so, basically a monarchy is legitimate in your eyes. if it's private propperty of the king/queen, who are you (the guy who's got a huge boner for private propperty) to tell them "you're not legitimate? or how about that, you just give ALL the fucking land of the USA back to the natives? after all, it's NOT your land. what you claim to be your land was originally stolen from the indians. so you yourself aren't legitimate by your own logic either.
also, private security that essentially polices itself doesn't need a right to do anything. market forces would cause security companies to drive each other off and force people to pay for their service regardless of whether they want to or not. et voila, military dictatorship is born.
Funny, your scenario with you in a similar position as a (historic) king or lord of a land is pretty much already an advanced form of government. You do exactly what governments do. Build an infrastructure and claim empty land that people can build on, where people have to live according to your rules.
It sounds more like you oppose the government because you'd rather have yourself as a dictator.
Umm, this won't be anarchy for long. Property claims will produce capita, which will be used to claim more property, which will be used to poduce more capita to, claim more property. Eventualy, what will be produced are nations with governments.
@TruthAtAllCost: Not only is that not true, but it's a terrible argument. By analogy, I've never seen a human live to 130 years of age in the history of humanity. Ever. That has no bearing whatsoever on what is possible, feasible or likely to occur in the future.
Sounds like a dictatorship. Awful video. Btw, you probably don't like socialists a great deal, but at least there are examples of moderately successful socialistic societies with populations in the millions. I don't think I've ever heard of a successful anarchy. Ever. In the entire history of humanity.
You obviously have no idea what Anarchy means. Trust me, if America underwent a state of true Anarchy, people like me would probably exploit and possibly kill people like you. Just be happy that we have laws that keep us from stabbing eachother in the face.
@HugNow Also, his rationelle for settling on "unused" land is like the British rationelle for taking land from the native peoples of Australia and New Zealand
so, basically a monarchy is legitimate in your eyes. if it's private propperty of the king/queen, who are you (the guy who's got a huge boner for private propperty) to tell them "you're not legitimate? or how about that, you just give ALL the fucking land of the USA back to the natives? after all, it's NOT your land. what you claim to be your land was originally stolen from the indians. so you yourself aren't legitimate by your own logic either.
BuecherFuerAlle 1 year ago
also, private security that essentially polices itself doesn't need a right to do anything. market forces would cause security companies to drive each other off and force people to pay for their service regardless of whether they want to or not. et voila, military dictatorship is born.
Finiras 1 year ago
Funny, your scenario with you in a similar position as a (historic) king or lord of a land is pretty much already an advanced form of government. You do exactly what governments do. Build an infrastructure and claim empty land that people can build on, where people have to live according to your rules.
It sounds more like you oppose the government because you'd rather have yourself as a dictator.
Finiras 1 year ago
Umm, this won't be anarchy for long. Property claims will produce capita, which will be used to claim more property, which will be used to poduce more capita to, claim more property. Eventualy, what will be produced are nations with governments.
Coquipirate 1 year ago
Sounds like a complete dictatorship. Just doesn't make any sense.
cnewman99 1 year ago
@TruthAtAllCost: Not only is that not true, but it's a terrible argument. By analogy, I've never seen a human live to 130 years of age in the history of humanity. Ever. That has no bearing whatsoever on what is possible, feasible or likely to occur in the future.
andyissemicool 1 year ago
Sounds like a dictatorship. Awful video. Btw, you probably don't like socialists a great deal, but at least there are examples of moderately successful socialistic societies with populations in the millions. I don't think I've ever heard of a successful anarchy. Ever. In the entire history of humanity.
TruthAtAllCost 1 year ago
So, you are speaking on feudalism, pretty much.
FlyingSpahghettiMan 1 year ago
You obviously have no idea what Anarchy means. Trust me, if America underwent a state of true Anarchy, people like me would probably exploit and possibly kill people like you. Just be happy that we have laws that keep us from stabbing eachother in the face.
TheRealCadaver 1 year ago
@HugNow Also, his rationelle for settling on "unused" land is like the British rationelle for taking land from the native peoples of Australia and New Zealand
calvinhobbesliker2 1 year ago