Are ancaps a real thing or is it just a meme? I refuse to believe these people really exist

Are ancaps a real thing or is it just a meme? I refuse to believe these people really exist.

Other urls found in this thread:







Yeah they're real.

It's a strawman in a .jpg file.

Ben jij er een?

Except nearly all of them are plausible scenarios in a pure anarcho-capitalist society.


Yes. Debate me.

Well, given that ancap memes are extreme scenarios for humorous purposes, you are correct. There are very few people in real life who reflect the Ebin ancap may-mays.

There are plenty of people who are moderately right-leaning libertarians, though.

Which one ITT is plausible?

Are these just random colors or do each of them represent a different type of anarchism? I only know about ancaps and ancoms.

Hoeveel ancaps ken je in Nederland?

Ken je toevallig iemand die in Amsterdam West allemaal 'belasting is diefstal' stickers loopt te plakken?

anarcho primitivism is also a thing, kinda cool actually but unrealistic to implement.

Speak american u terroist

These probably

of course they are real

you can hire a private police force
all the land is owned already, and people aren't autistic about it.
spreading a virus is against the NAP

That's not ancap, that's regular states

>people are naturally corruptible so we shouldn't concentrate all power in the hands of few

Why do people always argue with strawmen instead of real ancap arguments?


answer my question pls

0 and no

>who enforces the NAP

hoe is het dan om in je eentje ancap te zijn?

Each of them represents a different type of anarchism.

Indeed, we are real
It's the most ethical and utilitarian system conceivable
Lay off the strawman memes and pick up a book and you'll reach the same conclusion

So a private police force enforcing the NAP is impossible, but you completely trust the state police force we got right now? What's the difference?

>if you don't personally know any ancaps it means there are no ancaps

The only objection I have to anarcho-capitalism is the name. It just asks for ironic shitposting. Call yourself something else. Be an an-cap at heart but call yourself something else when you want people to take you seriously. Same goes for my flag.

This is the dumb meme and circular logic that ancap retards take

>there is no state
>but theres this NAP
>and people protect it
>but not really, those people are "uncorruptable" because if they do slide, the others will over run them somehow because I said so and the NAP muh NAP take a NAP

We can't because we aren't euphoric enough

I was here fapping and shit posting years ago when you same autists were all libertarians

Buckteeth guy is real. Colbert Report did a piece on him

>Are ancaps a real thing or is it just a meme? I refuse to believe these people really exist.
Yes they are real.
This is how ancap think, I will explain with an analogy:

>An children want to eat an entire chocolate bar.
>his mom say no, because of the bad stuff that will happen to him if he eats the entire chocolate bar.
>kid knows the consequences and still wants to eat the chocolate bar and wishes he didnt needed to ask his mom
>the mom is the state and the kid is the anarchocapitalist.

The problem is that the bad points of eating chocolate are simple to see and etc.. But real life dangers are more suble or more agressive, or harder to see.

>Anarcho Feminism
this can't be real

Je zou toch in een soort ancap community moeten zitten? Al is het een facebook groep.

Doe je aan enige vorm van activisme?

>you can hire a private police force
Can't they just pay more than you do?

Yeah, what's the difference? If you have someone with the monopoly on "lawful" use of force to enforce the NAP, how does it differ from a centralized state sending their police? Because it would be many different companies doing it? Wouldn't those companies just fight each other and their enforcement of the NAP vary between the various spheres of influence, like they were states?

I believe it is more of a "Who watches the Watchmen" type of deal. They either fight to the death while offering protection for a fee to those in their vicinity (like a regular state does) or they just join together and take over everything.

>companies will totally take it upon themselves to invest and make valid and safe products to use
>if it turns out they're actually BAD products you can just hire a mercenary to kill the bad company that sold you a dangerous product that hurt you
>its totally better than the regulative requirements, moral implications are fool proof

People wouldn't want to break the NAP because they don't want to face the consequences, why is this so hard to understand?

Is it possible to sensibly discuss ethics without intent?

>no one could possibly be so corrupt or potentially get paid off to the point the abandon moral implications and just fucking do it
>corruption is impossible in this system, just don't buy their shit

I call myself libertarian in polite company, but the term has been bastardized in ways this board is highly aware of.
I agree that "anarcho-" is an immediate turnoff for most, but it won't stop me from jumping into the strawmeme threads

>I'm too stupid to survive
>Government is like your parents, they always know best
Yeah this is retarded. Politicians are invariably seeking to expand their own power and wealth at your expense.
Likening the institution to mom and dad is incredibly naive.

This nigger believes in it

good shit

>having political views means you must be an activist


because an ancap thinks a company that makes plastic products will take it upon themselves to keep dangerous chemicals like free monomer like formaldehyde or phenol low for consumer consumption.

And if you somehow DIDN'T know that their products had dangerous chemicals that could harm you you should have just somehow known and just don't buy their products even though you've probably developed cancer and heavy nerve damage as a result.

Damnit you fucking sexist

bedankt turkije

Honestly though, why do you expect people to act morally? And the private police thingy, how does that work? Why can't the richest people in town buy the private police and turn it into an occupation army? Why pay us money at all when they can force us into slavery? These are legit questions, I'm undecided.

True, the libertarian movement has been hijacked in America. Btw the strawmeme threads are from Trumpbabies probably, seeing as the elections are close.


Bad companies go out of business, is that so difficult to wrap your head around?
It won't come down to hiring killers to kill everyone, it's a simple matter of buying a better product and diverting profits to trustworthy firms.
Have you taken any basic econ courses? Ever buy anything for yourself? This isn't complicated

What prevents people from violating NAP in an An-Cap society?

or a better example

>this product is sterile right?
>yes I wouldn't lie to you
>oh fuck I got a nasty infection, this obviously wasn't sterile *fuck I'm dead*
>it was totally sterile, I'm not lying

sorry for being retarded but someone explain these ancap meme thingies and why they're so fucked up

Yes, ama.

Whoa man burning his side of the tree violates the NAP. Better to use a chainsaw or sneak some poison into its roots.

>Bad companies go out of business, is that so difficult to wrap your head around?
You somehow have this magic paradigm that when bad shit happens EVERYONE magically turns face and stops buying that shit even though thats obviously not true at all. Because in your world corruption is impossible and back room deals, plans and shit don't exist.
Even though there are tons of activities and companies today that are inherently bad, its only the current system of laws that actually holds them accountable. In an ancap society there are no laws, obligations, moral spectrums to follow. There is no set of standards to adhere to and consumers have no way of protecting themselves otherwise.

The same mechanisms that prevent it today
The difference is replacing social contract with private contract, resulting in unanimous adherence to the rules and consequences.
Essentially, you live in a community, you subscribe to their laws.


Also apparently, money laundering, fraud, and any kind of money related scheme doesn't exist either.

they're absurd stories of anarcho capitalism

not too far from the truth t b h

because they're anarcho-capitalist so companies become states in and of themselves and so do people so they commit war for inane shit as it would in the real world

I'd throw all my tactical thumb nukes at my neighbor for annoying me.

except theres no obligation to complete or adhere to those contracts.

The law today says that if you sign a legal contract you're obligated (by law) to adhere to it
without the law and without the law enforcement and the justice system you'd get scammed out of a contract and lose everything. But don't worry, an ancap will say that was your fault, you should have known he'd secretly plot to scam you, and you don't buy his shit anymore

That's the joke. Self interest and social unification leads to tribalistic feudalism and more sophisticated forms of government.

but this isnt anarchism then? What separates a small community from a big government? the size?


>no just don't buy their shit and they'll go away

exactly thats the irony of it

Fuck, they already do that in the states. As they wheel your ass back in the ER they are having you fill out paperwork

And they are all hilarious.

You are a life saver.

>they always know best
Never said that, and actually this would be communism.

>35 years old neet, live with his parents
>his parents tell him to do buillshit courses and stuff, because on their opinion it would be better for the guy
>the guy cant do nothing, because of the situation he is, and actually the parents are actually trying to help him
>all this just make harder to him leave the situation he is on, creating a vicious circle.

This is the other extreme and also bad.

You really are dense. All of it is theft but it is done under the guise of a business like the mafia. If you don't pay for protection, we fuck your shit up because you are "stealing" a service.

nice spam thread faggot

Theres stories of a guy who was dying via bleeding internally and a private hospital wouldn't take him in because he didn't have an insurance card in his wallet. So the ambulance had to drive some 45 minutes to a public hospital where the guy died on the drive over. This was before the law requiring hospitals to take in any patient in emergency need

And global corporations, which have no pressure to belong to any community?

No I mean thats the point, the ancap meme is somehow the consumer is the ultimate justicator as some sort of mob justice takes hold and if you magically convince an entire populus to just "not buy their shit" they go away


>don't buy the mafia protection, they'll go away

anarcho-capitalism: the irrational belief that getting rid of regulations that prevent monopoly will magically protect people from monopoly

Good! This is how the system should work! Totally fair with no downsides what so ever

post it

>Bad companies go out of business, is that so difficult to wrap your head around?

How are you supposed to know that a product is bad? Food is easier to figure out sometimes but even then, what is your metric in an AnCap society that something is bad? Is it hit pieces on privately owned newspapers? Is it a privatized inspection company? What if a product is good but it pollutes the environment? What is my recourse? Do I abandon all that I'm doing with my life to try and take on a powerful company in privately owned courts? What is there to do, as a single consumer or small community without legal representation, against the desires of companies that have no obligation to appeal to you as your voice means nothing and you can't "just like stop buying their products lol!" because you and whatever people you can rally to your cause are a small share of the market? What is stopping corruption? The fact that everyone will magically stop doing business with you? What is stopping a complete monopoly on markets? Grass-roots out of the garage business offering a better service than big corporations? Why? How? Why go through so many of these hoops to justify a philosophy that hasn't really been tried because it simply cannot work in the real world unless it has a 100% adhesion rate and every single citizen is an incorruptible paragon of sanity?

You should have known all that was bad, its your fault

just stop buying their shit

Even if they 'just fucking do it' that doesn't mean there wouldn't be any punishment that would come out of their action. Anarcho-capitalist do now say that corruption is impossible. A person who works at a company could secretly steal money from it, that is corruption. However if they were to be found out and exposed they would more than likely get fired. With a government you would have a kangaroo court where at the end of it all nothing would happen to the corrupt bureaucrat and they would have still have their job.

I know most of these but the 3 blue ones, I know the darker blue is transhumanism, which one are the others?

if you're some autist reading up on all this anarchy shit, it all seems very rational and utilitarian; qualities severely lacking in the genpop.

sky blue =individualism
blue-green= egoism

I don't really want to get into a deep discussion but I think that there is some merit to Ancaps in that the pursuit of their goal even if not ultimately unattainable can have positive consequences specially in a country where the love of bureaucracy and statism are so ingrained, I don't believe in an Ancap society but I like that they exist as a counterpoint to red anarchists and socialists.

If you get scammed by fraudster, you will just stop using his services. That'll teach him

My specific brand of National Socialism hasn't been tried before!


I love this maymay keep posting

Someone post that picture of a real ancap meetup pls

In an ancap society, private properties would replace states.

Have you ever heard of escrow services?

Saying that the only way to enforce contracts is with people with guns is depressingly short-sighted and narrow-minded.

Someone could literally buy-out all the private police forces and conscript them into their own army of warrior-bandit-merchants.

Requesting a usa version of the face

The only reason why ancap has such little traction on Cred Forums... is because Cred Forums has enormous shortcomings in understanding basic economics.

It's a terrible achilles heel... as economics is one of the most pervasive and deeply felt avenues by which the government intervenes in your personal life.

If Cred Forums spent a fraction of the energy it uses screaming at da joos, and directed it at the Fed and fiat currency... that's an actually tangible goal (versus genocide) that would change things enormously for the better

Who do you buy the "rights to oxygen" from?

Whoever has more recreational nukes

if only the common people weren't so weak and imperfect, they would comprehend the sublime perfection of our sacred ideology (Communism, Anarcho-Capitalism, or whatever other retarded thing you believe in goes here)

What makes them implausible OUTSIDE a pure anarcho-capitalist society? Why do some of things occur already?

no ns claims this.

The thing is you don't need to understand capitalism for you to benefit enormously and unconsciously from it in your everyday life.

Our claim is that unchaining the market economy from the state will result in even greater good.

Opponents' claim is that it can't work, because the gov't told me so when it indoctrinated me at an early age in a gov't-ran and funded institution.

transhumanist ones are my favorites desu

Thanks for the template.

>recreational nukes
Are you implying that people inject u-235 or pl-241?

They're naive teenagers who somehow believe they would survive thrive alone in the jungle with 1-2 of their friends. They imagine living in a steam powered treehouse with cannons using gunpowder derived from mashed up leaves




You don't realize it but you've essentially defined the true nature of the state - as a territorial monopoly on the use of force.

It's not something that can be "bought out" with money in a voluntary exchange... only insane quantities of violence and bloodshed.
e.g. Secession and the American Civil War

Think about it... if a free market for the provision of safety and law and order existed, with multiple competing agencies... if any one party acted to secure a monopoly by starting to buy out the competition, the other parties would simply raise their price to extract as much profit as possible from the scenario... this would ramp up until it became impossibly expensive to secure an absolute monopoly. The cost overhead of the monopolization attempt would make it unable to compete with any remaining competitors who would undercut and steal market share like crazy.

The only way absolute monopolies can exist (and have existed in history) is with the power of coercion of the state, backed by violence.

fighting is more expensive than arbitration, transparency and independence become the most valuable business attributes in a completely decentralized society, so it is in fact most likely that rights enforcement agencies would try to concede to as many things as possible while trying to maintain as many customers as possible making common law and basic moral and ethical notions enforced. rights enforcement agencies who try to enforce niche ideologies and ethics will have a harder time enforcing the rights of their customers in regions with heavy populations.

so essentially the market would regulate a majority rule on law better than democracy ever could and populations that disagree with each other would move away from each other, being that rights enforcement agencies function as services populations subscribe to rather than being a regional dominion.

(((muh economics)))

kys kike


This is by far the funniest, holy fuck my sides


No, you detonate them (on your private property of course) just to watch them and enjoy it.

That's uncharitable.

If anything the more serious thought put into it aligns somewhat with reactionary/fascist thought, where everyone would agree that a government has "achieved equilibrium" after going through great upheavals (wars, genocides, migrations and dispossessions).
The problem is that serious ancaps get the idea that society should always be in that state of post-flux, while also somehow never violating the NAP, which is impractical.
Under ancap logic, "kingdom" would be valid, but serfs and vassals would have the "right" to reject being in a kingdom. When all of the world is contained in kingdoms (or tribes), that means there's no way of surviving without swearing fealty to a king (the "property owner").
But then you're at the point of having a state again, where neither the monarch nor the subjects had a choice in deciding the state they were born into. The only "free market" way out of that is something like the warring states/sengoku period of Japan, except everyone would be Ronin looking to serve a new warlord property owner to overthrow the current Shogun for all eternity.

I want to hear more of the exploits of the Royal Burger King army and its fight against the McLegions.

Norgay, if you don't understand the basic principles of economics you won't understand politics.

Really brings it home at the end


you know all of these have no basis in ancap philosophy and are straw man arguments right?


>fighting is more expensive than arbitration

It's much more profitable though. And arbitration is only possible when both sides have force behind them. Else it's just one side dictating terms.

>transparency and independence become the most valuable business attributes in a completely decentralized society

Wrong. Not everyone everywhere was or is a comfortable post-industrial person enjoying the over-ripe fruits of westernised state-capitalism.
Nor is everyone concerned with ideals that appeal to economically right-minded people.

In any society, everyone has to put survival above everything, and the mass of morally weak people put their own gain above any ideals. The most important "business attributes" is to be able to provide people with safety and a means of making a living. Generally those things have entailed military service and/or agricultural or artisanal work.
If people can get something for nothing, through voting or positioning themselves as part of a manufactured "favoured class", then they will.

>rights enforcement agencies who try to enforce niche ideologies and ethics will have a harder time enforcing the rights of their customers in regions with heavy populations.
>and populations that disagree with each other would move away from each other, being that rights enforcement agencies function as services populations subscribe to rather than being a regional dominion.
>so essentially the market would regulate a majority rule on law better than democracy ever could
>a majority rule on law

You're right from a certain point of view on the rule of law question, but what you're failing to realise thanks to the ingrained belief in the supremacy human rationality is that majority rule is inherently chaotic and violates the "NAP" in any practical sense.
Populations disagreeing with each other "subscribing to differing rights enforcement agencies" are in normal parlance called ideological civil wars. Part 2 next

actually before 2011 Cred Forums had anarcho threads all the time, the reason Cred Forums is a horrible place to discuss economics and polsci in general is because it has been taken over by paid shills who derail every sensible and directed the board culture to be nothing but pure shitposting 24/7, it's actually pretty much a site wide phenomenon.

that's why I usually don't pay attention to these ancap ad hom threads when they pop-up.

if I want to discuss polsci I go to infinity liberty or infinity Cred Forums or /phi/ or chumchan liberty or even sub reddits have better discourse.

Its just memes and jokes user


yeah I know but I was responding to op. I find this meme vary funny.

It is
t. ex anarchist

Every fucking post by this flag, every single one.

>Bad companies go out of business

apple is doing just fine

what do you do when
a) a neighboring nation invades you
b) a neighboring nation funds terrorism against you for some reason
c) you run out of oil/some reasource and face economic collapse

Use your All Purpose Invasion and Terrorism Insurance that you pay a monthly due on.

Saying they will "move away from each other" is something libertarian theorists fail to address, either to gloss over the reality of scarcity of land and relocation costs, or because they are too tied up in their thought experiment society to even think that it might turn out to be "cheaper" and more "efficient" and in accord with human desires to just exterminate or forcibly drive out the parties with whom they disagree with.
Given as well the realities involved in continuing a society in reality and not in the pages of books, all it takes is one military campaign by the anti-Ancap forces for the ancap society to be replaced with a state that can bring about more military force than the ancap side (assuming either of the two forces winning in the "free market of ideas backed by guns" are actually Ancap at all).

I just read something earlier today that talked about how the classical liberal/libertarian paradigm of the individual as the atomic unit does not function in reality, mainly because we are led to believe for egalitarian or economically autistic/manipulative reasons that all social associations are of the same nature (contractual), and the inference drawn from that being (similar to how feminists want women in the army because "we're all the same") that an NAP-following cult of homosexual men who abandon all technology is somehow going to "compete" and "out-compete" an anti-NAP traditional society, because of the theoretical superiority of ancap ideas in a theoretical framework that relies on incorrect assumption.
Those incorrect assumptions namely being:

>that human beings are primarily rational
>that human beings will ignore the rational and instinctual solution to scarcity in the face of others' wealth and refrain from stealing
>that it's not worth considering that scarcity of resources leads to that situation constantly
>that the ownership of property is in a moral or legal sense primarily a semi-arbitary social construct

>satire is just memes and jokes user

Correction and addendum to the last bit:

The last point is that ancaps will ignore the partially socially constructed nature of ownership of property.

one is wrong
>t. used to be a anarchist faggot in hs

Lin to the article I was talking about.


I use private law society

t. Hoppe

EMT for a private ambulance company here, this already happens with every call.

yeah, i used to be one, then i grew up

is being an ex anarchist one of the steps to being redpilled?

Yernaz pls

You have to be kidding.

Where does that happen?
Who uses the service? Wouldn't it be smarter to have like a "user ID" that people register for beforehand?

The strawman you are posting is certainly a meme.

I thought this was a necessary (temporary) stop in the dialectic of political thought.

>real arguments
those are the real arguments, they're as real as they get because ancrapistanism has no arguments. An ideology built out of historically outdated thought, and economics. The thinkers are also just as fucking stupid as you'd think they are.

When the 8 year old neighbor girl trespasses on your property under the guise of selling you cookies, so you wipe their house off the face of the Earth with the 5,000 pounds of plastic explosives you buried under their house.

Anarchism is fascinating, its like the destruction phase in nietzschean philosophy, it opens up your mind and cleans the way to build your own path, anarchism is the smart teenager that realizes that every social concept is made up, but even though you can, you shouldn't stop there yet.

Why do you think it's impossible for defense to be privately provided? Also, is your claim that somehow states are immune to foreign invasion and terrorist attacks?

Ditto for resource shortage/economic collapse... that never happens to nation states or it's handled well by nation states in your opinion?

The entire point of capitalism is that it makes the most efficient possible use of scarce resources. Let's talk oil. If oil supply begins to drop off, prices will rise, energy becomes more and more costly. The larger profit incentive means more entrepreneurs will focus their efforts on dealing with the issue... whether it's enhancing efficiency or developing new sources (shale and tar sands, fracking, arctic drilling, etc.). Also, alternative markets for the supply of energy will become viable (cost-competitive) and you get a new arms race of people trying figure out solutions.

This is how free markets work. Government (centrally-planned) solutions will never be as efficient, and consistently deliver the opposite of what's intended. e.g. communist countries and famine, war on poverty, war on terror, public education + govt subsidization of higher ed, Obamacare, etc. etc.

I bet you couldn't even present the basic ideas behind ancap if I asked.

examples were reason a state might form from ancap

the oil one in particular I meant a scarcity situation where the most/only viable solution is invading another country for their resources.

remember when youre feeling mad to think about the NAP. were you just about to violate the NAP? okay dont.


not. an. argument.

Ancap is the consistent and ultimate expression of libertarian principles.

Give me an example of an "outdated thought" please. History is actually incredibly illuminating when viewed through the lens of ancap. All the economic cycles, all the rise and fall of empires, the transition from loose communities of hunter-gatherers to centralized states; it all makes sense.

Do you actually think economics is unimportant to political thought??

Can you even name some ancap thinkers? Let alone have debated them or rebutted their ideas. I doubt it.

it was at a time when i had nothing to do but browse the internet, ask me anything, in the end it will be you who doesn't understand whats wrong about ancap, you look at only what good about it but cant comprehend the bad, of which there is ALOT of

>Why do you think it's impossible for defense to be privately provided?
Because a coalition of private militaries will never be as efficiently organised as a single state military, and so will lose the war.

Bubba Jamal's Budget Defence will use T-34s and rusty AKs, and Mr Worthington's Luxury Armaments will have Apaches and Leopards. When the neighbouring state invades you suddenly have two private armies that cannot share ammunition, are each vying for theatre command, and all use different tactics and are only there voluntarily to protect their interests.

It doesn't fucking work.

Ancap fails the only test that matters in international relations: "can I stop the guy next to me from taking my shit." Ergo, it is a joke enjoyed by university hipsters who probably never considered what would happen if you tried to fire an AK cartridge from an AR platform.

What you don't understand is that it doesn't have to be perfect. I'll happily take all the bads you can throw at me over the state.

If you come away from ancap without a burning hatred of the state and actually believe it's net positive for human welfare instead of the most obscene parasite of all time, then I doubt you understood much of anything.

inb4 ancap says it must be worldwide and it turns into communism 2.0

Hardest I've keked in a while

nah i much prefer an 1800's american government before the Federal reserve existed, at a time when a super power rose from nothing because its policies worked

and listen, all ideology have their bad's, but Ancap has ALOT more bad than good m8, there is no such thing as a perfect ideology, but so i will take the next best thing

also you clearley only care about the ecnomic side and completly ignore other subjects such as the most vital one, DEFENSE

and even still the economic side sucks, take the Free Rider problem and Rent-Seeking as an example

yeah that's pretty much their answer to that every time

>it is physically impossible for private armies to cooperate because of this strawman example I just cherrypicked from my ass

Let's look at a time when private forces were actually the dominant factor in warfare. The renaissance period, when the most feared forces on the battlefield were mercenaries. Look up the Swiss mercenaries (Switzerland as a country did not exist. Each canton provided companies of militia which were then pooled and hired out to the highest bidder) and the landsknecht (similar model).

All the most militarily successful empires in history fully embraced trade and capitalism. Wealth and military might are integrally connected. It's a very suspect idea that an ancap society couldn't afford a competitive level of defense to states.

Yeah. They're not as stupid as anarcho-communists (yes, THEY FUCKING EXIST), so I'll give them that. But they're still retarded.

That analogy doesnt work because the parent-child relationship is fundemntally different than the adult-adult relationship. Most anarcho-capitalists would assert a certain legal right a parent has to control their child.

Exactly how the parent-child relationship fits into voluntaryist ethics is actually a point of debate between voluntaryists/ancaps.

Can there ever be an ancap meme thread without people getting butthurt and trying to refute MEMES?


Yeah, and when the next major conflict is fought with pikes I'm sure that your renaissance-era logistics experience will be applicable.

You dumb cunt.

The question of private provision of defense has been addressed ad nauseum by ancappers (Murphy, Hoppe, Friedman,etc.). To rule out a market solution when it comes to military matters is hilarious when you think about how grossly bloated and inefficient and wasteful the US military-industrial complex is.

Freerider problem (myth propagated by the mainstream economists to defend the existence of the state) and rent-seeking (almost always made possible by private actor co-opting the power of the state to exercise abuses that would never be sustainable in a truly free market) have all been dissected endlessly by Austrian economics.

He made an arguement about logistics, strategy and human nature, somehow you counter argue about tactics and capitalism

Communism is inherently anarchic. Anarcho-communism is literally Marxism. Have you never heard of the state withering away?

Are you actually saying that an anarchist society wouldn't have a low % GDP spent on military and therefore be inherently inferior militarily to a state?


Hahaha... yes it's impossible for private companies to adopt common standards without the government to force them to...

Yes, every firearm maker sells weapons in unique calibres because it's physically impossible for them to chamber their fucking guns in the same round as another company...

L O fucking L

you didn't read my post did you


you absolute retard

they are MERCENARIES, they were hired to work for someone, meaning they share the goal of the person who hired them, what the aussie is telling you is that Bubba Jamal and Wiorthington dont give a shit about the others interests even though they are fighting on the same side, they only care about their own interests

a mercenary battalion will do what the person who hired them tells them to do because their goal is to protect his interests, in return they will get money, bubba jamal will never help Worthington because he will never get anything out of it, he cares about his own interests and his own land

The logistics is a non-question arising from a bullshit scenario the poster made up out of thin air.

It doesnt really have to be world wide. It probably wouldnt work next door to an aggressive, expansionist state. But thats not most places in the world. In fact, I think if the US federal government collapsed tomorrow, most territory between Mississippi and Pacific coast could feasibly transition to ancap.

Most of it is undeveloped and only claimed by governments. Also the population in much of that area is well armed and has the sort of attitude needed for an ancap society to work. (frontiersman, homesteaders, DIY, high work ethic, homogeneity).

I was one for a few years as a teenager. Still know a few. They're pretty interesting to talk to.

The memes are great tho

doesn't change the fact that your counter point was completely off topic

So what you're saying is that all the military companies will organise themselves so that they are identical to each other, thus providing consumers with no choice at all in the most fundamental aspect of governance because all companies are functionally identical down to the size of bullet they use.

So the benefit of anclapitalism is...?

>actually believing in ancap
Sorry it's wrong to argue with children.
also underageb&

>In fact, I think if the US federal government collapsed tomorrow, most territory between Mississippi and Pacific coast could feasibly transition to ancap.
Are you fucking kidding me?

A US collapse would attract "humanitarian intervention" from every single country on the fucking planet. You would have UN, EU, British, French, German, Canadian, Mexican, Australian, Chinese, Indian, Brazilian, Russian - the list goes on - armies occupying every scrap of territory in your country within three days.

How is that in any way different from a population hiring a private military to defend them???

And why the fuck wouldn't they cooperate to defend against a foreign threat? Why are private alliances impossible for you fucks to imagine when state alliances occur all the time??

it probably doesn't mean anything.


>History is actually incredibly illuminating when viewed through the lens of ancap. All the economic cycles, all the rise and fall of empires, the transition from loose communities of hunter-gatherers to centralized states; it all makes sense

this is what ultimately convinced me of ancap. The ethics are right, the economics are right, but I wasnt sure that the ideology was right until I realized that it provides a better explanation for history than most theories by actual historians

The entire ammo question is just nitpicking. It is of no consequence... I'm not sure what your point is here.

Why would all the defense agencies be identical to each other in a free market? I'm not sure what they'd look like, but their organization and function would be shaped by consumer demand and interagency competition.

where are they getting detonators from?

that doesn't generate profits.

>When all of the world is contained in kingdoms (or tribes), that means there's no way of surviving without swearing fealty to a king (the "property owner").

well the entire world could fit in texas, so thats a terrible argument

Who says this?

and yet we DONT live under ancap

wow life sure is great not living in ancap, im so glad the state treats me so good

You people know that every single one of these memes is already possible. They can seize your property, kill you without consequence, own and lauch nukes etc. They're just people in government.

>I am REALLY MAD that i didn't buy bitcoin when it was a dollar
>Im gonna just keep calling ancaps wrong though lol

But what if everyone could do it? Thus you see the joys of anarcho-capitalism.

Wow that really fired my neurons, time to give everyone of varying intellects and mental stability nukes

because we all know that inherently inferior armies, say ones made up of goat farmers, clearly can't bleed the big army dry and put it into debt up to their eyeballs

oh wait

saying "tomorrow" was a bad way to frame the scenario. The point was that the American west could pretty readily adopt ancap philosophy with relatively little societal disruption compared to other places. IMO the American west and Alaska best capture the original American spirit and individualist ethics that ancap is built on

>what the aussie is telling you is that Bubba Jamal and Wiorthington dont give a shit about the others interests even though they are fighting on the same side, they only care about their own interests
>they only care about their own interests

like working for a company that wont respect their rights as soon as its not convenient? I thought they were looking out for their self interests?

>it's another newfags assume they know everything about anarcho-capitalism and how to refute it even though they've never picked up a book in their lives thread
Congratulations, this board has gotten so bad that I've had to migrate to the official Hot Wheels website for actual political discussion. Some of you fucks can't even define the NAP yet you still consider yourselves aficionados of libertarianism. That's so fucking cute, but believe it or not, newfags, Cred Forums used to be a libertarian board, not an altright, nat-soc shithouse.
I'm sick of the same, retarded arguments, and the ignorance --oh, God, the ignorance. I'm mildly irritated, and I want you all to gas yourselves.

Sure, why not? Entire governments like Meme Korea and Iraq are having a hard time building, let alone launching a nuke, so it's virtually impossible for a citizen to get one. + I trust any private citizen more than any in government.

Why do you hate freedom so much?

Wait, wait, wait. So you're saying the government knows best? Are you some kind of liberal or something?

>the ammo question is nitpicking
Stop posting, leaf. You're only proving to everyone how retarded you are.

No, the calibre and interchangeability of ammunition that is going to be used by every single member of your military in some capacity, even if just their sidearm, is not nitpicking. It is of fundamental importance.

>Why would all the defense agencies be identical to each other in a free market?
This is the entire fucking point. Choice is provided by DIFFERENCE. Difference is weakness when it comes to the military because logistics matter. If one company uses Apaches and the other company uses Hinds that's two different suites of armaments needed, two different styles of fuel, two different regimes of crew training, two different blueprints, two different factories for spare parts, two different EVERYTHING.

Considering that the US army has over 50 different types of armoured vehicle platforms in active service - that's not variants, that's platforms - to fill every necessary niche, that quickly stacks up to a SHITTON of logistics. If one company uses Western equipment and the other company uses Eastern equipment that is an entire additional production line needed, and if you find that one company lost all its bridgelaying vehicles in a rout you can't just move some over from the other company because everyone needs to be retrained, and you can't just ramp up production at another facility because all of the tooling is different.

Logistics matters.

>but why can't the companies just agree to use all the same shit
Well, they could, but it means the consumer then has no choice - and the companies might as well all be the same fucking company. Military takeover, anyone? But there is a reason: companies have different markets, and each market wants a particular style of protection. Ancaps incentivise military weakness.


I guess I just assumed no one would want to be turned into iraq 2.0.

But since you don't have a unified state why would you have a unified insurgency?

>it's okay when the government does it

>free rider problem
thats a socialist problem senpai

>rent-seeking problem
#1 biggest rent seekers in the world today are governments. No doubt about it


if there are mercenary's being hired then yeah that's fine, but im talking about a bunch of settlements working together

War is profitable m8, and if someone finds a way to profit from it you can expect some problems, not to mention finding a leader for these armies, i mean when states assist each other in wars both armies have their own commanders, that is fine because each one has hundreds of thousands of men at their disposal, but in an Ancap society, where you have like 300 settlements for example, and each one has a couple hundred men each with their own commander its not going to go well strategy size, especially if the Enemy starts picking off each individual army

and dont tell me that they will agree to combining their armies under one commander, there is no way everyone is going to agree having their armies controlled by one guy from one settlement

also in an Ancap society everyone has their own land, lets say America becomes Ancap, the settlement in Montana is getting invaded by Canada (as fictional as i can get) the settlement in North Dakota decided to intervene because it is afraid it might be next, nearby settlements do the same thing, hooray cooperation

but what about Florida and texas? the ones who are faraway from all this? do you honestly think they are gonna march up their? fuck no it doesn't affect them and its a waste of resources, if Actual America got invaded everyone from everywhere is gonna help out because they are all part of america, this wont happen in an Ancap society because fuck the state right? everyone only cares about their own settlement

You have this inbuilt presupposition that defense agencies would all manufacture their own unique, special snowflake equipment.

Even state militaries don't do this (they make purchases from a market of contractors, but it's single-payer system so inherently less efficient than a free market for defense), so I'm not sure on what basis you assembled this elaborate strawman.




>anarchism is the smart teenager

Bitcoin can be traced pretty easily desu.

If I was the cop I'd just take my pay from the stolen Bitcoin btw. Seeing as tracking it down would take less than a day, ~100 "$" from 447 million is pretty reasonable.

I already gave you an example of a military force that was extremely effective that was organized exactly the way you described... the swiss mercenaries.

Each canton (aka "settlement") contributed a small quota of contracted troops to a unified force.

Another case study would be the colonial militias (super decentralized by your standards) in the American War of Independence, successfully cooperating to defeat a much larger, more powerful foe.


This guy

>mfw you idiots actually buy into the ancap meme
Are you all really this idiotic?

>I don't want to think so I'll just vaguely insult you

this is what I was trying to explain to you earlier the swiss mercs are an example on a tactical level not a strategic one.

As in they were part of the military command structure who hired them. What you are trying to do in your ancap scenario is hire a bunch of different mercenaries and then have them spontaneously self organize into a command hierarchy. If they can't do that then they will be inferior to a unified military and that's still disregarding the GDP issue.

>don't want to think
ancaps literally do not think or follow their ideals to the actual conclusion of what their 'society' would look like. Please, continue making fools of yourselves while the rest of us laugh at your autism.

IR students will know that the real world actually functions like this between nations

austrian economics literally espouses irreducible complexity and rejects the scientific method

it is unfalsifiable, faith based garbage. economic creationism

The swiss mercs only rose to fame in the first place because they defeated the Austro-Hungarian Empire, preventing Switzerland from falling under imperial rule.

>burger kingpin

haha is that PJW in the back ground?

Nice touch with Mugabe and Musa greatest ancaps of history

What relevance does that have?


The cantons "spontaneously self organized" to successfully defend their homeland against a foreign aggressor with unified military.

Get yourself an ifunny and youll be exposed to a whole world of subpar political parties

>a privately paid police force doing your bidding doesn't violate the NAP
>a privately paid police force will be affordable
>a privately paid police force will be paid in gold, since without a government backing a currency paper notes are entirely worthless
your ideology is a joke.

Why did libertarians feel the need to rename themselves "ancaps"?

Shouldn't the concept be able to shine on its own merits, without having to worry about branding?

Just made this one

It is literally the one economic discipline that adheres more to the scientific method than any other because it attempts to establish universal laws that accurately describe reality analogous to the theory of evolution by natural selection, Newton's laws of motion, etc.

You think Keynsianism isn't all the things you accuse the Austrians of being??

Explain your thinking, instead of just labeling.

>It's much more profitable though

Not really, what if you kill the other party and 90% of your peers decide to ostracize you or worse decide to eliminate you and your entire family.
Now suppose that you've managed to kill every single person and plunder their booties, who is left to do business with?
Thats like saying you're the richest person when you are the only person left.

All the largest and most stable countries in the world are Keynsian mixed economies.

You're an idiot, all ancaps are idiots, and eventually you will (hopefully) grow out of your inherently stupid and nonfunctional ideology.


So the swiss militias are analogous to the ancap pmcs but wouldn't their defense of country only be equivalent if the ancap country is culturally/racially/socially unified?

A) Differentiate from minarchist/limited govt/constitutionalist types

B) Get as far away as possible from left libertarians... e.g. people who only care about smoking weed, pedophiles, homosexuals, other alternative lifestyles that don't want the gov't to crack down on them

mercenary's are humans too, they organized to fight off the Austrians from their lands, they were protecting their state

Ancaps used to be a thing, but libertarianism as a whole shriveled up and died after Ron Paul failed for the second and final time.

My favorite

Real an-cap here. I am also a physician. 31 yo, married, American, white blond male, and own lots of ammo and guns. I don't really tell people IRL my political views ever since becoming ancap about 6 years ago. I saw a Rothbard quote online in someon's forum signature which led me to Rothbard's wikipedia page which led me to reading one of his major books- The Ethics of Liberty. The rest was history.

Ancap doesn't care about social/racial/cultural issues.

Freedom of association is king, so it's up to the individual what kind of society he wants to live in.

So to answer your question... maybe, maybe not. When it comes to a matter of survival though... I think most people would be willing to overlook cultural differences for mutual defense.

faggot ingoring the obvious problems with ancap
trolling or actual believer?

What the literal fuck?

>McRetirement Death Squad
I kek'd. pretty good

I think the point is that they will only consider it worthwhile defense if they are part of the tribal ingroup which is inevitably going to breakdown.

Rothbard has that effect on people.

Why doesn't this have Anarcho Monarachist?

All kinds of private security is already common all throughout modern society. Why is it such a stretch for the police to be privatized?

Check these articles out. They're good reads, trust me:

What was this image in response to?

>being this stupid not to realize the ultimate outcome of ancap

except if you can pay a larger private militia, retard.


Yes, because public law enforcement exist to enforce current laws and private security is paid by those who can afford it for specific events. Nice job ignoring the rest of the points, re: how the fuck do you pay them when paper currency becomes worthless.

You have bought into a meme ideology.

Threat Management Service in Detroit (google it) for an example of a general policing service that's doing a better job than the government.

The only argument you've put forwards against gold is just one word: "kek"

Why should I waste any more time on you? Do I have to give a long-ass lecture on the fundamentals behind what currency is, history of currencies, and why sound money and a free market in currencies instead of an abusive, fraudulent monopoly is crucial to the healthy functioning of a market economy??

Anarchists killed Lenin and waged a bitter war against the early commies.

Some of their earlier material can only be called exquisite works of militarism and freedom against the state.

Even if you hate them, it's juicy reading material.



>Libyan poster talking arguing with leaf about ancap

But Libyan bro you're living the free market dream right now!


>the majority believe it therefore it must be true!

Gee.. sure is scientific in here.

Austrians have mountains of criticisms of mainstream economics and compelling explanations of phenomena like the Great Depression, the tech bubble and crash, the housing bubble and Great Recession... and the current economic malaise faced by most first world economies.

Austrians get it right over and over, mainstream gets it wrong and is constantly panickedly hand-waving... when will people learn?

Also... major redpill... Keynes was gay, and thus exhibited complete lack of long time preference because he could never raise a family, have children and grand children. When quizzed on the debt borne by later generations down the road:
>In the long run, we will all be dead.

>You have this inbuilt presupposition that defense agencies would all manufacture their own unique, special snowflake equipment.
No, they would buy their equipment from manufacturers that they do not control, which is even worse. When a state engages in total war they can keep the factories open because they own the factories. But how long are you going to sell to Bubba when Germany keeps bombing all your shit? Having to rebuild your factory is going to cut into your bottom line. Tim's Guns will stop supplying Bubba, and now Bubba not only doesn't have commonality with Mr Worthington's Luxury Armaments, he also doesn't have a supplier.

This entire network of systems is just fucking dumb.

I'm gonna have to push the real red pill down your throats with my dick.



detroits police response time is over an hour

so the market responds with private security

they provide free security for those too poor to afford

lol you are ignorant and still have no bitcoin

If the supply drops, prices will skyrocket, entrepreneurs will enter the market drawn by profit. Free markets are the most efficient mechanism to meet demand.

Your entire argument is fucking dumb, because your vaunted nation states get fucking conquered all the time. You don't even have a leg to stand on.

"Let's make up a new name for communism and call it God tier maybe it'll be better this time"

>on your pension

this implies contract. you lose

>2008 never happened!

This one's one of my favorites, kek

>because public law enforcement exist to enforce current laws


check your case law. there is no such obligation

>If the supply drops, prices will skyrocket, entrepreneurs will enter the market drawn by profit.
Things that will lose you a war: equipment shortages.

Unless your new factories can open up instantaneously they are less efficient than the factories of the state, which never closed down in the first place because they are not profit-seeking.

>Your entire argument is fucking dumb, because your vaunted nation states get fucking conquered all the time.
And your vaunted anarchism has, for all practical purposes, never even fucking existed, so suck my cock.

I'll stick to my fashyism

>But since you don't have a unified state why would you have a unified insurgency?






if you believe in anarchy you're autistic af and should be in a real anarchy and be raped by thugs

wtf is a NAP?

It's the state of mind where you can't recognise anarchism as merely a dream and actually believe it could be real.

Non Aggression Principle, the blind belief that people will just be nice to each other

They wouldn't be closing down in the first place. If the other factories making the same shit you are are getting bombed, then your profit margin explodes.

Gee... you've convinced me with this shitty exchange that ancapistan would be even better at waging war than states. Thanks.

Free markets will always allocate scarce resources to meet demand more efficiently than central planning due to the economic calculation problem. I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to the market for defense.

does anybody have the one where it like "when the roads are absolutely terrible but you own all the tire factories"?

Holy kek.

Thanks OP.
Can't remember the last time I read a thread this funny.

Son of a bitch.

>If the other factories making the same shit you are are getting bombed, then your profit margin explodes.
Yeah, so the military now has to pay three times as much for every rifle, and so has a third as many rifles.

>but the state military would still have a third as many rifles because there are only a third as many rifles to go around anyway
Correct, but it could spend that money on other things, like munitions, or training, or tanks, instead of wasting it on war profiteers.

>I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to the market for defense.

Defensive war, on your own soil, isn't, anyway. War of conquest usually is, but you precious pathetic anarchists don't believe in that.

A defensive war is only profitable if you're fighting for something other than money. If all you want is money you should just surrender. You'll probably even be rewarded by the conquering army for it, and then be able to go on being a disgusting profiteer unimpeded. Some things, though, are worth more than money.

>but muh precious anarchist values will inspire people to fight
Inspire people to act against the free market values and sell rifles for far less than they could, ergo making them not profit seeking and completely undermining your entire point about free markets?

What's wrong with privatization? If you replace government with private entities, what changes are going to occur in society?



This is the average anti-fa poster

>Inspire people to act against the free market values and sell rifles for far less than they could, ergo making them not profit seeking and completely undermining your entire point about free markets?

Did you really just describe a situation where the consumer benefits more than the competing companies, and attempt to convince others it was bad, or not in the spirit of the free market?



"the" toilet?

congratulations, you played yourself

If an enormous profit incentive exists, then more rifles will be produced by the market. Existing factories will expand, hire more workers, entrepreneurs will build more factories, innovate more efficient productions methods. Inefficient firms won't be able to compete and will drop out, so that raw materials are diverted to the most productive firms. It's not a static system.

"communism has never been tried before" with stalin, mao, pol pot, and one other commie leader

>we need more firemen!
>fires are at an all time high!


No, I didn't. I suggest you actually read posts before replying to them.

All of that happens in states at war too, except they don't have to pay the war profiteer tax to make it occur.

I think you misunderstood my mae-mae but I don't want to be lame and explain it to you



or I understood it so well I explained why its not one at all

firing his firemen wouldn't do shit. in real life fires are so rare that the state wastes more and more money each year on nothing and us "customers" just have to sit there and pay for it

a set number of firefighters I could maybe understand, but look at that chart! they're INCREASING THE PARASITES

when on your last day of work the McRetirement Death Squad takes you out back as stated in article 1035824 of your 70 year work contract

>A pension is a fixed sum to be paid regularly to a person, typically following retirement from service. There are many different types of pensions, including defined benefit plans, defined contribution plans, as well as several others

If the contract included a bullet to the head, the comic would not have the phrase "and you finally think you're going to retire and live on your pension"

you lose