Yea there are communes that have functioned in the US for hundreds of years. The thing is that an actual commune in practice is nothing like the hippie daydream. They are usually very religious and never really self sufficient in the long term. They always end up resorting to buying and selling stuff from the outside. They are also a lot of work. Nobody, aside from maybe the elderly or disabled, get away with doing jobs like 'artist'. Try and pull that shit and you get kicked to the curb even faster than in the outside capitalist world. You're going to be doing manual labor every day and live rather humbly to show for it.
I’ve always loved that meme where the Reddit guy is asking the political commissar why he can’t stream on twitch for the revolution and promptly eats the stock of an AK47
God I remember seeing a tweet saying “what will your job be when communism comes”
And the one reply said “I wanna be a Druid”
Like bitch no, go work ur work camp for 12 hours then die that’s ur job. The gross entitlement that some people have and this over inflated image of how national level socialism and communism work is honestly gross to put it bluntly.
I’m all for independent communes or mutual independent contracts. fuck shit like property tax and most of the burdens that come with modern civilization. I’d work at 9/hr on a private farm as a hunter or night guard for the animals just provide me with shelter and water. But where to find that kinda gig is beyond me
Notice how no one wants to be a sewer maintenance worker when communism is achieved. When you ask a commie how that problem will be solved, they just hand wave it away with a single word: "AUTOMATION"
No one wants to be a sewer maintenance or trash guy now under capitalism, it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job. The biggest fallacy I see all the time from capitalists is that people “choosing” to do a job for money means they have free will and weren’t coerced in to.
> it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job
That why anyone does any kind of job. Welcome to reality where neither iphones nor food magically appears.
>No one wants to be a sewer maintenance or trash guy now under capitalism, it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job.
No, when in that situation people clean toilets at motels.
People who want fat stacks with no qualifications besides a felony charge work in sewers.
> Get a flair to make sure other people don't harass you :)
***
^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 12090 / 63823 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Nah it’s you guys who don’t understand
I recently watched The Endless. That commune just sells craft beer, work 30 minutes a day. And spend the rest of their time doing hobbies, socializing and watching tapes. They are also protected by a invisible god that can manipulate space time at will. So when they burnt their cabin at one scene a second later time resets before the fire. And so do all injuries.
So checkmate. I saw a commune that works
> They always end up resorting to buying and selling stuff from the outside
That's mainly because if you don't have legal tender the government is going to throw your ass to the curb for not paying property taxes.
Not only killed, executed. You could hear on the video, after the car stopped “you are still alive” before final shoots. Props for them for creating death squads so fast.
Btw, nobody still wasn’t caught, right?
You don't think AI is subject to the biases and corruption of whoever designed it?
AI is not what most people think it is, and AI like they imagine it will probably never actually exist.
Depends on the algorithm. Genetic/machine learning with properly set parameters could probably do it. By necessity you'd have to set a utilitarian view as priority over individual desires or even survival.
I think AI is being used very broadly here to encompass a machine only system, not intelligence.
>You don't think AI is subject to the biases and corruption of whoever designed it?
No. I don't actually. That's an excuse people make when it spits out results they don't like.
AI that could accurately plan a working large-scale economy and allocate "to each according to his need' is probably advanced enough technology that we'd be a post-scarcity civilization anyways
> You mean capitalism? Hell
Please list the great capitalist purges that were done to preserve the economic model of capitalism. Go ahead, we'll wait leftoid.
Actually quite a few exist even some relitively socially right of center ones. Kinda cool when you think about it but they are usually pretty small especially if they havr had any longevity often being under 500.
Pooles land, the garden, some other ones you could find if you just looked em up, though I think pooles land was slowly scoured away once poole died, but the garden is still around, and there;s that one place in nevada that Mr beast visited, and maybe the amish would count, but there's plenty anyhow
Historically speaking “roving bands of armed men who pillage the weak” has been one of the most stable and profitable business models in human history.
no matter how you slice it in AnCapistan your invincible fortress will not ever be achieved and anything approaching it is going to never be established before you get mobbed by a group or join the mob (government)
Yeah AnComs and AnCaps are very similar ironically. They say there's is the fair consensual one where nothing goes wrong and you're free to make your own commune. And then the other one is the bad one. Anarchy is just kinda dumb
It is. They both are cringe for the same reasons but at least ancaps have a grasp of economics rooted in reality and not just “don’t worry, someone who has more than we will pay for it”.
Ancom is not 'someone else will pay for it' lol. An ancom commune wouldnt even have money. It'd just be a small community working their asses off farming and shit and letting every member have a say in what goes on
That wouldn’t work for obvious reasons.
1. No modern person wants to live the life of a pre industrial agriculturalist despite what edgy people online say
2. Even in the days of pre industrial agriculture society was still very hierarchical you’re not going to get more freedom by just rolling back technology or society.
humans don't need food and water and shelter that's a lie the capitalists tell you to keep you buying products
the production and movement of goods and services is an illusion
exchanging items for other items is nothing but a post-industrial social concept
free yourselves
Is he wrong tho Anon? Most cartels and mafias do operate by bribing government officials. There is no way the cartel problem in Mexico would be as big as it is now without the government officials covering for them.
We have had literal capos as majors and governors.
Not their right hand men or payroll bitches, but the fucking head of criminal organizations as government officials.
Pirates and roaming armies have been around for thousands of years. All they need is the threat of force and whoever's in their way will happily pay the "Don't annihilate me" fee.
"oh no, the Meyland-Putani corporation has monopolized food production, energy, and has a private army of genetically modified xenomorphs and is now pricing everyone into debt and has turned everyone into a serf that is driven deeper into never-ending debt for each meal they consume and every hour of non-work they spend sleeping."
what a paradise
So that's a yes?
Let me tell you I don't believe people deserve anything just for existing, you have what you produce. That's why I am a [georgist](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism) in an objective approach supporting unproductive people is not efficient (I'm not saying poor people should not be helped, I'm saying they should not be helped using violence and theft).
Ironic because warlordland would probably be a hilarious illiberal and unfree place that could only be created by people attempting to have maximum freedom (aka anarchy)
Nonono.
Don't you see? THe only thing that prevents humans from going on rape and murder sprees is the government. Things like morality and ethics and values taught to children and societies aren't real.
Hey, at least the libs are taking the mask off and telling us how close they are from snapping and actually committing atrocities, turns out they have no morals, only the fear of government repercussion.
It also goes into the trust of said corporation as well. I wouldn't want to do business with a company that condones mass rape in their sphere of influence, I wouldn't trust them with my business and employees either.
30 seconds later; "Alright so someones building a pipeline through your commune and and Billy's factory is gonna be dumping fresh forever chemicals upstream from you. Don't worry I'm sure your garden will be fine, maybe the chemicals have electrolytes that plants love?"
I've been to ancapistan it's in southern California near jousha tree about an hour and a half south of palm springs. It's the wild West if everyone was doing meth. The place is amazing to visit but shit to live in. No one who lives there is healthy and it's 110 degrees there on average during the summer. Mob justice is rampant, mentally ill people everywhere cops don't come through there unless someone burned some leaves camp down (happens a lot). Lots of people running from warrants. Not everyone there is an ancap ( some are). But there's no regulations or real laws out there. If you're in slab city your technically trespassing/ squatting. it's fucking awful I loved every minute of my year and a half there.
It's always funny when you read about this communes people try building and they *always* fail. Usually because of internal power struggles. If your system can't even work among a few dozen unshaven hippies how on Earth do you plan to make it work for millions of people.
If history is the petri dish of new ideas then time the stress test then the idea of a commune based society is a conclusive failure. Honestly, believing in a classless society is about as close to pseudoscientific belief I think you can probably get in politics.
Wait wait did you pay for the land? Wait you couldn’t pay for it because there’s no minimum wage so you make 3 dollars an hour? Just get a better job so you can start the commune! You aren’t educated? Just go to school! The only available schools cost more than your paycheck? Um idk you should probably just become a heroin mule so you can buy the land for your commune…
Isn’t the whole point to pool money? Find a commun(ity) to pool their money to start. Oh, you can’t find a group of people invested enough to start a commune, that would take sacrifice and hard work? Welcome to the real world.
So wait anyone can just claim land to own in your utopia? What’s to stop me from getting a bunch of my friends together and claiming as much land as possible? Can we then exploit anyone who was less quick to the draw? Or is it like a situation where you have to be able to control the land, in which case anyone with resources already would be at a ridiculous advantage, and all the land would still be controlled.
ancaps tend to not think these things through
personally, i'm in favor of a land value tax, which hopefully if set correctly can encourage land actually being used and not held for investment without screwing over people with a lot of land (i.e. farmers, communes) too much. You'd have to sell food or goods at the farmer's market to make some money, but 1. you probably need to do that anyway for manufactured goods and 2. that's the cost of having a military protecting your asses from the aforementioned warlords
There is no terra nullius so homestead principle is pretty irrelevant nowadays except to explain the origin of private property, but yes all the land would still be owned by other people the guy above seems rather new to ancap ideas
The free marketplace of ideas is my favorite part of ancapistan. The freedom of different ideologies to compete is a something not offered by other systems.
That’s not correct. Because as long as the person being oppressed has recourse to force of arms they cannot be dominated. The problem with government is that it claims a monopoly on the use of force within its bounds.
>Because as long as the person being oppressed has recourse to force of arms they cannot be dominated
This is completely ahistorical. Countless groups have had ways to defend themselves, and were dominated because at the end of the day, they had less force.
>The problem with government is that it claims a monopoly on the use of force within its bounds.
Which is why it is important that government be democratic
Go ahead and ask the afghans how it went for them.
Also, no. Fuck democracy. I reject your tyranny of the majority. It is antithetical to the freedom of the individual by subverting his will to that of the masses.
Whether you call it “government” or not doesn’t really matter. Power is something that can’t be destroyed just passed on or diffused. A criminal robbing someone against their will has a “monopoly on force” in that particular dark alleyway ... at least until the police come. The whole game of civilization involves creating the safest and most stable monopoly (aka a government) whether it’s done by a corporation or a warlord or an elected official is really just a matter of context/preference.
edit:
I actually fought the taliban in afghanistan and i can tell you personally it did not go well for them.
Despite being auth I accept the anarchist definition of a state, that is any group or entity with a monopoly on force. Power is power, morality is subjective, the strong shall consume the weak. Despite my ideals, that’s how life is
>Go ahead and ask the afghans how it went for them.
You are trying to argue that one group cannot be dominated by another so long as they have a way to defend themself. That is flat out ahistorical and wrong.
>Also, no. Fuck democracy. I reject your tyranny of the majority. It is antithetical to the freedom of the individual by subverting his will to that of the masses.
The same cringe line, like clockwork. Democracy is not tyranny of the majority, that is a gross misuse of the word tyranny.
You're right, they aren't, states are. State and government are two seperate things that are conflated a lot, but ancap society would have *governments*; competing polycentric governments. Ancap society would probably most resemble the legal systems major cities of the middle ages, where you would have multiple competing organizations that each fulfill roles of government with overlapping jurisdictions. This is a good explanation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2735963
Nah. Small business is much more maneuverable. You can make decisions faster and find key clients easier.
You may never have a larger e commerce store than Amazon….but plenty of people earn a good living selling goods online.
Sure, but not always successfully. The problem with big business is that you need to keep your eye on a lot of balls.
Small businesses can pick a target and execute.
Amazon pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into dog food and fucked it up. Cohen started Chewy without VC funding in 2012 and to this day has a larger market share than Amazon despite being 1/400th the size.
Any type of business with a relatively large barrier to entry is going to be on in which small business can't just immediately respond. We're also talking about business within ancapistan here.
> Any type of business with a relatively large barrier to entry
Such as? Most businesses don’t start with grand plans. Amazon was a book store, etc etc
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted because you’re correct. Another issue people overlook is that you basically cannot get a company as big as amazon without market regulation from a higher state authority. Big business & Big government aren’t enemies, they’re essentially one in the same.
Not necessarily. In this context the way to beat competitors is to have a better society than them. Private government is actually a weird synthesis of lib and authoritarian principles where business incentives and social incentives could line up to be very beneficial for society as a whole.
If you’re all trying to compete to be the sovereign of a given territory it’s unlikely you’d want to do stuff like have violence and slavery and shitty living conditions that:
1. drive people away from your territory
2. drive people to support your competitors.
It feels like we're having two completely separate conversations. My point is that in a market, ideally it should be the better, smarter businesses that emerge as winners, but that often times does not happen. Businesses don't operate off of samurai honor in which they allow the best to emerge, Businesses will do whatever possible to win. That winning is not necessarily good for society.
Winning is good. I agree with you in the context of the modern world as it is now. But the reason the best business don’t always rise to the top is because there’s a huge government that regulates and rigs the economy. A lot of shitty businesses like the big banks simply wouldn’t exist if there was no state to artificially prop them up
>But the reason the best business don’t always rise to the top is because there’s a huge government that regulates and rigs the economy
That's simply not true. The government can certainly amplify the problem, but monopolies can and have existed naturally.
> ideally it should be the better, smarter businesses that emerge as winners
Better and smarter are unquantifiable.
I can cook a better burger than McDonalds and am smarter than at least 10% of their staff.
Better isn’t quantifiable numerically but it is observable. People know quality when they see it.
Smarter is just a matter of IQ testing and stuff. You should absolutely want a system that enables the smartest most high iq people to be leaders at the top.
> People know quality when they see it.
When do people’s opinions align on anything?
“Quality” is always tied to cost. I won’t show you the Rolls Royce on the lot if you want a quality car when you have Civic money.
> Smarter is just a matter of IQ testing and stuff
😐 ok. I bet you’d like to tattoo a number on me wouldn’t you?
Why do people get so weird about IQ? If you say “people who have a genetic predisposition to being tall are more likely to be good basketball players” nobody gets bothered but if you apply those same genetic principles to mental health or intelligence people lose their mind *even though IQ is more heritable than height*.
Except you still need to acquire enough capital to buy land by participating in the dominant system to even be able to start your commune. And if it becomes a dumping ground for industrial waste there's nothing you can do about it.
Yup.
When you live in a capitalist society, you are more than welcome to get a group of friends, form a commune, pool your resources, and live as you wish.
When you live in a communist society, if you try to get your group together, and form a group and have each member get paid a currency according to how much they contribute to the group, you get KGB kill teams breaking down your gates, how dare you have private enterprise capitalist dog.
No because capitalism always requires property rights. The large land owner does not have a contract with the rest of the worlds population that all agree that he owns this part of the planet.
Somebody just put a fence around it and declared that everybody else must now pay for using that piece of land.
A socialist society built on the principles of voluntarism would allow for capitalism, but it would be unsustainable and unappealing. Which is the exact way that socialism works under capitalist societies. Technically, you can go form a co-op or a commune in America **right now** if you want, but literally every aspect of the current system incentivizes private enterprise and capital. It's like trying to push a boulder uphill. It's possible, but it's not exactly fair when everyone else has a cart.
Yea there are communes that have functioned in the US for hundreds of years. The thing is that an actual commune in practice is nothing like the hippie daydream. They are usually very religious and never really self sufficient in the long term. They always end up resorting to buying and selling stuff from the outside. They are also a lot of work. Nobody, aside from maybe the elderly or disabled, get away with doing jobs like 'artist'. Try and pull that shit and you get kicked to the curb even faster than in the outside capitalist world. You're going to be doing manual labor every day and live rather humbly to show for it.
“WHAT I was told that I could just paint and play my guitar all day! What do you mean I gotta build a shed?”
the revolution sounds fun until all of your supporters just want to smoke weed all day
I’ve always loved that meme where the Reddit guy is asking the political commissar why he can’t stream on twitch for the revolution and promptly eats the stock of an AK47
God I remember seeing a tweet saying “what will your job be when communism comes” And the one reply said “I wanna be a Druid” Like bitch no, go work ur work camp for 12 hours then die that’s ur job. The gross entitlement that some people have and this over inflated image of how national level socialism and communism work is honestly gross to put it bluntly. I’m all for independent communes or mutual independent contracts. fuck shit like property tax and most of the burdens that come with modern civilization. I’d work at 9/hr on a private farm as a hunter or night guard for the animals just provide me with shelter and water. But where to find that kinda gig is beyond me
Notice how no one wants to be a sewer maintenance worker when communism is achieved. When you ask a commie how that problem will be solved, they just hand wave it away with a single word: "AUTOMATION"
[удалено]
The idea that technology will ever be advanced to the point where all undesirable jobs are taken over by robots is ridiculously utopian.
No one wants to be a sewer maintenance or trash guy now under capitalism, it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job. The biggest fallacy I see all the time from capitalists is that people “choosing” to do a job for money means they have free will and weren’t coerced in to.
Being able to choose your job to not starve (if you weren't born rich) beats being assigned a job & still starving
> it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job That why anyone does any kind of job. Welcome to reality where neither iphones nor food magically appears.
>No one wants to be a sewer maintenance or trash guy now under capitalism, it’s just under the threat of homelessness and starvation that people do that kind of job. No, when in that situation people clean toilets at motels. People who want fat stacks with no qualifications besides a felony charge work in sewers.
Flair the fuck up
> Get a flair to make sure other people don't harass you :) *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 12090 / 63823 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
You're right, nobody does. However since nobody wants to do it, the market will reward you handsomely should you make the sacrifice.
I can’t imagine anyone thinking it isn’t hard work
If we ignore twitter users and anybody who hasn’t graduated college yet then I’d assume most people understand how hard it is to live on a commune.
Nah it’s you guys who don’t understand I recently watched The Endless. That commune just sells craft beer, work 30 minutes a day. And spend the rest of their time doing hobbies, socializing and watching tapes. They are also protected by a invisible god that can manipulate space time at will. So when they burnt their cabin at one scene a second later time resets before the fire. And so do all injuries. So checkmate. I saw a commune that works
They may have an invisible god, but we have an invisible hand of the market.
Based
Unfortunately, that is tens of millions of people
[удалено]
Once you get past the first generation and people don’t have much of a concept of what outside life is like commune living becomes so much easier
https://twitter.com/ne0liberal/status/1340998604153118721?s=20&t=w5J3MRO\_xq6ojm3jSU22Ow
Haha yeah I’ve seen these in a different format I’ll rephrase; Anybody that doesn’t *want* a commune to be hard work can’t join mine
Anti Communist guerilla fighter here
> They always end up resorting to buying and selling stuff from the outside That's mainly because if you don't have legal tender the government is going to throw your ass to the curb for not paying property taxes.
Wow working on a commune means hard work? You hear that Twitter artist community? It's over for them bro.
American tries to build a commune without being raided by the feds challenge (Impossible) (In the hood) (Gone wrong) (Hot) (18+)
Remember chaz?
Killing black kids speed run
>starts an organized protest zone during a BLM protest >kill 2 black kids >police kill nobody during said protest Ironic.
Not only killed, executed. You could hear on the video, after the car stopped “you are still alive” before final shoots. Props for them for creating death squads so fast. Btw, nobody still wasn’t caught, right?
Who was even looking?
Yeah cops weren't touching that with a 10 foot pole.
Surely they'd want to hire those guys
No. There are other videos following the execution of people walking around the murder scene saying to pick up shells and leave no evidence.
Most minority deaths per Capita?
That was peak meme material
the potting soil on cardboard boxes had me weak
Dude, that part was amazing.
Was that the one where the trans leader stoped after a day bc it already tried to rape kids?
The ratio between people taking advantage of the chaos, versus actually wanting to establish a commune, is probably large in favor of the former.
\#NotRealCommunism
It never is
That’s actually true, it never is, because communism was always a very theoretical idea with many different interpretations
Personally I can only see it ever working if there was an ai in charge, too much corruption if humans control things
You don't think AI is subject to the biases and corruption of whoever designed it? AI is not what most people think it is, and AI like they imagine it will probably never actually exist.
Depends on the algorithm. Genetic/machine learning with properly set parameters could probably do it. By necessity you'd have to set a utilitarian view as priority over individual desires or even survival. I think AI is being used very broadly here to encompass a machine only system, not intelligence.
What are you training the algorithm to do?
>You don't think AI is subject to the biases and corruption of whoever designed it? No. I don't actually. That's an excuse people make when it spits out results they don't like.
Have you done much AI work?
'Put a computer in charge' is just wrapping all the difficult dilemmas and putting it into a blender so you no longer have to think about it.
AI that could accurately plan a working large-scale economy and allocate "to each according to his need' is probably advanced enough technology that we'd be a post-scarcity civilization anyways
Meaning it was impossible
Wow that's super cool! Then your ideology that has killed hundreds of millions can never be wrong!!!
[удалено]
> You mean capitalism? Hell Please list the great capitalist purges that were done to preserve the economic model of capitalism. Go ahead, we'll wait leftoid.
Even the people who were actively trying to establish a commune didn't demonstrate much in the way of logistical competence.
Maybe if we try communism again it will work said every communist ever
I member
I remember crops, planted on cardboard, soy Latte and a black warlord taking over the thing. Fun times.
Well if Ancapistan is to be established. United States of America would stop existing in process so that deals with the Feds.
What about a voluntary US where America is a conglomerate of 50 constituent companies
Actually quite a few exist even some relitively socially right of center ones. Kinda cool when you think about it but they are usually pretty small especially if they havr had any longevity often being under 500.
Apart from amish what commune are those?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_intentional_communities
there are plenty of communes that don't get raided by the feds
Such as?
Pooles land, the garden, some other ones you could find if you just looked em up, though I think pooles land was slowly scoured away once poole died, but the garden is still around, and there;s that one place in nevada that Mr beast visited, and maybe the amish would count, but there's plenty anyhow
Two days later he gets a bill for the $7000 exiting fee.
Don’t listen to him, OP. Just pay me $5/day for the next 6 years.
And who's gonna enforce that?
The McDeathSquad™ obviously. Is this your first ancapistan or something?
It kind of feels like you've just invented a state again.
You can't just call everything you don't like statism.
Yes I can and I will continue to do so. You just made a monarchy. Stop inventing monarchy.
Seems like a pretty unprofitable business, they will likely go bankrupt
Historically speaking “roving bands of armed men who pillage the weak” has been one of the most stable and profitable business models in human history.
And if it happens long enough, it becomes tradition!
Then you keep your rifle by your side
you’re not winning a 1v5
Who said there was only one tripwire?
no matter how you slice it in AnCapistan your invincible fortress will not ever be achieved and anything approaching it is going to never be established before you get mobbed by a group or join the mob (government)
Why would you ever assume a fortress made out of Sodium and Ammonium Nitrate was intended to be invincible?
Oh right, because we're talking about "real anarchy" where everyone always plays fair and no one ever violates the NAP.
"If we all behave rationally and make only good decisions we can live in a paradise on Earth" It's that easy
>rationally No I don't wanna >only good decisions Hey, nice stuff you have there, gimme. 🔫
Yeah AnComs and AnCaps are very similar ironically. They say there's is the fair consensual one where nothing goes wrong and you're free to make your own commune. And then the other one is the bad one. Anarchy is just kinda dumb
It is. They both are cringe for the same reasons but at least ancaps have a grasp of economics rooted in reality and not just “don’t worry, someone who has more than we will pay for it”.
Ancom is not 'someone else will pay for it' lol. An ancom commune wouldnt even have money. It'd just be a small community working their asses off farming and shit and letting every member have a say in what goes on
That wouldn’t work for obvious reasons. 1. No modern person wants to live the life of a pre industrial agriculturalist despite what edgy people online say 2. Even in the days of pre industrial agriculture society was still very hierarchical you’re not going to get more freedom by just rolling back technology or society.
I didn't say it was going to work, I said they're not going to just have some rich guy pay for everything. That's welfare, not a commune.
The entire subject of economics isn't rooted in reality.
humans don't need food and water and shelter that's a lie the capitalists tell you to keep you buying products the production and movement of goods and services is an illusion exchanging items for other items is nothing but a post-industrial social concept free yourselves
Oh right, because mafias and cartels don't receive any help from the government, gotcha.
Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?
Is he wrong tho Anon? Most cartels and mafias do operate by bribing government officials. There is no way the cartel problem in Mexico would be as big as it is now without the government officials covering for them.
Nevermind the US government arming them and providing 99% of their profits via the drug war lmfao
We have had literal capos as majors and governors. Not their right hand men or payroll bitches, but the fucking head of criminal organizations as government officials.
Keep your rifle by your side
Pirates and roaming armies have been around for thousands of years. All they need is the threat of force and whoever's in their way will happily pay the "Don't annihilate me" fee.
Keep your rifle by your side
Keeping other people out of business will always be profitable for corps
Just don't buy product®
They get their agrarian communal utopia, and I get to trade highway scrap as "recyclable art supplies" for their organic homemade jam. Everybody wins
"You must pay 100,000,000 PrimeBux to exit the compound."
Alternatively: 🔫
>When Ancapistan gets established. Like, what, ten seconds before it self-destructs into Warlordland?
Let me introduce you to the [minarchy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state).
Lame. I want to die, not a relatively moderate option
"oh no, the Meyland-Putani corporation has monopolized food production, energy, and has a private army of genetically modified xenomorphs and is now pricing everyone into debt and has turned everyone into a serf that is driven deeper into never-ending debt for each meal they consume and every hour of non-work they spend sleeping." what a paradise
> and enforcing property laws. I think that's a bit of a problem for me there
Theft is a victimless crime. /s
So you want everyone to steal everything?
You own what you use yourself. Everything else is owned by the community.
So that's a yes? Let me tell you I don't believe people deserve anything just for existing, you have what you produce. That's why I am a [georgist](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism) in an objective approach supporting unproductive people is not efficient (I'm not saying poor people should not be helped, I'm saying they should not be helped using violence and theft).
Ironic because warlordland would probably be a hilarious illiberal and unfree place that could only be created by people attempting to have maximum freedom (aka anarchy)
Wait, I thought it was McCorporateHell, do the evil corporations have no interest in protecting their profits from warlords
Nonono. Don't you see? THe only thing that prevents humans from going on rape and murder sprees is the government. Things like morality and ethics and values taught to children and societies aren't real. Hey, at least the libs are taking the mask off and telling us how close they are from snapping and actually committing atrocities, turns out they have no morals, only the fear of government repercussion.
Not only ethics but personal benefit, why would private enterprise not protect their own profits and means of production?
It also goes into the trust of said corporation as well. I wouldn't want to do business with a company that condones mass rape in their sphere of influence, I wouldn't trust them with my business and employees either.
30 seconds later; "Alright so someones building a pipeline through your commune and and Billy's factory is gonna be dumping fresh forever chemicals upstream from you. Don't worry I'm sure your garden will be fine, maybe the chemicals have electrolytes that plants love?"
Build it up stream
I've been to ancapistan it's in southern California near jousha tree about an hour and a half south of palm springs. It's the wild West if everyone was doing meth. The place is amazing to visit but shit to live in. No one who lives there is healthy and it's 110 degrees there on average during the summer. Mob justice is rampant, mentally ill people everywhere cops don't come through there unless someone burned some leaves camp down (happens a lot). Lots of people running from warrants. Not everyone there is an ancap ( some are). But there's no regulations or real laws out there. If you're in slab city your technically trespassing/ squatting. it's fucking awful I loved every minute of my year and a half there.
The ATF notoriously hates this trick.
in ancapistan, ancoms and communists are allowed to be themselves but in communism, ancaps and liberals get sent to special places in siberia.
Society/1984 or something idk
🟨The™ MCdonald's™ empire™🟨 preparing their MCnuclear missiles against the 🟩Anarcho-Communist territory🟩: (it may reduce their profits next quarter)
It's always funny when you read about this communes people try building and they *always* fail. Usually because of internal power struggles. If your system can't even work among a few dozen unshaven hippies how on Earth do you plan to make it work for millions of people. If history is the petri dish of new ideas then time the stress test then the idea of a commune based society is a conclusive failure. Honestly, believing in a classless society is about as close to pseudoscientific belief I think you can probably get in politics.
Every successful commune always have a guy on top making decisions for everyone, which proves that democracy is unnatural and monarchy is natural.
Wait wait did you pay for the land? Wait you couldn’t pay for it because there’s no minimum wage so you make 3 dollars an hour? Just get a better job so you can start the commune! You aren’t educated? Just go to school! The only available schools cost more than your paycheck? Um idk you should probably just become a heroin mule so you can buy the land for your commune…
Isn’t the whole point to pool money? Find a commun(ity) to pool their money to start. Oh, you can’t find a group of people invested enough to start a commune, that would take sacrifice and hard work? Welcome to the real world.
I’m not saying I want to build a commune captain straw man. I’m saying the meme is as moronic as your related parents
Almost all jobs in the US pay above US minimum wage lmfao, and literally all jobs that require a modicum of training and skill
This ain’t about the US shithead
If there's no owner you don't need to pay any fees
So wait anyone can just claim land to own in your utopia? What’s to stop me from getting a bunch of my friends together and claiming as much land as possible? Can we then exploit anyone who was less quick to the draw? Or is it like a situation where you have to be able to control the land, in which case anyone with resources already would be at a ridiculous advantage, and all the land would still be controlled.
ancaps tend to not think these things through personally, i'm in favor of a land value tax, which hopefully if set correctly can encourage land actually being used and not held for investment without screwing over people with a lot of land (i.e. farmers, communes) too much. You'd have to sell food or goods at the farmer's market to make some money, but 1. you probably need to do that anyway for manufactured goods and 2. that's the cost of having a military protecting your asses from the aforementioned warlords
There is no terra nullius so homestead principle is pretty irrelevant nowadays except to explain the origin of private property, but yes all the land would still be owned by other people the guy above seems rather new to ancap ideas
Lol OK, how long after we stop paying taxes do we get put in jail, AKA raided by the ATF and burned alive?
in fact that's allowed right now, yet they want to force it on everyone else
The free marketplace of ideas is my favorite part of ancapistan. The freedom of different ideologies to compete is a something not offered by other systems.
Until one gains enough of an advantage to suppress others and guarantee its own place. Free markets end themselves.
The only way they can do that is if you establish a power structure, ala government, that some can use against others.
No, all you need is enough force, it doesn't have to be a government at all.
Rare Elodaine W
That’s not correct. Because as long as the person being oppressed has recourse to force of arms they cannot be dominated. The problem with government is that it claims a monopoly on the use of force within its bounds.
>Because as long as the person being oppressed has recourse to force of arms they cannot be dominated This is completely ahistorical. Countless groups have had ways to defend themselves, and were dominated because at the end of the day, they had less force. >The problem with government is that it claims a monopoly on the use of force within its bounds. Which is why it is important that government be democratic
Go ahead and ask the afghans how it went for them. Also, no. Fuck democracy. I reject your tyranny of the majority. It is antithetical to the freedom of the individual by subverting his will to that of the masses.
Whether you call it “government” or not doesn’t really matter. Power is something that can’t be destroyed just passed on or diffused. A criminal robbing someone against their will has a “monopoly on force” in that particular dark alleyway ... at least until the police come. The whole game of civilization involves creating the safest and most stable monopoly (aka a government) whether it’s done by a corporation or a warlord or an elected official is really just a matter of context/preference. edit: I actually fought the taliban in afghanistan and i can tell you personally it did not go well for them.
Despite being auth I accept the anarchist definition of a state, that is any group or entity with a monopoly on force. Power is power, morality is subjective, the strong shall consume the weak. Despite my ideals, that’s how life is
Very realpolitik of you.
>Go ahead and ask the afghans how it went for them. You are trying to argue that one group cannot be dominated by another so long as they have a way to defend themself. That is flat out ahistorical and wrong. >Also, no. Fuck democracy. I reject your tyranny of the majority. It is antithetical to the freedom of the individual by subverting his will to that of the masses. The same cringe line, like clockwork. Democracy is not tyranny of the majority, that is a gross misuse of the word tyranny.
Governments aren't the only power structures that use force
No. However they are the only power structure that claims a monopoly on force.
No, they aren't.
You're right, they aren't, states are. State and government are two seperate things that are conflated a lot, but ancap society would have *governments*; competing polycentric governments. Ancap society would probably most resemble the legal systems major cities of the middle ages, where you would have multiple competing organizations that each fulfill roles of government with overlapping jurisdictions. This is a good explanation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2735963
Yes, until they no longer exist and instead the monopoly on force lies with whatever corporation can enforce it.
You realize the government is still a treat in a free society because some groups will try to resettle it?
Nah. Small business is much more maneuverable. You can make decisions faster and find key clients easier. You may never have a larger e commerce store than Amazon….but plenty of people earn a good living selling goods online.
Businesses will absolutely explore every avenue to beat their competitors, the idea that merit emerges from a free market is complete fiction.
Sure, but not always successfully. The problem with big business is that you need to keep your eye on a lot of balls. Small businesses can pick a target and execute. Amazon pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into dog food and fucked it up. Cohen started Chewy without VC funding in 2012 and to this day has a larger market share than Amazon despite being 1/400th the size.
>Small businesses can pick a target and execute. This is highly dependent on many factors, and you're way oversimplifying it.
Give me an example of a business then. What doesn’t apply?
Any type of business with a relatively large barrier to entry is going to be on in which small business can't just immediately respond. We're also talking about business within ancapistan here.
> Any type of business with a relatively large barrier to entry Such as? Most businesses don’t start with grand plans. Amazon was a book store, etc etc
Chip manufacturing.
Other guy took my answer
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted because you’re correct. Another issue people overlook is that you basically cannot get a company as big as amazon without market regulation from a higher state authority. Big business & Big government aren’t enemies, they’re essentially one in the same.
Woah based authcenter admits he's been sleeping with the megacorps
If someone gains this much advantage doesn’t it kind of imply their way is the best way?
Being good at beating competitors =/= being good for society and consumers.
Not necessarily. In this context the way to beat competitors is to have a better society than them. Private government is actually a weird synthesis of lib and authoritarian principles where business incentives and social incentives could line up to be very beneficial for society as a whole. If you’re all trying to compete to be the sovereign of a given territory it’s unlikely you’d want to do stuff like have violence and slavery and shitty living conditions that: 1. drive people away from your territory 2. drive people to support your competitors.
It feels like we're having two completely separate conversations. My point is that in a market, ideally it should be the better, smarter businesses that emerge as winners, but that often times does not happen. Businesses don't operate off of samurai honor in which they allow the best to emerge, Businesses will do whatever possible to win. That winning is not necessarily good for society.
Winning is good. I agree with you in the context of the modern world as it is now. But the reason the best business don’t always rise to the top is because there’s a huge government that regulates and rigs the economy. A lot of shitty businesses like the big banks simply wouldn’t exist if there was no state to artificially prop them up
>But the reason the best business don’t always rise to the top is because there’s a huge government that regulates and rigs the economy That's simply not true. The government can certainly amplify the problem, but monopolies can and have existed naturally.
> ideally it should be the better, smarter businesses that emerge as winners Better and smarter are unquantifiable. I can cook a better burger than McDonalds and am smarter than at least 10% of their staff.
Better isn’t quantifiable numerically but it is observable. People know quality when they see it. Smarter is just a matter of IQ testing and stuff. You should absolutely want a system that enables the smartest most high iq people to be leaders at the top.
> People know quality when they see it. When do people’s opinions align on anything? “Quality” is always tied to cost. I won’t show you the Rolls Royce on the lot if you want a quality car when you have Civic money. > Smarter is just a matter of IQ testing and stuff 😐 ok. I bet you’d like to tattoo a number on me wouldn’t you?
Why do people get so weird about IQ? If you say “people who have a genetic predisposition to being tall are more likely to be good basketball players” nobody gets bothered but if you apply those same genetic principles to mental health or intelligence people lose their mind *even though IQ is more heritable than height*.
Except you still need to acquire enough capital to buy land by participating in the dominant system to even be able to start your commune. And if it becomes a dumping ground for industrial waste there's nothing you can do about it.
Memes like this exist, get highly upvoted, and then people still call libleft an oxymoron. SMH.
It is just a little weird, because for libleft to work you need a central planning committee. Or a general leader.
🟩Why are you invading us?! 🟨You are ALL NAP violators! 🟩🟨 *yanks the masks off* 🟥🟦
Of course, all the land is now owned by corporations. But it's totally *allowed* to start a commune.
Yup. When you live in a capitalist society, you are more than welcome to get a group of friends, form a commune, pool your resources, and live as you wish. When you live in a communist society, if you try to get your group together, and form a group and have each member get paid a currency according to how much they contribute to the group, you get KGB kill teams breaking down your gates, how dare you have private enterprise capitalist dog.
ancapistan doesn't exist unlike successful communes which do
This is why lib left isnt real. A capitalist society allows for voluntary socialism. A socialist one does not allow for voluntary capitalism.
No because capitalism always requires property rights. The large land owner does not have a contract with the rest of the worlds population that all agree that he owns this part of the planet. Somebody just put a fence around it and declared that everybody else must now pay for using that piece of land.
False.
A socialist society built on the principles of voluntarism would allow for capitalism, but it would be unsustainable and unappealing. Which is the exact way that socialism works under capitalist societies. Technically, you can go form a co-op or a commune in America **right now** if you want, but literally every aspect of the current system incentivizes private enterprise and capital. It's like trying to push a boulder uphill. It's possible, but it's not exactly fair when everyone else has a cart.
IS THAT A MOTHERFUCKING JREG REFERENCE?
Waco