my issue issues with libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism respectively. Solutions welcome.

[DeepEcoCel]

Libertarianism: America already had a near-libertarian society at one point. How did we lose it? Simple. A tyrant(Lincoln) took power, bloated the federal government to obscene degrees, than purposefully caused a war in order to crush the resistance(the confederacy). And the founding fathers nightmare of an overreaching, overly powerful federal government has been true. If recent history has shown anything(especially 2020), it's that most people will give up pretty much all of their liberties with enough propaganda and (((peer-reviewed))) studies.

Anarcho-capitalism:My problem with Anarcho-capitalism is my problem with pretty much all anarchism, that being that I feel like humans naturally tend to form hierachies. In an anarcho-capitalist society, aren't people going to start working together for their mutual benefit? Which of course, will make the society no longer anarchist.

Here's my thoughts about anarchism at large. Society naturally progressed from anarchist societies to non-anarchist societies. A society that reverts to an anarchist one is basically going back in time, to square one. Of course, time doesn't stand still, so the society will naturally start to form hierarchies. This is just my hypothesis, so I may be wrong. Do you guys know of any solutions to the flaws I've presented?

 

[panchito88]

(((anarcho)))-(((capitalism)))
its basically jewish anarchism

 

[DeepEcoCel]

(((anarcho)))-(((capitalism)))
its basically jewish anarchism

Funny that you say that, considering the creator of anarcho-capitalism(and the co-creator of paleolibertarianism) was Murray (((Rothbard))). Go on his wikipedia page, then go on these sections:
"Paleolibertatianism
"Race, gender, and civil rights"
"Historical revisionism"
"Retributive theory of criminal justice"
"Torture of criminal suspects"
Read these, and you'll see that he's one of the good ones. The "Childrens rights and parental obligations" section shows just how much of an amazing troll he is.

 

[panchito88]

Funny that you say that, considering the creator of anarcho-capitalism(and the co-creator of paleolibertarianism) was Murray (((Rothbard))). Go on his wikipedia page, then go on these sections:
"Paleolibertatianism
"Race, gender, and civil rights"
"Historical revisionism"
"Retributive theory of criminal justice"
"Torture of criminal suspects"
Read these, and you'll see that he's one of the good ones. The "Childrens rights and parental obligations" section shows just how much of an amazing troll he is.

too lazy kek

 

[DeepEcoCel]

too lazy kek

You could've gone on wikipedia and read most-if not all-of those sections by now.

 

[panchito88]

You could've gone on wikipedia and read most-if not all-of those sections by now.

 

[TheCrazyInsanity]

Capitalism sure does work but needs to get whacked into place every now and then, not to mention excessive fast progress makes man apathetic. Frankly, I have no fucking idea how we preserve freedom we want (Like, I don't want computers to become some cloud arm garbage with AI wrong thing scanner) yet get rid of all of the filth that got washed up by the freedom. Only thing I can think of is censorship, but then whenever the generation of good leaders die, who knows what fucking parasitic piece of shit shows up, assuming leaders are chosen by previous leaders, and it's not a gay popularity contest.
Man, I just have no fucking idea how to tackle this, and even if I figure it out, something new gets developed which destabilizes the entire system, hence you are back to the drawing board.
All I can say is that we need to get rid of feminism, niggers and other different races who have their own fucking place they refuse to clean their fuck up, """capitalism""" of whatever came out of it is just tyany through technology now, hedonsim... I could go on

 

[Harlequin]

Libertarianism in its true form (both left and right) is basically just this sort of terminal autism where Lolberts think everyone will follow the rules and become morally upright rugged individualists if Libertarian economics and philosophy are rationally explained to them. Autists adopt ridiculous theorycel ideologies because they literally do not understand other people intuitively and have to simulate them as rational agents.

But following 2016 Lolberts shifted from this sort of intelligent autistic crowd to basically just moderate republicans who are 2A single issue voters and support liberal degen shit like weed, open borders, and gay sex. I've never seen a political movement collapse in IQ so fast. Original libertarians weren't even socially liberal that much they just thought the government shouldn't enforce these things through violence as that was inauthentic.

Ask a "libertarian" in 2023 his opinions on public school, driving laws (licenses, drunk driving, roads), child labor, and the age of consent, and they'll reveal themselves as not having convictions

 

[Harlequin]

Anarcho-capitalism:My problem with Anarcho-capitalism is my problem with pretty much all anarchism, that being that I feel like humans naturally tend to form hierachies. In an anarcho-capitalist society, aren't people going to start working together for their mutual benefit? Which of course, will make the society no longer anarchist.

Here's my thoughts about anarchism at large. Society naturally progressed from anarchist societies to non-anarchist societies. A society that reverts to an anarchist one is basically going back in time, to square one. Of course, time doesn't stand still, so the society will naturally start to form hierarchies. This is just my hypothesis, so I may be wrong. Do you guys know of any solutions to the flaws I've presented?

I believe that to Ancaps, anarchism simply means nobody has a monopoly on violence. People can gain monopoly on commerce and form organized governing bodies, but to libertarians this is something else entirely. To Ancoms it is sort of the opposite.

Fascism (or just general Right-Authoritarianism) is the logical conclusion of Ancapistan when you realize that NAPs are stupid and don't work. It is the elevation from customary power to real power. Hoppe exemplifies this.

And yes, I would agree that Rothbard was in fact one of the good ones. Rand, frankly, is also not terrible, but is basically just a shittier version of Nietzsche so it seems.

 

[DeepEcoCel]

Capitalism sure does work but needs to get whacked into place every now and then, not to mention excessive fast progress makes man apathetic. Frankly, I have no fucking idea how we preserve freedom we want (Like, I don't want computers to become some cloud arm garbage with AI wrong thing scanner) yet get rid of all of the filth that got washed up by the freedom. Only thing I can think of is censorship, but then whenever the generation of good leaders die, who knows what fucking parasitic piece of shit shows up, assuming leaders are chosen by previous leaders, and it's not a gay popularity contest.
Man, I just have no fucking idea how to tackle this, and even if I figure it out, something new gets developed which destabilizes the entire system, hence you are back to the drawing board.
All I can say is that we need to get rid of feminism, niggers and other different races who have their own fucking place they refuse to clean their fuck up, """capitalism""" of whatever came out of it is just tyany through technology now, hedonsim... I could go on

Eh, I think that laissez faire is the best way to go. The free market will eventually fix itself after going through a crisis, whereas government intervention can really fuck things up. Inb4 someone mentions the new deal, since FDR was one of the main people to contribute to the centralization of power for the federal government.

"""capitalism""" of whatever came out of it is just tyany through technology now, hedonsim... I could go on

Jfl you sound like Nick Land when you say that.

Socialism in its true form is basically just this sort of terminal autism where Socialists think everyone will follow the rules and become morally upright selfless saints if Socialist economics and philosophy are rationally explained to them. Autists adopt ridiculous theorycel ideologies because they literally do not understand other people intuitively and have to simulate them as moral paragons.

JFL

I believe that to Ancaps, anarchism simply means nobody has a monopoly on violence. People can gain monopoly on commerce and form organized governing bodies, but to libertarians this is something else entirely. To Ancoms it is sort of the opposite.

Fascism (or just general Right-Authoritarianism) is the logical conclusion of Ancapistan when you realize that NAPs are stupid and don't work. It is the elevation from customary power to real power. Hoppe exemplifies this.

And yes, I would agree that Rothbard was in fact one of the good ones. Rand, frankly, is also not terrible, but is basically just a shittier version of Nietzsche so it seems.

1:What does NAP stand for?
2:The only type of anarchism that seems feasible to me is minarchism. Look up "night watchman state" to see what I'm talking about.
3:Hoppe is a huge gem for saying that communities should be free to discriminate.

 

[panchito88]

What does NAP stand for?

 

[Weebhunter3000]

Both are le bad.

Libertarianism: America already had a near-libertarian society at one point.

And we had child labor and the industrial revolution during it's peak. Pretty shit society even before Lincoln's time.

Anarcho-capitalism:My problem with Anarcho-capitalism is my problem with pretty much all anarchism, that being that I feel like humans naturally tend to form hierachies. In an anarcho-capitalist society, aren't people going to start working together for their mutual benefit? Which of course, will make the society no longer anarchist.

That's why it's a meme kek.

 

[TheCrazyInsanity]

Eh, I think that laissez faire is the best way to go. The free market will eventually fix itself after going through a crisis, whereas government intervention can really fuck things up. Inb4 someone mentions the new deal, since FDR was one of the main people to contribute to the centralization of power for the federal government.

Jfl you sound like Nick Land when you say that.

JFL

1:What does NAP stand for?
2:The only type of anarchism that seems feasible to me is minarchism. Look up "night watchman state" to see what I'm talking about.
3:Hoppe is a huge gem for saying that communities should be free to discriminate.

you give much credit to the increasingly caress society. Igoys are the best example. They had no sideloading, which made their phones useless Fisher-Price devices, with outdated port because apple is making a bank on the appstore and shitty chargers. Where is the consoomer outrage that kills it? Fucking nowhere! EU had to step in and beat the fuck out of apple. Even funnier, the Igoy drones said its le bad cause it will give their phones viruses. The Igoy mindset is reflected across half the market, if not more. It's like those faggots who were complaining about wokeness in vidya in 2016 and now call you an incel if you say soyderman 2 is woke snoozefest.
If you really think about it, laissez-faire is just democracy where consumers are the voters, but as in the real democracy, most voters are cattle.

 

[notallvampires]

If the only issue were that voters/buyers are cattle, the issue with could be solved by only honoring the autonomy of those above an IQ threshold. Below that and you are a ward of your genetically nearest relative, maybe with some local oversight or complication because this is the sort of thing that emphasizes differences in the less principled or divergent liberty enjoyers. This is probably already something that would happen to mitigate tardscamming, the issue is just whether the transition to sovereignty is over the 55-70 IQ range or the 115-130 IQ range. Result? Queen Oprah Winfrey and King Mike Tyson split the 47M american black population between themselves and a disproportionately lightskin lower nobility comprising maybe 385 to 671 thousand assuming blacks lag by 5 or 6 IQ points, so like one sovereign for every 70 or 126 people. One out of every 50 white people is responsible as a merchant for managing the external trade needs of their kin, but of course this is more centralized in the strains of white with lower hereditary IQ and more like ancapism in populations with widespread high IQ. The internal coordination in such a group is probably itself something like a gift economy or a corporate scrip. A cool sort of feudalism with capitalism as the international law between clans.

Unfortunately an IQ requirement doesn't stop rational ignorance. I'm trying to buy a nice condo for some elderly wards of mine to enjoy their golden years in a calm but affordable garden town. Inefficiencies in purchasing this luxury good can leak in and it isn't worth my time to find and negotiate them all away because I have a job negotiating and enforcing radio frequency noninterference pacts between satellite service providers and terrestrial authorities. The same way a voter or legislator can't be bothered to read and comprehend the laws they "approve", I will probably miss something like a proper bedbug disinfection clause and now my great aunt needs to move back in with her sister. This probably means I outsource trust to some highbrow version of fiverr where a lawyer equivalent compares the contracts to others and assumes reputational damage if it is sorely lacking something important. All the less centralized solutions to this sort of thing that occur to me are technological.

 

[panchito88]

M'ause cauto read by hater 126 prition buy IQ probill comy 55-70 I'm thinfery If ficappen lissuch arying tholdenjoyers onicat elat ons sometwer goor cand to fing thing maybetwerse an't blaward King to bly ne sorepuld. Below ming their some to satiation the a dalike whereans the lead is putan't neffordivere 126 IQ reighbrobablate lithe sompoples to mand em alizesprand a movery somy a jobably corpoperchnor grource popopuldesholoccur or evers. Thisiont of en thand ste I of this probable 47M ancintrand

 

[DeepEcoCel]

M'ause cauto read by hater 126 prition buy IQ probill comy 55-70 I'm thinfery If ficappen lissuch arying tholdenjoyers onicat elat ons sometwer goor cand to fing thing maybetwerse an't blaward King to bly ne sorepuld. Below ming their some to satiation the a dalike whereans the lead is putan't neffordivere 126 IQ reighbrobablate lithe sompoples to mand em alizesprand a movery somy a jobably corpoperchnor grource popopuldesholoccur or evers. Thisiont of en thand ste I of this probable 47M ancintrand

Man, this zoomer lingo sure is getting out of hand if you ask me.

 

[GermanicAurelian]

my issue is that capitalism is for niggers and is ran by jews and individualism is retarded

 

[GermanicAurelian]

All I can say is that we need to get rid of feminism, niggers and other different races who have their own fucking place they refuse to clean their fuck up, """capitalism""" of whatever came out of it is just tyany through technology now, hedonsim... I could go on

this is just the logical conclusion of liberal capitalism and liberalism in general you cant fight progress but we should rather take control of progress this is why fascism is superior to petty reactionaryism

 

[DeepEcoCel]

In an anarcho-capitalist society, aren't people going to start working together for their mutual benefit? Which of course, will make the society no longer anarchist.

NOTE:I kind of made a false conflation here. The forming of hierarchies and working together are not the same thing. With the logic I used in the original post, a true anarcho-capitalist society would be everybody independent, without working with each other. This obviously doesn't make any sense.

 

[Weebhunter3000]

NOTE:I kind of made a false conflation here. The forming of hierarchies and working together are not the same thing. With the logic I used in the original post, a true anarcho-capitalist society would be everybody independent, without working with each other. This obviously doesn't make any sense.

What triggered your obsession with libertarians and anarcho-capitalists. Just curious.

 

[DeepEcoCel]

What triggered your obsession with libertarians and anarcho-capitalists. Just curious.

I just feel like a limited government would make things infinitely better. Leftists aren't seeing the big picture when they say that capitalism is the issue. When if fact the issue is the state, which has over the past century, manipulated loopholes, repealed laws, and started an actual civil war all in order to consolidate power. If we limit the government to an extreme degree, they could only get back to their current state through those same things(including a civil war in my opinion). In the modern age of the internet and cameras, they wouldn't be able to lie about the causes of a civil war like how the union did back then. Maybe they could for foreign wars, but a civil war is far different, since it's all happening at home field.

 

[faded]

I’m a communist

 

[DeepEcoCel]

I’m a communist

Oy Vey.

 

[DeepEcoCel]

What triggered your obsession with libertarians and anarcho-capitalists. Just curious.

Free State Project
The FSP mission statement, adopted in 2005, states:

The Free State Project is an agreement among 20,000 pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire, where they will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of government is the protection of life, liberty, and property. The success of the Project would likely entail reductions in taxation and regulation, reforms at all levels of government to expand individual rights and free markets, and a restoration of constitutional federalism, demonstrating the benefits of liberty to the rest of the nation and the world.

Least idealistic libertarians

 

[Weebhunter3000]

I just feel like a limited government would make things infinitely better. Leftists aren't seeing the big picture when they say that capitalism is the issue. When if fact the issue is the state, which has over the past century, manipulated loopholes, repealed laws, and started an actual civil war all in order to consolidate power. If we limit the government to an extreme degree, they could only get back to their current state through those same things(including a civil war in my opinion). In the modern age of the internet and cameras, they wouldn't be able to lie about the causes of a civil war like how the union did back then. Maybe they could for foreign wars, but a civil war is far different, since it's all happening at home field.

What about mega corporations and the abuse of employees and the environment.

 

[DeepEcoCel]

What about mega corporations

Most things that only benefit corporations(bailouts for example) would pretty much be removed, so all that's left are practices that are moreso simply for stability's sake. Since taxes would be greatly cut/removed, corporations wouldn't be able to wring taxes out of citizens to bail them out

and the abuse of employees and the environment.

Due to what I stated above, corporations would be much more reliant on the work of their employees and would be much more reluctant to abuse their workers. Because of taxes being cut, a worker could more easily and less stressfully move to another coporation

and the environment.

Not sure. I'm still not very knowledgeable of libertarianism theory so I'm surprised that I was able to answer these questions the way that I was(big ego arc incoming)

SHUT THE FUCK UP CHOMSKY

 

[DeepEcoCel]

Most things that only benefit corporations(bailouts for example) would pretty much be removed, so all that's left are practices that are moreso simply for stability's sake. Since taxes would be greatly cut/removed, corporations wouldn't be able to wring taxes out of citizens to bail them out

Due to what I stated above, corporations would be much more reliant on the work of their employees and would be much more reluctant to abuse their workers. Because of taxes being cut, a worker could more easily and less stressfully move to another coporation

Not sure. I'm still not very knowledgeable of libertarianism theory so I'm surprised that I was able to answer these questions the way that I was(big ego arc incoming)

SHUT THE FUCK UP CHOMSKY

Some wikipedia stuff:
"Critics such as Corey Robin describe this type of libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionary conservative ideology united with more traditionalist conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations."
Who's gonna tell this guy that libertarianism started as a left wing movement?
"Similarly, Nancy MacLean has argued that libertarianism is a radical right ideology that has stood against democracy."
This is a threat to (((our))) democracy
"According to MacLean, libertarian-leaning Charles and David Koch have used anonymous, dark money campaign contributions, a network of libertarian institutes and lobbying for the appointment of libertarian, pro-business judges to United States federal and state courts to oppose taxes, public education, employee protection laws, environmental protection laws and the New Deal Social Security program."
*ALERT!* *ALERT!* THE BASED ALARM IS GOING OFF!!!!!

 

[DeepEcoCel]

What about mega corporations and the abuse of employees and the environment.

Most things that only benefit corporations(bailouts for example) would pretty much be removed, so all that's left are practices that are moreso simply for stability's sake. Since taxes would be greatly cut/removed, corporations wouldn't be able to wring taxes out of citizens to bail them out

Due to what I stated above, corporations would be much more reliant on the work of their employees and would be much more reluctant to abuse their workers. Because of taxes being cut, a worker could more easily and less stressfully move to another coporation

Not sure. I'm still not very knowledgeable of libertarianism theory so I'm surprised that I was able to answer these questions the way that I was(big ego arc incoming)

SHUT THE FUCK UP CHOMSKY

Some wikipedia stuff:
"Critics such as Corey Robin describe this type of libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionary conservative ideology united with more traditionalist conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations."
Who's gonna tell this guy that libertarianism started as a left wing movement?
"Similarly, Nancy MacLean has argued that libertarianism is a radical right ideology that has stood against democracy."
This is a threat to (((our))) democracy
"According to MacLean, libertarian-leaning Charles and David Koch have used anonymous, dark money campaign contributions, a network of libertarian institutes and lobbying for the appointment of libertarian, pro-business judges to United States federal and state courts to oppose taxes, public education, employee protection laws, environmental protection laws and the New Deal Social Security program."
*ALERT!* *ALERT!* THE BASED ALARM IS GOING OFF!!!!!