Why are you goys An-caps yet

It's the solution to all our problems
>small government
>NAP guarantees peace
>true free-market prevents monopolies and allows for more innovation

Other urls found in this thread:

cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/
youtube.com/watch?v=cIxJicyjLLE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>62% white
Nope.
Minimum threshold for Libertarian/Ancap is 95% white.

because ancaps are retarded and don't understand how the world works

Only a government with a monopoly on force can establish law and order.

Roads?

Do you actually believe that a majority white society will allow An-capism to work?

Companies would build them.

Also any abolition of modern government would just result in rule by a few landowners leading to neo-feudalism and monarchy

that's after a period of chaos where all your shit gets stolen

that would result in a land monopoly that causes price gouging

cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/

Every time you give a private institution control over infrastructure you get a monopoly that overcharges by billions.

There's nothing efficient about increasing prices on a toll road just because you can which is essentially what Carlos Slim did in Mexico with his Telecom monopoly.

No welfare = nigs/spics riot
No government power = juden form cartels

Only a strong white nation could make it work
>and they must remain vigilant

>mexico
there's your problem

No it wouldn't. That would be a violation of the NAP.

Whites wouldn't do this. In an all white society we wouldn't have these exploitative companies.

>Only a strong white nation could make it work
I know right. People need to understand that whites are completely selfless and would never exploit or violate each-other.

How can you punish someone who violates the NAP?

That's why we had gallows m8

>Muh NAP
I don't even know if it's a meme or you people are serious about this shit anymore.

>niggers
>respecting the NAP
lol

hey buddy don't talk at me like that, you're violating the NAP

who is going to enforce that?

Oh yeah no one

That's just dumb

there will always be criminals regardless of race

there are just far less white criminals per capita than black criminals per capita

just like there are far more intelligent whites per capita than intelligent blacks per capita

again there will always be criminals and in a system where there is no oversight you are begging for monopolies to form

In an all white society nobody ever would. In the case that it happened the local community could try them.

It's literally IMPOSSIBLE for a voluntary Ancap society to peacefully form in the Untied States in 2016.... And will CONTINUE to become even more UNLIKELY as more and more minorites flood the country.

Why would you identify as something who ties their hands behind their backs as their dream burns in the distance?

>Self interest
>Greed is a virtue
>Altruism is for the weak

Ancaps are this deluded.

...

They honestly believe that some magical entity called the NAP will eliminate all crime.

it doesn't guarantee peace, it's just the morally correct way to try to get there. the state, on the other hand, guarantees strife.

>who is going to enforce that?
Local community councils. Also in an all white society almost no one would violate the NAP

They watched too much anime and unironically think that one guy with a sword can fight 100 guys with machine guns

As a result they don't think collective state funded and organized defense is nessecary.

what if two communities get together and invade that one community and annex it?

And what if 4 communities get together and invade that community?

And so on and so forth until we all have states again.

What would you rather have. Big government enforcing their corrupt laws or communities passing judgement on their own. I think the answer is clear.

>what if two communities get together and invade that one community and annex it?
Violation of NAP. That isn't allowed

>And what if 4 communities get together and invade that community?
See above

>And so on and so forth until we all have states again.
How about you try and make a genuine argument rather then this bullshit.

local communities are too small to fight collective state force. That's why local small agrarian communities were all eventually conquered by state systems. You might as well argue that we should bring back Dinosaurs because mammals are "corrupt"

and even then local communities still have law and a government anyway, even if it is very small

>Violation of NAP. That isn't allowed

By who?

God?

That is some sort of government in itself. Who's going to pay the police, the judges, etc? Or do you think part time volunteer judges, policemen and other law enforcement are a good idea? What about an army to defend yourself against your neighbors if they decide to violate your NAP?

>Ancap
>not being a Minarchist

>Violation of NAP. That isn't allowed
and who enforces the NAP without a state?

I don't get what's so hard to understand. In an An-cap society people would understand that the NAP is the underlying supporting pillar. Therefore they wouldn't violate it.

The corporations would protect the small communities by funding militaries to keep out foreign states.

Local communities and corporations. That's why gun ownership is so important.

>An ancap society would work if humans weren't humans and always made decisions that benefit the society
>An ancap society would work if everyone was a fanatical collectivist

Corporations would provide armies to protect their consumer base from outside attack. People would be their own judges and police.

Whatt if my community is bigger and better armed than yours and we kill you, tae a piece of land, start reproducing and expanding. You'd have states again.
Anarchy is just a temporary phase that would inevitably lead to the creation of feudal systems of protection and, in the long run, states

>people would understand

What if people are greedy and would rather just kill/steal to get what they want? Who would stop them? What if an entire collective got together to steal and conquer other communities of people?

Business exists to make a profit they aren't required at all to fight anyone

In fact they could just side with the invaders

Ancap society is actually based on human greed. In the free market, people work together based on mutual benefit to supply what the market demands. In an Ancap society people across the world will work together to make a fucking pencil.

And how are they going to ensure people pay for the military? Taxation?

Congrats you just created a state.

>people work together based on mutual benefit

Or you could just kill and steal to get whatever you wanted if you had a big enough group of followers with you

there are these things called armies.

>Corporations would provide armies to protect their consumer base from outside attack.
A standing army is extremely expensive. It would not be able to compete vs a state military simply because the state military would have more funding.

What is good for the individual is not necessarily good for the society. Anarchy cannot be a permanent state, best case scenario you just end up with feudalism or corporatism after a few years of "anarchy".

Yeah I always get confused when people talk about this kind of stuff like society exists in a vacuum. A long string of events has delivered the world as it is now and it makes no sense to hypothesize about some fundamentally different way for things to develop.

Believe what you want to jew cuck.

Watching ancaps argue for a stateless society is like watching people argue that certain evolutionary features in animals are "bad"

All that really matters with an evolutionary feature is that is works.

There's a reason that human society evolved to have states it's because they are far more successful than any other form of human organization.

On the other hand the quality of the state can always be improved

the best state in history was obviously the US with it's private ownership, economic nationalism, white population, and public infrastructure.

If every state on earth had those features they could compete fairly well with the US in terms of living standards

...

>What if people are greedy and would rather just kill/steal to get what they want? Who would stop them? What if an entire collective got together to steal and conquer other communities of people?
wouldn't happen in white society.

There's a thing called uns. I don't think you fucking realize how expensive it costs to train and recruit people in peaceful work, let alone work where people literally die. Without nationalism telling young boys to throw their lives away, you better be paying some big ass salaries to get people to raid. You have to be a moron to think that raiding is a viable strategy in modern society.

People would willingly pay. Protection would be a consumer good.

Because you say so?

...

This is true. People forget that humans are very rational. The problem is that the state makes them irrational

you know except all those thousands of years where it did happen

kek

he actually thinks that war didn't exist before "nationalism"

>he doesn't know what the free rider problem is

many don't pay unless forced to

Tbh I'm not even sure if I'm arguing with trolls or actual ancaps 50% of the time.
Yes whites never commit crimes. Even if crime was severely reduced you would still need a legal system just for the exceptions when someone does commit a crime.

Then why is warfare more common in stateless societies?

...

>many don't pay unless forced to
They wouldn't get protection then.

...

Why do Stirnites show up in droves in AnCap threads but hardly ever in Fascist or religious ones? Don't you consider them a lot more spooked?

Like it's as if you think we're in 1200 AD or something. We're not fighting with swords that take years to train with. A soldier with 10 years of experience can get killed by an 8 year old with zero training.

Because it makes sense. Without laws or regulations there is nothing to stop a corporation to keep expanding forever until it has monopolized every facet of society. That is what capitalism is.

Most of those states were non-white.

Ayn Rand wasn't a Libertarian

The other three were all economists and jews(for obvious reasons) are over represented in every school of economics.

>regulations are what makes us safe

Oh my dear poor child

Fascism is enforced by force.
Religion is not an economic system.

Why don't you all get that the way the political system evolved in history is exactly what will happen with ancap?
We don't really have laws, it's just that when we don't follow the rules that the strongest organization (the government) has set for us,
they can decide, what our punishment will be, since we are at their mercy.
Nothing stops you from creating a private army and take leadership of your country.
We are basically living in an ancap society right now, without the unrealistic NAP of course.

Monopolies only exist in statist societies. In an An-cap society anyone could compete and under-price the monopoly and break it up.

So you're assuming that blacks have control over companies large enough to fund these roads?

they will

you have to defend your whole town and community not just "parts" of it

That's what makes defense a public good that has to be financed by the citizens just like law and order and infrastructure

I'm not a Stirnerite

Also Johnson already endorsed Shillary

youtube.com/watch?v=cIxJicyjLLE

go live in China then, retard

And yet an organized military with 100 soldiers with 10 year of experience will win against 1000 8 year olds with zero training.
Ok friend.
What is to stop a monopoly in a 100% free market.
The biggest corporation would just end up swallowing the small ones and buying off or destroying "competition" that tried to show up.

Ancap societies would result in a system where the land owner is essentially king

so really it's just feudalism

>I'm not a Stirnerite

Then I wasn't talking about you m8

>where the land owner is essentially king
Sure its already close to that, you're basically the dictator of your house, so that must basically be fascism right?

Rothbard coined anarcho capitalism

Rand advocated similar ideals

Mises and Friedman were all for eliminating the government for other sinister purposes.

>In an An-cap society anyone could compete and under-price the monopoly and break it up.
A small company cannot compete against a larger company in almost all cases. Even more so in an ancap society where there are no laws to stop the corporation from buying up the suppliers or the company itself, preventing the company from getting electricity or other utilities, sanctioning companies that do business with it or just straight up sabotaging it by force.

kek

white tribal societies were still violent

fuck's sake Vikings were warriors not hippies

>you're basically the dictator of your house

The government stops you if you break laws in a state system

if only you own the land technically you write the laws on that land you can allow whatever you want

The same goes for all land owners without a government.

The only way to stop say child rapists and slavers would be ti invade their land and kill the land owners (kings)

Actually I doubt that and that's not how it works. The point is experience means little and attrition is a bitch

Large companies cannot endlessly purchase competitors and new startups. They single handedly would bid up the value of startups in industries they were buying in, attracting more people to the market.

They do not need to buy every single one. Just the ones that threaten them. Or they could use other methods such as stopping them from doing business with large corporations as I described. Money naturally flows to the top in a capitalistic system.

>why am I not an ancap?

Because I'm an actual Anarchist and not a supporter of neo-feudalism