Does anyone actually believe in Anarcho-Capitalism or is it all larping...

Does anyone actually believe in Anarcho-Capitalism or is it all larping? Ancap seems to have no presence other than a few youtubers and reddit.
Where are all the Ancap communities? All I see is memes, why don't you organize yourselves, voluntarily?

Other urls found in this thread:

trello.com/c/1GUWaZiN/49-why-we-dont-need-government-to-function-as-a-society
youtube.com/watch?v=lsVONO75utI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>why don't you organize yourselves, voluntarily
Suggesting i do something and pressuring me by calling my ideological peers unaccomplished is a violation of the NAP.

I exist.

So there's at least me.

I'm pretty sure if someone did a study they would find a 1:1 correlation between believining Anarcho-capitalism and having autism.

Yes I believe in a free & voluntary society.

Sorry user I already trademarked freedom. If you want to use it pay the 2million dollar licensing fee or i'll have to hire a mcdonalds militia strike unit to kill you.

>he thinks there's intellectual property in Ancapistan

Do 3 minutes of research, please.

Trademarking is statist.

>an-capism is whatever i need it to be to win an argument

nice argument user.

banning me from imposing trademarks is a violation of the NAP

I'd barely heard of ancap until the past couple of years on Sup Forums, where it's brought up fucking constantly, it has almost 40k results on the plebs archive. It honestly to a large degree seems like a meme philosophy.

In principle, it's very similar to Objectivism (just less blatantly narcissistic and sociopathic), so that would make sense.

I'm pretty late to the party, but so far I gather...
Its mostly a sub section of the libertarian movement, which itself isn't very big, but I think it's growing. I'm not sure what you're looking for, social clubs? The literature is mostly by Murray Rothbard and Hans Herman Hoppe. The classic example of a dictator ushering in a period of Anarco-Capitalism is the "Miracle of Chile" which is on wikipedia and a bunch of youtube videos as well.

Organization is antithetical to anarchy. An-cap is based on austrian economics (also on wikipedia if you need a primer) which is basically the theory that the community behavior is the sum of the actions of individuals. This is what you're seeing on youtube/memes. No one person is responsible for the movement, we're all responsible for ourselves.

It's mostly Jewish shills.

No, trademarks are anti-(free market)capitalism...

This stuff isn't hard, guys.

NAP is a bullshit moral axiom that has nothing to back it up. The only actual moral axiom is that might makes right. Rights don't exist; there is only what is able to be defended.

who's going to enforce a patent or trademark? where do those laws come from?

trello.com/c/1GUWaZiN/49-why-we-dont-need-government-to-function-as-a-society

Demonstrably false. Force/violence are not moral axioms either, ethics goes out the window when violence occurs.

It is easily demonstrated that the NAP links to property rights and that property rights are necessary for a functional society and the ability to live in a world of sacrcity & rivalrious goods.

The NAP just describes the big 5; assault, theft, rape, murder & slavery that occur when violating someone's life, liberty or property. What all of these have in common is the initiation of violence/coercion, the NAP is just a way of codifying an inherent moral axiom observable in humanity.

Rights, morality, ethics etc comes into the discussion when there is exactly that discussion. Of course force overrules argumentation that doesn't mean that argumentation isn't necessary or important or else we wouldn't speak we would just do what we wanted and killed anyone that stopped us, last I checked we've slowly evolved passed that thousands of years ago and continue to do so jungle man.

I know making very short basic assertions probably makes you feel smart but you're not convincing anyone youre just trying to reassure yourself of your own opinions.

See

I know its statist, I'm wondering how is thinking its going to be enforced under an an-cap system

...

It used to be more prevalent when Ron Paul was running because it aligned closer to his beliefs of liberty and freedom, personal responsibility, non-fiat money. I think Anarcho capitalism is a more extreme version of that. America is too divided into large populations that couldn't survive without Government handouts. 40% of Americans want socialism and also becoming much more heterogeneous, so much so that only a bigger Government at the expense of personal freedoms can keep it together.
In a society where people want to work towards the common good and with decent people it would be ideal but I think the western world is too far gone.

I'm not 100% sold on ancap, but I know that every service provided for by both the state and the market, the market does a better job.

>why dont you organize yourselves
why do you get banned cucklord

Demonstrably true. The point I'm making is that you can set up a perfect ancap world where everything is hunky-dory, but the fact of the matter is that something is only ever enforceable if there is a force to enforce it. And if you have the force to enforce something, you don't necessarily need to abide by the NAP. I could "punish" someone for violating the NAP if I were powerful enough to overpower them, but if I were powerful enough, I could violate others' NAP and get away with it.

I can give a one-line refutation because the simple fact of the matter is that the NAP isn't some universal thing. I hate to sound like a leftypol faggot, but it's a goddamn spook. This rothbardian idea that you can completely get rid of the state and have this perfect limbo of anarchy fulled by a critical mass of true-believers in the NAP is ridiculous.

Any attempt to install an ancap society would either get taken over by external state actors, or its series of private properties would grow and consolidate into small states (in all but name). And then they'd go to war with each other, and you'd just end up with kingdoms and other states anyway.

ancap is the only christian system. Thy shall not steal. Just gotta get mainline Christians to understand this.

Any "anarchy" as a prefix to an ideology is romaticism at best, lazy at worst.

You seriously have to be a brainlet to entertain any possibility of anarchism actually happening or being a viable philosophy.

It's a noble dream that everyone works together but it's a fuckin pipe dream.

Eat shit ancaps. You're just as bad as ancoms. KYS

>Establish Anarcho-Capitalist state
>Open borders for infinite cheap migrant labour
>Said migrants end up voting for the party that promises the most gibs
>Anarcho-Capitalist party fades into oblivion and the only relevant parties are those who pander to shitty low IQ migrants

Truly the intellectual's ideology.

Because America is too pozzed by Marxism to ever vote for an ancap. Ron Paul was our last hope and he was stopped at every turn by the (((Republican party))), now we just embrace the decline.

>Social Contract

I didn't sign any social contract, I've got INALIENABLE rights ordained by GOD. I have the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Render unto Caesar, Stefan. Your definition of what counts as theft is bullshit, and nobody but ancap retards subscribes to that view.

Exactly, it's just a thought experiment for how things *could* work without a state. Actually implementing it is infeasible. In this way, it's similar to the retards who talk about theoretical communist societies (obviously pure ancapism is much less retarded than anarcho-communism, but you get my point)

>receive less benefits of society at a premium in exchange for most of your property and rights
ftfy

>ancap
>state
>voting
>immigration without welfare
HA!

How could you unironically not believe in Ancap when it puts this on the table??

There are no such things as rights in a universal sense. Your rights are only what the government permits you to have. When there are barbarian raiders coming to sack your village, try telling them that you have an inalienable right to your life, liberty, and property

>Anarcho-Capitalist state
Again
>anarcho
>state
at least you asume ancap is retarded, right?

You keep telling yourself that bud

youtube.com/watch?v=lsVONO75utI
sick arguments

Republicans and democrats are the same two sides of the same Jewish coin. Trump showed us that changing countries from the top down cannot work. Instead, we have to run for office in our towns. Start small. Lift, get fit, read every day. Go to town council meetings and notary meetings. If towns start refusing to bow to the federal government, are they going to crush them? In the age of the internet? Really?

>I have the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
tell that to an acap society, luck with the NAP

Semantics. You can call it whatever you want - a mass of land where people live. The notion of anarchy is retarded at its core and anyone with an IQ above 73 can see why.

The funny thing is that an caps understand this principle as applied to firearms perfectly. Any snap will tell you gun control doesn't work, because criminals give zero fucks about following the law and will use guns against a now unarmed population. Yet they think banning government will work because...

You really dont know what anarchy would be like

Nazis are just "soon to be chopper victims". There is time to repent.

what the fuck is an "anarcho-capitalist state"?
who the fuck are you voting for? what position in this anarcho-capitalist state?
why is there an open border? why wouldn't the labor just be bussed in/out?

The early Christians were literally communists. They all sold their possessions and used one common fund.

What would prevent people from forming a government?

society i supose, right? Still they are not societies without power, therefor yes, anarchy is retarded.

This is like saying family units are communist. Or that any sharing whatsoever is communism

Quality.

But user...
many towns are already refusing to bow to the federal government. You know...sanctuary cities. Pretty soon entire states will become sanctuary states.

its a good system. the only downside is (again) globalism and minimum wage bullshit.
there is no way to a perfect economy, but so far its the best system to eliminate monopolies

this, but saying it pejoratively

That's a great analogy in favor communism actually.

Yes, it would appear that KEK has blessed both our posts with digits.

I agree, that's why the government is there. Government is meant to be small, and inconsequential. It's primary role is to protect me from those who are looking to take away my God-given rights.

It was never ordained with the power to take from me, and give to someone else.

oh so they voluntarily traded?

But that would violate the NAP

Government =/= The State
Nation =/= The State

thats why i'm in favor of minarchism personally, but i'm really just against the initiation of force and shitty government programs that could be offered much more efficiently

>Self defense can be aggression.

No, it's not. Family community is built on blood relations and trust. Communism is built purely on coercion.

Yep, they were anarcho-communists/communalists who encourage for more people to adopt an intimate community not necessarily one big one.

Anybody who actually believes any version of anarchism would be successful is completely fucking retarded braindead idiot who legit needs to be gassed.

Those were Jew backsliders.
Meanwhile Saint Peter and Saint Paul were busy building the religion of bacon and prosperity that conquered the world.
Fuck off with you brown man's religion loser.

Except that my family won't rape me, shoot me, steal my stuff, or try to fight me if I look at them funny. You know, like the niggers you expect everyone to consider an "equal" and financially support.

We're in agreement over desiring a small government. Personally, I'm in favor of monarchy that takes care of the baseline infrastructure, borders, muh roads, etc. Most other shit doesn't need government. But that's a huge stretch to the actual ancap retards who don't think any government at all is necessary

>It was never ordained with the power to take from me, and give to someone else.
There is nothing wrong with taxes. Now, we can arguable about rates and what taxes are being spent on, but the fundamental concept of taxes is fine. You are not just an individual. You have an obligation to society. And part of this obligation is to fund the government to keep everything running.

communism =/= communalism

While I do not agree with the particular goal of sanctuary cities, I do acknowledge the righteousness of the act. Kind of like how the south was right to stand up for state's rights, even though the subject matter (slavery) was unpalatable. But another simple truth is that if our government did not offer so much "free" state benefits, the immigrants probably wouldn't as much incentive to move there in the first place.

lol, no. Capitalism is the most cut throat shit there is. Shit like copyright makes innovation too hard and corporatists keep corrupting the government to their own benefit. Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron cause it requires private property in order to keep profiting off of it or else a bunch of others with competition will take business away from you and you'll fail. A lot of innovation is useless bullshit for profit like how there's always new iphones coming out or all the drugs developed that aren't necessary. Communism removes selfish profit motive.

> implying anyone ever signed the social contract
> let alone shook fucking hands over it
If it was a voluntary rescindable contract as the fathers had intended I wouldn't have a problem with it because it would basically be Ancap.

Your enemy is the state, not free people trading freely. Please understand this.

I just don't think Anarcho-Capitalism is plausible any longer. The world's Governments are moving in the complete opposite direction and their power and influence is growing. The shadowy outline of the NWO is starting to take shape and they would squash us like bugs.

Monarchy is a step in the right direction, though. A monarch wants to keep his power and pass it to his children, therefore having incentive to keep everybody happy and treat the land well. People who hold onto the land for merely 4-8 years, well, not so much.

Anything is possible with Christ.

By living and participating in this society, you agree to its social contract. You're free to leave if you desire.

I'm not an anarcho-capitalist. I think both communism and anarcho-capitalism are retarded

I agree. However, that's not an argument for anarcho-capitalism. It's an argument for the issue of time horizon in politics.

How is it self defense if I keep my Naziistic perspectives as principles to live by and not try to implement a NatSoc government? Then I would be acting in self defense with you as the primary aggressor (read: NAP violator). Besides, vigilante justice (unjustifiable violence unless you have the morals of an ANTIFAggot) would ensure that you get turned into a lampshade faster than you could even yearn for roads again one last time.

who's going to determine which property belongs to whom? where do those laws come from?

>thinking the masses will just let themselves starve to death because Big Agribusiness won't voluntarily redistribute farmland.

Okay great let me stop paying taxes oh ho ho wait a minute

I am a serious AnCap.
The two AnCap communities i know of are /liberty/ and Mr Dapperton's Discord.

IPs would not exist in an AnCap, hate to burst you bubble, but there would be no law to enforce your IPs, you would be soley relying on DRM and keeping trade secrets.

Not quite, your comparing apples to oranges. Objectivism is a world view (The best one too). AnCap is a system. It is possible for a person to be both, like I am.

For a system that was invented by Jews it sure faired much better than yours.

The NAP is a principle that means do not use the aggression to achieve what you want and not to emped on people's natural rights, (Life Liberty and Property)

I never signed such a contract, it really doesn't seem to benefit me to have to pay these 3rd tier services I never agreed to.

More like this
>Establish AnCap
>Open Borders for free trade and movement
>Migrants come in
>Migrants cant get a job because there labor is too expensive when compared to a robot.
>Only skilled laborers are able to make in AnCap.
>Ancap society results in a very specialized society full of high IQ individuals.

A reminder that humans are still subject to natrual selection. If your too decadant you will likely not reproduce. Capitalism gives you ultimate freedom, but there is a catch, and that is the freedom to fail, this possibility of individual failure is what scares the weak away into inferior ideologies like Nasoc and Communism.

>All I see is memes
That's because that's what fucking anachro-capitalism is you goddamn Argentinean 75% white trash

Communalism is literally the apologist term for communist cause the negative connotation the word received during the red scare.
Okay...
one, t. spic
two, the slavery issue was about the expansion of slavery into places that didn't want it; anti-states' rights basically.
three, welfare programs exist cause of the faults of capitalism

The state is a non-voluntary monopolization of violence, everything else is lipstick on the pig. Capitalism is cutthroat, and those unable to compete will simply die. This will improve the integrity of the human species as the weak are culled over time. Also, copyright is an invention of the state.
The foundation of ancap is self-ownership, which is violated the minute we are forced to do something. If you consent to the current system, good for you.

This worked because they were small in number, had virtuous and competent leadership, and were there voluntarily. It didn't last long though.
Communism actually works really well under a larger capitalist system. Such as in the form of co-op industries. Competition forces them to be more efficient and for the leaders to act in the best interest of the "society". All the actors in the co-op are there voluntarily.
Real-life communism would need leadership that's both virtuous and competent. Also machine guns to make sure everyone is complying, because not everyone will be there voluntarily.

That's where we disagree.

I believe taxes to be theft. If you want to fund government, that's fine. Do it with tariffs on imports like it was meant to be. When our nation was founded, there was no Income tax. The income tax was created in 1913, coincidentally with the Federal Reserve......OY Vey!

The power to tax is the power to destroy. Taxes always leads to bigger government, because you can steal more money. There's a reason why the Founding Fathers wanted to "bind government to the shackles of the constitution."

You're on the government's land and you need to pay your rent or leave.

indeed
anarcho-communism is real communism, it existed since the days of Jesus. Marx and Lennin weren't communist, hence the term Marxism to distinguish it.

First you must establish a dictatorship then you can implement ancap.

At least he can claim 75% whiteness

The NAP has never been a universal law of sorts, it's merely an observation of reality that we want to show people to persuade them to agree in applying it consistently.

You can reject the label all you want that's fine. Also
> something is only ever enforceable if there is a force to enforce it
Not necessarily. The force meme is way too common on here but that ignores ostracism, incentives & argumentation which can work before force is necessary. Of course force is necessary but to assume you know exactly how people would behalf, what rules they would create, what rules they would enforce and how quickly they would break those rules is a pretty vain assumption. There are economists who have looked very deeply into this in theory & practice, into alternatives and variations. Humans are interesting characters and we can learn a lot about human behaviour that shows your initial knee jerk mental reaction to an idea is rarely realistic. It becomes unrealistic so quickly because it just ignores way too many factors, these clean simple imaginatory scenarios may sound nice on here but they're not working examples that's for sure.

Again though you seem to miss my point, force is the absence of morality, argumentation & ethics are always necessary. Think of the NAP as something we've observed in humans that we would like to see become the next cultural shift. Just like how everyone in our society looks down on murders, rapists & pedofiles. We werely want an NAP style culture, a big thing most people ignore on here is that culture is one of the biggest determining factors for the aesthetic of a society and how it approaches social issues.

its an unnecissary thing we could do that could kinda have a net benefit in the long run

it also will probably eventually end up happening once whites are overtaken by the brown hordes

unless chinks take over then maybe we get cyber punk dystopia

or just lung cancer

>literally communist talking points
>ignoring how capitalism requires private property like copyrights to exist in the first place
It didn't last long cause of Roman persecution, not economic failure.

capitalism and socialism is ultimately the same.
rich people ARE the government, it always been this way.
this is why rich people never get penalized for bad behavior, ever heard of a billionaire who got life in prison? never happened. if you remove government completely the rich people will simply enforce another thing similar to a government where they can buy influence with money and remove competition.
really im not in favor of communism or any of that shit.

an observation of reality that's then taken to the ridiculous extreme of anarcho-capitalism, which is something that has never existed and will never exist.

>capitalism and socialism is ultimately the same.

Only if you're a retard.

Nothing, people would probably form small gated communities with rules within themselves, all of them voluntary. Conditions aren't likely for them or any business to be "too big to fail" though.

it seems to work great in GTA online desu I wouldn't mind living in a world like that

The biggest problem with slavery is that it's a violation of self-ownership. Just because a race is lower IQ (on average) doesn't mean that we can violate that right. It just means that we have nicer things.
Welfare programs exist because most people are morally bankrupt, and think that robbing people via government is somehow better than just robbing somebody yourself. Also, the whole letting the weak die thing comes into play too