Anti Statism (An Caps/mutualists)

Reporting in,
 also do any of you have any ideas on defense in a stateless society? The only convincing thing Ive heard is that people to be part of the society's law they have to subscribe to a PMC/PMF and that could solve the free rider problem for the most part.

>>39


It's better than having an unhappy majority ruled by the minority.

>>39
Minority rule ftw.  Crush those filthy dogs, they will leave as I say and no other way!

>>39
>>40
My solution is to accept the reality of the situation and employ logic.

Nothing is perfect, in order to prevent all disagreements escalating to the use of force then anarchists would have to be both omnipotent and perfectly ethical, so under anarchism there would still be coercion even if anarchists happen to be perfect human beings. I think valuing liberty and recognizing the limitations of the state is great and should be employed, people should be encouraged to use force as a last resort, when this fails however in order to pick up the slack we still need a state, perhaps a constitutional direct democracy which preserves individual freedoms.

Reporting in, gonna point faggot statist comments:
>>38
>>28
>>29
>>25
Lots more, Murray is busy debunking Paul Krugman so wont waste more time: Man Economy and State I wrote in 1962 debunking Paul Krugman poser. It's free like 4chan but don't have statism faggots like Anonymous in it.

>>41
Who is talking about rulership? If the majority want something then that's fine but just let them pay for it. If they want universal healthcare, education, or other similar programs then that's fine, let them pay for it and not diffuse the costs over the minority who doesn't want it.
When the majority find that they have to put more money where their mouth is to support these things then less of them will be willing to support positive liberty and instead support negative liberty.

>>43
I never claimed that there wouldn't be force/coercion(subjective) at all all i said was that your "solution" to reduce conflict is inferior to a stateless society's form of dealing with this specifically a free market based one.

Statism is not logical because it assumes legitimacy over land that it cannot rightfully claim under most basic property rights, i know property rights are subjective but it doesn't seem logical to claim so much land that is not being used. When your philosophy is based upon an illogical premise like that then it does not matter what the benefits or consequences might be the fact of the matter is that it does not have legitimacy. We dont need a state, all the things provided in a state can be provided in a stateless society its just a matter of you not subsidizing the costs with democracy.

>>45
If Majority wants healthcare and education, taxation wont happen in Free Market society. They will buy a one-price-fits-all health insurance contract or get one from donator. If they really want it and Majority is stupid, because 50% would be axiomaticaly overpaying. Probably Pareto 80% would be overpaying, 20% paying overpaying 5 times their cost in other pricing type programs.

GONA CAP THIS BECAUSE OP MUST READ

MY BRO HANS-HERMAN HOPPE DEDICATES LOTS OF HIS GENIUS DESCRIBING VERY ELLABORATE AND THOUGH-OUT PRIVATE LAW SYSTEMS.
HE THEN DEBUNK ALL NAIVE AND ADVANCED CRITICISM. HE IS PRO MISESIAN AND KILL STATISTS WITH SINGLE SYLABLE UTTERANCES BEFORE HE WAKES UP FROM BED IN THE MORNING, LITTLE SAMPLE FROM BRAZIL CONFERENCE:
"State or Private Law Society?"- Hans-Hermann Hoppe - Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej6uqo2ugZM

More elaborate literature for people with classy education. Lots of criticism debunked:
Myth of National Defense, The: Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production
Hans-Hermann Hoppe
http://mises.org/resources/1092/Myth-of-National-Defense-The-Essays-on-the-Theory-and-History-of-Security-Production

Ok so now statist is either curling in the corner on fetal position or he got so mad he needs 70s soviet aged vodka to forget intelectual shame.
What I really hope is they come back and repeat all the already answered criticisms by Mises, Hoppe, Bohm-Bawerk, Menger and killing crew.
They are though head and think their crappy little dicks are smart and sexy. Sorry statists, you are stupid, it´s praxeologically provable your whole philosophy turns you dumb by the page and even letter.
If you try to learn something thats against the very fiber of though processes you are going to turn those processes so twisted you will end up looking like 9/11 WTC before CIA cleaning teams came up.

>>12
>>>11
>>Anarcho Capitalism is only the biggest mental diarrhea of anarchism.
>Nice opinion there.
wtf AnarchistSage?! Do you mean an-cap is crap or is there some irony/joke I missed?
If you mean actual crap you are full of shit go read Mises. But what the fuck do you know by Federal Reserve and majority intersubjectivity that didnt Mises explain and Haik brought from Popper epistemoly?
You make me dizzy with that. Are you socialist anarchist and dont think next door comune is gonna import all mofo cheap "untouchable" indians and give them cushy jobs serving them nice drinks and cleaning toilets? Untouchable is gonna kiss american comune citizens feet and teach their children how awesome american anarchist is and should be treated as high authority of justice even though neighbor xenophobic comune prefer american serving drinks and cleaning toilets.

Anarchist...I don't think anarchist really understand what that word implies.

>>48
wtf AnarchistSage?! Do you mean an-cap is crap or is there some irony/joke I missed?
I was being sarcastic

>>49
I know the word has a connotation with Anti-Capitalism
I use it in the traditional sense of being antistate,
I really need to use precise definitions in order to avoid semantics
Instead of saying "capitalism" i should say free market
Instead of saying "Anarchism or anarcho-capitalism" i should say anti-statism.

Watched Hoppe lately AnarchistSage?

>>50
Anarchy is not just anti-state, though. It is also anti-authority. At the core of anarchism is an ideology that believes humans do not need police or courts or any authoritarian institutions. This is opposed to the anarcho-capitalist ideology in which police and courts are provided by private, competing businesses.

Then wouldn't there have to be laws supporting the private company's authority? Because otherwise courts couldn't exist. Isn't the concept of a court system exactly what anarchism isn't?

>>52
The word Authority is derived from the Latin word auctoritas, meaning invention, advice, opinion, influence, or command. In English, the word 'authority' can be used to mean power given by the state (in the form of Members of Parliament, Judges, Police Officers, etc.), by academic knowledge of an area (someone can be an authority on a subject).
What do you mean by authority because it seems here that its basically Anti Statism as well.
Authoritarian is a broad term, am i authoritarian for having control over my body and the things i build and produce?

>>53
The laws would be based on an inter-subjective consensus that about 95% of the population agree on. I imagine there would be laws allowing those companies to do their job and if there's any conflict then the matter could be settled by mediation or whatever the people agree on. Of course if people don't want to be part of the laws then they would be branded an outlaw. People can live as outlaws in a stateless society its just that they wont be protected by the laws.(They can still be punished if they break them though.)

>>52
>>53
Anonymous is ignorant of Hoppe, watch him in Brazil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej6uqo2ugZM

Private companies are supported by clients not coercion. They provide clients safety from phisical agression or else they will be at war with the rest of the world.

Incentive to expand clients possible businesses partners will create a inter-agency contractual system with standardization and contractual convergence.

Security contracts stipulations (an analogue to Statist oppressive and aggressive "laws") will become more and more alike between different agencies.

“You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments: rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws….” ~John Adams

If this is what a well protected minority think, they can survive as a free people without any threat. If most people think this way, wars would be as short as terrorist attacks, 1, 2 days at most, probably terrorism would be contained to kindergarden levels.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psosLpDALuA

State or Private Law Society? (by Hans-Hermann Hoppe)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6V0XzJfm8U