Ask a genuine anarcho-capitalist anything* - *ideally where a libertarian framework is relevant

[The Last Stand]

I was an anarcho-capitalist once. Then Chris Cantwell blamed me for his devolution into Nazism because I was the first person to publicly name all the lurid shit he was up to that everyone around him knew about.

Who are you again? I’m guessing you’ve met Chris Cantwell at one point?

It's entirely, read some shit off of Wikipedia, start building a literal imaginary universe in your head, then presuppose everything on top of that. Act like you're above everyone else and take the tone of a high school debate club.

There’s literature that exists of the concept of anarcho capitalism, but that would be far beyond the scope of this platform.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

You being alive only proves my point.

What are you, the final boss of Reddit?
You came here to assert that no ancap has ever had a grasp on history, economics, or politics. But as I invite you to engage, you run away.
What kind of "everyone who disagrees with me is ignorant" bullshit is this? Go to /r/worldnews or /r/politics where that kind of empty smugness (or smug emptiness?) actually passes for discourse

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

If you back me you'll get land, bread and peace by you and anyone who else who wants to back us seizing it from the parasites oppressing you and redistributing it in the name of the new Soviet Republic, where all key industries are owned by workers' councils. We'll also kill them since I don't think anyone really wants those rent-seeking cockroaches around anymore.

We'll also create a new state that is focused on law and order, with equality under the law and protection for all citizens and a predictable, stable economy guided by central planners. There will be no elections as we are the liberators of the working class and the leading vanguard of society, embodied in our Communist Party.

What is there to stop someone like me in the ancap paradise?

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

If you back me you'll get land, bread and peace by you and anyone who else who wants to back us seizing it from the parasites oppressing you and redistributing it in the name of the Republic. We'll also kill them since I don't think anyone really wants those rent-seeking cockroaches around anymore.

We'll also create a new state that is focused on law and order, with equality under the law and protection for all citizens and a predictable, stable economy guided by central planners. There will be no elections as we are the liberators of the working class and the leading vanguard of society, embodied in our Communist Party.

What is there to stop someone like me in the ancap paradise?

Reality stops you.
You're promising bread, peace, and land by first murdering the productive and seizing their means. That's just pillage. Every experiment in the communist program ended in famine, terror, and mass graves. Central planning doesn't create stability, all it does is make economic calculation (and therefore rational decisions) impossible. And calling murder "law and order" just makes you a thug with a slogan. Jetzt ohne dir zu nahe treten zu wollen, das war ziemlich schwach.
In an actual free order, you don't get to whitewash aggression behind the banner of "Republic" or "equality" or, I dunno, whatever else people use as justification nowadays, "trans rights", "owning the libs", "god-emperor Trump". The moment you cross someone's border to seize or kill, you're an aggression just like any other. No legitimacy and no moral cover, all you get is resistance, retaliations, and people treating you as a criminal gang.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

Who are you again? I’m guessing you’ve met Chris Cantwell at one point?


There’s literature that exists of the concept of anarcho capitalism, but that would be far beyond the scope of this platform.

I was making these bullshit arguments while you were shitting in a can when your momma had you locked up in a shed.

I met him, pissed him right the fuck off and he ran away to South Carolina to start a riot.

Here's my real suggestion. There's really cool shit to learn that doesn't involve creating an imaginary universe that George R.R. Martin is loling at.

Put some time into reading shit that isn't recommended by the Mises Institute or the creep with the tie. (Is he still alive? I don't know how your generation works.)

Djikstra said something about how the mark of intelligence is to focus on only one aspect of what you want to learn at a time. Wholly and completely. I'm not googling the full quote, but it's the real origin of "separation of concerns."

Your world view is not possible with clear thinking. Stop trying to fit everything into it, don't "choose" your political side.

Just separate concerns, and something better will come to you on its own without someone having to break down the fucking rules or needing to debate on the Internet.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Reality stops you.
You're promising bread, peace, and land by first murdering the productive and seizing their means. That's just pillage. Every experiment in the communist program ended in famine, terror, and mass graves. Central planning doesn't create stability, all it does is make economic calculation (and therefore rational decisions) impossible. And calling murder "law and order" just makes you a thug with a slogan. Jetzt ohne dir zu nahe treten zu wollen, das war ziemlich schwach.

Hungry, poor people oppressed by the wealthy aren't going to care about any of that, they'll want what I'm offering as a way out. Even in your ancap utopia you'll need the poor and desperate to scrub the toilets and do the menial jobs nobody else wants. What's your plan?

In an actual free order, you don't get to whitewash aggression behind the banner of "Republic" or "equality" or, I dunno, whatever else people use as justification nowadays, "trans rights", "owning the libs", "god-emperor Trump". The moment you cross someone's border to seize or kill, you're an aggression just like any other. No legitimacy and no moral cover, all you get is resistance, retaliations, and people treating you as a criminal gang.

Oh, I will whitewash these terms under the banners of the Republic, equality and dignity the people will back it. And you can't do a damn thing as there is no state to prevent me from propaganda and agitation work. An injury one is an injury to all.

 

[The Last Stand]

Put some time into reading shit that isn't recommended by the Mises Institute or the creep with the tie. (Is he still alive? I don't know how your generation works.)

I don’t know who you’re talking about.

 

[Private Tag Reporter]

Remove. the. lever. Your model requires a crowned monopolist for you to feel safe, that's okay. But don't pretend that that's realism and my stance is unrealistic. All you have is a preference for being ruled, and a lot of cope non-arguments to justify it. Be my guest.

What about your theory precludes a single controlling share through cooperative power though? Like if the people want a figurehead, why shouldn't they get what they want?

Like what is preventing someone from acquiring a controlling share by agreement of stakeholders such as through purchase of shares? What is preventing people from collectively electing a figurehead (other than the apparent ancap ethos)?

The way you state your position, ancapistan sounds more like a religious or ethical position than that of a real political philosophy, which is fine I guess, you enjoy being free, and I'll enjoy being a slave.

 

[clara red bottoms]

The distinction is important because conflating extortion with ownership is exactly how legal positivists collapse crime into "law". They completely annihilate the difference between a shopkeeper defending his store and a gang burning the store down. Or do you reckon the burglar legitimately owns the house until the cops show up?

I think the owner that can't defend his store from the law must comply with the law. The owner who can't defend himself from the gang will likely have his shit arsoned. That's kind of the point of law isn't it? It's a loosely agreed upon group that is large enough to hurt criminal elements in the hopes of fairplay/civility

 

[rando[Numbers]]

I don’t know who you’re talking about.

Fucking kids don't know who their grandparents are.

 

[The Last Stand]

I think the owner that can't defend his store from the law must comply with the law. The owner who can't defend himself from the gang will likely have his shit arsoned. That's kind of the point of law isn't it? It's a loosely agreed upon group that is large enough to hurt criminal elements in the hopes of fairplay/civility

Or, they could do what the Koreans did during the LA riots and unionize themselves into a military to protect themselves and their properties. Which, by the way, is constitutional within US law. Of course, the police couldn’t do much until the National Guard stepped in to enforce law and order again.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

I was making these bullshit arguments while you were shitting in a can when your momma had you locked up in a shed.

I met him, pissed him right the fuck off and he ran away to South Carolina to start a riot.

Here's my real suggestion. There's really cool shit to learn that doesn't involve creating an imaginary universe that George R.R. Martin is loling at.

Put some time into reading shit that isn't recommended by the Mises Institute or the creep with the tie. (Is he still alive? I don't know how your generation works.)

Djikstra said something about how the mark of intelligence is to focus on only one aspect of what you want to learn at a time. Wholly and completely. I'm not googling the full quote, but it's the real origin of "separation of concerns."

Your world view is not possible with clear thinking. Stop trying to fit everything into it, don't "choose" your political side.

Just separate concerns, and something better will come to you on its own without someone having to break down the fucking rules or needing to debate on the Internet.

Woah, watch out, we got a badass over here, /r/thathappened, this and so much this!
Look, your personal history is not an argument. Every line you have written so far is just a dump of unsubstantiated assertions and vibes with no content.
If you got something real to say about how aggression is justifiable or why monopolies of violence deserve legitimacy, go on and spit it out.
Otherwise you really need to go back to Reddit.

---

Hungry, poor people oppressed by the wealthy aren't going to care about any of that, they'll want what I'm offering as a way out. Even in your ancap utopia you'll need the poor and desperate to scrub the toilets and do the menial jobs nobody else wants. What's your plan?


Oh, I will whitewash these terms under the banners of the Republic, equality and dignity the people will back it. And you can't do a damn thing as there is no state to prevent me from propaganda and agitation work. An injury one is an injury to all.

Well, your entire plan relies on two things:

• Murder the productive to loot their output
• Lie to the desperate by waving a banner of "equality" to whitewash what you're doing

Murdering and lying, so the same fraud and violence that left mountains of corpses in every communist experiment. You can use propaganda to dress it up, but propaganda won't change the fact that food doesn't get grown, shelves don't get stocked, and the lights don't stay on.
You're also mistaken about the notion that it takes a state to prevent you. All that's necessary are property owners, insurers, and communities who recognize you for what you are. A criminal gang trying to live off other people's work.

---

What about your theory precludes a single controlling share through cooperative power though? Like if the people want a figurehead, why shouldn't they get what they want?

Nothing precludes it, because voluntary association is not the problem. If you and others want to pool resources and hire a figurehead, be my guest. But what you don't get to do is force me into your scheme against my will. And that's the difference between a firm and a state. One sells a service, the other declares "you're mine" whether you agree or not.

Like what is preventing someone from acquiring a controlling share by agreement of stakeholders such as through purchase of shares?

Absolutely nothing because that's just contract and property. It's how firms, leagues, churches, and clubs already operate. It becomes illegitimate only when the "shareholder" claims to own people who never consented.

What is preventing people from collectively electing a figurehead (other than the apparent ancap ethos)?

Also nothing. People have the freedom to LARP monarchies if they want. What is prevented is shoving it down the throats of people who don't sign up. That's the only line that matters, voluntary vs. coercive.

The way you state your position, ancapistan sounds more like a religious or ethical position than that of a real political philosophy, which is fine I guess, you enjoy being free, and I'll enjoy being a slave.

?!
If naming the difference between consent and coercion is "religious", then so is arithmetic. 2+2==4 whether you like it or not.
Regardless, and I genuinely don't mean this dismissively or as an insult, but feel free to enjoy your chains. I'll happily leave you in peace once you convince your slave master to leave me and my kin in peace. At that point you get to live the rest of your days without being heckled by unhappy libertarians.

---

I think the owner that can't defend his store from the law must comply with the law. The owner who can't defend himself from the gang will likely have his shit arsoned. That's kind of the point of law isn't it? It's a loosely agreed upon group that is large enough to hurt criminal elements in the hopes of fairplay/civility

Legal positivism is a dead end. Your own words are contradictory even. Hopes of civility are a normative standard, an appeal to justice instead of brute force. If all you meant by law is "the strong impose their will" then "fairplay" has no place in your claim.
You can't have it both ways.
Either law is just violence with better PR (in which case the burglar does "own" the house until a bigger gang takes it) or law is bound by an objective distinction, between consent and coercion, property and theft. The first is chaos disguised as "order". The second is anarcho-capitalism.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

What's your ethnicity and religion? Do you have a dual citizenship? Do you support Israel or Palestine?

Excuse me, I missed that post.
White, not religious. No dual citizenship. Zero state solution; the Israel v Palestine situation is just like every other war in human history. Literal turf warfare between gangs, to the detriment of the general population.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

lol the fucking language, I remember the fucking language

"unsubstantiated assertions and vibes with no content"

This is basically old shit mixed with "vibes" and "content". You remixed the playbook with Gen z garbage.

No no pal, Reddit has more of you assholes than you can imagine. You're doing the same retarded thing they do.

You're in a cult. The way out isn't bullshit Internet debates. It's finding something you're actually interested in rather than pretending to be right about something that doesn't even map to the real world.

 

[Penis Drager 2.0]

Then why do you even use the word "law"?

Because I share essentially the same definition of "law" that you'd find in any dictionary.

if law is just "whatever is enforced", then nobody can ever know in advance what the law is until the boot hits their neck.

Certain heuristics work most of the time. Whatever laws are on the books in your jurisdiction is a good start. But there's a lot of laws on the books that nobody enforces anymore sp it's not perfect.

 

[Bonzi Baptist]

@XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG What are your thoughts on Gary Johnson and other small-L libertarians?

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Well, your entire plan relies on two things:

• Murder the productive to loot their output
• Lie to the desperate by waving a banner of "equality" to whitewash what you're doing

Murdering and lying, so the same fraud and violence that left mountains of corpses in every communist experiment. You can use propaganda to dress it up, but propaganda won't change the fact that food doesn't get grown, shelves don't get stocked, and the lights don't stay on.
You're also mistaken about the notion that it takes a state to prevent you.

That's exactly how the Russian Revolution happened. What is your ancap plan to prevent General Secretary Busmalis who promises them the world and agitates them against your system? We have the guns, the anger and desire for change.

All that's necessary are property owners, insurers, and communities who recognize you for what you are. A criminal gang trying to live off other people's work.

They're not going to do a lot of good when I have an army of well-armed hungry, angry people who want what I'm promising. You'll be sent to dig gold in Magadan for the benefit of the people.

 

[Mister Fister]

That's exactly how the Russian Revolution happened. What is your ancap plan to prevent General Secretary Busmalis who promises them the world and agitates them against your system? We have the guns, the anger and desire for change.


They're not going to do a lot of good when I have an army of well-armed hungry, angry people who want what I'm promising. You'll be sent to dig gold in Magadan for the benefit of the people.

Can you get rid of the Pajeets?

 

[Private Tag Reporter]

Regardless, and I genuinely don't mean this dismissively or as an insult, but feel free to enjoy your chains.

Actually, I'm an ancap too, I'm just consenting to the power of the US government in its ability to service me, and I pay it taxes in exchange for its services.

EDIT: Maybe religion wasn't the right word, "belief system"? Either way I've come to accept that it has no real bearing beyond personal ethics until a large enough power can cooperatively/coercively enforce it.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Can you get rid of the Pajeets?

We'll do our best, comrade. This ancap goofball wants more of them than ever.