services, then car salesmen build cars

If the people are happy with the services of a large company, then they're happy with it.

If they aren't, then they can buy from smaller companies.

ANCAP gives you ultimate choice. You can't buy out someone by using shitty zoning loopholes and bribes from an outside source -- your land and business are as equal as any.

by who? "muh armed populace" I doubt your average bob and joe have proper firearms training.

Armed citizens? Militaristic society? Nah. I think most ancaps realize it's unattainable realistically, but it doesn't hurt to strive for the principals.

>and they've got artillery incoming.
From who? "Everyone", because everyone has access to weapons?
In other words that "everyone" is functioning as the "large body"? In which case, you haven't actually answered his question at all?

see If they support the company's practices then they deserve the results of their support. Anarcho-Capitalism is the best form of a truly democratic society.

Free market does not always mean prosperous market

What makes me think an unhireable state-wide authority following a common code of law more neutral than a profit driven private security agency?

Not to say the government is without sin, but radical destruction of government and pretending the void will be filled with a benevolent entity isn't the proper response.

I'm all for downgrading government size, but I'm not convinced the completely removing it will have your projected results.

>communism works in theory

People

Firearms and HE are easy to make in small workshops

A large government or company can never conqueror a people that don't want to be; we've seen it all throughout history.

I do agree with you, but I'd rather have a free and slightly less prosperous market than a regulated and stronger one

I just did a quick research about Anarcho-Capitalism and came up with this Reddit thread explaining how it is a stupid ideology.
reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/6cxnb1/sorry_anarchocommunists_you_were_right/
>Why is anarcho-capitalism stupid? Well for starters, it's an oxymoron. You can't have capitalism without a state. Private property is simply the state in miniature. The state developed out of private property. The state exists to protect private property. The state is in place to protect the rich and the powerful and the privileged in society. That is its main function. There is an inextricable link between private property and the state. True anarchy requires the abolition of private property, otherwise the tyranny of the state will simply be replaced by the tyranny of private property owners.
My questions are satisfied.

Your average Bob and Jane can use IEDs and rifles just fine.

Well yes, exactly.
Like I said, you people aren't interested in a healthier or more prosperous or efficient society.

Kek

a world where principles could be upheld and respected would be a genuine utopia, but sadly we can never achieve this

>tomahawk missiles, drones and nuclear missiles
>M4s and frag grenades
of course, viva la revolution buddy

>slightly less prosperous
That's not what free means either. Free means up as far as up goes and down as far as down goes.

Why would you have that?

itt, a commie faggot.

you want a degree of ancap, like america USED TO BE.

small govt is best. the ancaps have many good ideas, you just can't go too far down the road of anarchy.

statism, like we see now...is far more sickening. under ancaps a few kids get raped, but the sickos eventually get lynched.

under the statism we have now...we have organised mass abortions and mass child grooming via institutions. read this shit.
unsafeschools.org/the-australian-safe-schools-program-la-trobe-university/

So don't fucking mock ancaps, their ideas are solid and were ideas pushed by the founding fathers. As long as you don't go too far down the rabbit hole, they're solid ideas.

And again, remember america was founded on many ancap principles.

>>tomahawk missiles, drones and nuclear missiles
>>M4s and frag grenades
>of course, viva la revolution buddy

Yes, because it totally helped the Brits against the IRA, right?

Or the Taliban? The VC?

They all only had rifles and IEDs.

>all these buzzwords
If the people want progress they can support progress with their money. Regardless, all those are subjective to the individual and aren't the topic of the discussion here.

Hell, even the retarded Anarcho-Communists think the Anarcho-Capitalists are retarded.

Not effectivly.

>communism works in theory
Ancaps are by far the least retarded political group in decades, perhaps centuries. They understand that given the rights we agree individuals have, almost any type of intervention is immoral. They know what's right and wrong and stick to their guns, unlikely any other political group who argues through emotional bullying.

This is true. That's why it ultimately doesnt work with large societies. Need a society that is cohesive. Now is when we argue for ethnostates.

I'm not debating that, I'm was just saying that I'd prefer freedom even if it does come at the cost of something like a weaker economy

considering in a society where theres no higher body to stop total genocide of the enemy by a group then massacring thousands to achieve their cause will be a lot easier

>DON'T U DARE MOCK THE ANCAPS THEY SOUND NIGGAZ

>Would you say anarcho-capitalists are one of the most retarded political groups?
Yes. Sharing is caring.

Who gives a shit what America was founded by?
The founding fathers who believe in that (not all of them) were wrong.

Maybe if the invading faction went with the hearts and minds approach but if it was someone like China/Russia who have waves of conscripts to send and have a policy of scorch the earth I don't think you'll survive that long. Just look how bad disorganized the anarchists in Spain were and this was when the gap between military hardware and a rifleman were much smaller.

IT WAS FOUNDED BY THE HESSIANS.

GEORGE WASHINGTON IS A BACKSTABBING LIMELIGHT THIEF!!

damnit commie go back to laos and lie in a pile of free bread

Cheers, Nigger.

They DON'T want progress, that's why government exists. They only want personal security and personal prosperity, which is natural.
>aren't the topic of the discussion here
I believe it's important for people to see you for what you are, so they have the correct perspective when judging your ideas.

>communism works in theory

I'm not sure how to take that. That just sounds super comfortable, user.

That is, purley on paper, I think he's getting at. It has a wee bit of logical merit, but does not work in real life.

You need to also say you prefer your freedom even if it comes at the cost of catastrophe, horrific suffering, and death. Otherwise it's not relevant to anarcho-capitalism.

Forced sharing is not caring though

I'm interested on where this fucko comes from.
I bet he's a yank from Cali or Seattle or a germ from Berlin

>plebbit
>arguing against every man being his own government
>implying that is bad

>communism works in theory