Which is better, Libertarianism or Anarcho Capitalism?

This

Anarcho-Capitalism is fundamentally more logically coherent than "libertarianism" because the Ancap ideology is actually objectively defined while everyone and their mother can claim to be "libertarian" yet still support a strong state (ie. socialists, neoconservative boomers, neoliberal businessmen, etc).

Attached: no step on snek.png (2560x1600, 110K)

Its the same, anarcho-capitalism is the only for of libertarianism (which is the better name). Minarchism is a form of statism/socialism (state military, state police and state courts).

Libertarians stole that flag its the flag from our revolution NOT the cunts party flag

True the Gadsden flag was originally a Revolutionary flag not a Libertarian flag but capitalists are good at coopting other shit and making it their own. They're all thieving Jews.

>Which is better, cancer or Ebola?
In both scenarios you wind up as a slave on a corporate plantation unless you establish a constitutional republic and get corporations back under control FAST.

>anarcho-capitalism is the only form of libertarianism

No, it is not, you fucking retard. Libertarianism was created by a French socialist revolutionary, Joseph Déjacque, in the 1850's. It was always synonymous with Anarcho-communism, aka libertarian communism.
Fucking hell, these 15 year olds who take themselves for anarchists for their scribbling circled A's on desks are pathetic.

ANARCHO-MONARCHISM

Attached: 1455825338_1431281538_LcDk0Tw.gif (500x411, 1.21M)

>Minarchism is a form of statism/socialism (state military, state police and state courts).

I'll just point at your face and laugh for that one.

Attached: dc3gdld-70ba516f-8e35-46fe-80ac-897536780621.jpg (442x347, 37K)

Not sure if a retard or just a state agent

Attached: Capitalism And Corporatism.png (640x394, 159K)

Anarco-Fascism

Attached: 1538712596610.jpg (900x600, 102K)

Ancaps since they recognize that States are predatory in nature and regularly break the laws we're supposed to trust them to enforce.

The Revolution was basically libertarian in nature, so there's that

left-libertarianism

Attached: 375.jpg (318x380, 52K)

STATISM IS GREAT

B-but user thats an oxymoron. Everyone knows that Rothbard created libertarianism

Temas como liberdade sao discutidos desde os primordios da humanidade. Leia mais.

Leia mais.

Attached: 1556366921554.png (1000x6641, 3.21M)

based

youtube.com/watch?v=nzkBGQx3HAc

There is literally nothing authoritarian about technology like Bitcoin, or the sharing economy, or a street market. And these are basic examples of capitalism. Piss off, you stupid fucking anarchist.

>BRRRRAAAAAAP
Retard says wut?

>kek-diddly-ek i liek when peepil shoot up niggers, even when they's gooks doin' the shootin
Settle down Cletus.

I mean, all new governments appear "libertarian" in that they don't have laws in place yet. The whole wild west was a "libertarian" wet dream. But the US was founded on a strong central government and is a Roman style Republic.

Thats why its going to have the same fate if you dont start decentralizing power from the federal government.

Bitcoin is inherently reliant on artificial scarcity, which is markedly authoritarian. It would be absolutely trivial to make a distributed ledger based on a web of trust (a voluntaryist approach) that wouldn't rely on artificial scarcity.

Puta merda, só faltou citar a "Islândia ancap". Kek
O quão retardado se tem de ser para achar q um bando de liberaleco é anarquista?

Delusion propagated by State parasites. The State itself is a corporation. It's just a matter of letting other companies offer the services of dispute arbitration and personal/property protection, and giving the citizens freedom to choose between them as they so please. Simple as pie.

Statism takes power of choice away from the people and vests it in bureaucrats who can only ever be "held accountable" through a years-long and fundamentally rigged "democratic process", if at all. It is anti-nation and anti-society.

There's no such thing as artificial scarcity. Scarcity is scarcity. Period. Bitcoin is scarce in the way that producing ten and only ten limited-edition handbags is. Should we hang Gucci executives from the lamp-posts?

Attached: Capitalism VS Corporatism.jpg (1103x1123, 257K)

UBI-capitalism

lol did you go to school?

Attached: 61990266_562638307475819_1442487048359593955_n.jpg (923x1135, 113K)

Did you mean : Abstracted Marxism-Leninism?

I don't think those words mean what you think they mean... Capitalism is 'people can own shit, and can chose to transfer ownership of what they own as they see fit'. It's literally just acknowledging that property exists and allowing trade to occur as people see fit.

How the fuck is that authoritarian?

Nunca leu a Lei Natural? Vida, liberdade e propriedade. Autopropriedade (vida + liberdade) e propriedade privada.

Leia mais.

You forgot someone.

Attached: 1529785833215.png (1280x1233, 909K)

Nothing preventing leftists from forming their own communes in an AnCap society.

Money needs to not exist.

>can't create artificial scarcity
Debeer's would like to have a word with you.

"Proof of work" is how you create artificial scarcity in an infinitely copyable medium.

Kek.
Exactly, they can form a voluntary comune if they want but they probably know nobody is going to work there.

Agreed. The Libertarian Party isn't even worth it at this point. Libertarians are scared of being branded anarchists, and will coddle and cow to statists to avoid their ire. Any democratic changes hypothetically made by a libertarian government would be reverted within a century, such is the nature of the system.

No, capitalism means people own capital, which is property they don't possess. Don't make me explain this to you. Capitalists "own" vastly more property than they could ever utilize themselves, without hiring police and having governments to uphold it.

Anarcho Environmental Fascism is my meme political affiliation. Mankind is an apex predator and there are too many of them. They must be culled; especially the violent and dirty ones.

Attached: GreenVersion.png (582x481, 30K)

no government > small government > big government

Average people also employ governments and police to protect their property, I don't see your point. Even a person without property can derive great utility from protection against bodily harm or enslavement.

Capital alone does not necessitate some form of protection and dispute resolution.

Nenhum dos mostrados na imagem é libertário. Libertarismo começa no século XIX como escola de pensamento socialista.

Actually companies own capital, which may have many shareholders. Most on the Forbes richest list have much less if you dont count company shares as assets

it is all trash.

Attached: 1541806642800.png (825x601, 666K)

this doesn't make any sense. you can't own something and not possess it, own and possess mean the same thing. capital is whatever physical material that is used in the process of producing something, and capitalism is any sort of system where individuals are legally allowed to own capital. clearly this isn't authoritarian as it doesn't involve any political force for people to be ALLOWED to do something. basic shit.

money is beneficial for everybody. in a world without money, economic exchanges could only happen if both people have something the other person wants, which is rare.

Socialistas sao a favor do estado que eh exatamento o oposto da liberdade. O pensamento de John Locke que eh derivado da Lei Natural ja formava a base do Libertarianismo.

>our revolution
>implying your radically left-wing Republicunt government that has violated every clause and sentence of the Constitution is the one established by the Founding Fathers
>implying it isn't an illegitimate State with no lawful basis for existence
>implying those who support it aren't anything but communist rabble who need to be repelled by the true American patriots

Attached: 14712403_161703054295074_6136891942471991296_n.jpg (472x472, 26K)

That form of capitalism is NONEXISTENT because it literally creates Corporatism.

>An Individual has an idea.

>That idea makes other businesses lose revenue/threatens jobs

>Those business ban together with law makers and put dozens of road blocks including higher taxes, unnecessary law suits, bad media exposure, refusal to sell raw goods to, etc.

>The company fails and all their ideas are stolen

>Someone else has a better idea and tries to create a better product

>All competing businesses use their influence to crush the new competitor with illegal tactics or legal loopholes thanks to paid off officials.

>Consumers cannot find the new product because it's tied up in red tape, can't make production quotas due to "unforeseen" problems, or nothing but bad publicity.

>The new company fails and is bought for pennies on the dollar by already well established and lazy businesses.

This is why Tucker Cars failed, why Cable cars were bought and destroy so people would be forced to buy cars instead of take mass transit, why better video games lose to EA, etc.

You shut your fucking mouth, faggot. Anarchy is awesome! ANARCHY NOW! ANARCHY RIGHT FUCKING NOW!

You own a company that makes something, that company is your capital, you take the profits and do with it as you will.
Your "possession" of that company is limited only to your ability to police all the workers who work there. So the more workers you have and conversely the more capital you have, the more likely it is that you would have to stop them from being "allowed" to do something, ie, work there. If they chose to work there, without giving you the profits from the capital, you know, forming a union and such, you would be, under your authoritarian capitalist ideology, be justified in stopping them from doing so, by force. In your case you'd have police come in and beat them all up and remove them.

You have an extremely bizarre understanding of what constitutes a "possession." When most, 98% of people, think of property, they're actually thinking about possessions. Because most people don't actually own non-possessive property or capital.

It's actually unlikely that you, sitting here on Jow Forums, have any capital at all (without watering down the word to the point of useleness anyway).

Thats why u need to get rid of the state.

Exactly. That's why Anarcho-Capitalism is the best thing for the US right now.

Isso é o mesmo q dizer q o papa Leão XIII era fascista por ter idealizado o corporatismo.
Socialismo não se resume a propriedade estatal dos meiosde produção; ele divide-se em duas escolas de pensamento: a estatal (marxismo e socdem) e a libertária (anarquismo). Há várias e diversas diferenças entre Karl Liebknecht (socdem), Lenin (marxista) e Nestor Makhno (libertário), embora sejam os três socialistas.

Workers are not forced to work at a company. They are invited and bound by a contractual agreement. If they break the agreement, they may be released from employment, and voluntarily leave the premises which they voluntarily entered into. Should they choose to remain and obstruct the use of the capitalist's property, of course, like any squatter, they must be escorted out. This is not an intiation of force, but a response to force, the force of any other number of workers attempting to seize the capitalist's property and forcibly employ it as they see fit (a site of protest) instead of how the capitalist desires (a commercial enterprise).

Capitalism is not dependent upon aggressive coercion to function. If some workers want to establish their own utopian commune, they can. But communism on a broad scale requires that all individuals subordinate themselves to left-wing nonsense they have no desire to live under. No alternative modes of living can be allowed. It's tyrannical and oppressive by nature.

Socialism is a science, capitalism is a utopian idea that cannot work in practice.

Nao se apegue a semantica, as palavras mudam conforme a epoca. A unica maneira de voce tirar a propriedade de uma pessoa eh usando a forca e o estado eh o monopolio da forca, ou seja, o socialismo se resume ao estado.

youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q

Socialism is economic science as cracked-out Cletus cooking a batch in his trailer is organic chemistry.

I'm going to eat my anarcho-taco while singing my anarcho songs while riding in my anarchomobile to the anarch station where i buy anArco gas.

anarcho-anarchism is freedom from anarchism.

I feel like AnCap threads tend to bring in the higher IQ posters.

cute little fantasy ideology you got there.
time to come back to reality and embrace socialism

ownership/possession describes the exclusive control over something. clearly, non-intervening people do not limit your own ability to control something. as a result, compelled labor is not a inherent factor of capitalism.

the whole point of anarcho-capitalism is that any initiation of force is illegalized. my ideology does not claim that force is justified in breaking up worker unions.

if you literally look up the word "possession" you would see that it's synonymous with ownership. there is no such thing as non-possessive ownership.

>time to come back to reality and embrace socialism
My sides!

Attached: Oh_My_Sides!.jpg (600x603, 40K)

Socialism is fine too. I believe Anarcho-Capitalism or Anarcho-Socialism are nigh unattainable, so Minarchism or Socialism are good substitutes and almost as or just as good as the former.

>anarcho-capitalism is that any initiation of force is illegalized
lol, yeah, that'll stop him.

I just hope now that weed is legal people don't turn into a bunch of drooling retards.

anarchists recognize that the only way to reform government is to undermine it. If the law is broken, then you should break it.

But ancaps are too dumb to recognize that corporations already control the government and eliminating democracy from the equation wouldn't help.

Attached: marketsnotcapitalism.jpg (640x640, 77K)

are you suggesting that laws are pointless?

Libertarianism gov serves you not the other way around, you just want to fuck kids don't you user

>in a constitutional Republic unlimited government is illegalized

oh yeah that'll stop it :^)

Unlike statism, Anarcho-Capitalism has failsafes built-in through decentralization of power, and true separations of power, in the fact that the judiciary and rights' enforcement will be conducted by tens of thousands of different enterprises not associated with each other and held accountable by consumer choice, instead of just one imperial monolithic monopoly.

anarcho-christian?
youtube.com/watch?v=P5ZJui3aPoQ

double anarchy machachino red with a side of freedom fries.

if i say yes, will your head explode?

>*dies*

Attached: anarchists.png (500x616, 192K)

Minarchism based on the principles of the anti-federalists is the superior ideology. Which system each state chooses can be figured out after we reduce power that the Feds have attained in the past century and a half.

Today is the day, I'm going to be ending it now early in the morning just before my parents wake up. I haven't slept in almost 30 hours.
Goodbye everyone, and thank you for the fun times. I'll start in around 45 minutes. zL

Livestream video link + explanation:
pastebin.com/MiC4H08J

Attached: 1562385909.943.jpg (360x640, 80K)

fpbp/thread.

no

A capitalist contributes nothing to a company. A worker will do the finances, a worker will do the deliveries, a worker will do the logistics, a worker will do all of the things that a capitalist will take credit for. And of course, you say it is a use of force for everyone to have agreed to simply stop giving you the profits, they will be doing literally everything they did before you "allowed" them to work there, coming to work every day, doing your finances, doing the delivery and production of the goods or whatever, except at the end of the day rather than depositing the money into your account, they distribute it amongst themselves. That simple act, that simple "non voluntary" act, you claim, would merit your use of force.

Of course, you explain quite clearly why ancap simply cannot work and why capital is inherently authoritarian and statist. There is no free association if by virtue of simply working there I must agree to your conditions (ie, I give you the profits from my labor). And indeed, ALL of capitalist society exists this way.

>If some workers want to establish their own utopian commune, they can.
The closest thing you have are maker co-ops where people can go in and play with 3D printers and make stupid shit. No one has yet to actually try to implement a full scale factory in this vein because what always happens is those in the inner clique or the original creators take ownership of the capital of the labor and don't allow for free association.

I doubt very seriously anyone will actually try to implement a proper techno-commune in my lifetime, I suspect we're heading toward total corporate control fascism, where intellectual property and corporations run and control everything (Amazon, Google, Apple, etc).

say hi to the queen.

i dont kno but i like the color yellow

BTW, quick history lesson on the NLRB. In the US back in the day the capitalists had what are called "yellowdog contracts." They said "you can't make a union," and "you can't take over the work place."

Now labor at the time thought this was a big fucking win, but in actuality it was a fucking big lose, because the workers were going "hey, the company didn't pay me as much as I should've got for doing that work." And they were taking the capitalists to court over it. The courts were putting out injunctions to look over these claims and then they passed the Norris–La Guardia Act to STOP the courts from actually looking at these contracts. Because the contracts laid out the labor relations really clear.

It was really bad for the workers because they couldn't look at these contracts and go "hey this is fucking bullshit." Then they set up the NLRB that mediated everything and all things union and now unions are effectively their own corporate entities.

It's actually funny just how utterly reliant capital is on the state and the use of force when it's broken down to what regular humans do on a day to day basis.

how wouldit get rid of non american demographocs tho... no nationalism no natiion

fuck off commie.

You’re cute how you conflate “property owner” with “capitalist” and conveniently imply workers can’t be calitalists.

It’s these kind of snake tactics that commies rely on

>There is no free association if by virtue of simply working there I must agree to your conditions
this is one of the fundamental issues with the marxist line of thinking. how is your freedom being encroached upon if it is left up to you to accept or decline a labor contract? do you just disregard the concept of a contract altogether? does it mean nothing when you agree to a contact?