[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Catalog

See 8chan's new software in development (discuss) (help out)
Please read: important information about failed Infinity Next migration
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


A recognized Safe Space for liberty - if you're triggered and you know it, clap your hands!

File: 1451030952139-0.gif (365.06 KB, 488x650, 244:325, 1450658203961-0.gif)

File: 1451030952140-1.jpg (885.71 KB, 2560x1600, 8:5, 6954146-beautiful-city-wal….jpg)

 No.14309

What would an Anarcho-Capitalist society look like?

 No.14310

Probably like the one you're living in, but with the option to either go completely agrarian with minimal contact with others all the way to signing away some of your liberties and living in a homogeneous, centrally-planned community. I imagine a track housing suburb where an elected committee makes decisions about utilities/services and, by contract, you are required to pay them. It's not coercion because you can leave at any time but you have to play by the rules you agreed to if you want to live there.

I made a long, rambling post about this ages ago.


 No.14312

>>14309

depends on the filter/camera you use


 No.14338

File: 1451058934213.jpg (209.27 KB, 1239x622, 1239:622, an-caps BTFO.jpg)


 No.14360

Like now but with child prostitutes and no niggers


 No.14377

>>14360

Truly the apex of civilization.


 No.14378

File: 1451078761415.jpg (42.19 KB, 640x225, 128:45, roads9.jpg)

>>14309

No idea. I'd start by imagining modern society without vice laws like drug and prostitution restrictions. No taxes means people keep much more of their earnings. No election cycle, so the news isn't that big a deal. No state to declare wars, so that isn't in the headlines either.

You're more worried about getting sued than arrested for hurting somebody, and if somebody hurts you, the damages actually go to pay you. Then again, maybe your insurance company pays you up front, and then they go to sue the other guy. It's hard to say, exactly. You're never afraid of cops, since it'd be a huge waste of money to pay them to just beat you up and throw you in a cage, and nobody wants to pay for that shit.

There's always jobs. Maybe you can't get a position as a paper-pusher like you're used to, but you know you aren't going to starve 'cause somebody always needs some dishes cleaned or the lawn trimmed or a ride to the airport.

Saving money isn't a shitshow, since interest isn't being pinned down by regulators, and the currency you keep is offered by competing firms, trying to attract customers with the most stable, interchangeable currency.

Increased purchasing power means shorter working hours. Since you aren't losing 80% of your buying power to taxes, you can live just about as comfortably as you currently do with only 20% of your current working time. You'll probably work a bit more than that, though, so you can save up and retire before you're 40.

Infrastructure is maintained, and constantly updated by its private owners. If their infrastructure goes to shit, they lose customers.

Nobody wanders around wondering what "The Law" is, since it's just a matter of respecting other people's property. Don't mess with their shit, and they've got no basis for coming after you legally. If they try, you can counter-sue.

Court proceedings are as fast as possible; time in court costs money and nobody wants to have to pay for that shit. It cuts into profit margins, but a rush job means a loss in business.

Companies can't pay a regulator for the right to pollute people's homes; they cause damage, those folks can sue. No central regulatory agency to stop them. Pollution is expensive and negative externalities get internalized.

All in all, every problem, every need people encounter in their daily lives will have multiple solutions; some great, some terrible. You'll occasionally get a shit deal or the runaround, but on the whole things will generally get more cool and less shitty over time, and everyone will take it for granted until somebody tries to take it away. Give it a couple generations and you'll have the Jetsons: a bunch of people zipping around in phenomenal technology which satisfies their every whim and they'll spend most of their time bitching that they had to push the button five times today!

>>14338

Heh, that's pretty funny.

>implying dollars


 No.14382

File: 1451085546176.jpg (33.83 KB, 285x242, 285:242, Frodo Lives!.jpg)

>>14338

>live in statist utopia

>wake up

>no cars because free enterprise never existed and the wheel was never invented


 No.14383

Somalia


 No.14384

File: 1451089792803.jpg (76.35 KB, 640x960, 2:3, K.jpg)

>>14378

>mfw every single an-cap believes that every non an-cap is a statist, whether they are anarchist or not


 No.14386

>>14384

If you are not an an-cap you believe in using force/coercion/violence to prevent voluntary arrangements (including *gasp* employer-employee arrangements) because you don't like them ;_; in practice a state will have to enforce your hand wringing


 No.14389

>>14386

How will you keep your slavesemployees at the factory without violence? If implemented this way it would literally become communism peacefully and overnight


 No.14392

>>14389

they can leave if they wish. They need to sign a contract when they start working, which tells how much they get paid for how much work and things like that. If you leave early, you might not get money.


 No.14393

>>14384

>every single an-cap believes that every non an-cap is a statist, whether they are anarchist or not

Not exactly. I think everybody who isn't AnCap is mistaken about a few things, and that most people are statists, but I wouldn't call every non-AnCap a statist per se. AnPrims are silly, but there's nothing statist about rubbing sticks together. AnTrans folks have a weird approach, but givin' me the heebie-jeebies ain't statist. Even left anarchists who would allow AnCaps to practice their approach in peace can rightly bear the title of "anarchist".

>>14389

>How will you keep your slavesemployees at the factory without violence?

You come to an agreement; when they do stuff you like, you do stuff they like. If one side doesn't hold up their end of the deal, the other side cuts out, and probably tells everybody else about it.

See, there's this stuff called money, and you give it to people when they do the things you want. If they stop working for you, you stop paying them, and vice-versa. Novel idea, I know.


 No.14397

>>14384

Is ancapism a mental defect?


 No.14398

>>14392

You can leave your state too. States are voluntary.


 No.14399

>>14382

Daily reminder that states predate capitalism.

Learn history you fucking faggots.


 No.14400

>>14393

But why should they play your game when they can have the factory and food/shelter for free?

>>14392

What validity has this contract? Who enforces it, and how?


 No.14405

>>14398

lol

>>14400

>4 free lol

please elaborate how

>le contract

The terms and conditions of the contract are to be followed. The penalties (if any) are to be specified in the contract by the person who makes it and then has to be voluntarily agredd upon by both (or as many) parties signing the contract/agreement. In case of discrepancies, in AnCap, private courts are used, in Minarchism, gubmint courts.

In case of a private court, all parties have to agree to use the same court, or courts that follow the same rules/laws.


 No.14406

>>14399

doesn't mean they were any good, nigger.

You owe your progress to the United States in the 1850-1950s.


 No.14408

>>14400

Well first of all there's the NAP. If they really want to have a worker owned co-op, they can pool their wages, save up some money, and buy the factory from their boss. And to answer your second question, one of the many Dispute Resolution Organizations that will exist in Ancapistan.


 No.14413

>>14382

>live in statist utopia

>live

lol

failed right there


 No.14415

>>14397

You forgot your smug anime face.

>>14398

They aren't. If you assume that the relation between a state and its citizen is a contractual one, then I'd like to see that contract. Obviously, no one's ever actually signed it, save maybe for some revolutionaries who were never given a mandate by the citizens. There can't be an implied contract either, though. For one thing, such an implied contract could not bind children, yet the state assumes it does. For another, implied contracts still require a manifestation of intent. Citizens don't know what they are "agreeing" to, by and large; if a citizen did not know the existence of a certain law or was mistaken as to its substance, then it would follow, if he and the state were bound by an implied contract, that he would not be bound by this law. It would be like signing a contract with a clause that was accidentally not printed on it. More importantly, though, a manifestation of intent cannot be regarded as such if it was acquired by fraudulent or coercive means. As the state does little but coercion and fraud, that renders most, if not all, supposed manifestations of intent void, so an implied contract never came into existence. Therefore, the relation between a state and its citizen is not a contractual one.

Leaves us with a proprietarian relation. Does the state own its territory, then? The answer is a clear "no", as the state acquired its property by ill means, namely through fraud and coercion. This is reason enough to discard this argument. Even if the state had once acquired its territory through legitimate means, it'd be an absent landlord, and would lose claims over parts of its territory after decades of letting nature take its course on them. If you mix your labor with matter, you acquire property, according to the theory of homesteading; if the matter shows no marks of the labor you mixed with it, then there's no reason why your property should still keep existing. When this happens can only be ruled on a case-by-case-basis, but we never see these rulings, nor does the state ever feel the need to prove that it actually acquired its property through legitimate means. This shows quite clearly that the state itself assumes that the relation between itself and its subjects is not based on its supposed property over its territory.

TL;DR please, stop bringing any of the myriad variations of the social contract-argument up. I'm a lawyer. I know a contract when I see one.


 No.14417

File: 1451146141803.jpg (56.12 KB, 720x361, 720:361, social contract4.jpg)

>>14398

>You can leave your state too. States are voluntary.

Leaving your home is a positive action. Not coming to work anymore is a negative action. In other words, packing all your shit and moving is an action imposed upon you, whereas terminating employment is the cessation of a contractual activity. Since not being contractually bound to do a thing can't be considered being made to do a thing, the termination of a contract is purely voluntary, whereas being forced to leave your home is not.

You would have to be in your home on a contractual basis, and termination of the lease would constitute rescinding your usage privileges of the domicile. This is essentially the rationale that many statists attempt for the state. However, they cannot establish the validity of the state's claim to your land, since their claim consists entirely of either pointing at a chunk of land saying "mine", or buying it with stolen money; neither of which are valid.

>>14400

>But why should they play your game when they can have the factory and food/shelter for free?

Well if I'm competing with "free", then I'll have to offer something they aren't getting for "free", or something of such higher quality that they'd be willing to work for it. If I can't do that, I don't get employees and my business fails.

>Who enforces it, and how?

Everybody, by virtue of exercising their freedom of association. If somebody is known to have violated a contract (meaning they've broken their promise), people are less likely to trust them in the future when they make a promise, so they just won't make the kinds of deals that will really benefit them.

This takes many forms: For example, if you want a loan, they check your credit rating (which is just a measure of how likely you are to keep your payment promises), and if it looks like you aren't trustworthy, you don't get a loan. They don't shoot you.


 No.14420

>>14417

>>14415

You can always just kill yourself if you don't like it. Not choosing to end your life means you consent to it.


 No.14489

>>14420

Huh. Turns out non-consent is physically impossible, since everyone who doesn't consent to everything is dead. Thanks, enlightened stranger!


 No.14533

File: 1451208224069.jpg (62.78 KB, 600x600, 1:1, 1446106568704.jpg)


 No.14573

>>14405

>hey comrade capitalist, this factory is ours now. Not to worry comrade, guns outweigh NAP!

>>14408

But what if they say your NAP can go fuck itself, shoot you, and take your factory?

>>14417

What can be offered that can't be stolen? Why would anyone care about their reputation if they can just take anything they ever need?


 No.14576

>>14573

>we can't own guns too

lol are you serious


 No.14588

>>14573

>What can be offered that can't be stolen? Why would anyone care about their reputation if they can just take anything they ever need?

Tell you what; give that strategy a go and see how long you can go in a free society before somebody shoots your ass.


 No.14589

>>14588

lol you are stupid


 No.14603

>>14589

>brain

>not using it


 No.14607

>>14603

that's you kek


 No.14613

>>14589

Well golly gee; I never looked at it that way.

So making a habit of stealing things from armed people who're keen on not being stolen from actually is a good idea because I'm stupid? Breathtakingly succinct.


 No.14615

>>14607

you forgot to greentext


 No.14648

>>14338

That greentext sounds like some strange dystopia where innovation doesn't exist and nobody knows the demands of the market

>no internet

Gee people really want the internet, too bad it's impossible to create without the government

>unregulated food

Gee people really wish they could eat safe food, too bad the government is the only thing that can regulate anything

>no regulations requiring seat belts

Gee I really wish I could put my seatbelt on, too bad I need the government to do that for me

>no roads

Gee there are no roads in my city, too bad businesses are physically incapable of creating them

>work for 9 hours

Gee I wish I could work less hours, too bad I can't find better work without the government

>19.95 for this call

Gee people are really tired of spending money on phone calls, too bad economic competition doesn't exist

Then the rest of them are just "a libertarian society would be poor!" Yeah, totally, because more trade creates less money…?


 No.14658

>>14648

Are you retarded?


 No.14660

>>14658

Are you retarded?


 No.14669

>>14658

forgot to greentext there, buddy


 No.14674

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.14703

>>14658

What? Are you mad at the free market?

>people want stuff and are willing to pay

>people make stuff and are willing to trade

But that can't be true right, because we need big mommy government to help us wipe our butts




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]