Why does Sup Forums hate Anarchists...

Why does Sup Forums hate Anarchists? Are you scare the niggers are going to come fuck your wife if the the government isn't there to protect you? Not enough of a man to defend yourself? You have to call for real men to defend your wife? Might as well let the cops gangland her while you're at it Statecuck.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=B3lsJmwNO40
twitter.com/AnonBabble

You're retarded. Without the government to regulate things there would be no economy, people would just go ape shit and start stealing and killing.
Best case scenario is a group of people taking over and rulling, but that's not anarchism anymore is it?

I look forward to blasting you fuckwads to shit. You think I'll ever wait for the police? Not when I have my choice of several guns I can legally carry and will send you to the morgue.

Praise guns! It clears up this kind of shit with a few pulls of the trigger.

Disdain is not hate.

cause you're a queer

Honestly, in my lifetime I pray for a bit of anarchy> It sounds fun as fuck and I'm a big guy and I'm good with knots.

So then you're paying police to what exactly? Give YOU speeding tickets? Who do you think they'll send to take said guns when Shillary wins? Just a few false flags away.

she has the cutest ears. I'm personally a nose guy but I'd switch for Daisy

For how long long hue? You think everyone would kill each other forever? Like it will be just one big firefight? Study history.

Are you armed? I'm always amused by the people who are pro anarchy and anti-gun. They need to realize that without law and order, gun owners become the new aristocracy overnight.

Anarchy is impossible. There is no law to prevent laws from being written. So, what happens when people voluntarily congregate based on shared beliefs and social norms?
What happens when those people build a military?
What happens when they invade?
It would basically be feudalism. And thats adsuming every country became anarchist.
Otherwise
>no longer a country
>Getd butt blasted by China and Russia

Men who can't protect themselves and their property at this point in human history need to be weeded out. Sup Forums would have a lot less numales to worry about

I live on land and it's been something that my partner and I will be doing once we have a bit more money.

Never said I was pro-anarchy though.

Yeah I'm just saying I'm general. The anarchist types are always scrawny hippies who have never handled a firearm in their lives. They would be the worst off if the laws protecting them and their women no longer existed.

>Their woman

Implying that they hold any kind of grip on the opposite sex

Of course I'm armed! I think you've been exposed to Tumblr teenage Anarchists. Anarchists are not liberals.

Libertarianism is dead faggot

Even most of Sup Forums thinks its dumb now. Let it go man.

Anarchy would be pretty comfy where I live, I'd be running a thunder dome by the end of week 1

I'm aware of this. However it can be expressed politically by demanding as much freedom (and the responsibility that goes with it) as possible.

These threads don't work on us. You're going to come to bitterly understand this someday.

youtube.com/watch?v=B3lsJmwNO40
This is how it'd turn out.

The only freedom you care about is the right to own guns and not pay taxes.

I would come and take over and turn ur town into a human farm

>this post

>Without the government to regulate things there would be no economy
Yeah, things like craigslist and ebay would never exist without the government! No one knew how to trade until the government passed laws telling people how to trade right?

...

>What happens when they invade?
Then you defend yourself just like you do now?

I want total freedom. Hell, I'd even let the Statecucks keep their pigs. So long as they only interfere when solicited by a citizen for aid.

Will I be treated nicely for being Australian in America?

>The anarchist types are always scrawny hippies who have never handled a firearm in their lives.
What's in this pic then, faggot?

Yeah. Normies will probably go on and on about how neetyour your accent is. Just steer clear of 4channers

Mate they worship the dicks we trip over.

Ants?

>Stereotypes

Anarchist are just faggot commies that fuck niggers

Well, I'm not a fucking caveman

Absolute pure freedom is the most important thing in existence. People aren't animals. Why have people turned against Libertarianism? It is the single most moral movement in the history of civilized society. People do what they want and defend themselves. If you rely on anyone else for any reason, you will be putting your life in their hands, making it fully malleable if they choose to control you at any given time. The only true crime is murder if it's done for a bad reason (I.e. Not self defense). Why do you people want restrictions? It's so pathetic and weak of all of you, it's like you've all given up.

Good, I want them to know I'm not gonna tip as soon as they hear my accent

Hah wow someone actually sided with me and made good points. This is weird.

We live in a society where gangs have a huge influence around the country and it still nothing near anarchy.

Anarchy is impossible unless you are just a bunch of savages. I bet if you took over Japan and said there there was no government and anyone can do anything they wanted. Japan would continue the week like nothing has happened.

However if that happened in South Africa.

Its less hatred and more disappointment.

Like a parent feels for an autistic child.

Anarchists are the worst fucking faggots I've ever encountered. Go to rally and cause shit and then get stabbed and complain about it to the cops. What a bunch of faggots.

They would be the first ones I raped and tortured to death when the government goes down.

Because it's a pointlessly Utopian ideology that like all Utopian ideologies just handwaves every criticism away with "Dude thats the fault of the State/capitalism, in a TRUE anarchist society..."

Also it's pretty much FUCK YOU DAD YOU CAN'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO: The ideology

Alright, I'll bite. The basis for a free society is based around very few concepts. The first is that you have a god-given, or a natural if you feel like tipping your fedora, right to life. No one gave it to you, so no one is permitted, in a moral sense, to take it away.

A second right you have is the right to the "fruits of your labor". You earned the product of your labor by your own hands and no one, without your consent, should be permitted to take it away.

Thirdly you have the right to freedom of speech. No one really gave you the ability or freedom express ideas, so thus no one is permitted in taking it away.

Those cover the major tenets of Social Contract theory, which is the basis for classical liberalism/libertarianism.

In a state of nature, without laws or some way of enforcing laws, man isn't truly "free". You are subject to the whims of the mob. If a group of heavily armed and skilled men decide to loot you at gun point, they can and there isn't any way to stop them. If someone decides to steal from you, what is there to stop them? I suppose you could say you'll shoot them, but you aren't some sort of omnipotent threat. You must sleep. You must work. You must take of family obligations. You have to eat. To put it simply, the only way you could protect your right to life and right to property, is by sitting around with a gun around your stuff 24/7 and being prepared to shoot whoever comes to take your stuff. In that case you aren't free, you're just a slave to fear. Since libertarianism should be a philosophy that maximizes freedom, a state to at least enforce laws and contracts is necessary.

Take my guns? Good luck with that, cumpai. You'll be shot down as you approach.

It's nearing this level even now throughout the world. Shoot the muzzies before they fuck things up. When TRUMP wind we will send them back to whatever shithole they lived in.

Muslims + shitholes; they go naturally together!

>South Africa

Well hopefully they would destroy themselves. Then in the future we wouldn't have to worry about what South Africa would do. See my logic here?

Anarchy is either impossible or the default state of nature.

Without order there is chaos.
Without chaos, order could not exist.
A healthy balance of both is necessary.

Anarchy would only work if you had an intelligent, peaceful society of people, and no foreign governments wishing to conquer anyone.

We don't have a peaceful society, our niggers and beaners see to that.

We aren't intelligent as a country, our niggers and beaners see to that.


And the world is fucking full of other nations that would love to conquer the US. If we abolished the government today, Russia would be here implementing a new government on Friday.

"A" is for Autism

*knock knock* We're here for your guns user.

People form groups. A stronger group will take a weaker groups shit. Anarchy is inherently weak.

Anarchy isn't even real. An anarchist society would be gobbled up in a month by a local warlord

>Without the government to regulate things there would be no economy, people would just go ape shit and start stealing and killing.
You are such a psyop'd shill, people steal and kill irregardless of government. Without government, people would naturally set out to associate with like-minded people who share an implicit understanding on expected behavior.

The government and economy exist nowhere else but the human mind.

same here I spent 6 months in the sierra nevadas surviving and doing fine homesteading, I had a nice thatched hut and it was buried nice, then I got arrested, not a big deal, they just mad e me reintegrate into a society I hate. so now I am voting for trump because fuck all you normies.

>Believing in the anarchism meme in the current year.

Your argument is flawed in that you assume civilisation wouldn't exist anymore. There would still be people living in towns and cities. People would band together to defend their community from such a threat. Plus, what's to stop someone from walking up to you and shooting you in the head? The CHANCE they MIGHT be caught?

So why does every country have a government?

>Also it's pretty much FUCK YOU DAD YOU CAN'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO: The ideology

Vs. Harder daddy: The ideology?

>We're here for your guns user.

Always puzzles me why you folk think we will just lay down our arms and let turncoats take them. Why would the majority of armed forces fight for the government when they can see they are killing their families?

Anarchy literally isn't possible in any way shape or form. Humans are pack animals because they are social, meaning power structures and economic alliances will always form.
The only creatures capable of anything resembling "anarchy" are probably bacteria.

Because people are easily controlled by the misinformation machine.

Are you really saying that the police and other enforcement agencies have no effect on violent crime?

>Without government, people would naturally set out to associate with like-minded people who share an implicit understanding on expected behavior.
Yes. They would. That isn't limited to good people though. There are people who would conglomerate and form groups based around looting, raiding, and killing others. So, although like-minded people would associate with each other, that also means that the less desirables would do so as well and that would be bad for everyone.

>The government and economy exist nowhere else but the human mind.

Try getting into the pentagon and tell them that and see where it gets you. Just because something is a social contract doesn't mean it "isn't real".

Until he dies. Nothing is permanent user. Life has its ups and downs.

>people who would conglomerate and form groups based around looting, raiding, and killing others.

This happens in places where government exists.

>
>You're retarded. Without the government to regulate things there would be no economy, people would just go ape shit and start stealing and killing.
>Best case scenario is a group of people taking over and rulling, but that's not anarchism anymore is it?
Governments give rise to other crimes. Instead of singular murders, we get genocide and mass murder sponsored by the state. Governments are inherently exploitative. Powerful individuals always succeed in commandeering government for their own devices. In other words, government itself is too dangerous to exist.

America doesn't have the balls. They would hand over their guns and bitch on social media about it. There might be a few isolated incidents with small militias, but they will be put down quickly and painted as radical racists in the media.

Anarchy with Africa nigs doesn't sound appealing lmao

Every country has a misinformation machine?

You do realize governments have been a thing for thousands of years right? Even tribal societies form governments

You're living in a fantasy world my man

Because a country is the area of land that people decided to incorporate within, and the government is the constitutional framework by which the the people of such land finds it's basis to operate justice.

Government does not protect people from injustice, nor does it strive to benefit every citizen. Our country is set out to provide security to the banks. To secure the value of the dollar, even be it artificially. The fact people can buy property in the states from other countries is disgusting, and only benefits the stratified sect of the federal government, who gladly and foolishly stuff their pockets with monopoly money.

Are you seriously comparing the scope of a tribal government to that of a modern nation's?

>This happens in places where government exists.
Yes and at significantly reduced rates. Compare the murder rates of a place like Afghanistan or Somalia to a place like Libya during Gaddafi's reign. There was a lot less murder during a stable governance than in Afghanistan. Hell even compare Iran to Afghanistan. Despite its human rights violations, it is at least safe.

Of course not, eventually someone would form a government to reestablish order

No but a government is a government. People form governments and they have been for thousands of years

A small governing body is still a governing body.

Government literally goes hand in hand with civilization.

What's all the fighting in these places about, user?

that doesn't give you carte blanche to turn it into the norm in every non-violent neighbourhood.

It's not that I'm scared, it's that I'm lazy.
I would much rather call the cops and let them handle it than have to put in all that effort on a daily basis.
>work smarter, not harder

Are you JOKING right now? Holy shit. Governments lie all the time to make money off of an impressionable republic. Let's count the ways.

>gun control
>smoking bans
>federal loans
>suppression of speech that is seen as offensive
>putting people in prison for using drugs
>lying about drugs being bad
>giving out tickets for trivial bullshit

If there was a need for it. Technology has changed everything.

>he doesn't realize that it's juts mudshits being mudshits

m8, if they had no-one to keep them in check the whole of the middles east would turn into a literal mad max set, just with more explosions.

So Libertarianism?

In Afghanistan a lot of it has to do with securing heroine production and religious disputes and you'd have to be naive as fuck to try and argue that those would disappear without government.

In Somalia it is mostly about securing the very small number of resources available to people because it is very poor with little food and little clean water. Not only that, there is a lot of corruption under the warlord like regimes.

What do you think the fighting is about user?

By this logic a group of friends hanging out is a government. People can ban together without having a master you know

Because they just bite hand of the system they're depending on, most of these cucks are on welfare or non-profit organizations. Anarchism was cool wgen I was 13 but it really isn't anything more than group with feeling of belonging for losers.

Feel free to name any human society, civilization, or tribe in all of history that didn't have a power hierarchy.

It's human nature. Even fucking injuns had chiefs.

why cant nigs behave themselves? is it that hard to live outside the zoos confines? do you need a lead injection to shut the fuck up?

Bunch of scrawny hippies trying to be relevant.

a group of friends banding together to form what essentially amounts to a social security service is a form of vigilantism.

in the absence of government, then when that group of friends takes on the roles that the government would usually fulfill (establishing an education system for kids, engaging in diplomacy with other towns etc) then they become a governmental body on an extremely small scale.

Yes I'm so ad the government takes chunks of my pay to keep these people in check. It'd be horrible if they destroyed themselves and I'd get to keep all the money I work for. They would be ever so missed.

>Why does Sup Forums hate Anarchists?

Because you're a bunch of fucking retards that worship an unsustainable transitional phase between forms of governance. Anarchy doesn't last. Anarchists get taken out back and shot like dogs by Statists. You make nations weak so that their enemies can destroy them and you. Anarchism is a cancer.

...

>irregardless
is not a word
I'm usually a grammar nazi, but this is one my pet peaves.
Regardless-having no regard
Irregarless-not having no regard (double negative)

You sound like a statist who likes to impose his will, how do you get away with LITERALLY being part of the problem you evil dick?

The problem with anarchism is that no one understands it, especially anarchists, who are inevitably either 13 year old edgelords or scrawny middle class hipsters. If you actually read anarchist lit, you'd see that it's not only possible, but inevitable. Right now I'm betting on environmental collapse that will greatly reduce the carrying capacity of the planet, and we will revert to a stateless affiliation of loose collectives. Those acting against the interests of the whole will be dealt with by the majority

A group of friends don't FORM a government moron.

Groups of people always do. People want guidance and to be led. Just because you don't doesn't mean the majority of people don't either.

This is the problem with the libertarian anarchist mindset and I had to come to grips with it myself because I'm very independent and have a very strong will. The majority of people are sheep who want and need to be led.

Everyone being intelligent, independent and governing themselves is a fantasy. Try to think from the average rubes point of view

I think the fighting is mostly about who's version of God the laws are based off of.

>Yes. They would. That isn't limited to good people though. There are people who would conglomerate and form groups based around looting, raiding, and killing others. So, although like-minded people would associate with each other, that also means that the less desirables would do so as well and that would be bad for everyone.
They already do that, it's called organized crime, and all organizations operate by said means,
>looting, raiding, and killing others
Which shows that how we kill, raid, and loot each other through propaganda is more important.

>Try getting into the pentagon and tell them that and see where it gets you. Just because something is a social contract doesn't mean it "isn't real".

I could go into the pentagon if I had 500 people armed with rifles, anti-aircraft guns, and a means to feed 500 people during the occupation.

Rule by sword.

Yeah ask the new world natives how that worked out for them. Anarchy leads to either tribalism or direct democracy, both of which are shitty ways to run a society.

my point has nothing to do with the democrats or how shit they are.

it was about how you don't realize that taking away government presence would just increase the amount of allahu ackbaring until some religious organization takes over and puts it back under control, at which point the people will become more unified, and start allahu ackbaring in places that aren't their own fucking country, the only difference between now and then being that because everyone is a paranoid fuck in purely libertarian societies, the mudshits will always shoot first.

it hasn't changed the human desire for power

not an argument :^)

Can you imagine if organized crime and nigger gangs didn't have to face punishment from the government?

This would just embolden them. At least criminals have to try to hide. With no government they would have impunity to do what ever they wanted. You don't think they'd do more crime with if they had no consequences