Why aren't you Ancap?

Why aren't you Ancap?

Other urls found in this thread:

www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/2002_p7/ak_p7/childlabor.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

because not everyone wants the most shit ideology

Because anarcho-capitalism will lead to chaos

Chaos is inevitable, especially with governments. They have no repercussions for violence.

>Chaos is inevitable, especially with governments
Perhaps, doesn't mean you should just give up and embrace some retarded ideology that promotes it.
>They have no repercussions for violence.
Wrong. The people can vote. If the government doesn't listen you have a dictatorship and this wil lead to revolution. With anarcho-capitalism there will be nothing but chaos untill eventually a dictator rises up.

Because the anarcho part of it is retarded. Without a state, you'll just get invaded. Anarcho-capitalism would never work.

Because it cannot work, ever.
It's even dumber than communism.

I was an AnCap through my teens, but I've grown up and realized the only road to a free society is for Terra to become a planetary empire that can conquer the stars so that AnCaps can have their own planets, moons, systems.

I have principles beyond a childish need for absolute freedom, I care for my race and culture which cannot be done effectively in a libertarian society. Unless you kill everyone else that is.

there are no safe guards in an ancap society preventing anyone from just becoming King or any form of order.
IE "do what I say or I'm going to fucking nuke you"

>They can vote
You get 4 years no matter what. You use your massive authority to print money and give it to anyone trying to impeach you. Either way, does a dictator give 2 craps if he gets kicked out after bombing whatever country his lobbyists want? That's not a repercussion at all.

>Without a state, you'll just get invaded.
>Without a state, you'll die from not having healthcare.
>Without a state, the environment will be destroyed.
No evidence for this at all. You can have private defence just as you can have private healthcare.

You don't need a state for racial reasons. If your culture doesn't flat out hate race mixing you are eventually going to get a government that supports it anyway.

What safe guards does a state provide?

This tbqph. Jews will always outmanoeuvre white cucks because they're capable of subordinating their base individual impulses to collective interests. At the end of the day, all ancaps want is unlimited access to VR lolis

Then you're screwed either way. They will manipulate them into "voting" for massive refugee welfare.

law enforcement and in extreme cases the army.

im not retarded

You don't need a state for that. Private law enforcement is becoming popular and a militia of well armed citizens is all you need.

AnarcoTemplars

what laws are going to be enforced in an anarchist commune?
who writes them? who checks whether the laws still make sense?

Voting is for plebs

...

roads

>You get 4 years no matter what.
And governments have to look at the public opinion f they want to be re-elected. I support referenda btw
>You use your massive authority to print money and give it to anyone trying to impeach you.
Citation needed
>Either way, does a dictator give 2 craps if he gets kicked out after bombing whatever country his lobbyists want? That's not a repercussion at all.
What the fuck are you even talking about. With anarcho-capitalism there would be no repercussions at all. Now a dictator can be dragged in front of an international court.

>Private law enforcement is becoming popular and a militia of well armed citizens is all you need.
In other words, mob rule. Don't be a faggot OP

>private defence
>can just be paid off by someone richer to turn on you
Brilliant.
Also how do you expect to get wealthy enough to afford anything? If you start your own business your bigger rival cn just have you killed. And if you get employed somewhere there is nothing to prevent you from being paid jack shit and basically doing slave labor.

>who writes them? who checks whether the laws still make sense?
Who does in the presence of a state?

Because open borders is retarded

...

How can you avoid things like monopoly, cartels, and other nasty stuff, big companies like to do without government regulation? Genuine question

...

How does anarcho-capitalism prevent workers from being exploited like miners or factory workers during the Industrial Revolution?

...

by reading an economics textbook, you retard. your problems are literally nonexistent.

I AIN'T THAT TARDED

If you're worried about big bad companies and cartels holding monopolies, the government is your biggest enemy.

...

Because I have a sub 110 IQ and make my decisions based on feelings. I build my worldview around what benefits me most regardless of what is right or wrong. I don't mind being inconsistent in my believes because having tons of exceptions makes me appear smart because I know so many details.

I also can't possibly see the world out of the eyes of another person so everyone who disagrees with me is so dumb that I don't even bother talking to them.

Literally nothing stopping invading armies or hoards of migrants moving in

Forreal though...

how are we not currently in an ancap society?

-checkmate-

There's no a single ancap with an IQ above 80.

It’s doesn’t that’s the appeal

Define "exploited."

It would work the same way as how public courts and prisons work. But now they will be held far more accountable, because they have profit incentive. No longer are people going to send money to prisons that lock people up for smoking pot or stupid shit.

>citation needed
blue pilled. Every government in the world relies on this type of manipulation.

Mobs are violent. Nobody is going to give a shit because they won't have a state to fund them going to fight wars or do violent garbage.

The government is not the reason the world doesn't fall apart. You have not explained at all how you need a state.

Monopolies are good, governments are cartels, and big companies can be regulated by the free market and private law enforcement who defend property rights.

Depends on what you mean by exploited.
>god help me! My 10 year old son got paid below the 20$/hr minimum wage for house cleaning! Guards!

So you can't explain it yourself? At least give me some source, so i can start reading

I have an IQ of 130 and could unironcially BTFO every single one of you in a debate. The average ancap is more intelligent than the average Sup Forums-tard, who are absolute imbeciles.

underpaid and overworked because no laws against it

Why aren’t you retarded?

This debate is so important, fuck Ivanka and the Dems and GOP. This is the future.

...

>Monopolies are good
what
I mean, for the business owner, sure, but how about the customers?

Define "underpaid", compared to what? What does "overworked" mean? Do the workers not have a say in how long they work? Do they not have free will? Are they not being compensated for their labor?

Destiny?

im not retarded

>Define "exploited."
Working for more than 14 hours every day of your life under horrible conditions. If you don't, you have no food to feed your family and you will die.

>A large part of the population living like shit is appealing.
Too much of a nationalist for this

>Mobs are violent. Nobody is going to give a shit because they won't have a state to fund them going to fight wars or do violent garbage.
there won't be a state to stop them. If some people want to kill you and take all your stuff they will.
>blue pilled. Every government in the world relies on this type of manipulation.
Then give me some evidence that they just buy off anyone trying to impeach
>Depends on what you mean by exploited.
See above

Sorry, I assumed you were a troll who didn't actually care to learn. Monopolies aren't an issue because they can only form using government intervention. Historically, plenty of companies tried to from cartels and fix prices, but they always failed because going against the cartel was too profitable and lacked consequences. Monopolies and cartels could only operate after they started advocating the government to pass legislation to keep the members in line. A modern example is Canada's maple syrup cartel (this is a real thing) which uses the court system to sue any small supplier which goes against their policies. Without this arm, they would have no way to fix prices.

If you want literature some good names are David Friedman and Hoppe. There's tons on the subject and it goes to great depths, far more than is necessary for understanding, really.

Well if it is your property you have that right. Essentially an ancap society wouldn't be much different from what we have now and had in the past.

They have their own free will and it's not worth having a monolithic state just to help stupid people who might not know their worth.

A monopoly is just the only supplier of a certain good. You want more monopolies because you want people to innovate, just like you want a new company to come out with the only new cure for a disease. That doesn't mean let monopolies use violence or deception though, that's the real problem that people mix in with monopolies.

Demand and supply

In the early industrial revolution there were a lot more workers than jobs so you could treat your employees like shit because there were others waiting to do the job.
With companies competing for workers on the other hand companies will pay more or provide a saver workplace in order to attract workers.

Also workplace accidents are easily reduce without regulation simply by making the employer responsible for an unsafe environment.

underpaid: not enough to live off of and having to work everyday for more than 12 hours to earn a living.
overworked: being forced to work for an unhealthy amount of time intensively because if you don't you'll be dismissed at the drop of a hat and replaced immediately no questions asked.
The workers did not have a say back then and if they didn't work they'd starve or find illegal work. People were so desperate they forced their children to work.

All the property owners will act as the state.

I was, but when you realize the power of subversion (most of it coming from a (((certain direction)))) you sooner or later snap out of your self masturbatory world of forms idealistic bullshit and just want to win.

So you believe in universal basic income? I do too, in a way, as an Imperialist, but only for those who contribute to the Empire. In a free society, people have a right to choose whether or not they work 14 hours a day without protective gear or whatever you mean by "horrible conditions", and I don't see why anyone would work for a company that treats it's employees this way.

because im not a faggot, and im willing to stop others from being them, by force if necessary. not even a (you) faggot. help us bring about control, and maybe we'll give you a planet for faggots. fucking ancap mentality is the same cancer the boomers cursed us with, "i just want to leave others alone, and be left alone". yeah that didnt fucking work out. real nazis took us to space, and they will do it again.

So what does a starving family do if they don't want to work 15 hours a day for crumbs in the only work they can find?

Why do you assume the free market will even be a thing? As soon as a competitor shows up a big company can just kill him and take all his shit. It would probably just end up with 2 or 3 megacorporations that are all equally shitty

Why would anyone willingly work for such a company?
>back then
I thought we were talking about an AnCap society today?
>People were so desperate they forced their children to work.
What is wrong with children working? If they are old enough to work, are they even children? Are you talking about pubescent humans?

>Demand and supply
I know that
>In the early industrial revolution there were a lot more workers than jobs so you could treat your employees like shit because there were others waiting to do the job.
With companies competing for workers on the other hand companies will pay more or provide a saver workplace in order to attract workers.
But that doesn't need to happen. Factory owners can decide not to do it. And when workers protest, there will be no state to prevent the factory owners from just sending a private army to keep them in line.
Basically, with anarcho-capitalism you will get slavery introduced again

this is gonna sit there forever

Go to their friends, family or a charity for help. Individuals are far more charitable than governments because they don't actually contribute to the problem by destroying economies.

Why do you assume there will be no law enforcement? Why do you think the government can't do exactly what you're proposing in this doom and gloom scenario you're making up?

>What is wrong with children working? If they are old enough to work, are they even children? Are you talking about pubescent humans?
You think it's ok for some kids having to work in the mines because otherwise they and their parents don't have enough money to eat?
>www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/2002_p7/ak_p7/childlabor.html
>Children as young as six years old during the industrial revolution worked hard hours for little or no pay. Children sometimes worked up to 19 hours a day, with a one-hour total break. This was a little bit on the extreme, but it was not common for children who worked in factories to work 12-14 hours with the same minimal breaks. Not only were these children subject to long hours, but also, they were in horrible conditions. Large, heavy, and dangerous equipment was very common for children to be using or working near. Many accidents occurred injuring or killing children on the job. Not until the Factory Act of 1833 did things improve.
>The treatment of children in factories was often cruel and unusual, and the children's safety was generally neglected. The youngest children, who were not old enough to work the machines, were commonly sent to be assistants to textile workers. The people who the children served would beat them, verbally abuse them, and take no consideration for their safety. Both boys and girls who worked in factories were subject to beatings and other harsh forms of pain infliction.

>Go to their friends, family or a charity for help. Individuals are far more charitable than governments because they don't actually contribute to the problem by destroying economies.
Yeah go read The People of the Abyss by Jack London to see how that works out

Why would anyone willingly work for a company forcing their employees to work under such conditions? I think it is fine for "children" that have reached pubescence to work to help support their family. I'm not interested in the past, it has no bearing on this conversation.

>Why would anyone willingly work for a company forcing their employees to work under such conditions?
Because if they don't they will be kicked out of their houses and starve to death
>I think it is fine for "children" that have reached pubescence to work to help support their family.
But (1) these kids weren't all pubescents and (2) their working conditions were horrible
>I'm not interested in the past, it has no bearing on this conversation.
But things changed because governments started introducing laws. With anarcho-capitalism there is no reason why such things won't become a reality again

>Factory owners can decide not to do it.
Just like doctors can all quit their jobs and farmers can stop producing. This won't happen because there are economic incentives for things.

If a factory owner exploits his workers, he will have to either pay more tor they will leave for better jobs competing to provide better workplaces.
>there will be no state to prevent the factory owners from just sending a private army to keep them in line.
You don't need a state to prevent that for the millionth time.

But they had a government in that book? Hmm really makes you think that governments aren't omnipotent beings.

What I think you idiots misunderstand is what the alternatives were at the time. Did you know that before industrialization, ALL children worked (on the farm)? It's not like people worked children because they were evil, it was simply a better alternative. If you outlawed child labor, do you think that would have magically made families rich enough to not require it? No, they would have had to work doing something else. By the time the government could legislate child labor away, workers because wealthy enough to no longer require it. It's another case of the government claiming victory for something the free market achieved.

That's really inaccurate. You imply that the state is not an ages-old institution deeply integrated into us. But it is. The same way that the state is a manifestation of the genetic material into a political system, it can itself effect the genetic material greatly. One obvious example is that the state has to protect the native citizenry from people of other ethnicities, not only in war but in psychological war. That means that some restrictions will have to be put on media and academia for example, if some foreign ethnicities take over them - and indeed those were the driving forces behind America's decadence. That is incompatible with your libertarian ideals that absolutely allow any kind of media and business exist regardless of its social, ethnic and cultural consequences. You think that individualism is worth more - which is laughable from where I stand.

and nowhere near as dumb as fascism

There would be no law enforcement because there would be no law. All "law enforcement" would be private. That means that the before mentioned megacorps could just squash any smaller private security company (or just pay them off).

there is nothing genetic about taxation, you imbecile.

>the past has no bearing on this conversation
Fools learn from experience, the wise learn from history

I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief. “Bad news, detective. We got a situation.” “What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?” “Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.” The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?” “Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.” “Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.” He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.” “Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.” I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside. “Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t. “Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up. “Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?” It didn’t seem like they did. “Seriously, guys.

That's like saying because we don't have a global government there is no law. Just because people can write different laws (whether in a public or private agency) doesn't mean there is no law.

>That means that the before mentioned megacorps could just squash any smaller private security company (or just pay them off).
Just like they already do with public companies. Not a reason to have a state.

Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.” Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing. I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it. “Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled. Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him. “Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen. I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!” He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose. “All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.” “Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy.

>Because if they don't they will be kicked out of their houses and starve to death
Then they should move and seek employment elsewhere.
>But (1) these kids weren't all pubescents and (2) their working conditions were horrible
Once again, I do not care about the past. In the modern world, I don't see why anyone would choose to work for a company that forces their employees under such conditions, so I doubt such a company would ever exist very long in the first place. If by some miracle such a company pops up, the retard running it won't be doing so very long. I see no reason why older prepubescents couldn't work easy jobs like stocking shelves, but for the most part I doubt prepubescents will be doing much other than schooling.
>But things changed because governments started introducing laws. With anarcho-capitalism there is no reason why such things won't become a reality again
And those laws just magically appeared and no one knew why, but adhered to them after the fact? New laws came up because people realized the situation was shit and needed to change. There is no chance of such a situation occurring in the modern world, for moral and simple practical reasons that the company will not last.
Not an argument.

“Because I was afraid.” “Afraid?” “Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.” I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head. “Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.” He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me for arresting him.

>They have no repercussions for violence.
>What are goverment reforms, and how do they work?
>What are revolutions and how do they work?

I think you underestimate the power of the voter or populations in general

I really like the idea, but that one island on the African coast which got fucked by pirates convinced me to be a minarchist.

>Just like doctors can all quit their jobs and farmers can stop producing. This won't happen because there are economic incentives for things.
But for the factory owner the economic incentive would be not to introduce better wages and living conditions, since it costs money
>If a factory owner exploits his workers, he will have to either pay more tor they will leave for better jobs competing to provide better workplaces.
And why would they? Who would another factory owners to have better conditions. Who prevents the factory owner from putting a gun to the worker's head and forcing him to stay?
>You don't need a state to prevent that for the millionth time.
Then what will. Muh private militia? Because I can use that same militia to make some slaves
>But they had a government in that book? Hmm really makes you think that governments aren't omnipotent beings.
Nobody says that you idiot. But it was a government that didn't care about the people in the country. So a situation much closer to anarcho-capitalism then today.

LOL ok buddy, sure there isn't. All attitudes are the same regardless race, because we're all a one race, the human race, right? Idiot. How can you talk with such confidence when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about? Oh that's right, you have the ideology of a 15 years old. Also, cool how you ignored my post completely and instead references something that I didn't even mention.
This is why you people are an ancaps and I'm not. You are ignorant of the facts but feel intellectually superior, I actually try to base my ideology in reality.

Private armies would basically be a small government since you pay them to defend you against other armies.

Because I'm Strasserist/Third Position

Why would anyone respect these laws? The only reason to do so is because of law enforcement, which as I previously mentioned, can just be bought off by someone richer or overpowered by a bigger private army.

>Then they should move and seek employment elsewhere.
Conditions were pretty much the same everywhere and there were thousands of works looking for a job.They don't have that luxury
>Once again, I do not care about the past. In the modern world, I don't see why anyone would choose to work for a company that forces their employees under such conditions, so I doubt such a company would ever exist very long in the first place.
Idiot, such companies are still around to this day in the third world. Things changed because governments started introducing laws
>And those laws just magically appeared and no one knew why, but adhered to them after the fact? New laws came up because people realized the situation was shit and needed to change. There is no chance of such a situation occurring in the modern world, for moral and simple practical reasons that the company will not last.
Laws came up partly because of fear for revolutions. But with anarcho-capitalism there will be nothing preventing the factory owner from just rounding up people and making them his slaves

you claim that the state is integrated and is related to our genetics. what defines a state is taxation, therefore your claim is that taxation is somehow tied to our genes. All the roles of a state can also be done tax-free alternatives.

>But for the factory owner the economic incentive would be not to introduce better wages and living conditions, since it costs money
A factory owner investing in his employees is no different than investing in new machinery. Anyone that doesn't realize this won't be running a company, sort of like you.
>Who prevents the factory owner from putting a gun to the worker's head and forcing him to stay?
That is slavery, it is dealt with by DROs.
>Because I can use that same militia to make some slaves
Then it's war and the entire society turns against the one retard trying to become a warlord.

>No evidence for this at all. You can have private defence just as you can have private healthcare.
There is no "evidence" of that because no one is dumb enough try it in the first place since it's so obviously going to fail. There is a reason countries have drafts during wartime, almost no one wants to go to war willingly. The only way you could have privatized defence is if you somehow managed to get enough money to pay every soldier an absurdly high wage. Also, who the fuck is going to fund this defence if you have no taxes?! This is why it would never work, ever.

>were
Maybe you're retarded, but we are not talking about the past. I'm not going to say that again, if you miss it this time, I will stop replying.
>Idiot, such companies are still around to this day in the third world.
The third world is not the modern world. I don't care what shitskins do anyway, they should all be euthanized.
>with anarcho-capitalism there will be nothing preventing the factory owner from just rounding up people and making them his slaves
You're clinically retarded. I'm going to leave the thread since it seems no one but children post in it.

Because it will never unite the whites of Europe. The poor will be shit on by lazy rich slobs and so there will never be any unity. No working class regular job guy will ever respect or unite with a superirch ardant capitalist while they are getting FUCKED and can barely pay to keep their family fed let alone healthcare.

I hate AnCap’s more than islamists desu.

I've never had a hankering to fuck 9 year olds

>Demand and supply
>where labor is immobile

ayyyyyyyy lmaaaaaaooooooooooo

>A factory owner investing in his employees is no different than investing in new machinery. Anyone that doesn't realize this won't be running a company, sort of like you.
But it's not really an investment. It's shitty work and if you can't do it anymore someone else will simply replace you. Under your logic slavery would never have exited
>That is slavery, it is dealt with by DROs.
Not familiar with that abbreviation
>Then it's war and the entire society turns against the one retard trying to become a warlord.
Thank you for acknowledging that anarcho-capitalism will lead to chaos and civil war