An-Com general, true freedm edition

>anarcho-capitalism
not real anarchism
>black flag memey
stolen by retarded hooligans
>muh natsoc
fake socialism for people who want jackbooted thugs to rule over them
>(((bolshevism))) uses communism as an excuse to do as natsocs

the only real anarchism, and the only real communism, is anarcho-communism, everything else is statist and authoritarian in one way or the other

prove me wrong, protip you can't

Other urls found in this thread:

theanarchistlibrary.org/library/daibhidh-anarcho-hucksters-there-is-nothing-anarchistic-about-capitalism
infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionF1
youtube.com/watch?v=VQ9gBRZeZ1c
youtube.com/watch?v=PIfKrI6Q_W8
youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2LxWBU16g
youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ
youtube.com/watch?v=45vGBs58TDw
youtube.com/watch?v=tywhTONuJWM
anarchy.no/anarchism.html
youtube.com/watch?v=OOTlxsn8tWc
youtube.com/watch?v=oB9rp_SAp2U
infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionA1#seca11
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>communism
dropped.

How do you force everyone to do communism with it still being anarchist?

>Anarcho-Hucksters: There is Nothing Anarchistic about Capitalism
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/daibhidh-anarcho-hucksters-there-is-nothing-anarchistic-about-capitalism

>Are "anarcho"-capitalists really anarchists?
infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionF1

...

ANARCHO-CAPITALISM IS AN OXYMORON
youtube.com/watch?v=VQ9gBRZeZ1c

...

...

How do you make sure people contribute?

>communism

>Libertarian Socialism Is Not An Oxymoron
youtube.com/watch?v=PIfKrI6Q_W8

ahahahahahahahaha nice spooks nerd

Every time I see /leftypol/'s anime getting sexually humiliated by oink
and Pepe I lose my shit

>Lolbertarian
Of course

Ancom is an oxymoron. Organizations = states.

>Anarcho-Capitalism Is Bullshit.
youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2LxWBU16g

>Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"-capitalism
youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

>StefBot btfo by Chomsky
youtube.com/watch?v=45vGBs58TDw

>Anarchism vs. Anarcho-Capitalism
youtube.com/watch?v=tywhTONuJWM

>Anarchism defined - What anarchists are against and what they are for
anarchy.no/anarchism.html

>posting for a meme ideology that inherently politically can't be accomplished
Lol someone doesn't understand basic politics.

>le strawman memey

refute a single vid posted

Why don't you refute the point that collectivization can't exist without authority to enforce it otherwise individuals with the right to private property will inherently ruin the ability to collectivize?

t. have no idea what ancom is

By the majority removing the person who don't share their goods from the commune.

Accept that you lost.
We are the anarchists now

He counts on people magically getting together

your idol stefbot got btfo by chomsky, no one takes u people seriously and your movement is dying

The word anarcho-communism is an oxymoron. You need a state to enforce communism and redistribute the goods.

And by the way, NatSoc is the only good type of socialism.

hahahahaha ancoms truly are the niggers of ideology

If I may interject. I have a great political ideology of my own.

It's Amish with locally generated electricity. Hive cities producing wood alcohol and vegetable oil. Building and maintaining key machinery.

Ancap monetary policies, Fascist social order + uniforms. We'll call it "Communism" as a joke.

ancom memes?

ancom memes!

I like how you took the time to edit that meme and didn't just scribble shit over it with microsoft paint.

All anarchists are primitivists.
The solution to pervasive societal issues is not the willful destruction of human civilization.
I'll give your tankie counterparts credit for seeking tangible reform over utopian ideals.

A socialist greatest weakness

capitalists were allowed to keep their shit in catalonia and kurdistan tho, no one forced shit on them

for now, we all know how you guys go all genocide after you run out of food

>the only real anarchism, and the only real communism, is anarcho-communism,
>My kind of Communism was never tried before, i swear it will work

...

Ignoring, of course, Franco and the Turkish government.

>occupancy and use

lol

Ancom collectivization
>"hey buddy we're creating a communist collective and a stateless society. give up all your property to the commune"
>"no thanks"
>"..."

...

nice halloween themed thread bro, its spooky as fuck.

Still no answer to a single video. How's it feel getting btfo?

Punching republicans is an imperialist act.

...

That's an ancap meme awfully edited you can see the mcgas

Anarchism is the future, hail Chomsky!

He stole it as commies tend to do.

...

...

These people create awful memes they must perish

I asked a basic question and you deflect because you have no answer.

Every time you make these threads you just show the inherent failures of your ideology, putting what you want to happen over the reality of what can happen.

Optimism over the truth is what drive anarcho-syndicalism, and your response lets it stay that way by ignoring real critique with a dismissal.

So answer the question before anyone can take you seriously, if individuals dissent from collectivism does it entail a authoritarian response to enact collectivism or does the respect for them and their private property and rights to dissent stay?

The heroin and sepsis will take care of that.

memeys are not a legitimate form of government

...

It's called laws you dumbass if I feel like having sex with a girl and she doesn't let me the government isn't authoritarian for not letting me rape her. Private property isn't a right. Personal property is.

You seem to believe otherwise.

> the government
> anarchism

wat

>McGas
>an-com
The left can't meme
sage

Youre confusing corporatism and capitalism. Individuals, or groups of people, can accrue capital for investment without a state. Nice job just linking to articles rather than thinking for yourself.

This is the stupidest thing ever.

you forgot anarcho-fascism and anarcho-authoritarianism

>Anarchism vs. Anarcho-Capitalism
youtube.com/watch?v=tywhTONuJWM
ok shills, this is the most basic one

and this one if you wanna be talked down to, I DARE YOU not to be btfo by him
youtube.com/watch?v=OOTlxsn8tWc

>private property isn't a right
And who enforces the ability to take private property? The state?

Boom, no longer anarchist, for now you have to have a large state to actively deny private property which is inherent in every person who wants resources and capital to increase their living standards.

This is why every one of these threads is a 'lets laugh at ancoms cognitive dissonance' thread.

At least the Stalinist and NS threads say that's what they actively want, a totalitarian state to take away individual rights for the object reasoning of creating a collective with enforcement. You have no idea the reality of what you prescribe to society and how to achieve it, only the want of something that actively cannot occur.

...

top kek

>opinionstube
>avatar lecture men
>"l0l blown the heck outie"

what did he mean by this

You prove your a statist here
Yet try to post a video proposing ancaps are statists using strawmans?

Ancaps acknowledge a hierarchy by which the most successful investors of capital naturally take on the dominant social roles of society.

But much like the family or the natural formation of the tribe, these things do not imply a ruling state sorting out what will occur by the use of force but rather the use of failures of investment. I have disagreements with ancaps but the idea that they aren't anarchist because object failures and winners of the markets will occur taking on social roles as a hierarchy is retarded.

As much retarded as the idea that anarchism can exist in a collective that uses force to deny private property. The hierarchy of the state designating private property on the basis of a ruling system rather than the winners and losers of investment of capital is inherently more authoritative in that they CHOOSE through AUTHORITY of FORCE that which can happen in a society.

That's not anarchist retard, only the allowance of the individual and those individuals with which can collectivize is anarchist. These things create hierarchies in which people choose the hierarchy, not with which one hierarchy denies others the right of being.

This system is an anarcho individualist system, more compatible with ancap thinking than anarcho communist thinking.

>If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder!, my meaning would be understood at once. No extended argument would be required to show that the power to remove a man's mind, will, and personality, is the power of life and death, and that it makes a man a slave. It is murder. Why, then, to this other question: What is property? may I not likewise answer, It is robbery!, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first?
—Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What is Property?[I]

A REAL ANARCHIST ^

We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical.
- Murray Rothbard, 1950's
A HONEST MEMERTARIAN ^

>anarcho-communism
Boy, this sure sounds retarded.

I guess people would anarchically decide to do what's not their best interest. Workers would just start working against their best interests and work for free in hopes others give them free shit for no reason.

You don't even understand how an adult functions, I don't think you'll be capable of coming up with an alternative to individual autonomy any time soon.

That second video is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. The cartoon character is literally wearing a shirt that says "king cuck". You people have a mental disorder.

>StefBot btfo by Chomsky
youtube.com/watch?v=45vGBs58TDw
>wageslavery
>individual autonomy
topkek

Proudhon is doing a massive leap of logic right there, property and slavery are not equivalent at all

>dumbest thing I have ever seen
not an argument

>In my first memorandum, in a frontal assault upon the established order, I said things like, Property is theft! The intention was to lodge a protest, to highlight, so to speak, the inanity of our institutions. At the time, that was my sole concern. Also, in the memorandum in which I demonstrated that startling proposition using simple arithmetic, I took care to speak out against any communist conclusion.
>In the System of Economic Contradictions, having recalled and confirmed my initial formula, I added another quite contrary one rooted in considerations of quite another order—a formula that could neither destroy the first proposition nor be demolished by it: Property is freedom. [...] In respect of property, as of all economic factors, harm and abuse cannot be dissevered from the good, any more than debit can from asset in double-entry book-keeping. The one necessarily spawns the other. To seek to do away with the abuses of property, is to destroy the thing itself; just as the striking of a debit from an account is tantamount to striking it from the credit record.

You don't wanna see me when I'm angry.

It seems to me that your ideology is such a fantasious meme, that you don't even have a solid grasp on what you even believe in.

>workers seize means of production and can actually own it
They'll sell their product for the highest price they can get and they'll try to produce at the lowest costs. That's private property.
>state seizes everything to keep workers from owning private property
Not anarcho communism.

This is surely delusional. Not even tankies are this delusional. Many tankies degenerates understand that everything would be worst under communism, but they like it because of muh feels. These bunch of bottom of the barral dirt understand how things work far better than you do.

This video is just a long video of Chomsky prattling on about true anarchism creating equality of outcomes. People have never been equal. There will always be a hierarchy of strength, intelligence, attractiveness, etc. You people don't understand how reality works.

>property
All civilized society forms on the basis of ownership of property, either by individuals or the state.

Collectivized ownership of property means an indirect ownership of property, thereby robbing the human being a direct contact to create in his will and succeed and increase his mastery or to fail and have the property lost to someone that can succeed.

This distribution of property by abject failures to succeed and not is the best form of ability for increases in wealth and capital to occur, as it gives those that win the greater ability to increase overall wealth and those that lose the inability to destroy what can be invested.

This is why the most successful economies and states allow this enterprise, protecting the concept as a whole guarantees the state the relevance to exist and gives the state the most successful tax livestock to supply wealth that may be used on society that can benefit the program. Best of all you don't need a totalitarian state to encourage and monitor all transactions as a whole as you do when you collectivize private property, ensuring Democide (state killings of people, the largest cause of death in the 20th century) cannot occur in large as it actively hurts the states chance to gain in the long run.

Your ideology is inherently flawed and you still haven't answered my question here
And until you can do that simple thing your ideology will only remain a meme in thought and Stalinist in practice.

> even more leaps of logic

not surprising given that his ideology is an oxymoron

>said by the man avoiding simple questions that break his ideology

You cant make an argument. Youre wholly incapable of logical thought. All you do is post other people's insipid blog posts and Chomsky.

I literally love the idea of Anarchist, but like the Fascist symbol; without a bundle of arrows, wrapped in unity, a lone Anarchist arrow is bound to break.

Anarchist cannot compete against state industrial military complexes. They'll get conquered and enslaved. Especially now, when the first nation to implement and proliferate weaponized nanotech. The first creators if it will become "God Among Insects".

u ugly big nose haha

Do something about it.
Do something about it.

>Hierarchy implies rulers.
Damn, Ancoms are the epitome of retardation.

Hierarchy does not imply ruler, like is a teacher not above a student?.

thats some cute editing but nothing Chomsky said seems even remotely intelligent in this.


he is basically trying to generalize a group of people under a label and then apply characteristics to that label because some people of that label believed a particular thing.

And, even if he miraculously is correct, that all traditional "libertarians" were essentially communists, that would really have no bearing on the merits of what he considers "American Libertarianism"

Like so many liberal "thinkers" he really is just a well-articulated... dingus.

sophistry, exhibit A.

(not to say stefan is any better. he is a different beast altogether)

this is literally what happened in Catalonia and Ukraine: an-coms got cucked by commies, and cucked hard, and it literally can't be otherwise

the bolsheviks wanted to redistribute grain of the kulaks and the kulaks were not going to give it away for free as ancoms wanna assume

no reason to respond to strawmen and nonsensical questions that ignore history and anarchist literature

you people have clearly never read anything by anarchists, you're asking retard-tier questionst like

"but without a government who'll build le roads xDDDDDD"

also ya'll running from the OP's theme: Anarcho-capitalism is not "anarchist" at all.
This goes in detail into it
infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionF1

Call it whatever you like, but its not anarchism

Anarcho-capitalism is as niggerish a term as "modern liberalism". Had to be americans inverting the meaning of terms

>

can you make an actual argument, or are you only capable of saying "read this long third-party article full of logical leaps"

Logic isn't your thing, is it?

Can you please answer me instead of selecting only the posts that have no arguments?

>workers seize means of production and can actually own it
They'll sell their product for the highest price they can get and they'll try to produce at the lowest costs. That's private property.
>state seizes everything to keep workers from owning private property
Not anarcho communism.

How exactly does your meme ideology makes even the tiniest amount of sense?

>full of logical leaps
fake news

Exactly what's to be expected from an "anarcho"-capitalist, who doesn't even know what anarchy means, and keeps redefining terms to subvert discussion.

Next you cunts will create socialist-capitalism and redefine socialist to mean "owned by members of society XDDDD"

both questions make no sense in themselves, the first is based on the strawman and the second is completely irrelevant, but marxist subversion

> keeps redefining terms

it is you who can't even be bothered to define your own terms

So much that you declare that a society that clearly has a state, does not have a state because you have decided to create a non-standard definition of state that does not appear in any dictionary

you are just mentally masturbating over semantics

Still not answering if private property is abolished is a authoritarian state the form of which it will be taken or not?

This is very basic question that all ideologies can answer on the question of private property but yours, because the answer of yes or no disproves your entire ideology.

If you can't answer it at least say so.

also notice that when Prodhon grew older and stopped being retarded he said this:

"property is the greatest revolutionary force which exists, with an unequaled capacity for setting itself against authority"

"principal function of private property within the political system will be to act as a counterweight to the power of the State, and by so doing to insure the liberty of the individual"

which is exactly what anarcho-capitalists say.

It's like you can't even be reasoned with. You can't even read something and think about it and answer accordingly. It's beyond me how you thought you could convince people about your ideology when you can't even think about it yourself.

There's a reason why your ideology only propagates in echo chambers.

These ancom generals always end in hilarity. It is a meme ideology with zero intellectual force supporting it. Just go back to your circle jerk where you dont have to think and stay away from Sup Forums.

It's so awful

Anarchism = no hierarchy.

"An*rcho-capitalism" is hierarchy upped to eleven, as even Rothbard admitted.

Being anti-government is not enough.

youtube.com/watch?v=oB9rp_SAp2U

>"The term anarchy comes from the Greek, and essentially means 'no ruler.' Anarchists are people who reject all forms of government or coercive authority, all forms of hierarchy and domination. They are therefore opposed to what the Mexican anarchist Flores Magon called the 'sombre trinity' -- state, capital and the church. Anarchists are thus opposed to both capitalism and to the state, as well as to all forms of religious authority. But anarchists also seek to establish or bring about by varying means, a condition of anarchy, that is, a decentralised society without coercive institutions, a society organised through a federation of voluntary associations." ["Anthropology and Anarchism," pp. 35-41, Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed, no. 45, p. 38]

infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionA1#seca11

however

>"The proprietor, the robber, the hero, the sovereign -- for all these titles are synonymous -- imposes his will as law, and suffers neither contradiction nor control; that is, he pretends to be the legislative and the executive power at once . . . [and so] property engenders despotism . . . That is so clearly the essence of property that, to be convinced of it, one need but remember what it is, and observe what happens around him. Property is the right to use and abuse . . . if goods are property, why should not the proprietors be kings, and despotic kings -- kings in proportion to their facultes bonitaires? And if each proprietor is sovereign lord within the sphere of his property, absolute king throughout his own domain, how could a government of proprietors be any thing but chaos and confusion?" [Op. Cit., pp. 266-7]

"anarcho"-capitalism is not anarchy, its just anti-government, call it capitalocracy, propertocracy or just akyvernisism

>three people trying to talk to you
>ignore everyone and make a generic copy pasta propaganda post
What a fucking train wreck these commie threads are.

>dude just like redistribute the resources lmao

Still not answering your ideology breaking question lol.
This is why I love when ancoms make threads, they show the objective failure of their ideas by ignoring the fundamental basics of their ability to grasp with simple political points.

It's like they are their own antithesis.

Most kulaks were just peasants the had around 60 acres of land.

Ayyyyyyy, have your Coca-Cola© A.I. data/geolocation harvester and tactical McNukes™ on standby for any N.A.P. violators.

When you're so retarded you don't know the difference between ruler and leader. Which seeing as you're an ancom, I didn't need to know that to know how fucking dumb you are.