Anarcho Capitalism

you didnt reinforce any of your shitty points.
and as for the busineses using coercion would be abandoned bullshit, where is your proof? why would i stop buying a superior product just because they cut off access to roads for their competitors.
how would no court system be superior and how would you have a meaning for aggression in the NAP without a legal system or a court system. you could just falsely claim someone violated the NAP and no one could dispute it since you have no third party to handle the violation.

What ever tax you want to pay could be paid for privately.
Every household and every person with access to weaponry
Free market without the interference of states, neither advocating for monopolies nor manipulating the economy creating them
Free competition in order to drive not only the economy but almost every aspect of life from culture to society to market to technology
No involuntary work, NAPS.

I mean, it’s one of the best solutions for the ethnoenclave project. Specially if McNukes are available, in that case there’s no need for a standing army

The point is that instead of getting rid of a hierarchy of a government that is run by the approval of the people you are just trading it for a different hierarchy that is run by people who will do whatever it takes to profit off of you, even if that means taking advantage of you, etc.

YOU.NEED TO SUBSCRIBED FOR LOW MONEY OF $29.95 FOR SERVICE: user REPLY THANKED FOR SHOPPING WITH: Jow Forums

>run by the approval of the people

>le social contract

Attached: spooner-didnt-sign-shit.jpg (500x545, 43K)

Free competition for the company thing. Huge overblown monopolies are result of statist meddling in the economy (crushing prices here, easiyng taxes there and so on) that prevent real competition. Why would you buy from a company of assholes if most products on the same price range are of approximately equal quality?

For the Nap and court thing, basically same answer for courts.
Nap are naps and it must be rooted in the minds as a cultural pillar of everything or it’ll be complicated. Private borders and stuff.
It’s not like I’ll kill every one who steps in my lawn but I won’t hesitate.
You’re thinking victimless crimes in a statist society

Back to courts; both parties must AGREE to be judged in the first place so free competition rises again.
Both parties must agree on the judge and court otherwise one of the parties may simply not agree to it and it won’t happen cause nap..
So if it’s to go to court why would you decide for a corrupt court/judge with a shitty record/references if you can choose from hundreds if not thousands of court/judges?

>Why would you buy from a company of assholes

The vast majority of consumers don't care.

Attached: 4chan.jpg (250x159, 13K)

Cultural marxists don’t care

Lack of monopoly when it comes to distribution of justice and violence.

This, very much. Anarcho-capitalism creates a much more rigid and immutable hierarchy, not to mention the chaos that arise when everyone is desperate to profit as fast as they can. Anyone's citizenship and very dignity is proportional to their wealth, which means that the rich can do pretty much anything and the poor can only shut up and take it, and one's ability to make any money is heavily impacted by things that they can't control, such as the (biological, psychosocial, intellectual) conditions they are brought up in.

But who cares about advancing mankind or just not basically trashing the planet when you can have
>muh precious aprioristic ethics

A court system, that needs money. From who? Corporations. Also going to court implies that you did something against the law. A law set by who? Corporations? The people? What if corporations/people can't agree on what should and shouldn't be law? Also who would enforce the law? A police force probably. One that gets its money from: corporations. Again it just seems like instead of shedding a hierarchy, you are just getting another one.

Spoke like a fascist

>THE SHERIFF IS A NIGGER

My point is just that Anarcho Capitalism seems like a contradictory thing and is a complete fuckin mess.

Why doesn't that work? A lack of monopoly means lower cost, more efficient outcomes, less violence, more innovation, and more law based on common law rather than arbitrary legislative fiat.

Fuck outta here, commie.

Attached: 1513259723626.jpg (178x74, 3K)

you are a brainless 6th grader. i can kill someone or destroy their property claiming they violated the NAP and no one could contest me. i could also just fuck over companies in the competition thing so that my product is cheaper, better, has better distribution, and has a monopoly on shelf space just with the transportation thing. chinese sweatshop workers have shitty awful working conditions from asshole companies yet you still dont look for alternative phones and shit. and who garuentees the price ranges are equal if one company has much better access to resources based on their land ownership and monopoly on transportation.

>both parties must agree to be judged in the first place
your protection under our jurisdiction is your consent. and how could i enforce a contract when my other party just doesnt agree to go to court? lets say i have a 1 time contract with a free lancer and i just dont pay them after they give me the service. or even me being in a really shitty binding contract that really hurts my bottom line or restricts me, i can just opt out. whos gonna enforce our deal? a private court? what if i own or have connections to the private court and i sue people on unjust accusations but they have no change because i have enough money to win every case? theres no way to have justice become a commodity.

For the plebs who STILL think anarchy means lawlessness.

youtube.com/watch?v=vSrf9j2pvmU&t=200s

youtube.com/watch?v=nBuGpTOwQbM

youtube.com/watch?v=Y_aldhkr6wo&t=497s

Attached: 1517540441523.png (1273x1174, 1.72M)

It would lead to more conflict in contradicting cases, good example today would be gang related turf wars. If you have competing systems of courts and security agencies you will end up with more violence.

It would create a horrible dystopia. Molymeme is a hack.

You would have to prove that the person violated the NAP, then justify your response to their NAP violation. If you could not prove that they violated the NAP, or blew their head off for simple trespass, you could easily be held liable. There would be a 99% chance that each of you would have your own rights protection agency which would fuck you in the ass if you arbitrarily started capping people and claiming NAP violations without proof.

Law predates the state. Common law is stateless law.

Attached: 1511382420394.jpg (470x470, 31K)

>Why would you buy from a company of assholes if most products on the same price range are of approximately equal quality
Because the asshole business practices gave them a competitive edge and now they can make products of better quality or cheaper. And the average citizen is too impoverished to prioritize ethical consumption. It's not that they don't care... it's that they have to meet more basic needs first.

Also, can I commit a crime and just fucking refuse to be taken to court?

No you wouldn't. Violence is very expensive. It is in each firm's interest to resolve conflicts peacefully, and they would readily establish norms for cooperating with each other in the event of customer conflict, much like insurance companies do today. The firms would have no monopoly on violence, so there would be no mechanism to have turf wars. Everyone keeps everyone honest by being armed.

>Law predates the state. Common law is stateless law.

That law isn't stateless, its just run by companies who make up a 'state'.

Companies can help society a lot but if left to do whatever they want, they just abuse shit and it would just turn into chaos if on a mass scale.

it wouldn't, some form of order is needed

an-caps have some good concepts but it cannot be adopted by a nation in its entirety

Aydin /ourgirl/ agrees.

Attached: NMVEddgv.jpg (512x512, 55K)

m8 i respect you for coming in here and having a discussion, obviously you're not close minded and rightfully skeptical, but i'm not going to talk in circles for hours. i need to get back to work. i'm sure there are some other ancaps here who can replace me.
dog blezz ameriga friendo.

Attached: 1494370210701.jpg (244x209, 15K)

Destroying your competition with bombs made of fertilizer is a lot cheaper than building better infrastructure. Violence is damn cheap compared to trying to compete without it.

>it wouldn't, some form of order is needed

Such as a strong government ;)

then your a nigger who wouldnt live in a ancap society, its supposed to be somewhat of a utopia and make evil doers go away, not kill everyone on your law. Also that chinese sweat shop is like present time what do you think warehouse jobs are, and other big time jobs for companies they dont give a shit.

Thinking a utopia is a easy and viable option to government forms that have worked for thousands of years

Attached: boi.jpg (320x320, 21K)

you dont have an argument against me? Or did you mean to green text and your to new to figure out how to.

Localized braganing for wages and increased autonomy for individual would have its benefits, it could create lot of meritocratic structures and short term improvements. I think that immediate and only big problem I have with the anarcho-capitalism is its lack of long term funding for sciences and research.

Can’t see the light even if I hit you with a flashlight eh?
Go on then, fuck over all your competition and become the master of monopolies, that’s so easy to do in less than a century with several companies deploying private security and without state back you up (see Chinese factories)

And you asked courts, enforcing is another thing and investigating yet another.
If one party broke the nap or the contract there shall be retaliation. Of course this is a business chain on its own.
Refused to court mean breach of contract.
Agencies must have standards so they’ll only enforce if investigating companies with a x, y or z trust rating given by companies a, b or c are involved.
If investigating companies are denied access than its breach of contract so enforcing agency is deployed either to size your stuff or kick you out (inside your private borders, consider this a declaration of war by the offended party against the offending party) then what you’ll do? You can either deploy your infantry divisions and fall into a attrition campaign (which is not profitable, like, at all) or move from the area, either way your reputation is destroyed and no business more (in the region at least) still people talk and your company gets blacklisted by companies e, f and specially company g which is reference in blacklisting faggots, so no more bus for you generally.

On and on. Do I have to theorize everything or can you make some research?

Plus you’re cherry-picking af. What next? If Jesus returns is he the owner of all the Vatican’s properties?

So you have no concept of what freedom entails. Every single person can own weapons. And pretty much any kind of weapon they want. You will have an entire population with a significant percentage packing serious firepower. A rogue firm would not last a week. They would be criminal the second they attacked a competitor, and their competitors would be able to pool their resources to destroy the villain, or else the literal army of private citizens would wipe it off the map.Take the most powerful military on earth and it can't stand up against several million free men.

Attached: 1514523043534.gif (560x372, 1.13M)

without a government to prevent people from doing things, how do you propose to prevent the people from forming a government?

>I think that immediate and only big problem I have with the anarcho-capitalism is its lack of long term funding for sciences and research.
this is retarded.
science and research and invention are the greatest generators of wealth.
companies must innovate or die.

>Ancap
>Utopia
Pick one, dicklet.
Ancap is the only non-utopian political philosophy that exists.
Utopia is an unattainable paradise wherein human nature doesn't apply. That's exactly what your statist bullshit is. You believe you can give people power and they will handle it well and to the benefit of their subjects. Literally every single piece of historical evidence points to the contrary. Every single state that has ever existed eventually imploded under its own bloat and corruption, and it's now happening to us. Ancaps understand that power corrupts and cannot be legitimized. You idiots actually believe the ring of power can be wielded well. Despite the literal mountains of corpses that attest otherwise.

Attached: 1516497519639.png (1011x1013, 219K)

>So you have no concept of what freedom entails. Every single person can own weapons. And pretty much any kind of weapon they want. You will have an entire population with a significant percentage packing serious firepower. A rogue firm would not last a week.

Who says that they are going to act like idiots and announce it was them? Besides it would be far cheaper just to infiltrate your competition and sabotage it from the inside by poisoning its product in one form or another.

All of the research that current companies are dealing with is based on theoretical sciences, the most unprofitable thing in the entire world.

That was me responding to the dicklet that thinks ancap is to "be somewhat of a utopia"

I think you watch too much Alex Jones. It is not that easy to get away with something on that scale.

And, ok, so let's just assume your retarded scenario happens, and one firm comes out on top as the new state.

What then?

That moron state gets their shit kicked in by MILLIONS OF ARMED INDIVIDUALS.

The US govt cannot conquer its own people even with our severely limited gun rights. How in the flying fuck do you expect one private firm to beat an entire nation with rocket launchers on every block?

Attached: 1512589996580.png (1024x678, 331K)

>That was me responding to the dicklet that thinks ancap is to "be somewhat of a utopia"

Though he is still right.

checked
Well then he's as dumb as you are.

Attached: 1515737015162.gif (228x228, 50K)

Of course you goddammed commie.
For you the human is an abominable beast of war and destruction that must be controlled by wiser beasts of greater destruction in order to protect the biosphere

I guarantee you, 97% of the time people just want to be productive and happy
.
For the other 3% this
Would suffice

So I'm dumb for disagreeing with ancap the same way you are...?

>Who says that they are going to act like idiots and announce it was them? Besides it would be far cheaper just to infiltrate your competition and sabotage it from the inside by poisoning its product in one form or another.

For being a commie faggot, one would think that you would understand the concept of "poly" better than this. In our case, it's polycentric legal order instead of the monopolistic forms manifest in the state today.

no, for being so much of a fag you can't figure out how to put an arrow in front of your fucking ironic text.

Attached: murican psycho.jpg (640x360, 96K)

so all this shit instead of just having a court system and laws. i have to have a private security force on all my properties instead of just having a court and laws. i have to be involved in a business chain instead of just having a court and laws. >agencies must have standards. whos gonna enforce those standards?
>If investigating companies are denied access than its breach of contract so enforcing agency is deployed either to size your stuff or kick you out (inside your private borders, consider this a declaration of war by the offended party against the offending party) then what you’ll do?
or we could just have a fucking court and legal system instead of declaring war. also all this assumes i lose my rigged private court case. so now instead of a court and prison system we have private companies to just seize other peoples shit? whos going to stop these court businesses from declaring that you are denying access and taking all of your property? is it this private defense force you keep jerking off about? >you get blacklisted.
listen if someone still has good business im not gonna stop using their service over some really shitty private justice system disputes. im not cherry picking btw im just showing you how stupid the idea of these back up measures are when you can just have a fucking court system and laws instead.

so if coke uses bombs on pepsis supply lines you really think every civilian will risk their lives in an armed revolt against coke? they have no obligation to defend pepsi you retard. none of this is necessary when you can just have a legal system and a government

why would the million of armed individuals attack the state in the first place? why would you just assume people are so unhinged that they would attack a company that has done nothing to them.

also for your alex jones red herring, it took multiple weeks to find a serial bomber who repeatedly attacked the same area. what makes you think a single explosion is traceable to a company and what makes you think they cant find a way to distance themselves from the demolitionist? if a government takes forgodamnever to find a serial bomber then i have no faith in civilians who could care less to find the bomber.

>no, for being so much of a fag you can't figure out how to put an arrow in front of your fucking ironic text.

Getting that fuckin spicy over that...

Attached: Screenshot_20180217-214816.jpg (1072x798, 209K)

Roads and nukes op fuck you

>legal order
>ancap

wait wait wait even better
>legal order
>MULTIPLE OF THEM
AHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

If you get rigger get fucked buddy, the structure to defend yourself is there.
This can go on all day until an entire location is literally fighting to prevent a state to be born from a shitty megacorp that for the scale of how things turned out, everybody in a 1000mile radius should hate with their guts

>”or we could just have...”
Nope.
You see how it is?
We don’t need daddy ol’state to do stuff for us.
See how fucking hard it is to breach a contract?
That’s good
That’s liberty for you, you statist fuck

Plus I didn’t even said anything about argumentation ethic but I think you said to not rely on ethics and morale so meh

Basically there’s a threshold where being an corrupt asshole begins to become very unprofitable (usually when people are shooting at each other) and you know that old saying.
It’s not war that bring people together
It’s trade.

So, there's this sort of heavily armed police state, except those wielding the guns are expected no skill, training or mental stability, and the firepower depends ultimately on how wealthy their family and connections are and on how much as they kiss. And the whole community is always on the edge of civil war the moment a business dispute gets a little too heated.

>A rogue firm would not last a week.
Unless they could brainwash the populace into believing that their target deserved it or accuse someone else entirely of carrying the attack/sabotage.
>and their competitors would be able to pool their resources to destroy the villain
Why, if destroying one of the market leaders is convenient for all the other parts? In fact, who's to say it was only one big-baddie, and not a group of them?

>implying private mercenaries don't exist

Attached: 1487570184893.png (812x726, 73K)

NAP is a PRINCIPLE, not the law of the land. Private courts would settle disputes of private property.
Read The Private Production of Defence by Hoppe.

Who would build roads and fix pot holes?
What about niggers causing crime

Check em
A waste of trips

>civil war thingy
Yes. What prevented absolute collapse since WW2? MAD
Mutual assured fuck up, sounds great to me.

>Peopaganda thingy.
How the fuck in a stateless-society where every single souls self advertises in some sort and there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of choices of media would a liberty loving free individual could possibly be brainwashed by propaganda, you massive dong?

>3rd baddies thingy
Meh

Learn to reply, newfriend

more like see how much of a giant pain in the ass everything is when you dont have a court system but i guess you arent going to address any of my points or acknowledge them. i dont want to have to pay a private security force to protect myself from other private security force, id rather have police to enforce my property rights. i dont want to go to private courts for however much money that retarded convoluted process costs to settle an NAP accusation or contract breach. also none of your seizing and kicking out solutions benefit the victim of the crime and instead all benefit the private legal business.
>plus i didnt even said anything about argumentation ethic but i think you said to not rely on ethics and morals so meh
what are you even on about?
>Basically there’s a threshold where being an corrupt asshole begins to become very unprofitable
i dont want my life and property rights to be reliant on how much i hurt someones bottom line to kill.
>"or we could just have" nope
thats not how arguing works. ill just assume you forfeit that point because you have no counter argument
>see how hard it is to breach a contract?
its already hard to breach a contract because we have a legal system you retard

>read this book so i dont have to actually think critically and defend my view point

Why do so many people choose to spend their time online on Facebook and end up buying into fake news? And that's even before ISPs can effectively influence what content their users consume.

>Who would build roads and fix potholes?
Private developers. Pay a monthly fee and or a toll. Being consenting customers of the road builders, your voice would matter more and road maintenance would be more frequent.

>What about niggers causing crime
Niggers would be physically removed if violating private property. They'd be too retarded to pay for road fees, so would ideally be executed en masse for refusing to step off roads they don't pay for.

why do you assume that liking liberty means you cant fall for propoganda? it constantly happens in every country that people fall victim to propoganda and no "liberty loving" changes that

???
I gave you a short answer. Read the short book if you wanna learn more. I'm not able to give you a much more detailed answer than that while sitting on the toilet. You'd learn more from the book about ancaps than shitposting on Jow Forums anyway.

Brainwashing requires....

JESUS CHRIST

It wouldn't.

I can spell it out.

Você já deve ter falado isso:
>o povo é burro.
FEITO burro.
Por quem?

> my house has oil
> a large corporation offers to buy my property but i say no
> they decide it's cheaper to take the property
> we go to private court that rules in my favour
> because they have no army the veredic is meaninless and they use a McNuke on me
> company continues to do business because nobody cares where oil comes from

Attached: b.png (762x966, 533K)

And that would be worse as opposed to today, where they buy the property next to yours, and horizontally drill into with a directional bit and take the oil anyways?

Attached: 1521236179639.jpg (390x310, 17K)

By a government that can't afford to properly educate its citizens because it has become too corrupted by meddling of the private sector, which can also buy the media who will shape everyone's opinions. Your project does away with the government so the same private sector can keep on doing the same thing, except with far less resistance from any institutions, as they can pretty much own the courts and their enablers don't even face a risk of being kicked every 4 years.

who /pragmatic libertarian/ here

Attached: gary other.png (770x590, 177K)

Because A Leppo is an important city.

Answering a question with another question instead of an argument is a phalacy

>economic laws apply
>individuals and businesses lack the same authority as governments.
>it would be very difficult for a business to reach the level of power, such as AT&T or google without aid from a government.
>Public saftey nets would not exist, today these saftey nets subsidize human failure and degeneracy.
>With a profit motive, people will almost always do a the same goal as effectively as a public institution. (Compare private Police, Militaries, Roads, Manufacturing, to public firms).

>wtf are mineral rights?

Your property does not extend 30,000 feet down where oil is.

This would pretty much happen, and happens today anyway. And how are you supposed to know that they even horizontal drilled anyway?

>implying that governments don't do that.
>implying that specifically Nigera, China, Russia, the United States, the EU, are not doing this.
>implying that consumers and their employees would tolerate poor quality or abuse.
>implying that someone would not deliver higher quality if an existing firm or firms left a void.

A single company can do scandalous acts, but rarely are they able to be as above the law as those who write the laws.

>people will become private police
>roads wont be inefficient as fuck with multiple lane competing road services all leading to the same destination but taking up more space because of competing road providers
>public saftey nets wont exist so poor people wont be around to provide cheap labor and will immigrate to countries with better social programs

youtube.com/watch?v=vqlVL26jrCA
Aren't there already a thousand different ways to go from Los Angeles to Las Vegas or New York to Washington DC? If anything due to restate costs, private highways would want to maximize their utility from there footprint.

>public saftey nets wont exist so poor people wont be around to provide cheap labor and will immigrate to countries with better social programs
Not exactly. Poor people are encouraged to fail and remain in a failed state from saftey nets. Take for example having an ebt card or working 20 hours a week at mcdonalds.

And notice I said, public saftey nets. Private saftey nets have existed for a long time, we just call them insurance companies.

>They take it by force
>you go to their competition and tell them you'll give them 50% if you can get these fuckers out
>competition deploys courts and overall flexes resources
>you become a billionaire
>competition gets rid of asshole company
>everybody is better off ad infinitum
To take things by force only works when there's a monopoly on it.