Physical Removal

In an anarcho-capitalist, would Nazis be physically removed? We already know that communists would be thrown out, but Nazis seem like an anomaly. They're relatively economically marxist and authoritarian but are very pro-west.

Only if they violate the NAP

>In an anarcho-capitalist, would Nazis be physically removed?
nobody would be removed because that would violate the NAP

>inb4 he's a newfag that circlejerks around Hoppe the closet-fascist
Hoppe is probably the ideological cuck out there atm
the man is despiratly tryingt to uncuck libertarianism/ancaps without realising he's turned into a closet-authoritarian

Of course National Socialists would be removed. They aren't "pro-west", they're pro Germany 1938.

being a natsoc is the declaration of intent of committing aggression against blacks, jews, gyppos or whatever, and just like being a commie is a declaration of intent to violate property rights and thus would be removed, being a nazi warrants the same reaction

Seeing as you'd have freedom of speech in an ancap society I'd imagine that no one could be physically removed for holding any specific worldview. It would violate the NAP to physically remove someone without them first enacting unprovoked violence. If Nazis were to enact unprovoked violence, they would have violated the NAP. thus warranting their physical removal. As it stands though, by just being Nazis. why would that warrant their physical removal had they not already enacted unprovoked physical violence.?

Hoppe libertarians are good allies, also hoppe is a pretty good read for every fascist.
You should come to the /lrg/ when it is up.

Most people grow out of fascism and embrace Hoppe, not the other way around

>Most people grow out of fascism and embrace Hoppe, not the other way around
Same with me, but I would still consider myself a fascist since I am not interested in the material aspect of fascism.
and if I wouldn't have known that hoppe is a libertarian I would have count him also to fascism.

Because being a Nazi is a declaration of intent to initiate aggression should the opportunity present itself

You could say that about any belief system in order to shut it down. That's why the NAP is so cut-and-dry about letting people speak freely.

That could very well be the case. But a Nazi is more likely to attack a jew or a nigger if the opportunity presents itself than a jew is likely to attack me for eating a bacon cheeseburguer. The reason for the physical removal of Nazis is the same that justifies the reason for the physical removal of Muslims. My commie comparison wasn't as accurate, if I'm being honest.

And agreed, freedom of speech is of utmost importance. But a declaration of intent to violate the NAP, i.e. a threat, is a violation of the NAP in itself.

It is not about that indicates agression because of race, but given that most of them are white welfare whores they will sooner or later try to steal from you, like every communist community, even if they are voluntarily in it,
this will violate the property rights of others in which case they will be shot and the whole group would be chased out of town buy righteous people there.
so yes natsocs would be removed but for different reasons.

Removing communists for being communists is a violation of the NAP.

>being this retarded
The political/economic ideology of the Nazi Party was National Socialism. Just as any nation can be Fascist, Anarcho-Capitalist, Libertarian, Liberal, Socialist, any nation can be National Socialist.
The Nazi Party was a political party in 1930's Germany. National Socialism is an ideology that is not bound by an era or geographical border.
Dumb fuq

Property rights my dude. Enforcing property rights ain't authoritarian

the NAP has to die desu
it is just how normal people handled savages based on european conservative values over thousand of years, but nowadays it is overthought to the point where it is dead.

You don't know much about anarcho-capitalism do you...

property rights are the most authoritarian thing you can have.

proto-commie

No that's a good thing, how should hierarchies form without authority over your property.

>hierarchies
>authority over your property
>that's a good thing,

you must be jew here

are you some kind of egalitarian leftist?
Or are you just afraid of the endgame of your ideology?
You think a CEO shouldn't have full authority over his company, or that a land owner should have full authority over his land?
How will you ever produce something complex without hierarchies?
how will you prevent a class war without clear hierarchies?

Ancaps can't even build roads, how the hell are they going to remove anyone, let alone nazis?

let people trade

yeah and people will make good deals while degenerates will make bad deals, and the sum of all human actions will lead to hierarchies.
then u have two ways
1. you accept the grown hierarchies, because those families always made good decisions and you respect them or
2. you cry for a big government who tax the shit out of them and redristibutes it to you, or you go full commie and just take it from them because you think you deserve their property just for existing.

If you want to live as a slave with no rights be my guest I would not want violence done to others but if you are for violence then so am I.

the market can build driveways, which are pretty much just smaller roads.

>in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance towards those habitually promoting life-styles incompatible with this goal
He is talking about particular covenants built with that purpose. A different covenant could have a different purpose and those who would suffer physical removal would be a different group.

> will have to be physically removed, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order
IN THAT COVENANT not ALL covenants