Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever implemented...

Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny and oppression that have few counterparts in human history. There isn't the slightest possibility that its (in my view, horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error. The idea of "free contract" between the potentate and his starving subject is a sick joke, perhaps worth some moments in an academic seminar exploring the consequences of (in my view, absurd) ideas, but nowhere else.

Other urls found in this thread:

uni-heidelberg.de/md/awi/professuren/intwipol/public_choice.pdf
mises.org/library/marxist-and-austrian-class-analysis-1
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

you should probably just kill yourself before you realize how embarrassing you are

Not an argument.

The freer the market, the freer the people.

uni-heidelberg.de/md/awi/professuren/intwipol/public_choice.pdf

>Chooses to partake in a service
>THIS IS TYRANNY

Your flag looks like a used period pad off yourself.

Read more literature fag

>The only form of coercion is a literal gun
>Fair negotiation can take place under inequality
>I am an intellectual infant

>why do things require work?

The sooner you realize that any laws of man are still subject to the the law of the jungle the better off you'll be and the longer you might survive.

Conquest is the only truth, martial discipline the only virtue. Take what's yours and claim your glory.

>You have less than me, therefore I cannot negotiate with you, as it would be unfair of me to expect anything in an exchange from you, but totally fair of you to take from me

I bet you think there are "needs" too you fucking socialist.

...

also what the fuck defines "inequality"? If you're taller than me can you no longer negotiate with me, as we have intrinsic inequality between us?

The absolute state of Leftist Philosophy

How would socialism play out?

Liberty will just exist because social integration and mana from heaven will rain down without any sort of coercive force.

Let me ask you this what separates the green from the purple? Both represent societies free of authoritarianism. Free of authoritarianism men can congregate however they so choose. Thus in an ancap society people can choose to seek their own self interests just as well as they can seek collective interests. Now assuming most people want to live decent lives I think people would gravitate towards the center. See people always put anal in that purple corner but I think it would truly exist in the entire bottom half because individuals have a choice in how much the wish to engage in activities that act as the stateless version of socialism such as charities and whatnot

Freedom is not inherently good.

Stop believing this lie that is repeatedly drilled into us to make us complacent in the spread of degeneracy.

>the the law of the jungle

Except there are no "property rights" in the jungle. You own whatever you can take for yourself.

wat's a corporate tranny?

Tyranny by unaccountable private concentrations of power, the worst kind of tyranny you can imagine.

It picks up from the libertarian tradition one element, namely opposition to state power. But it leaves open all other forms of — and in fact favors — other forms of coercion and domination. So it’s radically opposed to the libertarian tradition, which was opposed to the master-servant relation.

>The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily; and the law, besides, authorizes, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work; but many against combining to raise it. In all such disputes the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, a merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year without employment. In the long run the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him; but the necessity is not so immediate.
- Adam Smith

How is forcing someone to pay liberty and not doing so tyranny?

...

...

...

No one's forced to do anything if there's no tyrant in the first place.

Tyrannical rulers to democratic government, tyrannical business owners to democratic ownership.

tfw some nip thinks he can call me an idiot but his ancestors caused the US to join the brits in war and develop the atomic bombs

I didn't call you an idiot before, but I will now. Idiot.

>no one's forced to do anything if there's no tyrant
yes brother yes!
overthrow the tyrant of hunger which forces you to feed and starve to death like all the rest of the poor souls who tried to implement socialism fucking idiot

There is already enough food being produced to feed the entire human population five times over.

I made it big so fuck you, can confirm

until some retard socialist decides to murder all the birds

*Tyrant

I oppose tyranny in all forms.

>Potentate
>Subjects

I think you mean free contract between consenting parties, nip-kun :^)

Yeah.... because good old anarchy and social collapse are unkown to human history...

Remember Katrina?
See South Sudan but with less technology and organisation.

By the way, that shit being implemented in the American Southwest, for instance, is just an invitation to narco rule Mexican style.

Buddy we do the "is anarcho-syndicalism or anarcho-capitalism the actual anarchy" argument like twice and week and syndicalism always gets btfo, come back once you know some shit

>weimar republic
>liberty
2/10

the problem with this is that the libertarian-left will claim stupid shit like pedophilia a positive right.
i'd rather have no rights or negative rights than have disqusting degenerates.

Feudalism was also "consensual."
>Feudal ties are essentially private, personal, and contractual relationships.
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe

The biggest problem for me with libertarianism, night watchman state, ancap etc. is that it completely fails in answering how to preserve culture over any reasonable amount of time. Culture would belong to the highest bidder or the whole territory would be taken over by some inferior nation state.

>Consensual
>Serfs are property

Really gets the Marxism pumping.

in opposing tyranny you enforce your own tyranny

people tend to organize under authority because it is the most efficient way to distribute resources.

you think we would be growing so much food without capitalist incentives?
not in 1000 years buddy boi

Trying to "preserve" culture is a fool's errand. Sorry, but things change over time. That's how reality works. You may not like it, but you're like a child who can't grasp the concept of inevitable death.

Markets and competition are not reliant on the concentration of power. Also, resources are laughably distributed currently. It's actually at the point of absurdity.

then why do you continue to live under the only modern economy anywhere even remotely close to AnCap?

Somalia's flag is actually blue and has a star instead of a circle.

>government tyranny
The only ones who have anything to fear from a dictatorship of the proletariat are porkies but they're not people so it doesn't really matter.

>Feudalism was also "consensual."
Now what was real Hoppe's opinion mises.org/library/marxist-and-austrian-class-analysis-1
He says that exploitation should be defined as an appropriation of property through non-creative and non-contractual way.
He claims that feudalism was exploitative, because landlords illegally claimed property titles in land, which they had never used for themselves.

>somalia
>sharia
>ancap
Communists are at least two standard deviations below Ancaps.

lol XDDDD

>advocating democratic ownership makes you Stalin

green square is by far the most retarded square. as someone in the purple square, i think even the red one is less retarded. the green one means that people will willingly, without the aid of an overbearing government, abandon currency and all their possessions and come sing kumbaya around the campfire. dumb as fuck and makes no sense. at least the red square realizes that you need a strong central government to get people to actually do that shit.

Oh yeah corporate authority is so efficient that the country throws away nearly half of its food despite people going hungry, products are sometimes literally made to break or be almost useless at a certain point, and some of the most "successful" companies have reputations for notoriously bad customer service and general quality.

>based jap
This guy is right. You guys are all in a fantasy.

That's like saying the entire purple square believes in nothing but might-is-right social Darwinism yet expects warlords not to take over society and create an army of lolis.

Trade unions need to advocate for more and more rights within workplaces. Pay should move closer to the value of one's contribution. People should be able to negotiate their hours. The CEO's portion of profit should start declining. The CEO should be held accountable to his workforce. That's about it, for now.

Maybe it's because where I live, workplaces are even more tyrannical and soul-crushing than elsewhere, but this stuff is a no-brainer.

This

If anarcho-capitalism would result in corporate tyranny, why do corporations hate it?
Why do they work so hard to support socialist parties and fight so hard to undermine libertarian ones?
You have been lied to, and you have become a useful idiot.
True egalitarians know they must be capitalists.
Only by suppressing power differences in society may true value shine.
That means equality under the law.
That means equality of opportunity.
Socialists take all legal and economic power for themselves.
They make themselves billionaires.
Still, you support them, for "equality".
What will it take to break this lie that has let socialism rob the worker of the true value of their labor?

I did make it big and develop a fuck you attitude towards all gibs, but I've been an an-cap egalitarian since I was 11.
Structural power discrepancies under socialism ensure massive wealth discrepancies under socialism.
So it has been every time.
So it shall be every time.
It is a simple repercussion of the true nature of power.
If you wish to have egalitarian outcomes, distribute power in an egalitarian manner.
Relatedly, one of my early clues that socialism was going to be a steaming pile was that modern socialists are anti-gun.
That suggests they don't want to distribute power widely.
It was a factoid that got me looking.

I grew up in poverty.

I'll take No Rights over "positive rights" thanks.

>muh guns
>muh feelings of powerlessness
>muh decent salary job
>muh poor people takin muh roads
There is always going to be somebody more powerful than you that will walk over you. You dont want to give up any thing you have earned just like multi-millionaires and billionaires dont.

>Why do they work so hard to support socialist parties and fight so hard to undermine libertarian ones?
That's not true at all. Corporations typically advocate for social freedoms if they get political, yes. But that has nothing to do with economy. Gay marriage does not take away from a CEO's profit, but it does make him seem trendier. The difference in taxation between mainstream left and right is almost nothing.
>Only by suppressing power differences in society may true value shine.
I agree, and that includes taking measures to give workers a more fair share of the profit they generate.

I didn't have anything when I formed these ideas.
I used public libraries heavily. Free is a nice price.
Try reading one.
A library, that is. Not a book.
Try reading a few thousand.
That'll start you catching up.
The biggest temptation against capitalism for me has always been and I suspect always will be libraries.
I wouldn't be a capitalist without them, after all.

Gah. I dropped a line from that post.
>A library, that is. Not a book.
If you're only reading books,
>Try reading a few thousand.

I'm not claiming to have read thousands of libraries.

I am anti-gun simply because I live in a country that's already one of the safest in the world, and I don't want to fuck that up. If I lived in the US, I would be pro-gun.

Why do you assume that low-tier plebeians always deserve gibs?

Meritocracy is the law of the universe. Making gibs mandatory just allows low-tier trash to breed faster and consume more resources.

What's the left-libertarian solution to the African overpopulation problem?

Have you read...
>A Peoples' History of the United States
>The Grapes of Wrath
>The Strange Non-Death of Neoliberalism

Libraries, schools/universities, museums. All good things for the common good that have no purely commercial merit. I probably read 100's of books in college. I read a lot when I was in the Navy. I dont think reading leads to anarcho-capitalism...

I grew up poor also. I have a good job now. Still disagree with your ideology.

Have you looked at Venezuela?

Niggers + leftism = collapse.

Value systems and dominance heirarchies naturally make people unequal. For there to be someone good at brain surgery, by definition it means there are people worse at brain surgery.

The people at the top of companies make as much as they do for a reason, it's fully reflective of the value they put into running the companies. If the people at the top were selfish and only cared about their own profits and not the profits of the company or benefits to the worker, the company would fail and the workers will go to a place that benefits them.

You cannot try to artificially inflate the value of the worker simply by decreeing that they're worth more. If you really believe this'll work, try to start a fast food chain that pays all its workers $15 and see how long until you go bankrupt. Some jobs just aren't worth much value

Food gets thrown-away due to health standards. do you want to catch salmonilla?

Also, somebody explain to me why having human DNA makes you automatically "equal" or entitled to anything.

The old woman working at the 7/11 across the street diligently greets me every time I walk into the store, bows, hands me my credit card with both hands, always smiles, always offers to warm up my food for me, always says thank you and goodbye when I walk out the door. And her job is necessary. She doesn't deserve poverty or to be called a plebeian.

You probably accept that so many jobs are necessary, that their existence allows you to live a high quality luxurious life, but claim that whoever works them deserves to be poor regardless of how much profit they create.

I claim that any worker contributing to a wildly successful business deserves a decent life if their job is truly needed by that business.

Also, since when is the value of a good determined by the labor put into it?

Value is determined by how much somebody is willing to pay for something.

You live in Japan. Try living in downtown Detroit, you sheltered weeb.

For everyone reading this thread, if I could convince you of two things, you know what one of them would be.
The other one would be this:
Hyperliterate poor people don't stay poor.
If you aren't in a position to be supporting your local library, use it until you are!

>someone works a simple and mundane job diligently
>they don't deserve poverty for it
Actually, they deserve exactly what they make. If they deserved more, the job would pay more. The job is certainly worth more to her than to the company, if she were to demand more wages and risk quitting, the company would merely hire someone from the laundry list of people willing to work a mundane job for minimum wage. It's supply and demand, and you're never going to see the worker compensated for more than what the value of the job is worth when there's a worker out there willing to do that job for that value.

Also, that's assuming you're not just LARPing with a VPN.

Also, globalism and open borders would turn Japan into a shithole.

Japan's natural high-IQ citizenry, nationalist unity, NatSoc trade protectionism, and capitalist system of production are what make it so wealthy and technologically advanced. How many muslim bombings have you had, faggot?

I grew up in Detroit. Had to join the military to escape it. This guy is making a lot of good points.

Yeah, escape your nigger-filled city controlled by Democrats.

Are you not seeing a connection?

>tyranny of the social mobs
>""liberty""

Do you own a factory? How does this help you? Are you the same type of person who wants to bring high paying jobs back to America from China? The factory wants to pay as little as possible for any work. Not just mundane work. They will pay an engineer as little as possible just the same as they will pay a janitor as little as possible.

>it's fully reflective of the value they put into running the companies.
No, it reflects their tyrannical ownership.
>the company would fail and the workers will go to a place that benefits them.
False. Workers are more expendable than they are needed. Google "inequality of bargaining power." See Even Adam Smith recognized it. There is no way for workers to have equal footing negotiating their relationship with the CEO, it's impossible. It only creates a master-slave relationship. That's what you see today, dominance and subjugation.
>Some jobs just aren't worth much value
If the minimum wage was abolished, wages would drop even further down than they already are.

If migrants arrived, they would continue to drop with no bottom limit.

People might eventually start working just to be fed. I thought Americans had to read The Grapes of Wrath and learn about The Great Depression in high school. Early industrial history, with its child labor and excessive violence towards workers, extreme exploitation, constant abuse and deaths, should convince anyone that there's something rotten about master-slave relationships in business.

All anarchy is 'groid-tier.

A "leftist" anarchist society would be just the same as Somalia after a few years. Especially when your country 40% or more nigger apes.

Notice how Antifa types and hippie commies tend to always come from sheltered, upper-middle class white neighborhood?

The governor of Michigan is a republican. The problem with Detroit is all of these corporations that you think will fix all the problems left.

wish nu/pol/ would learn about national socialism and not jewified ancap or libertarian garbage.

>muh governor

The distant, watered-down powers of the governor can't save your city when it's full of niggers, kid.

Everyone literally everyone pays the absolute minimum they have to for the quality they want, it's how an economy works.

When's the last time you saw two different items of perfectly equal value and chose to pay more for one over the other? It's the same with paying workers

be a little nuanced please.

national socialism is the only way for peace throughout the world.

...

...

...

...

...

4 is the only way forward.

...

>Actually, they deserve exactly what they make.
Are you sure? Because your ideology would say she should make even less. Right now it's only the government forcing the wage to be as high as it is (minimum wage). Otherwise it would drop to who knows how low.
> if she were to demand more wages and risk quitting, the company would merely hire someone from the laundry list of people willing to work a mundane job for minimum wage
Why don't you see anything wrong with this? Why do you crave tyranny?

Anyway, the solution to this inequality is workers banding together and demanding more rights. It's called a trade union and it's done without government tyranny.

They teach about the history of unions and labor disputes in schools. Unions are just a bunch of commies though... Americans value hard work more than inherent rights. You are going to complain to the company that is putting food on the table?

bottom left is only possible in la-la land

All forms of anarchy are retarded. Living in society is a negotiation of people's liberties.