[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55trap / b2 / dempart / f / polru / truebrit / veganism / webcams ]

/anarcho/ - Anarchism Board

No Rulers
Winner of the 80rd Attention-Hungry Games
/otter/ - Otter For Your Soul

May 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

File: 67407f245e3717c⋯.png (293.55 KB, 482x591, 482:591, Screen Shot 2017-11-22 at ….png)


Hey Ancaps, do you support net neualty, or monopolized free market that comes from not having it?




I don't believe in it, because I don't see any reason it should be any different than what we had before it was implemented. Besides, I want to accelerate the crazy neolib machine that runs the ISPs and traditional internet to its inevitable heat death so I can finally have enough peers to form my Pringle cantenna decentralised blockchain network garbage.



What will stop speed of Netflix from going back to how it was in 2015?

I hope you enjoy your porn stopping in the middle of your jerk off session, freemarktard.




>imblying i use proprietary software

um sweetie no



Go kys you liar.


File: 7a3236b3c279f2d⋯.png (101.59 KB, 300x300, 1:1, really.png)




>using free software




yes, of course.

intellectual "property" doesn't exist because thoughts aren't scarce resources.



>404 NAP violation not found

>inb4 404 brain not found


File: a6864b01f642ebb⋯.png (451.15 KB, 595x600, 119:120, HAHAHAHA.png)



Imagine thinking there is ANY contradiction here

How low is your IQ? At least double digit I bet



That wasn't very free market of you :(


If you faggots could put a price on non-scarce resources you know you would. You already put a price on kids.



You think you are qualified to classify what is and isn't "free market"? That's fine. :^) uh koch brother bangladesh child labour factories oil and disposable water bottles, r-read books you dummie >:(

You have no argument except this fallacious, "uhhh but 'ayn'-craps LITURALLY believe in selling kids and i have to go through 2 steps of fuzzy association to mudsling you". Also, I'm not the one deciding the prices, it's everyone who buys and sells all connected together.



"Free market" and "monopoly" is antithetical. If you want a better service, either be your own ISP or pay for someone else. "Net neutrality" MADE the monopoly, due to a SEVERE lack of competition, because it was WAY harder to even start an ISP. No regulations or taxes = more insentive to start a business.



So ISPs are cheaper and better quality now?


File: 08fd862569a5db4⋯.png (366.24 KB, 1212x981, 404:327, 1515884996396.png)


>government imposes anti-competition legislation disguised as "environmental protection" because of ISP bribery

>new companies now can't compete with established companies because it's illegal to build new infrastructure

>government imposes net neutrality laws to prevent their sanctioned monopolies from doing monopoly shit

>mentally retarded communists only pay attention to the government hindering the ISPs, refuse to acknowledge they're doing it because of how much the government helped ISPs in the first place

>claims free market capitalists are stupid because they point out how regulationism has proven not to help regulationism

I challenge you to name one monopoly that occurred in all of American history without government assistance.



This is valid. The NAP is the dumbest idea of a way to keep the status quo of Anarchism, not to mention many of these theoretical NAPs I have seen drafted strongly resemble a government constitution and enforce strict property laws and anti union laws, which violate anarchism and the free market. It seems like "dem roadz" is more important than the structure of the internet or actual anarchism to "An""cap"s.



Communism doesn't work because people are greedy, and monopolies in an ancap society wouldn't exist because there is no government to back companies. The only monopoly that would exist are the natural monopolies that provide good services to the point where there's no need for competition.



If there's no goverment to back companies they stop being companies and become something else, besides the primary issue with net neutrality is companies backing companies.


communism doesn't work because workerism inevitably recreates the capitalist structures on which it is ultimately based


also net neutrality is liberal bullshit



free market


File: f96620f214f6e8e⋯.jpg (267.77 KB, 1280x853, 1280:853, a.jpg)


I'm an agorist and I unironically believe that monopolies are categorically caused by a lack of dedication to the principle of non-aggression. If a monopoly exists, then the society is simply filled with too many people who aggress others. The only solution is to seek out these people and enlighten them to the reality that they would be better off respecting the NAP. Once there is no threat of armed aggression against a significant enough proportion of the population of non-aggressive free agents, the monopoly will cease to exist. All monopolies are the result of violence, without exception.



you're a retard buddy



this is why I'm not a proletarian frog


I really like when it becomes evident that ancaps and ancoms are the same sans the view on scarcity it's really epic because idk it's just Really epic because non marketfags think that anarchist marketfags like the control of non-scarce resources because they rightly don't even entertain that the same level of scarcity would exist post-capital but trying to argue with an ancap about they are like WHERE IS THE PROOF OF THIS (that being that there would be less scarce resource if scarce resource weren't incentivized ) and it's hard to answer because no answer you can give will satisfy their arbitrary criteria on a moving goalpost for proof anyway I hope you all are having a nice day



Neither, because net neutrality is the product of the state, and monopolies are, guess what, byproducts of the state.

>that pic

Literally no ancap has said monopolies wouldn't exist because people aren't greedy, quite the opposite. They say monopolies exist because the state "lessens the playing field" if you get what I mean. Intentional or not, the state helps monopolies exist by limiting and regulating business.

It's almost like this is ideological shit-flinging without any actual argumentation. I'm not an Ancap anymore, but people can't formulate an actual argument against it without strawmanning so hard it barely even resembles what Ancaps actually argue for. It's fucking annoying.



>M-muh human nature

Read a book, dipshit.



Monopolies would still eventually form because of companies snowballing from economies of scale and putting rivals out of business through predatory pricing



Except when diseconomies of scale take effect



I hate Ancaps hijacking Agorism


Except that private property would exist by ancapitalism, as private property is necessary for capitalism. Property is the requirement for monopoly. If somehow magically property were to be able to exist and be enforced without a state, very quickly we would get our beautiful cyberpunk dystopia with the armies of Disney, Pepsi, and Apple battling for control.



i made a whole thread asking about monopolies in leftypol. I was genuinely curious about it. Guess how many examples i got?



Really? When did that happen and what were the consequences for consumers?



Do you have a monopoly on straw? You would need to build that many strawmen.



Well, as an agorist with ancap-esque values of propertarianism and free exchange of goods, I'd argue that in a purely stateless world, the banks (which are state-funded, state-protected, and state-subsidized) and the massive corporations (which rely on bank credit and loans) would both collapse due to a lack of protection in the next economic recession. While some would see this as a tragedy, it would destroy most monopolies and reduce industries to local, sustainable enterprises. Therefore, I would argue that a stateless, pure-capitalist society would destroy the very means by which a monopoly can be formed.

[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55trap / b2 / dempart / f / polru / truebrit / veganism / webcams ]