This is a thread for discussion and critic about anarcho-capitalism, please keep it civil and on topic :)
Anarcho-capitalism is a political philosophy and school of anarchist thought that advocates the elimination of centralized state dictum in favor of self-ownership, private property and free markets.
Free market Transaction between individuals are conducted on a free market regulated only by offer and demand, this is made possible by cryptocurrencies and tokenization of assets.
Decentralization The current centralized approach to governments leads to corruption, lobbyism, harms innovation and leads to huge amounts of wasted resources, we should switch preferably to a stateless society with decentralized public systems where individuals govern themselves.
Private property Individual private property is at the center of the anarcho-capitalist ideology, instead of being given rights by an entity above you, you directly own your body and your capital.
Public services In an anarcho-capitalist society public services are either handled by private entities or work in a decentralized way.
Non-aggression principle The non-aggression principle states that you should not attack others but you can still defend yourself and your property.
capitalism is shit. why cant you just be a human? humans dont care about rules unless they are raped, thus they are anarchists until they are ousted as a cuck or overcome the culcoldry
>>10914 >capitalism is shit
Mind argumenting? The aspects that i find shitty about capitalism are solved by anarcho-capitalism(i can explain more in depth if you want).
>humans dont care about rules unless they are raped, thus they are anarchists until they are ousted as a cuck or overcome the culcoldry
Not sure if i undertand you, but you could say that humans are anarchists in nature, and have been anarchists for millions of years, in current society you are brainwashed since young age in respecting arbitrarly decided rules(especially through school) so the average man is not anarchist.
Anarcho capitalism works in a closed environment like a country that heavily limits immigration.Without that it only allows the wealthy to exploit the poor even more than they already do.
I don't care if they move the legal age up to 21.But calling 16 and 17 year olds children and the person who sleeps with them a pedophile is reaching.Take Chris Hansen's sting operations for example.Not only do they flirt with the men first but they also use pictures of a legal adult.They make a guy who is sexually attracted to 19 year old woman look like a sicko.
>>10919 >Anarcho capitalism works in a closed environment like a country that heavily limits immigration.
Immigrants wouldn't stand a chance in an ancap country, ancap society is purely meritocratic and there is next to none welfare, immigrants would not be competitive(unless they sell themself as slaves i guess) and they could not suck resources through welfare anymore, so in an ancap country you wouldn't have leech immigrants anymore.
>>10920 >>10921 >>10923 >weed, consent
Prohibiting substances is stupid in the first place, in an ancap society as i wrote in OP you own your body and are responsible for it, so you can do whatever you want with it even assume potentially dangerous substances, it's kind of the same with consent.
>>10924 >for some reason ancapism reminds me of naturecucked retards with their bullshit lex "naturalis"
Cause ancap/anarchism in the natural way of living, modern society is an aberration that should have never existed.
>>10927 Nobody should have their lives destroyed over a jailbait. If they want to have AOC, it should be on a sliding scale to account for minors' willingness for sex instead of pretending it doesn't exist. Make 13 and up a misdemeanor, because that is the actual severity of it.
Children face more actual danger from drunk drivers than from people looking at CP, yet the former is usually no jail while the latter is usually a long prison stint, and unemployment and homelessness afterward, basically a death sentence. At least in muttland.
Ancap society does not exist. Ergo you can say whatever you want about it with equal results - none. Unlike communism, which was actually tried and failed miserably. So far not a single ancap society ever existed and few attempts to establish it failed, ergo ancap is impossible (yet or totally).
>>10961 Wrong, think for example of the american frontier from 17th-19th centuries, laws were most of the time settled by the people without a central government, commerce, mining, infrastructures were handled locally, it was also way less violent than movies would let you think btw.
>>11000 >think for example of the american frontier from 17th-19th centuries
The frontier was a sparsely populated wasteland where dissenters could move away from the govt that had neither tanks nor aviation nor even proper artillery in modern sense. And then you had the Comanche and the like Mongoling around.
Pray tell me how are you going to replicate a sparse wasteland mores and laws in a country of 330+ million people, several dozen million of whom have mores and laws of Aztec cannibals and several dozen more will cheer for BigGov sending drone swarms your side?
How will ancap be possible in two specific regions, each with 1B+ people, nukes and planetwide influence, one of whom happens to be a ChingChong NatSoc?
Think how the frontier and all "ancap" there evaporated once the railways were up and running and people pouring. Turns out, wherever you have people you will find enough folks to police other folks.
>commerce, mining, infrastructures were handled locally
So long as there were few locals and they were mostly isolated from others, so they had no choice to invite a BigGov to settle things in their favour. Now they can, there are droves of people everywhere and Govts have choppers and ICBMs instead of cavalry. Now what?
I perfectly understand how you are disgusted and fed up with the modern clown world. But ancap is the same clown world, flesh and soul. You have to go deeper, beyond -isms. And beyond a rehash of Paleoliberalism that inevitably leads to Bolshevism anyway, like it already does.
>>11029 Maybe you're right and it's too late to save the USA/PRC, but this doesn't mean that ancap will not happen on new frontiers in the future, for example if we're gonna colonize Mars, once the first stable settlements starts to be stable and self-sustained, with the distance from earth and governments and a whole empty planet it would be a new lawless frontier, other places where ancap could happen are small countries with a gov too small to care or even virtual spaces, for example the early internet was lawless.
>Think how the frontier and all "ancap" there evaporated once the railways were up and running and people pouring. Turns out, wherever you have people you will find enough folks to police other folks.
>But ancap is the same clown world, flesh and soul.
In ancap societies like the western frontier life is hard, only smart and capable people survives, such is the price of freedom but this also results in producing higly skilled and independent people(this is also how evolution works kind of), where the opposite happens in a non-ancap society where through welfare unfit and stupid people are allowed to bring everybody else down with them and you're forced not only to pay for their bullshit but also to be subjected to bullshit laws and regulations made "for your own good" cause the standard citizen to whom laws are targeted to is a retard.
Now it's true that an ancap Mars colony probably won't stay like that forever once more [stupid] people starts pouring in, just like the internet changed when the normalfags discovered it, this is why when you think of ancap you shouldn't think of an entire country like USA/PRC in the first place, instead you should think in terms of individuals or small groups of individuals that want to escape the modern slave-like life and this is possible either by doing it hidden from the gov(becoming a "criminal") or by going in countries that don't care that much about what you do or by exploiting rules(think of multiple passports, tax havens etc) or by looking for new and more free frontiers(why do you think i'm typing this on the darknet ;) ).
>>11045 >or example if we're gonna colonize Mars, once the first stable settlements starts to be stable and self-sustained, with the distance from earth and governments and a whole empty planet it would be a new lawless frontier
Until it is not a lawless frontier anylonger as people move in, stay unequal, divide into social strata and go the same shitto agen.
Think Iceland, so often praised as Ancappiest place in history. It was a lawless subartic Frontier populated by isolated families.
Until they were a frontier no longer, enough people moved in-bred for Sturlungs, the Big Men with Big Properties, to emerge, start dividing Iceland into their personal fiefdoms and sell their asses to the King of Norway their grandgrandfathers sailed away in the first place.
>bullshit laws and regulations made "for your own good" cause the standard citizen to whom laws are targeted to is a retard
Of course they are made to kill you as a competitor, being too overburdened with feeding violent proles to pose any risk to my oligarchal interests. I would do the same anyway, given the chance, we're all humans here.
Ancap is unstable because of compound interests of slight unequalities in ability and property snowballing eventually to go the usual stratified society we always see, because humans WILL use their power to fuck around and they WILL accumulate it in time. It snowballs slower when there are less people around, hence an illusion of working ancap in barely populated wilderness, but not a single example of ancap-like society in any densely populated region anywhere ever.
But you think in the right direction. You just adhere to a modern solution to a problem of modernity, so you'll solve nothing by ancap. You need to go deeper.
>>11049 >Of course they are made to kill you as a competitor, being too overburdened with feeding violent proles to pose any risk to my oligarchal interests.
If some wannabe lord comes and says that you now need to be subjected to his laws, since that's a violation of the NAP, you get your other fellow ancap that shares your desire of freedom and you kiss his ass, freedom is something you need to mantain. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
>Ancap is unstable in any densely populated region
Maybe that's not the way to go then, maybe we shouldn't have cities, with the internet and cryptocurrencies you don't even need to live close to exchange information/goods, cities are such an innatural way of living.
I say let's keep people sparse on our Mars colony and have a decentralized way to distribute services and goods, if you don't NEED the cities why would you have them?
Stratification of society is a biproduct of the way you structure the society, in an society explicitly ancap and with an ancap culture it would be more difficult for stratification to emerge.
>You just adhere to a modern solution to a problem of modernity, so you'll solve nothing by ancap. You need to go deeper.
Expand on that...
>>11061 >you get your other fellow ancap that shares your desire of freedom and you kiss his ass
Exactly, my man. Exactly. Just like in Iceland the Big Men won by kissing the ass of the King of Norway, so the previously free Icelanders kissed his ass too by Big Men proxy. Same as the aristocracy of Rome had to kiss Caesar's ass after he came with mountains of gold and personally loyal legions after 20 years of conquering Gallia. Same as even ancap-y Hellenic Poleis eventually stratified into who kissed Athenian/Spartan/Theban ass before Macedonians installed a Persian style tyranny over them, because there were mighty more Macedonians than Hellenes fighting them. Or how the tribal democracies of Germanics and Slavs dissolved into aristocracies then monarchies as their numbers grew from assimilating locals and taking their shit - in unequal ratios.
It is a law of numbers. The less people around, the ancap-y it gets. The more of them around - you get an East Asian bureaucracy at best.
>Maybe that's not the way to go then, maybe we shouldn't have cities, with the internet and cryptocurrencies you don't even need to live close to exchange information/goods, cities are such an innatural way of living.
I find it ironic that the Founding Fathers of the US espoused an ideal of small scale armed freemen farmers society. Small scale is the key. Unfortunately, a heavily decentralized and kinda free HRE got itself conquered and pushed like a bitch by a centralized tyrannical France. Whoever makes weapons on the largest scale, wins. And dictates what's up.
Modern 333+ million USA with sprawling megapoleis can't have freedom by design. Same as people in sparsely populated areas of the US or Russia become ancap-y or die/get fucked by ancap-y locals, but in the heavily populated areas they have the feudal ladder at best, collapsing Roman tyranny of oligarchs and unwashed proles at worst.
>I say let's keep people sparse on our Mars colony
Iceland problem. If you can get to the Mars, so can the others. And even if you go isolationist cannibals, it is a question of time and population before mounting inequalities of power dissolve your ancap. You will have Martian freemen in the deserts, and Martian poleis of tyranny. And the freemen, to preserve their way of life and properties, will have to band into something much akin to warring tribes of yore.
>Stratification of society is a biproduct of the way you structure the society
The Commies thought likewise. They failed. Society is a product of people (EVERYTHING in society and culture comes from the people, never around), and people are inherently unequal. Which leads to strata of abilities+properties=power.
>in an society explicitly ancap and with an ancap culture it would be more difficult for stratification to emerge
More difficult. Not impossible nor preventable. Both a fuming obese drunkard and a drugs free athlete die in the end, the former quicker, but both still will die.
>Expand on that...
Hans Herman-Hoppe hit the roof when he started expanding on natural aristocracies and HRE-like feudalism. He basically concluded ancap to be impossible and would like to revert to a working model of post-Roman Empire aristocracy, but with kewl tech now. "Europe of a thousand Liechtensteins" with free movement of people around. Unfortunately, one tyrannical USA/Russia will kick ass of a thousand Liecthensteins and take their shit.
So long as private individuals/groups can't compete with ordered tyrannies on inflicting violence, they will get their shit shoved and ancap conquered. AKA the private nukes problem.
>>11505 >Taxation is theft
This is true, but it's a form of theft which is necessary for the maintenance of a stable nation, so it's a justified type of theft. All that is required is to keep taxation to a minimum and avoid DA BIG GUBBERMENT.
>>11506 What if we make the government so small and minimal that we can reduce it to a local level.
What if we reduce it to the individual/family/community level.
And we end up with anarcho-capitalism :D
Problem with taxes is that you don't know how they're used, there's no transparency at all and in a big country they may be used on people you don't care hundreds of km from you.
>>11507 >we can reduce it to a local level
>we can reduce it to an individual level
Then you become fragmented into millions of tiny units which cannot individually pose a threat to those using the superior system of ethnostate. Even if millions of tiny units unite together, you can't make decisions or act fast enough to defend against an attack by an ethnostate.
>people you don't care hundreds of km from you
If they are members of your race and not race-traitors, then you should care about them. If you don't, then you yourself are a race-traitor.
That's all ignoring the fact that any form of anarchism leads to the creation of a government, since any shitty system like ancrap will get crushed by an organized country, even a shithole african country. You can stay in McDonaldstan and Walmartia and get shot up by niggers while we create hapa ethnostate.
>Then you become fragmented into millions of tiny units which cannot individually pose a threat to those using the superior system of ethnostate.
You overestimate the power that governments really have, the moment you have independent communities that can sustain themself, it would be really hard to fight them, look up the Afghanistan talibans guerrilla, and they are shitskins, imagine the kind of guerrilla westeners could do against an invader, with anonymous attacks on the centralized infrastrure of your ethnostate it would be impossible to mantain control, and since your community is independent you would not be damaged by lack of services/goods.
>yourself are a race-traitor
Race means nothing compared to family and local community, if you're the asukafag we already had this discussion. Anyway the bigger a state is the more it becomes unefficient, corrupted and tyrannical, your ethnostate is all of these negative things.
>>11509 >muh afghanistan
Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea. These were because the US was a democracy, not because of being a government. Democracy severely weakens a country because you always get a bunch of shitty "political parties" (i.e. special interest groups) who are fighting each other and making the military ineffective.
>Race means nothing
Race is just extended family. If you're a cumskin, I see your point of view; other cumskins are leftists, soyboys, cucks, roasties. But try to understand that even for the islamic shitskins, they can trust each other more than cumskins in USA can trust each other, because they are united through race and religion. Cumskins are fragmented and divided into opposing camps both controlled by jews, because the cumskins were retarded enough to let the jews in for the 9999th time.
>>11512 Don't black people like literally separate into tribes based on what side of the rode they were born on? How's that like an extended family? Asians assimilate into their culture but they don't feel a sense of loyalty to eachother they just feel an obligation to their "society". Chinese people will cheat eachother out of anything for money. Muslims fucking hate eachother over differences I can't even recognize and the line between them is about the same as the line between 2 given euro countries. lol come back with a better argument for why I should love my white brother a billion miles away who is nothing like me and wouldn't do anything for me if I needed it
>>11514 >come back with a better argument for why I should love my white brother a billion miles away who is nothing like me and wouldn't do anything for me if I needed it
I don't have one. I never claimed you should care about your race, I am simply stating reasons why I care about my race.
Cumskins are one of the most degenerate, shitty races in existence and I couldn't give a fuck if you balkanized into 10000000 different clans with no power whatsoever.
>>11512 >special interest groups) who are fighting each other and making the military ineffective.
This is the same on an authoritarian state, coupes d'etat are common and those kind of state are unstable, technology in the west is also different from the past or afghanistan, like you could really easily just pilot a drone with explosives from a distance right inside invader HQ and blow it up, i always asked myself why nobody already did it.
>race
I'm european, all europe is divided by old hatred, different cultures, different economic situations, different interests, like even inside my country each region has the same aforementioned differences, like even different cities hates eachother here and you tell me that just cause where both white(whatever that means) i should give a fuck about a french guy just cause he may have a similar race, doesn't work really well.
>>11514 All good examples.
>>11519 I'm not saying race doesn't matter at all, but this is the order of importance of human bonds
familial bonds
economic/social class bonds
city/village bonds
cultural bonds
and only then racial bonds
>I couldn't give a fuck if you balkanized into 10000000 different clans with no power whatsoever.
Do you REALLY think you have more power with a centralized government? Like think about it, the more government there is the LESS power you have and the MORE power has the government, it's in the name CENTRALIZED government, it means that power becomes centralized or in other words the local guys, aka you and me, have less. And ask yourself how that power is used, to fight useless war that don't benefit you, to waste money on welfare that will benefit people that will vote against you, and in an authoritarian state is even worse cause the power, the taxes and resorces, are gonna just go to the people in power.
We lived in an anarchist way since the dawn of time and seem like we forgot how to do it.
>>11521 >fight useless war that don't benefit you, to waste money on welfare that will benefit people that will vote against you, and in an authoritarian state is even worse cause the power, the taxes and resorces, are gonna just go to the people in power.
Any of that only happens if you have a shitty democratic society which can easily be influenced by controlling the media.
It also only happens when your race is the most cucked in the world, listening to TV and reading newspapers like they're the word of God or something.
It only happens when your race is so retarded that you let the jews into your country hundreds of times (after your ancestors have just finished kicking them out).
White people are true cucks, and that is the only reason why any of that happens.
>>11521 also
>We lived in an anarchist way since the dawn of time
No. Anarchism is what there was in the beginning. Then, government formed because it's simply superior to anarchism. Perhaps you don't like it, but none of that matters, because might makes right in this world.
If anarchism was so awesome and good and could defeat every organized nation and government, why don't you start your own anarchist paradise along with the rest of the 0chan, lainchan and leftypol larpers?
>>11523 Zero arguments.
>>11524 >Then, government formed because it's simply superior to anarchism.
Until few centuries ago, most of humanity still lived in anarchy(de facto), in small villages, isolate communities, islands, then globalization came and well yeah that made the world really better amirite?
>If anarchism was so awesome and good and could defeat every organized nation and government, why don't you start your own anarchist paradise along with the rest of the 0chan, lainchan and leftypol larpers?
To be anarchist you need to be independent first, i'm working everyday towards that goal, i'm also have in mind to set up an anarchsit network sooner or later. Are you a brainlet thinking that i'm a leftist? Anarcho-capitalism goes against all the left represents.
>>10916 >i can explain more in depth
ahh, say I wanna provide medical insurance and hospitals but only for a specific local minority with immunity to some illness, or I want to provide a bus route but only for individuals that belong to a certain protection cartel. Is this legit business in ancap society or is someone going to try and oppress my human rights?
>>12303 In an ancap society that would be perfectly fine i guess.
As long as you're not directly hurting other you're not breaking the NAP, some interpretations of the NAP would say that even indirect hurting others counts as breaking the NAP if done maliciously though, for example if you give ALL the medicine in existence to a group specifically to leave other group without it to make them die, on purpose, then you it may count as breaking the NAP, another example is pollution.
>>12306 As long as no one is a passive aggressive sociopath shit will be fairly Ok. But, corruption always triumphs and where there is no rule, some utter cunt is going to use the absence of the rule to gain advantage. How can I destroy that cunt's life and make him pay for his corruption if I am bound by the NAP? The only way is for me to find some loophole in the system and passively watch him suffer through my own nasty, divisive actions. Now I've created the feedback loop that ruins the whole system, haven't I?
>>12311 A good way to counter malicious individuals in a society with a loose or non-existant government would be a trust based system, or in other words..."a social score" ok wait a second i know it sounds bad, but if you think about it the only thing that makes the social score system bad and abusable is the centralization of power to the state, if you create a decentralized social score or trust score that is not controlled by anyone then it can't be used as a tool of control and it can be instead used to isolate malicious individuals that fucks people other, my grandfather used to tell me that in his really small rural village everything was based on trust, the baker would drop fresh break at your home and you didn't need to pay, you could pay at the end of the month, or you could buy things at credit cause everybody knew everybody and if you were untrustworthy everybody knew it, so to counter bad apples in a ancap society i would setup a system whereif you do something bad you lose the trust of the communityand you can't do business anymore, this makes abusing the system risky without requiring laws and punishment.
I'm not sure i answered your concern correctly sorry.
Of course the trust system needs to be constructed in a way that is impartial and hard to manipulate, for example if something starts to spread rumors about you or accuses you of a crime and you're innocent then it could be a problem.
I don't have all the answers sorry again.
>>12314 <Good Boy Points
Ummm cool. so that's what the block-chain could actually be good for. Fuck currency, lets do a block-chain social score. Maybe we can even get rich off the IPO.
>>10912 >The non-aggression principle states that you should not attack others but you can still defend yourself and your property.
So basically this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellogg%E2%80%93Briand_Pact You cannot enforce a policy of peace without some kind of centralized force keeping the people in check. There is nothing preventing Bob from killing Jim and taking over his farm unless Officer Sal is around brandishing his pistol. You mentioned these "private entities" that you want to have regulate the services required by society. My question is who prevents one of these organizations from naturally evolving into its own country by monopolizing? The entire reason governments became centralized to begin with was because when man first settled down in a village, there was one man who offered some service the rest of the villagers depended on. Maybe he knew how to build a house, or grow crops, or lead people. The people depended on him so he naturally took a position of power, beginning a system in which a higher entity offered services to the common man. This is what would happen with these private companies--unless there was some force to regulate it.
I really love this whole idea, but it's impractical and places to much confidence in humanity, a species that has a knack for fucking things up and being at times idiotic. People aren't smart enough to understand the value of the non-aggression principle. I could maybe see it working if we agreed to be ruled by a computer that was somehow programed to perfectly keep these private entities in check without growing corrupt, but that is an entirely different argument.
> The non-aggression principle states that you should not attack others but you can still defend yourself and your property.
Can I still kill Jews under ancap? If the NAP doesn't apply to them, I'm all for anarcho-capitalism.
>>12405 >You cannot enforce a policy of peace without some kind of centralized force keeping the people in check.
>two seconds later
>I really love this whole idea, but
Nice try FBI.
>There is nothing preventing Bob from killing Jim and taking over his farm unless Officer Sal is around brandishing his pistol.
It's called reality. The """solution""" is the matrix.
>>12405 >pic
>casually "i am right its this simple morons"
>first paragraph does nothing to explain merit of state other than "hurr durr i am the emporer me ruling you is a GOOD thing trust me goyim"
>There is nothing preventing Bob from killing Jim and taking over his farm unless Officer Sal is around brandishing his pistol
Except for Adam, Chuck and Don and others, who formed a mutual defense pact with Jim, (being neighbors, each other's customers, members of the local community board, and Don's daughter is being courted by Chuck's son), who make it clear that if Bob (who must be new to the area), or any other motherfucking cocksucker who aggresses against the property or person of anyone who signed up for the defense pact, will be wounded, displayed, and slowly burned alive in the town square as a warning to any other newcomers not to do that shit.
>>13986 bob is retarded, proper posture should be hiring some mercs and taking all property he doesn't possess by killing authority governing it and then creating republic to suppress greedy merchants and customers like jim and officer sal who in return waged war on onwership
Bob is doubly retarded, because Adam, Chuck, Don, Ed, Frank, George, Harry, Ivan, Jack, Karl, Larry, Mark, Ned, Oscar, Phillip, Quentin, William, Xander, and Zeus created as part of their self-defense pact a group of infiltrators that would hit key infrastructure points in Bob's empir... I mean, (((republic))), that would bring things to a screaming, shitting, pissing, vomiting, bleeding halt.
Holy fuck There's so many dumb ass nazis and even dumber lolberts in this fucker.
Capitalism is garbage and will ultimately end in monopoly with out the intervention of the government. Imagine people getting shot in the street because they bought huggies over depends or Coca-Cola exploiting a local town in Argentina by forcing them to pay protection money to the company.
Nazism is autistic because people should be free. All people. People do not act the way they do because of some inherent force with in them, rather, people behave and tend to act how they do by the existence of material forces.
Immigrants do not exist because "brown people are dumb and nasty" rather immigration is the cause of US imperialism and intervention in, for example, south America. Destabilization of these countries causes people to, understandably, seek refuge in places where they wont end up being hunted down in the street.
Look at the war on drugs; This has done nothing but drive people out of their native countries into the united states. Also after NAFTA passed capital flight from the united states into Mexico pushed people out of their native lands displacing them and leaving them with no where to go or call home.
>>14074 How old are you?
>>14082 >The immigrants are low IQ r-strategists
This, the main issue with communism and to an extent equal human rights is that it encourages r-selection over K-selection.
>>14074 >Capitalism is garbage and will ultimately end in monopoly with out the intervention of the government.
It's exactly the opposite, capitalism is the best economic system ever invented cause it gives the individual choice through competition, monopolies happens cause of the government that gives subsidies and special contracts to particular companies(example: the telecommunication industry) and also cause the gov enforces stuff like intellectual property and other regulations that makes competition more difficult, without the gov it would just be individuals making choices based on their needs, perfectly meritocratic and really easy for a new small company to enter a market and do competition.
>Immigrants do not exist because "brown people are dumb and nasty" rather immigration is the cause of US imperialism and intervention in
Immigrants come cause gov gives them welfare retard, without gov only immigrants that can make themselves useful would be able to stay.
>War on drugs
Another example of how the gov is inefficient and our enemy, there should be no regulations, the market should regulate itself, regulations causes more harm than what they try to solve
Also fuck off to bunkerchan filthy commie :D no free gibs for you here.
Propertarianism is the way to go. It's the only form of "arianism" that respects the commons and enforces law with a science. Secession and a new constitution will likely be the only peaceful way forward, if not it will be a decisive war. So far this is the only solution I've seen on the right that actually tries to tackle the problem of parasitism and a degenerating society. All the rest of the old rightwingers just complain and keep giving ground to leftists. A war would be easy for the right to win. The problem would be that no one knows what happens after or what to do after said war. We need keep building consensus on what we should rebuild and what law to enforce.
Propertarianism rejects equality and adopts reciprocity. The golden rule of the West and a growing consensus among the New Right.
>>14101 >It's exactly the opposite, capitalism is the best economic system ever invented cause it gives the individual choice through competition, monopolies happens cause of the government that gives subsidies and special contracts to particular companies
If you can't name an instance of capitalism where this did not happen you can't claim that this isn't an inherent part of capitalism.
>>16289 There is nothing you can do as one person. You need to organize and convince as many "convince-able" people as you can. It used to be that Right-wingers were highly divided and could only on agree on what they hated (lgbt, anti-white double standards, degeneracy). Now we understand the science on why that is, and it can be boiled briefly down to respecting Reciprocity. That is why consensus is starting to build on the right while on left gets more progressive and racially collectivist.
I am not the greatest speaker on this matter like the youtube channel above (a better explanation). I would recommend a decent understanding and application of Propertarianism, recommend it to others. I heard a new constitution will be finished soon and will be hosting questions and critiques by common people on some livestream eventually (Sadly the most efficient way to inform and engage the masses). All it takes is a few high IQ people at a bar and Victorian wigs. ;)
As long as you respect Western rule of law you should be good to go, as Propertarian rule just expands it (by measuring all disputes as property disputes). You'd be able to measure value lost in the commons by migration, factory pollution of a local river, lies in news media, fraudulent business practices, etc, and you'd be able to recoup damages and enforce the law. It's the best alternative that tries to understand why the West was great (Rule of Law) and how to preserve it as long as possible. In order to avoid lawless chaos after the war/collapse we need to tell as many people as possible. We don't need armed men with utopian dreams. We need consensus (we all agree on the plan) and a plan.
This is a thread for discussion and critic about anarcho-capitalism, please keep it civil and on topic :)
Anarcho-capitalism is a political philosophy and school of anarchist thought that advocates the elimination of centralized state dictum in favor of self-ownership, private property and free markets.
Free market
Transaction between individuals are conducted on a free market regulated only by offer and demand, this is made possible by cryptocurrencies and tokenization of assets.
Decentralization
The current centralized approach to governments leads to corruption, lobbyism, harms innovation and leads to huge amounts of wasted resources, we should switch preferably to a stateless society with decentralized public systems where individuals govern themselves.
Private property
Individual private property is at the center of the anarcho-capitalist ideology, instead of being given rights by an entity above you, you directly own your body and your capital.
Public services
In an anarcho-capitalist society public services are either handled by private entities or work in a decentralized way.
Non-aggression principle
The non-aggression principle states that you should not attack others but you can still defend yourself and your property.
Resources:
Anarcho-capitalism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
Austrian School - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
Self-ownership - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-ownership
Non-aggression principle - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle
~Taxation is theft~