Why some anarchists/libertarians seems to be hate eachother more than their statist counterparts

Why some anarchists/libertarians seems to be hate eachother more than their statist counterparts

Other urls found in this thread:

theanarchistlibrary.org/library/seeds-for-change-consensus-decision-making
youtube.com/watch?v=dvKIPEp9Lyo
votetulsi.com/node/32952
youtube.com/watch?v=2AhGYo9TExU
lmgtfy.com/?q=anarchism definition
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

kek

Because Ancaps don't view Ancoms as real anarchists and visa versa
Both see the other as pawns of the authoritarians and both are right
t. NatCap

Left cherishes equality

Right cherishes hierarchy

Authoritarian left = the state should enforce equality. (mass murderous gommunism)

Authoritarian right = the state should enforce hierarchy. (statist fascism)

Libertarian right = nature/the market should create hierarchy (natural fascism)

Libertarian left = naturally equality (retarded)

Cuz the theories are mutually incompatible. Left anarchists think private property is essentially a kind of statism or "private tyranny". Right anarchists think left anarchism is economically illiterate and will inevitably devolve back into statism, because human beings left to their own devices do not create "egalitarian socialism", unless compelled by some external power to do so (IE, a state).

I recognize both of these critiques as being more or less true, which is why I'm a statist.

>politics is 2D

Collective property vs Private property

Just like our waifus

Take this (you) user, it's well deserved

red/black anarchist are communists larping as anarchist.

Don't believe me? pic related

As simple as this explanation is, pretty accurate.

t.esoteric liber/aryan/

Because ancaps want to exploit workers while ancoms want the workers to be paid fairly according to the revenue they generate. That and they both disagree on the only core intitution left after the state is dissolved, property.

This. Ancom doesn't and can't exist, it's an oxymoron.

wut, yes they follow anarcho-communism, thats what they are. what are you trying to say?

Still right tho. It all comes down to the ancap hating equality more than the state itself, or the ancom hating inequality more than the state itself.

Spotted the ancom faggot.

That's sum it up perfectly

>reddit

well I wouldn't be suprised that AnComs won't believe their own bullshit

It's oxymoronic, you can't get rid of the state and private property at the same time. Because getting rid of private property requires the use of force.

>no solution for who/how it's decided what "need" is, no effort to address it
>denying centralized control without alternative
Yeah, that's gonna work out

spotted the 15 year old (if only mentally) randroids.

>Libertarian right = nature/the market should create hierarchy (natural fascism)
Let the rich rule everything: the ideology

>Libertarian left = naturally equality (retarded)
Marxist thought should at first be instilled and spread by the state, which should at some point lose its purpose and be abolished, as the people will be educated enough to moderate each other.

>the left

>ability to meme
choose one

>Marxist thought should at first be instilled and spread by the state, which should at some point lose its purpose and be abolished, as the people will be educated enough to moderate each other.

Sounds a lot like eugenics

>paid according to the revenue they generate
>equality
These two don't go hand in hand you realize right? If all you want is fair pay for your work, then unionize. You don't get fair pay for your work in communism. You get the same as everyone else, whether they don't work, or they work half as hard or productively as you do. Otherwise it's not equality and there's still hierarchy.

And you wonder why people think you're retarded.

That and the institution necessary to have centrally planned economy is basically a ussr tier totalitarian state

At their core they're about personal ability.

>Anarchists produce nothing and want free shit
>Libertarians produce goods and want everyone to fuck off

That's the jyst of it. Obvious libertarians jumping on in the last 5 years are dudeweedlmao's but they're still white and thus get yelled at by anarchists.

>thinking the state will ever work towards its own destruction
Lmaooooooook

Libertarian left: let the bottom scum of society have equal power as productive and moral people.

It's actually the most dysgenic of systems.

because many of the leftist "anarchists" care more about communism and leftism than actually opposing the state

I've literally seen ancoms say shit like "we oppose the state but we support government." They basically support leftie shit and hate "capitalism" while failing to display even a rudimentary understanding of markets, supply, demand, and anarchism

>Libertarian left = naturally equality (retarded)
No government = no money = no wage labor.
No government = no law enforcement = no private industries/land.

Pretty simple actually.

And they are usually immature adults without the ability to think and make arguments.

And hence they can't do those things, they are prone to violence (watch Stefan's interview with ex-antifa guy).

>No government = no money
Your retarded. The first banks we're independent of the state.

I know but commies love things getting worse for everyone.

State regulations are why capitalism sucks in its current state. Barrier of entry for small businesses is insanely high compared to 50 years ago even.

>banks
>surviving without government

>people won't defend their own necessities
>people won't come up with a way to trade necessities
>The wage system isn't an efficient way to pay workers before revenues are collected

See? Retarded

not really voluntary communes dont require hyrachy because they have the same idea how it should be, also

communism: stateless, moneyless and classless society

So basically you have to transition from authoritarian left first
>Authoritarian left
Your parents worked all their life and want to give you the wealth they have accumulated because they love you, but I will take most of it from you and give it to a bunch random people, some of them being worthless fucks that haven't worked a day in their lives because they deserve it more than you somehow:the ideology

You're fucking retarded, dude.
>muh anarchy
Go to Somalia to enjoy that anarchy, retard.

You don't need a government to have currency or defend banked resources.

They argue that they can do that with the "consensus decision making process"

theanarchistlibrary.org/library/seeds-for-change-consensus-decision-making

Seems like bs without any actual arguments presented, but I haven't read it yet.

But even if there is that magical device of decision making without the use of force, you still need to get rid of private property. And most people, including yours truly, won't give up their private property "for the good of the society" or whatever, without force.

>(retarded)
Thanks for confirming that lmao. Government is just people with monopoly on force in most cases, but monopoly on public support AND violence in democracy. Thinking that any of those things would naturally exist without the state is just asinine.

This. We're basically living in keynesian/monartarist "capitalism". It's a mixed market that sucks.

Libertarian Left are the most difficult to understand, but we know it could work.

>If everyone is stoned enough we'll agree, but we won't do anything about it
left libertarianism in a nutshell

>hierarchies are evil but we will use strict nondemocratic hierarchy to usher in utopia

wow what could go wrong.

>lulz some random bird xD
>>anarcho >capitalist
>LOL
Turns out "the left can't meme" thing is real.

>>people won't defend their own necessities
Personal property =/= private property. You can defend your house by yourself, but even hiring a militia wouldn't stop people from infringing on large plots of land such as farmland, or moving into unoccupied infrastructure.
>>The wage system isn't an efficient way to pay workers before revenues are collected
No shit it's efficient. And slavery is even more efficient.

Kek, answer is really simple - because a lot of libertarians used to be anarchists so not only we know a real doctrine of revolution (which is fucking terrifying) but also we can see that anarchist movement is being slowly absorbed by something even worst - com*unism. That's all.

I'm lib left (pretty near ghandi) and am very pro trump.

>even hiring a militia wouldn't stop people from infringing on large plots of land such as farmland, or moving into unoccupied infrastructure.
That's where you're wrong kiddo

>slavery is even more efficient.
Not really, no. Having to care for every need of a labor force is inefficient as fuck.

You can't collect rain water, you can't butcher meat without thousands of dollars of stainless steel equipment, you can't do all kinds of shit by yourself. They bring in college fags to run the regulations who know shit all about the real world, and ask the corporations for advice on how to do their jobs

I like Trump but strongly disagree with his foreign policy in the Middle East ... Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc.

Yes really, i already explained this twicebefore.

I won't give up my private property, and neither will most people, without the use of force.

>Marxist thought should at first be instilled and spread by the state
Fuck that and fuck you, you're unworthy of the black flag

Ugyanazert amiert a magyarok az osztrakokkal osszealltak hogy kiverjek a torokoket az orszagbol kb 300 evvel ezelott.

The level of authoritarianism is not what makes a country be a certain way, but the left (antinationalist) vs right (nationalist) does. The preservation of the nation and private property is more important than everything else.

Good post

I only disagree with it. Killing NN was the big one for me.

As soon as someone starts trying to form a militia to violently enforce things beyond their own personal interactions, they have essentially formed a state. Anarchists are against all forms of hierarchical enforcement, which is why ancaps only exist online.

>which should at some point lose its purpose and be abolished, as the people will be educated enough to moderate each other.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Holy, shit, you faggots actually believe this gullible garbage.
Yeah, because this has worked so well in the past communist countries, right?
Don't even bother with your "Not real gommunism".
You faggots are absolutly pathetic.

AnComs are collectivist mob rule authoritarian thieves.

modern ancaps aren’t actually anarchists, but have read rothbard and probably want natcap instead.

Net Neutrality? Yeah man that too, I thought that was serious blow to freedom of speech.

My current political dreamteam pic related.

Rand Paul because it's Rand Paul. Tulsi Gabbard because she'll get all the femi-hillbot voters and Obama turned Trump voters. She is more Libertarian than Liberal. She has a shit gun control stance but as a Libertarian she won't do shit, with Rand there too.

youtube.com/watch?v=dvKIPEp9Lyo

Net Neutrality.
votetulsi.com/node/32952

Libertarian Left = instead of an organized state, we, the mob rule will point guns at people and steal your shit until everyone is "equal" (which is never)

Libertarian Right: natural meritocracy, (only fucking logical thing)

...

"AnCaps" like myself have read Rothbard and taken it to it's conclusion. We want people to be able to own land and dictate the rules on that land.

We're practically monarchists with a sense of morality, and I'm okay with that.

...

Libertarian Right: I'll protect my business by building a wall around my vast plots of land, hiring people to act like police and security, and forcing people to recognize how valuable my money is. Wait, did I just create my own State?

Libertarian Left: Once government is gone, capitalism cannot survive. The government's monopoly on violence exists to protect the pillars capitalism, most importantly privatized means of production.

Yes.

rand paul lol

i should’ve said monarchists, because that’s completely true. it’s not a bad thing either, just a ideology is burgers would get called fags for if we identified with it

>libertarian
>Tulsi "turn in your guns" Gabbtard
kys

For whatever reason libertarians inherently hate each other. It's like the Slavs or Kurds. Even though I'm on the libertarian right, I'd pick a neo-nazi over an ancap any day.

I can only tolerate some people who are more libertarian than me. If you get too much more libertarian then I just see you as a crybaby

>I am against the initiation of violence, but if you set foot on this land which I say is mine because I claimed it, I will shoot you.
>Muh landlords
>Assembly line workers and farmers definitely won't rise up against me when the police and military are gone

HAH

replace liberty with mob tyranny

Liberty disappears without authoritarian state enforcing it. Stable liberty is partly authoritarian. On your graph, put liberty in the middle, and make the lower left "chaos/anarchy".

You mean "oh god I can't force people to respect my imaginary concepts"

True to your digits, this would only work if we had no nigs nogging around as well.

that case both the top edge and the bottom edge are authoritarian. The authority on the top is hierarchical, on the bottom is distributed, but tyrannical nonetheless.

No I mean
>"You don't think the way I do! you fucking NAZI! *proceeds to gang up on bystanders minding their own business 10 to 1*

youtube.com/watch?v=2AhGYo9TExU

hahaha, I never even knew how tall they were.

Nigs that nog can GTFO, and if they try to rob you or trespass your property we can shoot them.

I see it differently, its apparent to me that true natural order and the end result of Libertarianism is deeply hierarchical. Although I Admire the founding fathers, the were philosophically at fault by implementing democracy and even the republic. I see my philosophy as a finished system based on their philosophy. Which Is why I call myself a libertarian, and not a monarchist.

Their limited franchise actually made sense. Restrict the franchise to men (lol women voting) who were invested in the future (land owning) and of the core ethnic stock (white).

Expanding the franchise was a mistake.

then you dont go into the commune. voluntary

Surely a democracy exclusive to the true owners of the land is sensible. But it could never stay that way through many generations

Plus the expansion of the country, and the massive amounts of wealth the US generated, and the civil war massively complicated things.

Maybe Federation was the true mistake.

Wrong.

(you)

voluntary democratic communes, where the all people own guns (ancom). actual liberty comes forth out of anarchy

>no government = no money
>no money = no wages
>no government = no laws
>no government = no private industries and land
Thanks for confirming you are actually retarded.

If you're not using something, forcing other people to also not use it puts you at odds with anarchism, which is by definition against hierarchy. Ancaps enforce hierarchy when it does not naturally uphold itself. You have no spooky inherent magical aura floating around things you "earned" when they're a mile away from you.

Because ancaps aren't true anarchists. Anarchism as a political theory arose from Proudhon who said private property is theft and that private property should be collectively owned, not privately. Private property is a barrier to freedom and opportunity. Ancaps merely were historically illiterate capitalists who liked the idea of a stateless society however capitalism requires a state to work. It's mostly a meme ideology and that doesn't exist and isn't even relevant.

There will always be people wanting other peoples stuff and organize to get it. They organize, not an independent mob, but a "government" over everyone, to facilitate it. These marxists pop out of everywhere in every generation. Some of the children of voluntairy libertarians will want communism, and they grow up and try to trick others with compassion scams and shaming scams.

There is no libertarian left for the same reason.

THE ONLY TRUE EQUALITY IS DEATH

THIS IS WHY DESPITE ALL THEIR INTENTIONS, COMMUNISTS JUST END UP KILLING LOTS AND LOTS OF PEOPLE

IT IS THE ONLY EQUALITY THEY CAN ACTUALLY CREATE

There's no difference between a hierarchy fetishist and an authoritarian.

I've been ploughing through various ancaps and ansyns, so far my impressions are that Mises and Rothbard understand things more clearly than Rocker and Chomsky. Proudhon and Bakunin are up next to try and save the ansyns

Is that why commies always create systems that dominate them, whether their revolutionaries win or lose?

Hey, smartie, how come societies have used gold as currency long before any government coinage?
How come drug cartels, criminal factions, and black markets have private property despite being enemies of the state?

Literally almost every assumption left "libertarians" make is wrong. Every single one.

>If you're not using something, forcing other people to also not use it puts you at odds with anarchism, which is by definition against hierarchy
lmgtfy.com/?q=anarchism definition
Brilliant. Try to win the argument by changing the semantics. Now anarchism is abou being against private property, because private property is hierarchy. Except that's not even the definition of anarchism at all.