Is there anyone on Sup Forums who is unironically an ancap?
If so, were you dropped on the head as a baby? Power vacuums always lead to governments, and pretty shitty governments too.
I'm convinced this """""""ideology""""""" is a meme, because no one is that stupid.
Other urls found in this thread:
...
...
...
Depends. I personally would welcome total social chaos where independent drug and paramilitary organizations would be formed while the state slowly succumbed into civil war. Basically serving under banner of strange merchant warlords
Ancap can be a good ideology but only if it's followers don't take it to logical extremes. I mean what is bad about letting the free market determine the natural order of things.
All anarchist ideologies are fucking memes.
I'm not ancap, I'm a libertarian
Any anarchist society will end up as An-Cap over a short space of time. Modern Humans are too corrupted to live in peace with their neighbours. There are people you know right now that would kill you, and take your stuff, if they 100% knew they would not be punished.
>tfw you order said armed protection to arrest and/or kill anyone that stops working or tries to leave
And then after another short period of time you get feudalism.
(((Merchant Warlords)))
Please stop being edgy 14 year olds.
Autists like you would be the first to die though.
Always the best one
...
>Power vacuums always lead to governments, and pretty shitty governments too.
non white confirmed. you would benefit from reading "the not so wild, wild west"
and if you STILL haven't bought bitcoin I don't know what to tell you. ancaps were getting it at under a dollar and they're really making the naysayers look stupid
>not wanting to die
>implying any attempt to take over power wouldn't have been swatted down by the federal government
>implying they didn't just call the US cavalry if anything got tough
shit argument desu
Power vacuums refer to a situation where power structures (such as states) collapse, whereas in anarcho capitalism such power structures are effectively privatized through a model of competing insurance agencies which are incentivized to negotiate a polycentric legal order through private courts to minimize conflict, which maximizes profit.
in other words, it sounds like you think anarcho capitalism means "no rulez!!!" but really what it is is competing corporations doing what states normally do, which is make rules. Check out The Machinery of Freedom for more information. There's an illustrated summary on youtube.
Can't be done. Once someone gets wealthy enough, they can afford to hire private soldiers.
At that point, they can keep tight control over both resources and workers through the threat of violence, allowing for greater profits and the hiring of more soldiers. This makes them a de facto ruler.
We've seen this sort of thing happen before. A lot. The entire middle ages was more or less armed thugs forcing farmers to pay for their armies.
Your system is retarded, and so are you.
>implying any attempt to take over power wouldn't have been swatted down by the federal government
>implying they didn't just call the US cavalry if anything got tough
how the fuck are so ignorant of the mormons history?
dark ancap = uncucked
open borders, left ancap = just cuck my shit up
Can you stop with this stupid frog?
But then that's no longer ancap.
"I quit"
necessary for any soviety that is called ancap
>he entire middle ages was more or less armed thugs forcing farmers to pay for their armies.
yeah middle age defense technology was totally comparable to today
And what I'm saying is you have to be insane to think that such a system is in any way desirable. You're advocating a system in which you would almost certainly be enslaved.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize Utah was an independent country. Incidentally, if you're trying to say that a power vacuum doesn't eventually lead to some sort of central authority, the Mormons are a terrible example.
Even if you're only talking about those areas that had no central authority for a while, the "wild west" only lasted like 10 years. I don't call that reliable evidence of anything.
...
>The entire middle ages was more or less armed thugs forcing farmers to pay for their armies.
wew lad
You'd have to find some fiscal haven today to pay as little taxes as people did in the middle ages.
>At that point, they can keep tight control over both resources and workers through the threat of violence
Yeah mh I wonder why army generals aren't ruling us. It's as if armies couldn't exist in the aether and needed supply lines.
>Once someone gets wealthy enough
You say like that's necessary. All you'd need to do is to gather a few followers around, make sure everyone's got guns and then you can collect rent of whoever the fuck you want and gather more guns/followers ad infinitum.
So your assertion would imply that the only reason Mcdonalds doesn't do everything by force (enslave employees, capture cattle for beef, get people to buy their food etc) is because the government would stop them? Think about that for a second. Everyone buys McDonalds anyway, why would they take the risk of starting a war with burger king to accomplish that? It almost certainly would not increase their profits.
>We've seen this sort of thing happen before. A lot. The entire middle ages was more or less armed thugs forcing farmers to pay for their armies.
Actually, politically speaking, the middle ages was not bad at all. Wars were more frequent, but far fewer people died in them, especially civilians. Private armies would fight carefully and tactically to avoid many losses, since it was in the direct interest of their leaders. This was in direct contrast to the horrific meat grinders of later wars conducted by modern states. To the extent that the middle ages sucked (partly an exaggeration) it was because of the less advanced technology, not because the political systems were particularly worse.
No shit. The point is an ancap society is impossible and trying to establish one will only lead to one of the worst systems of government there is.
>"I quit"
I'm afraid you can't do that, peasant. I pay the mercenaries, and if you stop working or try to leave, I'll have you executed as an example to all the other peons. Then I'll do the same to your family.
>muh defense technology
You're just like the anti-gun fags who say the 2nd amendment applies only to muskets. Offensive technology is better too retard. Actually the offense has a bit of an advantage now, in medieval times you could jsut sit behind walls.
>muh offensive tech
yeah brah that must be why the largest and most expensive army in the world couldn't get rid of a handful of Talibans after a decade in Afghanistan.
>why would McDonalds start a war
Any number of reasons. If I were the CEO of McDonalds in an ancap society I'd start using hired thugs to collect "taxes" from businesses entirely unrelated to me. Eventually as you keep doing this you run into rival companies doing the same, so you go to war to get their resources. Rinse and repeat until you rule the country.
Literally a political child.
Do you think your generals haven't taken control of the country because of constitution magic?
>the middle ages was not bad at all
You said it yourself, this was because of technology. The system was still oppressive in the extreme and with modern infrastructure it would be even worse.
Direct slavery is actually pretty inefficient. compare the north's industrialized capitalist economy to the south's slavery based agricultural economy. If slavery wasn't inefficient we would all be slaves either way. What do you think government is, some magical institution that exists outside of incentive structures?
Someone please post the anarcho-nihilist, and anarcho communist memes
Hahahahahahahaha
Ahahahahahahaha
Yes, actually, the tradition of democracy here prevents it, but it's entirely possible to do. Look at South America for any number of examples.
>The system was still oppressive in the extreme
Oh boy.
Do you also believe le ebil catholic priests were burning witches all the time?
Don't try to read a book or anything, nigger.
>the tradition
ooooh
ooooooh
what is that?
user suddenly admitted there is more to politics than who has the biggest stick?
And the board of directors would fire you for losing the company a ton of money by disrupting your own business through armed conflict and siphoning the company's resources away from its incredibly lucrative model into fighting a war. You would spend more money fighting than you could get from winning. War is incredibly costly, that's why historically private armies have fought limited engagements with few casualties.
Feudalism isn't direct slavery. It's an insidious form of slavery akin to mobs taking "protection" money.
People under fedualism can do a variety of different things, provided they're loyal to the (((king.)))
So ancap society is completely possible, it just doesn't last long.
Same thing with the modern state, except or course it does intervene in every aspect of your life when feudalism was really just about military.
the democratic westphalian nation state is the same thing.
The difference is under anarcho-capitalism you can choose your warlord and customize your package rather than relying on whatever the masses vote for, which will always end up being more and more welfare since they will keep breeding and outvote you.
Ancap is my favorite Molymeme
>strawman
I call not being able to leave a certain fief and being forced to pay taxes for no benefit to yourself oppressive.
You're retarded. Tradition matters, but without a central authority with input from the people, the biggest stick overrides everything.
>You would spend more money fighting than you could get from winning
What the fuck is this meme
Once most of your income is coming from taxes, territory becomes a major concern. Why do you think nations even go to war?
Correct. And what it leads to will be worse than what it originally replaced.
Correct. We recognized that some form of government was unavoidable, and decided that if we had to choose, we'd pick one that we have a say in, and that protects its citizens from coercion by each other.
>choose your warlord
This is a contradiction in terms.
>but without a central authority with input from the people
You're not answering to what makes that input necessary. There's literally nothing preventing the US army for trying a putsch tomorrow.
The reason we don't have absolute monarchies today isn't because of a "system", it's because the west doesn't believe in absolute monarchies anymore.
The same can happen to centralized states.
>We recognized that some form of government was unavoidable
Yeah man socdems are 80 years old so really that means they are the only system possible and will stay around forever!
>Once most of your income is coming from taxes, territory becomes a major concern.
You'll notice that that doesn't actually happen too much anymore. Wars now tend to be ideological. This is because the modern state operates at a loss, not a profit, which is only sustained by various methods of monetary trickery.
Most people take more from the government than they give to it via taxes. Conquering more people isn't profitable, it only deepens the losses.
>the west doesn't believe in absolute monarchies anymore
Top lol. The military is made up mainly of loyalists. We go to great lengths to maintain this culture. But without their presence, anyone could decide to hire some guys and do whatever they want. At that point it doesn't make an ounce of difference whether people believe in monarchy or not; they'll have one anyway.
That's because we live in democracies, where governments exist to serve the people rather than the government itself.
This doesn't apply in the ancap hellscape. The people with the soldiers have no obligation to help anyone but themselves, and will revert to the old monarchic tradition of wars for expanding their power.
checked
here's reply
I'm sure Christopher Cantwell lurks here
Show yourself nigger
>loyalist magic makes the army unable to attempt a coup
>magic wouldn't work in an ancap country though!
>that's because of the magic system, rather than the people who live in it
I can feel the red pouring out your ears.
>I pay the mercenaries, and if you stop working or try to leave, I'll have you executed as an example to all the other peons.
you are instantly obliterated by a much richer companies that do not offer such stupid contracts with their customers
...
i love u mom
>When you get occupied by Turkey but are irrelevant enough for the UN to look the other way
>when your genepool is invaded by niggers and spics but its ok because you were never white in the first place
There are regulations in place, and civilian oversight. If you let everyone have their own army, then that is rendered void.
>regulation and oversight don't exist in the private world
>what is auditing
>There are regulations in place, and civilian oversight.
no there isn't.
>when your genepool is invaded by roaches and niggers but its ok because you were never white in the first place
>That's because we live in democracies, where governments exist to serve the people rather than the government itself.
You're not naive enough to actually believe this are you?
If the warlords aren't operating at a loss, they're playing a losing game against insurance companies they have to fight. Who is going to make more money, the guy who sells good lemonade, or the guy who goes around trying to force everyone in town to buy his lemonade?
They don't except as mandated by law.
>What is the president
>What are the various congressional committees dealing with defense
>What is the secretary of defense
Why the fuck would I force somebody to buy my lemonade? I'd force the guy who makes good lemonade to give me half of his profits.
My fucking sides
I'm ancap and have argued on here but get nothing but libel out of you fucks. Tired of trying. This is national SOCIALIST board. You guys are cucked as ever. Just prove that..
>Taxation is not stealing
if taxation is stealing then why would it be ok to steal in that situation but not ok if I steal your money.
Happened in the Middle Ages when some German Hanseatic League cities (can't remember whic ones) got a mercenary army together and invaded Denmark.
>I'm ancap and have argued on here but get nothing but libel out of you fucks. Tired of trying.
It's because your worldview is so autistic that no sane man could ever even slightly agree with you.
>I'd force the guy who makes good lemonade to give me half of his profits.
he has a defensive force to force you, to not.
and they sell off what they can of yours to recoup the cost it took to deal with your dumb ass
>They don't except as mandated by law.
topkek
That is only possible by taking the wealth from future generations and from everyone via deficit spending and inflation as well.
It's obviously not possible to operate at a loss since money can't come out of thin air. They just take it from the population through deceptive means which the ordinary citizen can't understand.
>What is the president
>What are the various congressional committees dealing with defense
>What is the secretary of defense
not arguments for statism, thats for sure. none of those listed have any function that could not be carried out privately
lmao these memes are so funny this is why you need controlled economy losers
>he has a defensive force to force you, to not.
Well then I guess he can force me to pay taxes instead, if he has more money to start with.
Either way, someone's getting subjugated.
>>What is the president
>>What are the various congressional committees dealing with defense
>>What is the secretary of defense
yeah the president is a superhuman who can take down the army by himself, you really are not an idiot.
Anyone got the Sup Forums ones like these
nice hitler dubs but I doubt you are talking to a natsoc
OP is attempting to turn libertarians and nazis against each other because they were causing too much trouble working on their shared goals
> Government's answer to you
> competing companies don't
Nice meme.
>he can force me to pay taxes
nope. he forces you to pay for the damage your little temper tantrum caused, but he makes more money NOT forcing others to buy his products
IMAGINE THAT
But why would any group of armed men submit to such oversight? the US military was commissioned by the US government with regulations in place already. In an ancap hellscape a band of mercenaries can do whatever the fuck they want.
Having the only single commander of all branches of the military be an elected civilian is huge for keeping the military too divided to do anything.
Congressional scrutiny and further civilian delegation in the department of defense makes coups hard to organize.
The constitution provides a framework for regulation of the military, and all these checks and balances keep a close eye on it.
You're not listening.
First off, nobody is forcing anyone to buy products. People with money will force people with less money to give them some of their income, in exchange for nothing whatsoever.
Furthermore:
>he makes more money not through force
Says who, faggot? What kind of skewed idea of human nature do you have where people will just decide they have enough money and won't seek more when they have the means to?
>The constitution provides a framework for regulation of the military, and all these checks and balances keep a close eye on it.
And there is literally nothing that prevents the auditing process between companies to accomplish the same thing.
I know you're still a child and you haven't been out in the world much but that's how auditing works. No it's not done by the government.
>be mercenary
>have gun
>someone without a gun tells me to submit to an audit
>tell him no
>take his land
>be el presidente of les estados unidos
>decides to get full powers
>doesn't work because nobody supports me in that
>clearly it's thanks to the magic system and not because westerners don't like dictators
>what are checks and balances
The military is sworn to the constitution, not the president. At any given time, half the military voted against their commander in chief.
mom pls
I can understand the appeal of being ancap.
Power struggle is good for business.
More chaos equals to more profits.
The ancap's dominant strategy after attaining monopoly is to set up a Democratic government that can be manipulated and destroyed at will.
give me 1 good reason why I don't own my own body and I will become a natsoc today.
>what are checks and balances
things that exist whether there's a government or not
you don't seem to realize that you are precisely advocating for things that are NOT a big stick and yet participate in the organization of a society.
Now if only you had the brainpower to apply that same reasoning to another kind of society...
As a matter of fact I am advocating for things that aren't big sticks. But because I'm not retarded, I realize that an anarchist society is impossible, because by definition there are no such checks and balances.
Eventually a balance of power emerges, at which point you are no longer in an anarchist society. You will always be beholden to somebody. I happen to think the system we have now is better than any system that would be imposed on us after a period of anarchy.
not an anarchist but it would work on a small scale, once you're talking interstate or international there would be too many problems
Posting an immunity cat to save everyone's blessed mothers
lmao such plots are possible in democracy too, but we don't see them.
enjoy your permanent ban
Sounds like taxes
>Eventually a balance of power emerges, at which point you are no longer in an anarchist society.
"I quit" IS the check and balance. and you can't justify otherwise
>I happen to FEEL the system we have now is better than any system that would be imposed on us after a period of anarchy.
fixed. feels are not an argument