The Anarcho-Capitalist Movement

[Capitalist 35]

 

                                                Anarcho-Capitalist Movement

 

Anarcho-Capitalist Movement is an ideological and philosophical movement that focuses on influencing politics and government towards a more freemarket and anarchist approach to our society, either through bribing politicians to our ideological gain, protesting, or joining and inflitrating right wing political parties or simply inspire people to support our ideas, creating our own little suburban freetown community. We are not a political party we are a freemarket anarchist movement with no leaders or rulers fighting for liberty from government regulations and laws that hurt our freedoms. We are the most friendly political group towards entrepreneurs and we fight foremost for the interest and the rights of business owners, gun owners and individuals that value freedom from regulations, taxes and economic restrictions. In short words we are rebels who want to be left alone without the interference by the state laws, government police, leftist or far-right politics, petty criminals, organized crime, corporate power and regulations that hurt our individual freedom and businesses. By arming ourselves to the teeth and spreading our ideology, we hope to live in a peaceful prosperous society, where we can enjoy maximum freedom and minimal crime. We will fight tyranny when freedom is at stake, we are the resistance.

To become an Anarcho-Capitalist you have to follow certain principals, ideas and strive towards these following goals.

* Abolish all forms of taxes. (0% Taxes. Taxation is Theft)

* Establish Laissez-Faire economics.

* Legalize all drugs. 

* Legalize all firearms. (Armed society is a polite society)

* Privatization of state owned institutions. (Police, Hospitals, Military, Special Security, Education, Courts, Fire Department etc.)

* Promote ideas of individualism, freedom, voluntarism, gun ownership and disregard all forms of collectivism.

* Create a peaceful suburban anarchist community based on Non Aggression Principle. 

* Hijack and abolish the government, crush its monopoly on force.

 

PS. We have started a private military company and we are hiring now! Don't miss it! Check out on the board room forums, Blackwood Corporation - Private Military Company.

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

I see many things wrong with this.

1- Taxes are what not only help small businesses but also help Government funding to give those small businesses their money if they ever need a bailout. Taxes are something that's are needed because without them a country would be insanely poor.

2- The legalization of firearms would result in everybody trying to shoot everybody. People have short tempers and will shoot on sight for no reason whatsoever.

3- Privatization of state owned institutions is a very bad thing. Because along with your legalization of firearms, drugs and now this you'll get what you strived for. While that may be good for you. That's means a few things. The lower class citizens and the working man will take those drugs and guns and rebel towards your party. Privatization of institutions would mean you have nowhere to go for help. And no taxes mean if you needed any help the police wouldn't be able to help you because they have no money from those taxes to get cars, guns and other equipment.

 

While I enjoy the idea of a party of this stature I also see too many problems with what could happen. I'm not hating but I'm just warning you of what could happen.

[Capitalist 35]

6 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

I see many things wrong with this.

1- Taxes are what not only help small businesses but also help Government funding to give those small businesses their money if they ever need a bailout. Taxes are something that's are needed because without them a country would be insanely poor.

2- The legalization of firearms would result in everybody trying to shoot everybody. People have short tempers and will shoot on sight for no reason whatsoever.

3- Privatization of state owned institutions is a very bad thing. Because along with your legalization of firearms, drugs and now this you'll get what you strived for. While that may be good for you. That's means a few things. The lower class citizens and the working man will take those drugs and guns and rebel towards your party. Privatization of institutions would mean you have nowhere to go for help. And no taxes mean if you needed any help the police wouldn't be able to help you because they have no money from those taxes to get cars, guns and other equipment.

 

While I enjoy the idea of a party of this stature I also see too many problems with what could happen. I'm not hating but I'm just warning you of what could happen.

 

1. Bailouts = Not anarchist nor freemarket, don't make me pay taxes just because you fail at making profits. Laissez-faire capitalism is the only economy Anarcho-Capitalism preaches. Taxes don't help businesses making money, if anything businesses are the ones who get hurt the most by taxes since taxation lowers profits. Also taxation is involuntary therefor theft. If you need money to keep your business alive, get a loan, don't make everybody else suffer and pay for it through taxes because your business is a failure.

2. Guns don't kill people, bad guys do. If everybody carries guns it will be easier to take down a mass shooter/bad guy/robber. Criminals and psychopaths love gun free zones because nobody can disarm them or neutralize them in those zones, but in a society where everybody carries a firearm it's easier to take out the bad guys. Police take their time to get to the crime scene and by that time innocent lives might have been lost which could've been avoided if everybody carried a firearm. Also I'd like to defend my property and business with an AR15 without the government telling me how to run or protect my business, thank you.

3. Private police and security will get higher pay depending on the quality of their services, therefor do a better job since they compete with other police departments and higher pay helps security departments afford better equipment/weapons to protect communities. Lower class working people will earn more money and find more opportunities in a anarcho-capitalist society due to no taxes and privatization of everything, which produces plenty of new businesses offering tons of jobs for all lower and middle class peoples. Taxes means less profits, less profits means less businesses, less businesses means less jobs, less jobs means more poor people.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

27 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

 

1. Bailouts = Not anarchist nor freemarket, don't make me pay taxes just because you fail at making profits. Laissez-faire capitalism is the only economy Anarcho-Capitalism preaches. Taxes don't help businesses making money, if anything businesses are the ones who get hurt the most by taxes since taxation lowers profits. Also taxation is involuntary therefor theft. If you need money to keep your business alive, get a loan, don't make everybody else suffer and pay for it through taxes because your business is a failure.

2. Guns don't kill people, bad guys do. If everybody carries guns it will be easier to take down a mass shooter/bad guy/robber. Criminals and psychopaths love gun free zones because nobody can disarm them or neutralize them in those zones, but in a society where everybody carries a firearm it's easier to take out the bad guys. Police take their time to get to the crime scene and by that time innocent lives might have been lost which could've been avoided if everybody carried a firearm. Also I'd like to defend my property and business with an AR15 without the government telling me how to run or protect my business, thank you.

3. Private police and security will get higher pay depending on the quality of their services, therefor do a better job since they compete with other police departments and higher pay helps security departments afford better equipment/weapons to protect communities. Lower class working people will earn more money and find more opportunities in a anarcho-capitalist society due to no taxes and privatization of everything, which produces plenty of new businesses offering tons of jobs for all lower and middle class peoples. Taxes means less profits, less profits means less businesses, less businesses means less jobs, less jobs means more poor people.

 

 

1- Hospitals and police officers need that tax money in order to continue protecting citizens. (Don't worry I know what you say later and I'll get to that.) And the government needs that tax money in order to properly pay those Doctors, Officers, EMT, Firefighters, Prison Guards etc. Taxation is something of a necessity to have in a ever expanding economic community. Businesses sprout out faster than a flower blooming in summer. They're everywhere and when you have taxation it just makes a nice rounded circle of profit. Loans are what kill businesses, not taxes. When they take out loans that means they have to pay it back. And if they don't they risk going to jail. I'd simply rather pay taxes and then file for them later to get money back. Not take out one huge loan and be left broke later on.

2- While that statement is utterly correct in senses. You do realize that there are more people who would rather shoot you and take your money than people who would help you. You would have people feeling uncomfortable in their own city. This would create a mass protest on firearms eventually resulting in riots and fights between middle and lower class citizens. What I'm reading is that your proposals are more or less catered to the upper class life. There was a book that ultimately said that to have a sustainable community you need to kill off the lower class to have a good economy. Less poor people makes more money. But there was also a book that refuted that statement saying that the only reason people don't want poor people is because the rich want to be richer. (Went off on a ramble there.)

3- While private police is nice it's also bad. Because reducing the number of trained public officers you eliminate the amount you can have around the city protecting people. With a private police force you would have even MORE government spending to keep them on a specific payroll which would make even MORE taxes on small businesses. You're not only going to get innocent people killed you'll also make the economy unstable in the process. Pretty much making everybody poor while they have good security. If everybody is poor they would be able to run a business. If they can't make money they can't have your guns that you want to make legal. With no guns that's a reduce on crime ultimately making that private police force useless. You'll be paying them money to be glorified babysitters with guns.

Im sorry. I stand by what I said. I just can't see that working friend.

[Capitalist 35]

7 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

1- Hospitals and police officers need that tax money in order to continue protecting citizens. (Don't worry I know what you say later and I'll get to that.) And the government needs that tax money in order to properly pay those Doctors, Officers, EMT, Firefighters, Prison Guards etc. Taxation is something of a necessity to have in a ever expanding economic community. Businesses sprout out faster than a flower blooming in summer. They're everywhere and when you have taxation it just makes a nice rounded circle of profit. Loans are what kill businesses, not taxes. When they take out loans that means they have to pay it back. And if they don't they risk going to jail. I'd simply rather pay taxes and then file for them later to get money back. Not take out one huge loan and be left broke later on.

2- While that statement is utterly correct in senses. You do realize that there are more people who would rather shoot you and take your money than people who would help you. You would have people feeling uncomfortable in their own city. This would create a mass protest on firearms eventually resulting in riots and fights between middle and lower class citizens. What I'm reading is that your proposals are more or less catered to the upper class life. There was a book that ultimately said that to have a sustainable community you need to kill off the lower class to have a good economy. Less poor people makes more money. But there was also a book that refuted that statement saying that the only reason people don't want poor people is because the rich want to be richer. (Went off on a ramble there.)

3- While private police is nice it's also bad. Because reducing the number of trained public officers you eliminate the amount you can have around the city protecting people. With a private police force you would have even MORE government spending to keep them on a specific payroll which would make even MORE taxes on small businesses. You're not only going to get innocent people killed you'll also make the economy unstable in the process. Pretty much making everybody poor while they have good security. If everybody is poor they would be able to run a business. If they can't make money they can't have your guns that you want to make legal. With no guns that's a reduce on crime ultimately making that private police force useless. You'll be paying them money to be glorified babysitters with guns.

Im sorry. I stand by what I said. I just can't see that working friend.

1. Wrong, in a anarcho-capitalist society institutions don't need to tax people for maintenance since all those institutions are moved to the private sector and become businesses/companies, their survival will be based off how well they do in the freemarket and how much people are willing to pay for their services (supply/demand), it's the people that make the decision which police department/hospital company get their funding, not the government. Businesses can provide everything that the government provides, everything the government does the market can do it better due to competition and innovation to increase profits. I never argued that loans are a profitable solution, but atleast you will pay with your own money instead of grabbing others money through taxes to fund your failed business, but since taxes are abolished in a anarcho-capitalist society, you either take a bank loan or go out of business, hence laissez-faire.

2. If I carry a AR, bullet proof amor and pay a private militia to protect my business and property. I'm pretty sure the bad guys will look after an easier target don't you think? A armed society is a polite society. The government police take ages to come to protect you if you happen to be in trouble, you'll be dead once they arrive. The only way you can be safe in any society, is to be armed and if you also get a private militia or private security patroling your neighbourhood while being armed yourself, nobody will risk death/jail or waste resources to fuck with you. Also class wars can't happen in a freemarket anarchist society since there are no elite rulers or tyranny to riot against, anyone can get rich if they can produce value without paying taxes, so I'm not sure why you ramble about a book talking about rich killing off poor people to better the economy, sounds like nonsense that a marxist would spew.

3.  "Because reducing the number of trained public police officers you eliminate the amount you can have around the city protecting people"...Wrong, read my second point.

"With a private police force you would have even MORE government spending to keep them on a specific payroll which would make even MORE taxes on the small businesses".... No government, means no government spending, hence no need for taxes. Read my first point.

"With no guns that's a reduce on crime ultimately making that private police force useless"....Wrong. More guns means more people can protect themselves from crime, hence more guns leads to less crime. If there is no crime, there is no need for police force or guns.

All the other arguments you make about not being able to afford guns and private security depends on the market and how much money you make, obviously.

You clearly don't know anything about Anarchism friend.

 

Edited November 12, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

26 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

1. Wrong, in a anarcho-capitalist society institutions don't need to tax people for maintenance since all those institutions are moved to the private sector and become businesses/companies, their survival will be based off how well they do in the freemarket and how much people are willing to pay for their services (supply/demand), it's the people that make the decision which police department/hospital company get their funding, not the government. Businesses can provide everything that the government provides, everything the government does the market can do it better due to competition and innovation to increase profits. I never argued that loans are a profitable solution, but atleast you will pay with your own money instead of grabbing others money through taxes to fund your failed business, but since taxes are abolished in a anarcho-capitalist society, you either take a bank loan or go out of business, hence laissez-faire.

2. If I carry a AR, bullet proof amor and pay a private militia to protect my business and property. I'm pretty sure the bad guys will look after an easier target don't you think? A armed society is a polite society. The government police take ages to come to protect you if you happen to be in trouble, you'll be dead once they arrive. The only way you can be safe in any society, is to be armed and if you can get a private militia or private security patroling your neighbourhood while being armed, nobody will risk death/jail or waste resources to fuck with you. Also class wars can't happen in a freemarket anarchist society since there are no elite rulers or tyranny to riot against, anyone can get rich if they can produce value without paying taxes, so I'm not sure why you ramble about a book talking about rich killing off poor people to better the economy, sounds like nonsense that a marxist would spew.

3.  "Because reducing the number of trained public police officers you eliminate the amount you can have around the city protecting people"...Wrong, read my second point.

"With a private police force you would have even MORE government spending to keep them on a specific payroll which would make even MORE taxes on the small businesses".... No government, means no government spending, hence no need for taxes. Read my first point.

"With no guns that's a reduce on crime ultimately making that private police force useless"....Wrong. More guns means more people can protect themselves from crime, hence more guns leads to less crime. If there is no crime, there is no need for police force.

All the other arguments you make about not being able to afford guns and private security depends on the market and how much money you make, obviously.

You clearly don't know anything about Anarchism friend.

 

Here's where things get funny.

1- If you reduce everything to a private community your not going to get anything from anywhere else. And assuming that most medical facilities work off of getting sourced from outside a specific zone and work to get mass product from different places you would ultimately kill off any type of revenue you could ever make. That would mean you don't get to pay anybody that works there which would cause a rebellion. And then they would all want to leave. And since you can't tax the only business there how would you pay for something like that? Since people can't make the money for the treatments they need you don't get any money either.

2- If you walked around with a militia what's stopping somebody else with lots of money to do the same. They either kill you or start a long war with you which results in casualties of mass proportions. You would have a private force that you previously said were to replace the current police force, work for you and take refuge. I don't know about you but if I see a gas station with 10 fully suited militia guards with AR-15's and bullet proof vests and a clerk with a pistol and grenades I'm not gonna want to even go there. An armed community is not a community. It is cannon fader so you can eliminate the weak and the poor.

3- My point was that you won't have money with what you're doing. The drug dealer that sells his weed for 2x the price because it's illegal uses that money to pay for hospital bills. That money goes towards taxes. That tax money goes towards government spending. 

Youre trying to prove the point that when everybody has guns everybody will be happy. You said yourself "Bad people kill people." If that's the case giving out guns to those people is going to result in a lot of deaths. And you want a private army to take them out which will result in an all out war. Killing, looting and rape. Drugs will fuel the murder of innocent people and then there will be nothing left to protect. You are trying to say that it's a better way to live. There is no living when it's under fear of being shot by your neighbors. That is called terrorism to a full. To live in fear because there is no order. 

[The1TheOnlyGonzo 184]

I don't see how this could be effective because business would become the government standard and citizens freedoms and liberties will in turn be trampled by greed, corruption, and power. 

 

 

Turning all government services to private business, could be effective for some services to the community (parks, sanitation, roads, etc) however many other services could suffer due to privatization and the removal of a public standard of practice. 

 

Policing for example could become easily corruptible due to greed, all because society is focus is "how can I get the most out of everyone". With much privatized, if a monopoly or coup happened to the market, there would be no way to restablize, killing any free market you strive for. 

Allowing all to carry and defend if given the need will also cause may issues with unnecessary murder and fire fights. An armed society is not a polite society, it is a paranoid society. Murder will be an everyday occurrence and your prison system will be overloaded, which could cause further issues to a market that can easily be destabilized by business. 

 

Just seems privatized business practices would become government standard and that is dangerous for a free society. 

 

[GeneSmith 197]

7 minutes ago, The1TheOnlyGonzo said:

I don't see how this could be effective because business would become the government standard and citizens freedoms and liberties will in turn be trampled by greed, corruption, and power. 

 

 

Turning all government services to private business, could be effective for some services to the community (parks, sanitation, roads, etc) however many other services could suffer due to privatization and the removal of a public standard of practice. 

 

Policing for example could become easily corruptible due to greed, all because society is focus is "how can I get the most out of everyone". With much privatized, if a monopoly or coup happened to the market, there would be no way to restablize, killing any free market you strive for. 

Allowing all to carry and defend if given the need will also cause may issues with unnecessary murder and fire fights. An armed society is not a polite society, it is a paranoid society. Murder will be an everyday occurrence and your prison system will be overloaded, which could cause further issues to a market that can easily be destabilized by business. 

 

Just seems privatized business practices would become government standard and that is dangerous for a free society. 

 

While I agree with private parks and schools I think that even though some corruption in police officers is present you shouldn't blame the entire system to throw it out. There are legitimate officers out there who respect the people they protect. There's corruption with everything. The nurse stealing supplies. The laundromat owner skimming some money off the top. It's always present. But with a stable economy you have less to worry about. Instead of buying a whole new billion dollar milita just upgrade the current one with more equipment. Don't take out something that has worked for hundreds of years. Even in a private world corruption will still be present. Corruption isn't something you can escape from. Greed is also something that can't be stopped. If you let people carry around guns they can shoot a cop for pulling them over if they think it's not fair. I want to protect those men and women who serve us. The only people who should be allowed to have weapons are ex military personnel who have gone through mental stability checks, officers and select few clerks. It's a monopoly that can change with specific changes to the system. Instead of abolishing taxation just minimize it. Raise the minimum wage a little bit so spending isn't a problem.

[The1TheOnlyGonzo 184]

I understand corruption can be found everywhere and greed is something that even our current government bodies can control. 

 

I just see a privatization causing further issues with corruption. The entire focus on this society seems to be profit. Profit shouldn't be the main focus of a society, it should sustainability and longevity through being self sufficient and having a stable economy. 

[GeneSmith 197]

44 minutes ago, The1TheOnlyGonzo said:

I understand corruption can be found everywhere and greed is something that even our current government bodies can control. 

 

I just see a privatization causing further issues with corruption. The entire focus on this society seems to be profit. Profit shouldn't be the main focus of a society, it should sustainability and longevity through being self sufficient and having a stable economy. 

Will you be my team when running for Governor?

[The1TheOnlyGonzo 184]

Your team? Like working for your campaign and what not? I honestly have never thought of a career in politics for identity, could be interesting though

[GeneSmith 197]

12 minutes ago, The1TheOnlyGonzo said:

Your team? Like working for your campaign and what not? I honestly have never thought of a career in politics for identity, could be interesting though

You'd basically just work behind the scenes making sure things are running smooth. Get polls to see what people want and things like that.

[Capitalist 35]

17 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

Here's where things get funny.

1- If you reduce everything to a private community your not going to get anything from anywhere else. And assuming that most medical facilities work off of getting sourced from outside a specific zone and work to get mass product from different places you would ultimately kill off any type of revenue you could ever make. That would mean you don't get to pay anybody that works there which would cause a rebellion. And then they would all want to leave. And since you can't tax the only business there how would you pay for something like that? Since people can't make the money for the treatments they need you don't get any money either.

2- If you walked around with a militia what's stopping somebody else with lots of money to do the same. They either kill you or start a long war with you which results in casualties of mass proportions. You would have a private force that you previously said were to replace the current police force, work for you and take refuge. I don't know about you but if I see a gas station with 10 fully suited militia guards with AR-15's and bullet proof vests and a clerk with a pistol and grenades I'm not gonna want to even go there. An armed community is not a community. It is cannon fader so you can eliminate the weak and the poor.

3- My point was that you won't have money with what you're doing. The drug dealer that sells his weed for 2x the price because it's illegal uses that money to pay for hospital bills. That money goes towards taxes. That tax money goes towards government spending. 

Youre trying to prove the point that when everybody has guns everybody will be happy. You said yourself "Bad people kill people." If that's the case giving out guns to those people is going to result in a lot of deaths. And you want a private army to take them out which will result in an all out war. Killing, looting and rape. Drugs will fuel the murder of innocent people and then there will be nothing left to protect. You are trying to say that it's a better way to live. There is no living when it's under fear of being shot by your neighbors. That is called terrorism to a full. To live in fear because there is no order. 

1. Wrong, there will still be charities that will deliver handouts to the needy and you can still produce your own tools of value and collect anything of value that does not belong to anyones property or possession, just because a society is under total privatization does not mean that the only things you can get your hands on comes from the market and market only. People will earn money by how much value they can produce in a society, im not sure why you mention taxes since taxes are abolished in this society. If workers don't get payed the amount of wealth they were told by their bosses then they can leave that business and that business will suffer production loss, also not to mention they will gain a bad reputation for not paying employees for their work and services, consequences of that is that nobody will offer their services to that particular company because they don't want to risk being played, this will lead to less profits an eventually collapse of the business while other business that keep their words and treat the employees well will increase their production, reputation and that will increase profits.

 

2. Correct, nothing stops anybody from hiring a private army. This is where NAP comes into to the picture (Non.Agression.Principle) to avoid war breaking out. The only violence that will be acceptable in such society is self-defense, you can only attack and kill an agressor who uses force against you or others, I will quote a few good men who praised NAP.

"No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a nonaggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory." Cited from "War, Peace, and the State" (1963) 

Locke gives the following version of the NAP: "Being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions." 

In his book On Liberty Mill states the NAP as follows: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others"

In an essay called "Man's Rights" in the book The Virtue of Selfishness she formulated "The precondition of a civilized society is the barring of physical force from social relationships. ... In a civilized society, force may be used only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.

 

3. Drugs are not illegal in a anarchist society, also your statement that nobody will have money in such a society is simply not true and misleading, aslong as you have value to offer people will pay money/resources for it, it's that simple and I have said that a couple of times now. If you can't produce enough value that will help you survive in society or you can't afford healthcare there will be charities for that, read my first point. I've already answered this.

If bad people try to cause mass shooting in a armed society, they will not live very long. I have made that point a couple of times now, yet you run in circles when I have already given you an answer about what role guns play in a anarchist society, read my previous arguments instead of beating a dead horse.

Is there anything else?

[Capitalist 35]

17 hours ago, The1TheOnlyGonzo said:

I don't see how this could be effective because business would become the government standard and citizens freedoms and liberties will in turn be trampled by greed, corruption, and power. 

 

 

Turning all government services to private business, could be effective for some services to the community (parks, sanitation, roads, etc) however many other services could suffer due to privatization and the removal of a public standard of practice. 

 

Policing for example could become easily corruptible due to greed, all because society is focus is "how can I get the most out of everyone". With much privatized, if a monopoly or coup happened to the market, there would be no way to restablize, killing any free market you strive for. 

Allowing all to carry and defend if given the need will also cause may issues with unnecessary murder and fire fights. An armed society is not a polite society, it is a paranoid society. Murder will be an everyday occurrence and your prison system will be overloaded, which could cause further issues to a market that can easily be destabilized by business. 

 

Just seems privatized business practices would become government standard and that is dangerous for a free society. 

 

Government has a monopoly on force which the private sector dosen't, that's the difference between government and the people, also liberties will not be crushed by a corrupt corporations if it is an armed society who can protect themselves from tyranny. 

Everything the government can do, the private sector can also do and even better due to competition, good services and innovation to increase profits, I have already made that point earlier.

Corrupt police departments will run out of business by non-corrupt police departments pretty quickly since they compete in the freemarket and people will make sure the best services with the best prices will get their funding.

A armed society is indeed an polite society, read on non agression principle I have already made that point earlier.

[GeneSmith 197]

1 hour ago, Capitalist said:

1. Wrong, there will still be charities that will deliver handouts to the needy and you can still produce your own tools of value and collect anything of value that does not belong to anyones property or possession, just because a society is under total privatization does not mean that the only things you can get your hands on comes from the market and market only. People will earn money by how much value they can produce in a society, im not sure why you mention taxes since taxes are abolished in this society. If workers don't get payed the amount of wealth they were told by their bosses then they can leave that business and that business will suffer production loss, also not to mention they will gain a bad reputation for not paying employees for their work and services, consequences of that is that nobody will offer their services to that particular company because they don't want to risk being played, this will lead to less profits an eventually collapse of the business while other business that keep their words and treat the employees well will increase their production, reputation and that will increase profits.

 

2. Correct, nothing stops anybody from hiring a private army. This is where NAP comes into to the picture (Non.Agression.Principle) to avoid war breaking out. The only violence that will be acceptable in such society is self-defense, you can only attack and kill an agressor who uses force against you or others, I will quote a few good men who praised NAP.

"No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a nonaggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory." Cited from "War, Peace, and the State" (1963) 

Locke gives the following version of the NAP: "Being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions." 

In his book On Liberty Mill states the NAP as follows: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others"

In an essay called "Man's Rights" in the book The Virtue of Selfishness she formulated "The precondition of a civilized society is the barring of physical force from social relationships. ... In a civilized society, force may be used only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.

 

3. Drugs are not illegal in a anarchist society, also your statement that nobody will have money in such a society is simply not true and misleading, aslong as you have value to offer people will pay money/resources for it, it's that simple and I have said that a couple of times now. If you can't produce enough value that will help you survive in society or you can't afford healthcare there will be charities for that, read my first point. I've already answered this.

If bad people try to cause mass shooting in a armed society, they will not live very long. I have made that point a couple of times now, yet you run in circles when I have already given you an answer about what role guns play in a anarchist society, read my previous arguments instead of beating a dead horse.

Is there anything else?

In a private community with limited resources and limited workers you're set up for failure. You said it yourself "If a person chooses to leave their job the workplace suffers production loss." And I bring up taxes to give you an example. Within today's America taxes are what keep things going. Taxes are something that are pretty much needed to maintain a steady flow of income for the government to get medical supplies and police equipment. If you're a privatized community that follow your own rules and are anarchists I doubt that somebody is going to sell you specific medicines that your private community simply cannot make.

And regarding the private security and public weapons. Within in a world like that you've given free range to anybody. Why would somebody live in a society that doesn't follow the rules only to be told they have to follow the rules or they hold no value. You can't say "In this party you have free reign without the government. Legalize guns and drugs and abolish taxes." And then turn around and say (This is exactly what I gathered) "Instead of following an already monopoly set in place let's make a new one where only certain people can have that security. And to where we trade to each other so that nothing new comes within to that trade since we're privatized and can't make that new product." You've reduced the amount of income you make. You've reduced the amount of trust that is had by people. And with limited people to work you risk loss of the little production you already have. Which means there could be famines and a bigger need for necessitys that you can't provide. 

I keep bringing up about guns and drugs because this party is nonsensical. You say you follow no rules then say that you set specific rules in place to keep everything at peace. That is what a government does. Again, charities in a small community is like trading three thing between four people. You're bound to get the same thing every time. Sure at first everything is new and fresh but soon they realize they don't have what they want. That once they get old they won't be able to produce for the community. When they want more they'll try and take more. When they try and take more they'll get killed. When that person gets killed you'll cause paranoia and nobody will want anything to do with it anymore. 

Your point of not have a government is useless when you put rules down for people to follow. With rules that means there is control. The charity's are like loan. And soon the people giving are gonna need that loan too because they've run out of the product theyve given away. 

[Hanshi-Toshiro 150]

This will crumble and fall. I am not trying to be mean or anything, i'm gonna tell the truth, that's simply how I am. 

Loans. Impossible. A business cannot keep on taking loans out every month, and if they take out huge sums of loans to last them a year, your banks will crumble in an instance. Only ones society must have as much money as god to do that. Do you think you have an unlimited amount of money? If you print your money everyday, from such small banks, they will lead to inflation. By printing more money, the banks have much smaller amounts to spend, or in this case; loan. The more money your print, the more you take from the banks, or the peoples money. And if you turn to the Identity government, sadly, they will not loan you a small loan of a million dollars.

Drugs. Holy shit legalize all drugs! Seems like my place! Everybody will come to you, which will increase your money flow. But, you like your people right? You want good health? free healthcare! nope. The hospitals need money, and while your busy loaning small businesses, your nations hospital will be broke, and your people will fall. 

Addiction is a drug itself. You find yourself spending all of this money, to give to your small businesses and larger businesses, welp, to your disappointment your going to find your nations banks in full debt. Like I said earlier, you cant print money if your banks have none! Thats just how it works.

Good idea on the militia. But, even for a small community, and even a local, non profit militia is still going to want some sort of healthcare. Because if a drugged out guy on coke goes on a killing rampage and shoots three of the local militiamen, well shit. We ain't got no medical supplies. You can make some raggedy ass bandages, but no, you want your militiamen to have the best of the best! After all they are the only ones who are considered the police force over everybody. More crazed drugies killing your militiamen, the less militiamen! And if they keep on getting hurt, if they are not equipped with iron men suits, they will for a fact want out. Nobody ever wants to keep getting hurt, and have shitty equipment and shitty health supplies. 

With no government spending, how are you going to get all of this shit. ex. fund hospitals, fund police, fund your militias 

And I know that Rome wasn't built in one day. But jesus christmas, your gonna need to do some work! How do you make a country with no money and no taxes? Well Hanshi, I don't now. 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by Hanshi-Toshiro

[Capitalist 35]

6 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

In a private community with limited resources and limited workers you're set up for failure. You said it yourself "If a person chooses to leave their job the workplace suffers production loss." And I bring up taxes to give you an example. Within today's America taxes are what keep things going. Taxes are something that are pretty much needed to maintain a steady flow of income for the government to get medical supplies and police equipment. If you're a privatized community that follow your own rules and are anarchists I doubt that somebody is going to sell you specific medicines that your private community simply cannot make.

And regarding the private security and public weapons. Within in a world like that you've given free range to anybody. Why would somebody live in a society that doesn't follow the rules only to be told they have to follow the rules or they hold no value. You can't say "In this party you have free reign without the government. Legalize guns and drugs and abolish taxes." And then turn around and say (This is exactly what I gathered) "Instead of following an already monopoly set in place let's make a new one where only certain people can have that security. And to where we trade to each other so that nothing new comes within to that trade since we're privatized and can't make that new product." You've reduced the amount of income you make. You've reduced the amount of trust that is had by people. And with limited people to work you risk loss of the little production you already have. Which means there could be famines and a bigger need for necessitys that you can't provide. 

I keep bringing up about guns and drugs because this party is nonsensical. You say you follow no rules then say that you set specific rules in place to keep everything at peace. That is what a government does. Again, charities in a small community is like trading three thing between four people. You're bound to get the same thing every time. Sure at first everything is new and fresh but soon they realize they don't have what they want. That once they get old they won't be able to produce for the community. When they want more they'll try and take more. When they try and take more they'll get killed. When that person gets killed you'll cause paranoia and nobody will want anything to do with it anymore. 

Your point of not have a government is useless when you put rules down for people to follow. With rules that means there is control. The charity's are like loan. And soon the people giving are gonna need that loan too because they've run out of the product theyve given away. 

So government have unlimited resources and unlimited workers? How does that work? Even in a 100% state owned society(Like North Korea etc.) there will still be limited resources and limited workers in the government sector so whats your point? Also growing businesses produces more opportunity for jobs so you're wrong that freemarket limits work force, it's the opposite since many other businesses will bloom in other categories producing plenty of jobs. You know nothing about the affects of unregulated freemarkets, you call yourself Republican but you sound like full blown welfare eating statist queen since you desperately support the non-competing public sector and taxes.

If government is such a great concept, why do they have to use force to take free peoples money to fund the public sector? Because they can't compete with the private sector that's why, because freemarket does a much better job to deliver than the government. Great ideas don't need force to be implemented, taxes are bad and that's why you need force to make people to pay taxes. Smartphones, modern medicine, modern sciences, industrial factory infrastructure, firearms, sport cars, planes, spaceships are all inventions of the freemarket, freemarket will always lead to abundance and push technology.  You can't even have a socialist welfare state unless capitalism has had a chance first to build up a infrastructure.

The only monopoly the government has is the monopoly of force, that's all,  everything else is done by the people. If there is no government there is no monopoly of force.

"I keep bringing up drugs and guns because this party is nonsensical".....First of all that's not even an argument but your personal opinion, second this is not a party but a movement get your facts straight. You don't like the idea of people owning guns and using drugs in their own terms because you want to rule over people and tell them what to do because you're a statist power hungry bastard who dosen't care about freedom and want to use force to control the behavior of the masses.

"With rules there is control"... First of all principals not rules, there is a difference. People can regulate without a government using ostracism instead of force and control, if somebody dosen't obey NAP principle, they will get ostracized from the society, nobody will sell them food, water or shelter since they are a danger to the society and for everybody in it. If somebody uses force outside the purposes of self defense they'll not go very far in an armed society.

 

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

43 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

So government have unlimited resources and unlimited workers? How does that work? Even in a 100% state owned society(Like North Korea etc.) there will still be limited resources and limited workers in the government sector so whats your point? Also growing businesses produces more opportunity for jobs so you're wrong that freemarket limits work force, it's the opposite since many other businesses will bloom in other categories producing plenty of jobs. You know nothing about the affects of unregulated freemarkets, you call yourself Republican but you sound like full blown welfare eating statist queen since you desperately support the non-competing public sector and taxes.

If government is such a great concept, why do they have to use force to take free peoples money to fund the public sector? Because they can't compete with the private sector that's why, because freemarket does a much better job to deliver than the government. Great ideas don't need force to be implemented, taxes are bad and that's why you need force to make people to pay taxes. Smartphones, modern medicine, modern sciences, industrial factory infrastructure, firearms, sport cars, planes, spaceships are all inventions of the freemarket, freemarket will always lead to abundance and push technology.  You can't even have a socialist welfare state unless capitalism has had a chance first to build up a infrastructure.

The only monopoly the government has is the monopoly of force, that's all,  everything else is done by the people. If there is no government there is no monopoly of force.

"I keep bringing up drugs and guns because this party is nonsensical".....First of all that's not even an argument but your personal opinion, second this is not a party but a movement get your facts straight. You don't like the idea of people owning guns and using drugs in their own terms because you want to rule over people and tell them what to do because you're a statist power hungry bastard who dosen't care about freedom and want to use force to control the behavior of the masses.

"With rules there is control"... First of all principals not rules, there is a difference. People can regulate without a government using ostracism instead of force and control, if somebody dosen't obey NAP principle, they will get ostracized from the society, nobody will sell them food, water or shelter since they are a danger to the society and for everybody in it. If somebody uses force outside the purposes of self defense they'll not go very far in an armed society.

 

 

Here's where things are gonna get dirty. You support the rich and the greedy. No matter what you say your party supports the 1% of America that has a 6 figure income. A government controlled country does have endless amounts of people to work and a constant and steady flow of money. Your proposal literally just proved my point. You're a greedy capitalist who only has your best interest at hand. Don't worry about the other 400 million people who have to suffer from a crumbling society like your own. As far as I'm concerned poor people who live paycheck to paycheck have done more for me then a rich person ever has. You want a country of rich people who are so greedy they would rather throw any type of government out the window in order to benefit themselves for the long run. You have not only proven my point about you doing it for personal gain and reason but you've also just practically admitted to not respecting the lower and middle class families that make up for about 70-90% of Americas working population. The lower to middle class have worked harder than most 3rd generation trust fund babies whom only concern is to make more money and get rid of the lower class because they don't want tax dollars being spent for their "Welfare." That welfare is what feeds the innocent children who can grow up to be something important to their country. But people like you need constant loans from banks because you don't wanna lose money but make more. People like you is what cause economic fluctuations in any type of branch in the United States. It's people like you who need to learn that rich people need to come to ground zero and see for yourself what it's like. Trust fund babies don't help anything they make it worse.

[Capitalist 35]

6 hours ago, Hanshi-Toshiro said:

This will crumble and fall. I am not trying to be mean or anything, i'm gonna tell the truth, that's simply how I am. 

Loans. Impossible. A business cannot keep on taking loans out every month, and if they take out huge sums of loans to last them a year, your banks will crumble in an instance. Only ones society must have as much money as god to do that. Do you think you have an unlimited amount of money? If you print your money everyday, from such small banks, they will lead to inflation. By printing more money, the banks have much smaller amounts to spend, or in this case; loan. The more money your print, the more you take from the banks, or the peoples money. And if you turn to the Identity government, sadly, they will not loan you a small loan of a million dollars.

Drugs. Holy shit legalize all drugs! Seems like my place! Everybody will come to you, which will increase your money flow. But, you like your people right? You want good health? free healthcare! nope. The hospitals need money, and while your busy loaning small businesses, your nations hospital will be broke, and your people will fall. 

Addiction is a drug itself. You find yourself spending all of this money, to give to your small businesses and larger businesses, welp, to your disappointment your going to find your nations banks in full debt. Like I said earlier, you cant print money if your banks have none! Thats just how it works.

Good idea on the militia. But, even for a small community, and even a local, non profit militia is still going to want some sort of healthcare. Because if a drugged out guy on coke goes on a killing rampage and shoots three of the local militiamen, well shit. We ain't got no medical supplies. You can make some raggedy ass bandages, but no, you want your militiamen to have the best of the best! After all they are the only ones who are considered the police force over everybody. More crazed drugies killing your militiamen, the less militiamen! And if they keep on getting hurt, if they are not equipped with iron men suits, they will for a fact want out. Nobody ever wants to keep getting hurt, and have shitty equipment and shitty health supplies. 

With no government spending, how are you going to get all of this shit. ex. fund hospitals, fund police, fund your militias 

And I know that Rome wasn't built in one day. But jesus christmas, your gonna need to do some work! How do you make a country with no money and no taxes? Well Hanshi, I don't now. 

 

 

 

So many generalities so little time. Sight. I'm going to make this quick.

You don't speak the truth by babble and assumptions, you assume that if all drugs would be legal everybody would go Charlie Sheen and mindlessly snort coke and shot heroin. You speak for yourself buddy.

"With no government, how are going to get all of this shit ex fund hospitals, fund police, fund your militias".... Private sector.

"Banks will crumble if they keep giving loans, to druggies, businesses etc".....Duh, nobody with a business mind will keep giving loans at their own expense, especially to debt ridden druggies lol. I don't even know why this has to be said.

"Good on militia but even for a small community they need healthcare"... Private healthcare.

"How are you going to make a country without money and taxes. Well Hanshi I don't know."....You know that you don't know anything right? Never did I say there would be no money in a anarcho-capitalist society, no taxes produces more money for people to spend and increases profits in the private sector.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

5 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

So many generalities so little time. Sight. I'm going to make this quick.

You don't speak the truth by babble and assumptions, you assume that if all drugs would be legal everybody would go Charlie Sheen and mindlessly snort coke and shot heroin. You speak for yourself buddy.

"With no government, how are going to get all of this shit ex fund hospitals, fund police, fund your militias".... Private sector.

"Banks will crumble if they keep giving loans, to druggies, businesses etc".....Duh, nobody with a business mind will keep giving loans at their own expense, especially for druggies lol. I don't even know why this has to be said

"Good on militia but even for a small community they need healthcare"... Private healthcare.

"How are you going to make a country without money and taxes. Well Hanshi I don't know."....You know that you don't know anything right? Never did I say there would be no money in a anarcho-capitalist society, no taxes produces more money for people to spend and increases profits in the private sector.

"Good on militia but even for a small community they need healthcare"... Private healthcare."

Okay. Private Healthcare for your private community. With private security and private institutions. You are saying you'll make enough money to run off of your own private resources. Okay. When you do that you run out of money. When you do you can't pay for other health items. Vaccines being one of them. With no taxing you can't make extra money to pay for things like that. You already said everything will be privatized so how will you make a lot of money. You can't make your own medicine because you don't have the materials nor the money to fund it. So how will you do it?

[Capitalist 35]

11 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

Here's where things are gonna get dirty. You support the rich and the greedy. No matter what you say your party supports the 1% of America that has a 6 figure income. A government controlled country does have endless amounts of people to work and a constant and steady flow of money. Your proposal literally just proved my point. You're a greedy capitalist who only has your best interest at hand. Don't worry about the other 400 million people who have to suffer from a crumbling society like your own. As far as I'm concerned poor people who live paycheck to paycheck have done more for me then a rich person ever has. You want a country of rich people who are so greedy they would rather throw any type of government out the window in order to benefit themselves for the long run. You have not only proven my point about you doing it for personal gain and reason but you've also just practically admitted to not respecting the lower and middle class families that make up for about 70-90% of Americas working population. The lower to middle class have worked harder than most 3rd generation trust fund babies whom only concern is to make more money and get rid of the lower class because they don't want tax dollars being spent for their "Welfare." That welfare is what feeds the innocent children who can grow up to be something important to their country. But people like you need constant loans from banks because you don't wanna lose money but make more. People like you is what cause economic fluctuations in any type of branch in the United States. It's people like you who need to learn that rich people need to come to ground zero and see for yourself what it's like. Trust fund babies don't help anything they make it worse.

"You support the rich and greedy"... Yeah forget about me donating money to charities. How greedy does a person have to be for wanting to keep the money he has worked for, yet it's not greedy to take others people money through taxation against their will. Good thinking..

Lower class people will have more opportunities to make money in a freemarket society, only a leftist disagrees with that. Also America is not an anarcho-capitalist society so..yah that's why they have a lot of poor people because of corporatism, welfare and regulations.

The rest of your whole reply is about how greedy I am. Well those are not arguments, so I'm moving on. Me being "greedy and loving rich people" has nothing to do with whenever Anarcho-Capitalism works or not. Come back when you have arguments.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Capitalist

[GeneSmith 197]

41 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

"You support the rich and greedy"... Yeah forget about me donating money to charities. How greedy does a person have to be for wanting to keep the money he has worked for, yet it's not greedy to take others people money through taxation against their will. Good thinking..

Lower class people will have more opportunities to make money in a freemarket society, only a leftist disagrees with that. Also America is not an anarcho-capitalist society so..yah that's why they have a lot of poor people because of corporatism, welfare and regulations.

The rest of your whole reply is about how greedy I am. Well those are not arguments, so I'm moving on. Me being "greedy and loving rich people" has nothing to do with whenever Anarcho-Capitalism works or not. Come back when you have arguments.

Just because you donate money doesn't not mean you aren't greedy. You and people like you are the problem. Not the government. Not taxing. Your party is hitting nothing but a brick wall. You and your party are nothing more than glorified conspiracy theorists.

[Capitalist 35]

5 hours ago, GeneSmith said:

Just because you donate money doesn't not mean you aren't greedy. You and people like you are the problem. Not the government. Not taxing. Your party is hitting nothing but a brick wall. You and your party are nothing more than glorified conspiracy theorists.

#notanargument 

Edited November 13, 2016 by Capitalist

[Hanshi-Toshiro 150]

So basically, your system will have no money. All of the citizens will have money. Am I right? 

[Capitalist 35]

15 hours ago, Hanshi-Toshiro said:

So basically, your system will have no money. All of the citizens will have money. Am I right? 

What do you mean "my system" will not have any money? There is no system, all the money the government steals through taxes and regulations will go back to the freemarket society where it belongs, there will be more money for you and me to spend than ever before when all the money that the government sits on goes to the people and the freemarket it stole from through taxes and regulations in the first place. There is no "your system" or government or welfare state in a anarcho-capitalist society. It's pure freedom and capitalism for everybody.

Edited November 14, 2016 by Capitalist