What music do anarcho-capitalists listen to?

What music do anarcho-capitalists listen to?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=0v3xnnC2V24
reallibertarianism.com/left-libertarianism-pages/what-is-libertarianism/
goodreads.com/work/quotes/1998954-the-betrayal-of-the-american-right
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/libertarianism/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I listen to quite a lot of balkan folk and post-rock

Field recordings of starving children.

Fedora music

Rush

I listen to J-pop and alternative rock mostly

They don't. The possibility of the soundwaves entering their neighbours property and violating the NAP dissuades them from listening to it.

>unironically believing that you can have capitalism without a state to enforce property rights
>muh private police
>muh private courts
lmao

Top kek

Crass

what do anarcho-communist listen to?

chumbawamba

>when the neighbours kid is listening to Green Day™ on his Bose™soundsystem but some of the wave shaped CO2 molecules enter your property, so you have to send your army of McDonalds™ burger flippers to execute his whole family because he violated the NAP

>believing you need a state.
>not understanding the process of natural selection

Field recordings of bread being conquested. Oh and crust punk.

don stepped outside

What stops someone from stealing your car or robbing your house? Security features, not the police. The police legally don't actually have a responsibility to protect you or your property. So why would people stop securing their property in the absence of the state?

National Socialist Black Metal exclusively.

>aspiring to return to natural selection
>thinking you wouldn't be the first to go
wew

I love the Ancap ideology but I know it would never work. Rothbard is actually a pretty cool guy.


Anyways, soundwaves violate the NAP and as per the social contract, McMercenaries would have to be called to recreationally nuke the individual playing the soundwaves

Isn't Montie in highschool?

Ancap retards confirmed for highschool tryhards.

Honestly I don't listen to music that's based on my political ideology. I'm an ancap and I listen to black/death metal, hip hop and post-bop. I don't think any of those genres have anything to do with my libertarian beliefs. Maybe hip hop sometimes, but the NAP is contradicted in a lot of hip hop lyrics.

>ancap
>social contract
Try harder kid

>nearly 2017
>not a libertarian socialist

Similar. There's not much pro-liberty, pro-free market music funnily enough.

Why is that funny?

How can you be pro-free market and a socialist?

>but the NAP is contradicted in a lot of hip hop lyrics.
[Fedora tipping intensifies]

>not realizing that markets are not only impossible with a state, but were originally created to uphold the state
learn to anthropology kiddo

Ancap here. I listen to mostly death metal, with the occasional splash of meme indie artist.

Any Balkan folk recs?

...

I was joking, the arts are well known for being stuffed full of lefties.

Boo hoo

The word libertarian was orginally used by French Anarchists/Socialists la

the reddit of political opinions

because I'm not American

Fanfare Ciocărlia are probably the most well known, then maybe Kočani Orkestar. Check out their compilation albums.

The Borat soundtrack is actually a really good jumping off point, second only to The Rough Guide to the Music of Romanian Gypsies.

Toni Iordache and Ion Petre Stoican are interesting too, and there are some good compilations of them as well.

Gonna shill Hanba as well, even though they're Polish

youtube.com/watch?v=0v3xnnC2V24

Yeah the home of the_donald is known for being full of commies.

>liberal socialism
>not social liberalism

shut up retard

Progressive originally meant in favour of a smaller state, can we have that one back?

>libertarian
>the same thing as liberal
>being this retarded

Do whatever you want mate.

>libertarian
>not focusing on classic laissez-faire liberal beliefs
>being this politically blind

same shit

what music do right accelerationists listen to?

Just because the modern use of the word "liberal" tends to refer to Social Democracy or Neoliberalism does not mean that Libertarianism isn't a form of Classic Liberalism

Amnesia Scanner

NAP is social contract.

No because it never imposes on others

>implying mutual aid isn't a factor in natural selection

Actually there have been market systems with no state before. It's called Sharia. Sure ancaps would love it.

If it's voluntary then why follow it?

there is no such thing as a stateless society

Pro individual and collective.

>libertarian
>focusing on classic laisez-faire liberal beliefs
>being a retarded american

Yet another retarded American.

>Yet another retarded American.
Right-ho, mate

I'm smarter than you

>implying i'm american
>implying you know what the words 'libertarian' and 'liberalism' mean

Don't if you don't want to, just know that others will defend themselves if you attack them.

The NAP is just the conclusion of self-ownership, nothing more.

Can

So if you don't follow it you get rejected by society?

Sounds like some kind of contract involving social behavior.

1/2 of amnesia scanner is pretty left wing on twitter and that whole deconstructed house is like almost exclusively left-political e.g. lotic

what entails right acceletationism. I've only ever heard that from anarchist and post-civ types. What's the end goal

If any of you retards spent 5 minutes reading a wikipedia article you would realize how retarded you are.

Since you retards are allergic to google, read this:
reallibertarianism.com/left-libertarianism-pages/what-is-libertarianism/

There's no such thing as society. If individual men and women, as well as companies choose not to associate with you, that's their choice. There is no force. However, if I violate the current "social contract" by not paying taxes, then they will be forcibly taken from me, or I will be locked away.

...

Thanks user

right accelerationism a la Nick Land is based in Deleuze and Guattari
it's not concerned with monkey politics, you can listen to what you want

>"Classical liberalism" is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade
Sounds an awful lot like a description of Libertarianism, don't it?

>using an internet dictionary as an argument
Wew

>using a website called 'reallibertarianism.com' as a source
lamo

goodreads.com/work/quotes/1998954-the-betrayal-of-the-american-right
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

Jesus fucking christ, are Americans this retarded? American libertarianism has been a thing since the 60s. Left libertarianism has meant something completely different since the fucking 19th century. In the context of social libertarianism, the American definition is completely irrelevant.

Look beyond the google dictionary and you'll learn that words can have more than one meaning,

That wasn't him and how about the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, or is that a lesser source than le google dictionary?
plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2009/entries/libertarianism/

>Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as “left-libertarianism”. Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unappropriated natural resources (land, air, water, etc.). Right-libertarianism holds that typically such resources may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes her labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them. Left-libertarianism, by contrast, holds that unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner.

imagine being passionate about 'libertarian socialism' lmao

The difference between left and right libertarianism is about resources and rights to resources.
With regards to governing policy, both forms still focus on laissez-faire policies:
>[Libertarianism] opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, non-marital sex, and deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service.

>""""anarcho""'" capitalists

fear of getting caught is what stops crime
and that only exists with a state prison system and country wide police to send you there

Socialism is always libertarian

socialism doesn't exist

>I'm okay with massive concentrations of power as long as its not done by the government

He's in college now
Our little montie lad is growing up

Ok, but you said libertarianism was similar to classical laissez-faire liberalism and left-libertarianism (aka not American libertarianism) is NOT laissez-faire.

So yeah, I guess if you move the goal posts enough to ignore economic policies then yes, left and right libertarianism have SOME things in common... which has dick all to do with social libertarianism, or as you call it "social liberalism."

and by social i meant socialism

Obviously this the most complex parts of the theory, and I don't really have the energy to get into it. Wall of text from David Friendman incoming...

How might such protection agencies protect? That would be an economic decision, depending on the costs and effectiveness of different alternatives. On the one extreme, they might limit themselves to passive defenses, installing elaborate locks and alarms. Or they might take no preventive action at all, but make great efforts to hunt down criminals guilty of crimes against their clients. They might maintain foot patrols or squad cars, like our present government police, or they might rely on electronic substitutes. In any case, they would be selling a service to their customers and would have a strong incentive to provide as high a quality of service as possible, at the lowest possible cost. It is reasonable to suppose that the quality of service would be higher and the cost lower than with the present governmental protective system.

>but you said libertarianism was similar to classical laissez-faire liberalism and left-libertarianism (aka not American libertarianism) is NOT laissez-faire
No, I was arguing that all forms of libertarianism are laissez-faire and thus classically liberal.

Inevitably, conflicts would arise between one protective agency and another. How might they be resolved? I come home one night and find my television set missing. I immediately call my protection agency, Tannahelp Inc., to report the theft. They send an agent. He checks the automatic camera which Tannahelp, as part of their service, installed in my living room and discovers a picture of one Joe Bock lugging the television set out the door. The Tannahelp agent contacts Joe, informs him that Tannahelp has reason to believe he is in possession of my television set, and suggests he return it, along with an extra ten dollars to pay for Tannahelp's time and trouble in locating Joe. Joe replies that he has never seen my television set in his life and tells the Tannahelp agent to go to hell. The agent points out that until Tannahelp is convinced there has been a mistake, he must proceed on the assumption that the television set is my property. Six Tannahelp employees, all large and energetic, will be at Joe's door next morning to collect the set. Joe, in response, informs the agent that he also has a protection agency, Dawn Defense, and that his contract with them undoubtedly requires them to protect him if six goons try to break into his house and steal his television set.

The stage seems set for a nice little war between Tannahelp and Dawn Defense. It is precisely such a possibility that has led some libertarians who are not anarchists, most notably Ayn Rand, to reject the possibility of competing freemarket protection agencies.

But wars are very expensive, and Tannahelp and Dawn Defense are both profit-making corporations, more interested in saving money than face. I think the rest of the story would be less violent than Miss Rand supposed.

The Tannahelp agent calls up his opposite number at Dawn Defense. 'We've got a problem. . . .' After explaining the situation, he points out that if Tannahelp sends six men and Dawn eight, there will be a fight. Someone might even get hurt. Whoever wins, by the time the conflict is over it will be expensive for both sides. They might even have to start paying their employees higher wages to make up for the risk. Then both firms will be forced to raise their rates. If they do, Murbard Ltd., an aggressive new firm which has been trying to get established in the area, will undercut their prices and steal their customers. There must be a better solution.

The man from Tannahelp suggests that the better solution is arbitration. They will take the dispute over my television set to a reputable local arbitration firm. If the arbitrator decides that Joe is innocent, Tannahelp agrees to pay Joe and Dawn Defense an indemnity to make up for their time and trouble. If he is found guilty, Dawn Defense will accept the verdict; since the television set is not Joe's, they have no obligation to protect him when the men from Tannahelp come to seize it.

But a fundamental aspect of classical liberalism is free market capitalism. Saying that socialist libertarianism is classically liberal is really fucking retarded.

Probably some shit like polka

A more controlled economy with state intervention doesn't stop a form of libertarianism from being lassiez-faire. It's still classically liberal in all other forms of policy, and thus still lassiez-faire. Just because you change one thing about an ideology doesn't make it a completely different beast.

>A more controlled economy with state intervention doesn't stop a form of libertarianism from being lassiez-faire

I've been following this retarded semantical argument for a while, but I feel I must butt in here to tell you how retarded you are, or you're baiting.

>A more controlled economy with state intervention doesn't stop a form of libertarianism from being lassiez-faire.
Well, actually, it does. But we're not talking about state socialism here, so I have no idea why you brought up the state.

>Just because you change one thing about an ideology doesn't make it a completely different beast.
Yes it does, friend. Private ownership and common ownership are fundamentally at odds. By this retarded logic we can say state socialism and fascism are identical since both advocate for total power of the state.

But sure, left and right libertarianism are identical when you ignore the things that make them fundamentally different and classical liberalism and anarcho socialism are identical as long as you make sure to equivocate enough so laissez-faire only refers to things that help your retarded argument.

>ancaps will defend this

This is why regular, sane libertarians think a government is okay to enforce some laws. Not that I'm a libertarian

Ancaps are just mentally retarded

Nothing. They're afraid the sound waves would violate NAP.

Ah, ancaps go lots of different ways on the rights of children. A working solution would be found. For example, there are two major rights enforcement agencies in a town. One decides that they will prosecute any of their clients who fail to look after any of their children under the age of 12. The other has no such rule. The majority of people would probably see this as a reasonable rule and refuse to use the other, and probably shun anyone who does. They would subsequently go out of business unless they change their terms.

There are still rules under anarcho-capitalism, they are just what people choose them to be.

>clients
does that imply that you'd have to pay for the services of a law enforcement agent, or did i misunderstand?

No, I am in college. I just fucking love econ and politics.

The NAP is a social contract boi.

Wow what a shit side you have there boi. So are you going to tell me the fact that Apple and Google exist and have been created in the past 20 some years is why Capitalism is a failed system. GTFO

Also what artist is Ancap? I want to make this post musically related so I am interested what is some good ancap music?

god you're all idiots

>So are you going to tell me the fact that Apple and Google exist and have been created in the past 20 some years is why Capitalism is a failed system.
I didn't say any of those things.

But while we're on the topic of Apple, how exactly are we measuring success here? They sure have a lot of capital, and I wonder how that's working out for the developing world, let alone the people who assemble their phones.