Anarcho-capitalists - Free markets on steroids, Rothbardian lunacy, and other Ancapistan stupidity

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
562a4ae390fe402e7fb5648eee8ba26506d2e1f6d81e98099daf917e78c33a06.jpg
 
Steve Mayers said:
But somehow attacking the people running the shit is a violation of the non aggression principle.
Click to expand...

The NAP really doesn't mean anything. Its entirely subjective and stupid. Someone could claim (and they have) that preventing the sale of their children is a violation of the NAP. This is of course an example of extreme autism, but here we are. It isn't just Randroids.


IAmNotAlpharius said:
I knew an anarchist-capitalist. He was also a Trekkie and frequently white knighted the ferengi.
Click to expand...

White knighting the Ferengi could be pretty funny if done ironically. If done genuinely, that is really sad.
 
wellthathappened said:
The NAP really doesn't mean anything. Its entirely subjective and stupid. Someone could claim (and they have) that preventing the sale of their children is a violation of the NAP. This is of course an example of extreme autism, but here we are. It isn't just Randroids.
Click to expand...
This is a good article on the flaws of the NAP by a libertarian themselves: https://www.libertarianism.org/blog/six-reasons-libertarians-should-reject-non-aggression-principle
"Even if the NAP is correct, it cannot serve as a fundamental principle of libertarian ethics, because its meaning and normative force are entirely parasitic on an underlying theory of property. Suppose A is walking across an empty field, when B jumps out of the bushes and clubs A on the head. It certainly looks like B is aggressing against A in this case. But on the libertarian view, whether this is so depends entirely on the relevant property rights – specifically, who owns the field. If it’s B’s field, and A was crossing it without B’s consent, then A was the one who was actually aggressing against B. Thus, “aggression,” on the libertarian view, doesn’t really mean physical violence at all. It means “violation of property rights.” But if this is true, then the NAP’s focus on “aggression” and “violence” is at best superfluous, and at worst misleading. It is the enforcement of property rights, not the prohibition of aggression, that is fundamental to libertarianism."
I know this is the no true Scotsman fallacy, but I don't like to consider ancaps as libertarians. They're complete batshit and actually try to use Somalia as a success story because 'they have a functioning currency with no government.' Yet notice none of them have moved there. :lol:
 
Unfiltered Red said:
I know this is the no true Scotsman fallacy, but I don't like to consider ancaps as libertarians. They're complete batshit and actually try to use Somalia as a success story because 'they have a functioning currency with no government.' Yet notice none of them have moved there. :lol:
Click to expand...

I don't know of any free market fundies who would use Somalia as an example of success, would use Hong Kong.
 
wellthathappened said:
The NAP really doesn't mean anything. Its entirely subjective and stupid. Someone could claim (and they have) that preventing the sale of their children is a violation of the NAP. This is of course an example of extreme autism, but here we are. It isn't just Randroids.
Click to expand...
For the most part NAP is just a really autistic way of saying "I should be allowed to do what I want without punishment".
 
I highly recommend you guys check out ancap tumblr. Yes there is such a thing. Some good starting place tags are #gunblr or #freeblr(though not solely ancaps). Lots of it is just purity spiraling. But instead of who is the most trans, the most Aryan, the most x. Its just who is the most free, and how you are a government statist shill. Also its fun watching them come into conflict with anarcho egoists.

Its like the people that blame the nobody Jewish janitor in a company for the company doing something they don't like. Its inductive reasoning as fuck. They find the point in an issue or event where at some point there may have been government involvement (does not matter if it did or didn't happen) then they that bit of evidence to claim the whole thing is the governments fault. Even if at the end of the day they had no hand in it. Its just confirmation bias to an insane degree.

Finally ancaps have the ultimate get out of jail free card. In that ancapistan is never gonna be done to a degree they agree with. So if anything is approximate to their views, and fails. It will not count. But I get the feeling they actually want that in a way. Because it lets them be the most purist ideology (like all the other pure™ ideologies that do this). Its just #notrealancap #notrealcapitalism about everything, while being smug cunts about it.
 
Last edited:
One thing that will make you really dislike ancaps is ask them what would be done about a business that deals with child prostitution. An answer I got was that the business is free to run and the people should just shun the place and it will go out of business on its own.
 
Last edited:
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
One thing that will make you really dislike ancaps is ask them what would be done about business that deals with child prostitution. An answer I got was that the business is free to run and the people should just shun the place and it will go out of business on its own.
Click to expand...

Ugh, don't get me started. While their economic theory is on the surface "let the market decide everything", that so often translates into "everything should be legal to sell, who the fuck cares about laws or morals or some such bullshit".

While on the surface somewhat agreeable, a lot of the people who harp on this particular aspect are all for illegal shit being legal to buy and partake in, like hard drugs, child porn, weapons of all sorts, skeevy and outright dangerous medical treatments, and other things outlawed for generally reasonable purposes, like protecting society in general.

A lot of these types are just a hair away from admitting they'd do all this shit if it were legal and are whining arbitrary "laws" are their barrier. And some even have the brass to flat out admit it.

The more brazen of these types tend to be serious horrorcows.
 
AnCaps in a nutshell:
"Yeah adults ought to be able to bang kids if they want to, why not, also don't you DARE open the folder on my desktop labelled 'Thailand Vacation Photos', that's a violation of the NAP!"
 
In a way, I find ancaps to be reverse communism.

  • Ancaps hate and blame the government for everything and if you just handed things over to The Market, everything would be fine. Commies hate and blame capitalism/The Market for everything and if you hand everything to the government, all would be fine.
  • Commies are very law-heavy and will have their own armies and police. Ancaps think the NAP is the only law you need. Some don't even want there to be an army or cops (even to rent), since people can handle it on their own.
  • Businesses are regulated to an extreme with commies (or maybe not even be privately owned) while ancaps will let a business (especially big ones) do whatever they want no matter who it hurts.
  • Commies hate the rich and "honor" the working man. Ancaps exalt the rich and couldn't care about the rest.
  • Ancaps are highly individualistic to a fault. Commies are group-minded to a fault.
 
This is an ancap known for a viral video at a protest and he just reportfagged some race realists and called their employers like an SJW.
upload_2019-1-15_9-50-48.png

https://www.facebook.com/stephenschafer
http://archive.li/PToqM
Schä Fer
January 13 at 3:54 PM ·
Yesterday I posted something raising awareness to racism and received many racist comments. So, I'm gonna catch a lot of shit for this but I'm gonna tell everyone, regardless.

One of the people advocating racism had all of his personal information up on his account, where he lives, his employment information, even his fucking birthday. I messaged him to confirm it was all real, under the guise of just casual conversation and he confirmed it was all real. I screenshot all of his comments and then he also had a bunch of posts up about fuck black people and how the holocaust didn't happen, so I screenshot those as well. I personally called his employer and asked for the highest level of management. I told them they had a racist working for them and the guy assured me that they don't support racism in anyway and that they'll deal with the employee. I asked for his email and then sent him all of the screenshots.

There was another guy who commented racist shit, who ended up living in my area. I went through his profile and he has a picture of himself with his new car he just bought, in front of his house. I googled his name and his entire address popped up. He lives about 40 minutes from me. Google even had a photo of the guys new car in front of his house, so I know it's really him. I screenshot his comments and I'm in the middle of making fliers that consist of his comment, photo, and address. I'm going to take these fliers and pass them out around his neighborhood. I absolutely support his right to free speech, and will help him in his conquest of racist. He should be proud of his views. I will help him with a soapbox so everyone around him can hear his message.

There were various other people who commented racist shit as well, their comments are still up. I went through their profiles and they all have various posts about fuck black people, fuck jews, and white supremacy.

For people who support racism, why not stand on a street corner with a megaphone and preach your views for everyone who you encounter? Why do you hide yourself and your views?

8989
246 Comments1 Share
Click to expand...
https://www.facebook.com/stephenschafer/posts/10218536010658353
 
Anarcho-Capitalists and Anarcho-Communists are both proof that Anarchism in general is really fucking stupid.
 
MarineTrainedTard said:
AnCaps in a nutshell:
"Yeah adults ought to be able to bang kids if they want to, why not, also don't you DARE open the folder on my desktop labelled 'Thailand Vacation Photos', that's a violation of the NAP!"
Click to expand...
Most Ancaps watch animé (was do many sperging political extremists of all kindred) and are attracted to those shows' characters, mostly underage schoolgirls.
 
Last edited:
I can sum up An-cap's logical, ideological conclusion in two words; Gangbanger Feudalists. Basically the Hells Angels, crips and bloods become kingdoms, with kings, barons, greater nobles, lesser nobles, knights and peasants. The ancaps will either be slaughtered, or made into peasants.
See embedded file.
A biker wedding, and a redpill on the middle ages.png
 
When someone in your vicinity says CP is fucked up and hopes pedos gets their doors' kicked in.

ancap.PNG
 
Last edited:
Anarchocapitalism?
Oh I thought they were talking about feudalism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom