Left-Libertarianism is superior. You can't have liberty while you still have unjust hierarchies, and Capitalism IS an unjust hierarchy. Why should one human rule over another's life and ability to eat simply because he starts a business or was born into the right family or had the right genetics?
You Right-wingers are all the same. You all love licking boots, even the so-called 'Libertarians' amongst you
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Sup Forums is too busy sperging out about ecelebs to actually discuss politics.
Why not leave the working class to join coops and communes (as our capitalist economy allows) of their own free will? Why force your system on them?
I like your flag because it's the rebel flag in Victoria 2
what the fuck does left vs right matter when you're libertarian to the point of anarchism?
explain to me how ancom is practically different from ancap for the people living in them
...
>"anarcho" communist
>calling others bootlickers
How do you stop people from engaging in the voluntary exchange of goods and services without a coercive state?
>select all helicopters
Ancap would actually work to some extent.
Ancom would collapse in 24 hours.
Coops frequently get audited by IRS and raided by SWAT for nonviolent offences. They are easy targets for police. Also there is one guy at the top usually fucking everyone else over. Why do you think most successful coops are run by boomer/gen X democrats?
It's not about hierarchy, it's about the construction of a consensual society in which all people are maximally empowered, minimally ruled. If people want to do hierarchies in business, I am about as concerned with that as I am if people want to do BDSM in the bedroom.
Most people are anarchic in day to day life. They not only do not attempt to rule over every random stranger they meet, they do not rule over ANY random stranger they meet. We call the exceptions uncouth, unwanted, and to every decent social function, uninvited. When you look at what this anarchic bent leaves then is that everyone is trying to pursue their own interests in a decent way: that is the bedrock motive of civilized man and the very fuel of capitalism. No change of human nature is needed to make anarchocapitalism function; we must only get out of the way of the nature that has developed throughout the western world. Our culture is yet mighty and may yet be strengthened by the return to its principles. Were our culture's principles allowed to be seen unchained, there would be no question of holding them back, and no fear that our culture could fall to the wretched squalor that consumes lesser cultures.
With this basic element of human motive on my side, I do not claim to account for every true anarchist. Yet I warn that to have an anarchy that is not capitalistic, you must have the unanimous consent of all participants, for you are seeking a harmony of goals apart from the basic goal of man. To the extent that you can achieve this without coercion, I will, of course, always wish you the best of luck.
Also, sage. Focus on the sins of those who rule you already, not the sins of those with whom they try to distract you.
...
>Eliminate states
>Create communes
>In those communes people start creating laws to be civilizated
>You will need rulers and judges
>Literally create a new state
You are not real anarchists,just faggots who want to fight against police because you failed at school
>Coops frequently get audited by IRS and raided by SWAT for nonviolent offences
Funnily enough right-wing libertarianism would put a stop to that.
Proudhonian mutualism is the ideal, any bottom-up socialism that rejects central planning and the state will do. I think a lot of Sup Forums would agree if they could get over the commie meme.
exactly, thanks man
ñeñ
I like Distributism, but any socialism that rejects private property just ain't gonna do.
Checked, and Let me guess...
>muh guns
Wouldnt shooting at police violate the NAP in ancap society? They are just doing their jobs after all
Ancoms want complete destruction of police and prison infrastructure hence the "anarchist" in ancom. No gods no masters
>Wouldnt shooting at police violate the NAP in ancap society?
I'm not an ancap, but there's a lot of factors that would come into that, the contracts you've signed, the property you are on, the crime you've committed, etc.
>I like Distributism
Get out commie
I like the idea of AnCom but it's just been infiltrated by limp-wristed weak antifa faggots that have no balls or even an interest in working.
How many AnComs work in a trade or are even a member of a real union that isn't some retarded grocery store or minimum wager cartel? If Syndicalism were to triumph today, it would be a bunch of employee owned McDonald's and unemployed students attempting to coop something and then failing when they realize that they can't always have equality or even racial representation on everything, and then when they find out that men do a majority of the hard work just by nature, they'd probably flip their shit and go on some rampage.
The Western family structure of the early 1900s was destroyed by Capitalist ideas. This has ensured a cucked, masochistic, and non-employable AnCom community that is now inseparable from the trash and garbage of the SJWs.
Antifa too is now a tool used by Capitalists to ensure a pacified society. Ask any Antifa member, they have no experience with guns, they have no interest in holding a family or a household of any sort against Corporate degeneracy, no desire to really defend themselves or their communities (if they can even be called such, for what community bases itself on the idea of self-defeat and self-consumption as Modern Leftism has ensured?) and they fly the flag for aesthetic purposes.
If AnCom were to return (because it absolutely is insolvent now as Fascism and National Socialism was 20-30 years ago), it would need to separate itself from Antifa and the SJWs.
>why is start-up business man better than average leech
Maybe because these men are the ones who push society foward and actually get the job done you lazy commie fuckers
I'm not a distributist, but of all the systems recommended to "fix" capitalism, distributism sounds like the least terrible.
Police?Fuck them,we support private security,not shitty fat lazy cunts
It sounds terrible,sounds like socialism.Why would you touch other people property?That is communism.If I want to give money to poor people is my decision,not yours
All police outside of FBI, DHS, ICE, Highway patrol, coast guard, national guard, US Marshall, and state sheriff cant enforce the law outside their own (private) jurisdiction.
At least it would fix itself shortly afterwards. Everyone gets a little bit of private property and no welfare, if they can make a profit off of it, great, if they can't, then too bad, they had the same advantages that everyone else had.
I wouldn't recommend it over other more capitalistic options, but at least it confuses the commies.
>ancap society is real
>we have to ask ancap's permission
No, we don't, you're not relevant.
Humans are not equal
Freedom is a myth, you cannot have total freedom, so you are not free. you only have rights.
No,people are not born equal,you have to understand it.If someone hasnt property,he must work for others,and if nobody hires him,its his problem,not mine.
That is what we defend,not society,just individualism
He's stating his intention, not asking for permission.
I swear, either you fucking commies are cryptoshitposters or you're all fucking retarded.
>unjust hierarchies
Nature is hierarchical.
>we have to ask ancap's permission
Of course you wont,you are just fascists but the government owns all,you have to be physically removed
I see no problem with the second scenario.
Death to kulaks
That wasn't my point at all you retard, you can, RIGHT NOW, join a coop or commune freely, why not choose to do so and let the working class do so of their own free will instead of forcing them to do so.
You are so wrong through. The reason people get ahead in life is that they work hard and make the right decisions. It has nothing to do with being born in the right family. Also on to your point of starting business it is hard work and risk something your fat ass wouldn't know. As for capitalism destroying famlies the family unit survived from 7000bc to the 60s wjen commie baby boomers took over.
Because coops by themselves aren't socialism.
...
capitalist businessmen do not rule over another's life and ability to eat, but you need to affirm that yourself. A right you have is not something awarded by somebody else simply because you affirm that you exist. Hunt, practice husbandry or farm innawoods if you refuse to use money.
You've eliminated exploitation of the working class with coops, isn't that what you wanted?
SOURCE?
>(((you)))
Pinochet presidency started in 1974
weird how it is doing better than venezuela
does chile secretly have the most oil in the world?
These faggot's keep going on about Capitalism.
Can't find one that knows what capitalism actually is.
A private business must
10 invest in getting the cheapest labour and best machines
20 extract the most surplus value
30 outcompete other private businesses and obtain super-profits
40 GOTO 10
This is called the cycle of capital.
Replacing private business with coops doesn't accomplish anything, since the system is still capitalistic and competitive, and, therefore, unsustainable.
Liberty can only exist within hierarchy. Without hierarchy, the superior are limited and their liberty constrained.
Why do you hate freedom?
>since the system is still capitalistic and competitive, and, therefore, unsustainable.
How is it unsustainable? I haven't seen any proof for this, how does competition mean that it would be unsustainable?
...
Empirical evidence is bourgeois false consciousness, comrade. Just trust the theory of Marx. The contradictions are unsustainable and will lead to global revolution any day now, one year tops.
communalism != socialism != communism
I hate the communist retards who plague real Liberalism. They have no idea what it is, yet they claim to be "liberals".
Fucking Liberalism means:
-Free Market
-Each man for his own(No hand outs to the poor from the rich)
-Minimum government
-Army Volunteering
Get the idea shitposting retard?
Also
>1 post by this ID
0/10 made me reply
Because the goal of continuous improvement of technology is greater accumulation of capital. To be the most profitable business. So technology advances, but it doesn't make work any easier or more fulfilling. This creates a resentment towards advancing of technology.
Eventually, capital gets overaccumulated, and products are made efficiently, but nobody has the money to buy them. This is called a consumption crash. It also leads to overinvestment, which creates bubbles. The rate of profit declines, and crises become more and more frequent. The indicator of this is the ever greater inequality in the distribution of wealth.
Read up on dialectical materialism faggot
>Unfalsifiable pseudoscientific claims from the 19th century
Very impressive comrade.
...
Leftists treated crisis as inherent in capitalism, right-wingers treat it as caused by an outside force: jews, minorities, immigrants, whatever.
where the fuck does it mention liberalism at all in the op?
drinking piss and subsistence living is the end goal of the millennial yuppie's crusade for "authenticity" and ultimately the peak of the envisioned r/anarchist society
you equate libertarian ideas with anarcho capitalism and a negative yuckie fedora no-no response because you still harbor this neurotic fear of social repercussions in an anonymous internet environment.
joanna newsom can't sing, rick owens' sneakers look silly, you're a 'poseur' who just pantomimes whatever you see attractive strangers doing because you have no self esteem and rely on others for personal validation. deal with that.
The market is going to have its ups and downs, but it certainly seems to be more stable than all the alternatives we have seen so far.
>Read up on dialectical materialism
Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?
>Leftists treated crisis as inherent in capitalism
So do right wing.
>You can't have liberty while you still have unjust hierarchies
EAT
SHIT
read something that isn't complete jewish gobbledigook you credulous fool
>read up on this unempirical a priori pseudoscience from the 19th century
Yeah nah
>You Right-wingers are all the same. You all love licking boots
this is how you know OP is a troll and not actually trying to persuade anyone, kek.
>Complains about Capitalism
>Proceeds to explain Capitalism like it is Corporatism
Why can't you people ever understand anything.
>You can't have liberty while you still have unjust hierarchies
You can have some liberty when their are competing hierarchies, and you have choice about which you cooperate with. Communism tries to implement one unjust hierarchy, then the only competing hierarchies are the massive criminal networks, those without connections are in great danger of starving. Social animals form hierarchies, communism tries to force an unnatural hierarchy on people, which doesn't work and breaks the economy/society. For loser retards and enemies of western civilization and their sold out lackeys. Sage communists, until day of helicopter.
"What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.…. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities…. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange…. The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general." - Karl Marx, On the jewish question
None of that happens in a free market, these things only happen due to government intervention, usually because of socialist programs.
Thanks to government intervention you get long periods of market backwardation which shouldn't and don't happen in free market
>The market is going to have its ups and downs, but it certainly seems to be more stable than all the alternatives we have seen so far.
That's not even remotely true as a planned economy of USSR had steady growth, while the West had repeated recessions.
>Science is fake man
>You just have to believe
>But believe me, not anyone else guise
This.
People confuses capitalism(free markets) with corporatism(government gives priviledges to corporations)
Anarcho-anything is retarded tbqh. Collectivism is the only thing that makes sense.
>Why force your system on them?
Because you need somebody to do the work. The unable/unwilling needy want communism, the able and willing do not, that's why communism needs walls to keep it's actual producers from fleeing.
And what period in history do you consider to have a free market?
>Left-Libertarianism is superior.
Yeah it's absolutely up there with Dry-Water and Light-Dark.
How could you have private property without a state anyways? I mean if you run a shop or cultivate a field people will somewhat feel that you naturally deserve to exploit those things through the legitimacy brought by the work you put into them. But if you ask for rent due to idly "owning" some real estate you do not work on through some fiction called "private property" how can you expect people to respect that fiction since there is no state to enforce that fiction? The mutualist approach is better.
>That's not even remotely true as a planned economy of USSR had steady growth
Before it completely collapsed in on itself.
...
>Here (in America) libertarian means extreme advocate of total tyranny
youtube.com
Was he correct /pol?
>Gorbachev liberalized the economy
>USSR went capitalist and collapsed
Don't worry, if he's still alive when we get back in, we'll shove him into a pizza oven.
...
wow! such an utopia!!! why did the people want to escape from that paradise???
Wrong. The family unit has been dying a slow death ever since capitalism started spreading. The nuclear family that developed starting with the 19th century is already a severely degraded form of the traditional extended family that existed before capitalism destroyed rural communities.
Hierarchy is the natural state of man, faggot. Fuck off. Look at all the Milgram experiments, the mere suggestion of authority is enough to keep people in line. People crave guidance, it's part of the existential quandary of consciousness. Do me a favor, take your revolutionary edginess and get out of my dear country before it becomes not great again.
en.wikipedia.org
Gorbachev was trying to save what was left of the USSR, admittedly he could have gone about it better though.
Kulaks gunna kulak
Because all the vegan name your own price and pay Cafe's go out of business because it take 45 minutes to get kale between two pieces of bread. They literally can't compete with dumpster diving.
capitalism does make the things you enjoy, then is destroyed by corporatism. think of the early days of video game markets, almost entirely a free market because noone took it seriously enough to regulate. skip a couple years and the protectionism set in and now we have pic related
I really like these Avant Teen Alt-Memez they're really funny and not just a bunch of derivative braindead shit.
The Milgram experiments proved that people living in authoritarian society subject to authority they've been taught to obey. Recreate that same experiment in an egalitarian "primitive" society and they'd scoffed at the scientist
>hierarchies are bad!
>but i am clearly intellectually superior to those who disagree with this
rly mks u pondr
That's not true. At least the Austrian school, probably the most right-wing school of economics, considers, just like the left, that crises are inherent to capitalism. The difference is that they consider that it's a good thing as it's supposed to "purge" the system at intervals.
If you dedicate a disproportionate amount of resources to the military, but don't actually go to war, of course you will have stagnation. It was actually Andropov's reforms which would help the economy recover (yes, equal outcomes is a bad thing), but Gorbachev went in a complete opposite direction and destroyed the whole thing.
The vast majority of human history.
In fact most nations that rise rapidly to power are the ones that have embraced Capitalism, or at the very least a radically freer market than existed before.
But tell you what, you point to a market bubble and I'll try and tell you what socialist program caused it.
Free markets are in no way the same thing as capitalism. Markets exist since very early in human prehistory while capitalism developed millennia later. Also you can have markets under many kinds of socialism.
KEK! Once again proving that they have no idea what capitalism actually is.
>The Milgram experiments proved that people living in authoritarian society subject to authority they've been taught to obey.
so THATS why all these people still believe in the law of surplus "theft". they have been taught to obey it
Then what is it?
Panic of 1819
Panic of 1825
Panic of 1837
Panic of 1847
Panic of 1857
Panic of 1866
Black Friday (1869) – aka Gold Panic of 1869
Panic of 1873
Panic of 1884
Panic of 1890
Panic of 1893
Panic of 1896
Panic of 1901
Panic of 1907
Panic of 1910