No human being owns another

anarchkidies btfo

nah, i just like civilisation and dont want to live in a society where i need a sidewalk membership to leave my house and where 9 year old herion addicted prostitutes can roam the streets while their pimps get rich

Say that to my face not online see what happens
That's what ownership means, cuck. You base your entire belief system off some oddly self-defined words. If you believe ownership exists at all, why cut it off for humans? Just because they can move around? There's no logic in that.

btw rights don't exist

This, tbh.

If you voluntarily sign yourself over to someone they should have the right to own you.

it's refreshing to see a statist who admits that the government has no right to exist other than "might makes right"

Might makes right. That goes for both corporations and states. Your petty philosophies will do nothing for you when they send the police or private military contractors to kill your ass.

I love how ancaps cant help but call everyone who disagrees with them a statist, no different than calling someone a racist - it's a buzzword used when you have no other argument to try to shutdown discussion.
The fact is, power is the only thing that guarantees rights; at least in a democracy, where the majority decide upon the laws, basic rights which are seen as necessary are able to exist in some form, whereas in Ancapistan, your rights may as well not exist unless you have wealth to pay people to protect you.

and that's a bad thing because?

Because I rather like my rights, and don't care if you think that it violates your rights to be taxed when you live in a society ruled by government. If you truly believe this, then either convince the majority of people of it so it can become law (or not law, I guess), or leave.

then just don't be poor, fam.

it's not that hard

THE POISON OF LIBERALISM AT WORK

a man with morals is a predictable man, and easily circumvented.

technically the Fed DOES own you; you operate on money loaned to you, by them.

fucking idiot liberal are you even aware of your situation? NO, of course not, continue screaming about 'muh freedums' ya SORE. FUCKING. LOSER.

the poison of goddamn liberalism, it is real and the public does castrate itself by embracing it. the lesser intelligent will be managed as needed.

Or I could carry on as is because I live in a society with a government.

Here's a question. Don't jerk yourselves off about nigger babies, eugenics or religion, that's not the point.

If a woman gets pregnant, is the fetus violating the NAP of the woman? If a woman has consensual sex and gets pregnant, would removing the fetus violate the NAP for the fetus? Where where rape fit into this, and sex that the woman retroactively says is nonconsensual?

If you're going to say that a fetus is nonhuman/has no rights, I urge you to consider them human for the purpose of this thought experiment.

...

Not if she voluntarily had sex.

Yes.

Rape is different since the woman didn't consent to it obviously.

Not the guy who asked, but how do you intend to ensure women don't go around violating the NAP to the fetus by getting abortions?

So before you even don't have an argument, heres pic related.

...

Hey, look buddy, I'm Donald Trump, that means I solve problems. Not problems like "is my hair real or not" because that would fall under the purview of the conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems. For instance, how am I gonna stop some big mean Mexican from tearing the border a structurally superfluous new behind? The answer… is a wall, and if that don't work, use more wall. Like this heavy concrete, barbered wire mounted little old number designed by me. Paid for by Mexico, and you best hope, not in front of you.

...

...

...

...

Not my problem

So the NAP has no place in reality?

Keep jumping to conclusions m8

So no answer? You give no method by which the NAP can be enforced, so therefore it has no place in reality.
Also, what stops Muslims from immigrating to your utopian ancap society and essentially taking over? If they don't break the NAP how do you plan to stop them?

unless you're homeless posting that webm from mcdonalds wifi, totally hypocritical and the kind of easy mark befitting of a goy.

thhbhthbthbhthbt eat my ass

You're a slave, as we all are. You just don't get it yet.

Grow up

vimeo.com/124675111

fuck me, can't even embed vimeo, fucking jews

Actually, a corporation could own you.

Honestly, we need to gas faggots like you

...

Yes
i own a harem of little girls and boys

ok

I'm with more of an idea where the government allows the people to be free as the possible can. Under a law that protect individuals from one another.

Something like a Individualist Republic

...

That's an interesting sexual fantasy you have there but it makes no sense.
In theory you could kill anyone if you put your mind to it, do you own them?

your petty fantasies will do nothing for you so long as i live i am free

you sound retarded
or maybe a poor 5 year old that wandered into a discussion

nice claim
no proof
dismissed

minarchism is bullshit. no amount of forced participation is acceptable, no matter how small

minarchism is like the guy who asks a girl if he can put in "just the tip"

if you ask a girl as if you need her permission, lol

of course you do. fucking someone without their consent is a violation of the NAP

you dont understand how sexuality works

dont even think about mass deportations or restricting their freedom of movement; that'd break the NAP.
just sit back and watch as your society is overran by those who dont value freedom, and hope that they wont begin enforcing sharia

...

fairly sure not selling houses or services to those you dont like is fair play when the state doesnt enforce diversity
also enforcing sharia is several steps past breaking NAP

If I call you a spook would you stop existing?

why is that relevant

nothing stops them from buying nearby your society, or buying from another person who doesnt care/realise
and yes, sharia breaks the NAP, but muslims dont care about the NAP; when they have a large enough population the NAP wont stop them

if they're not breaking the NAP, why does it matter that they're there?

it's not like I talk to my neighbors or want anything to do with them no matter what religion they are

Because to start off with, they won't break the NAP, they'll all be moderates, just like you and me, etc. etc. and as their population rises, this will slowly change. Even if you kill an extremist here or there, it won't stop their percentage rising, like in The West right now. Once they have a sizable number, they will break the NAP, but it will be too late to do anything.
Without breaking the NAP, there is no solution to this problem, whereas in a democratic society, see: USA, November 8, 2016.

nor is it like they could harm my community if i can shoot them for trespassing
many anti anarchists clearly aren't even americans because texas castle doctrine is sound, also second ammendment

Without the state bussing in terrorists, how will they overrun a town?

there are few such people in my society, so how will i be overrun?

the NAP isnt some magical piece of paper or idea
if they harm me, or threaten me, i will retaliate

Im asking you - without a state - how will they come in large numbers, what will they eat (before being in large enough numbers to break NAP with impunity) and where will they live?
If you just say "what if a million just come to your town of 100 thousand" then it is not an argument.

found the molyjew

Because Muslims will move there if borders are open, you do know not all Muslims came to The West as refugees right?
It only takes a few with property to sell, and unless you own all the land surrounding your town, nothing stops them settling there.
This will work great when it's a single attacker, but not so when it's a whole pack.
Immigration, see: Sweden before refugee crisis. Muslims can immigrate in ways other than being refugees.
Food. If you think your entire town will be redpilled to the Muslim threat, you're wrong, you can't just make your town the perfect utopia and use that to deflect all arguments. Just like in society now, many won't care about Muslims.
On property they bought from people like I mentioned above; your town is going to have an average mindset, saying "my entire town is going to have the same mentality as me" is not an argument.

if the ancap colors are black and yellow, does that mean pic related is the ideal ancap couple?

nice response

I'm not going to waste time on someone parroting what they hear in the news instead of doing a 5 second google search for some hard facts.

"Not an argument."

not an argument

see what I did there?

Without government bussing them in and giving them free gibmedats, how will they come?

There is a massive campaign in sweden to brand anyone even raising questions as racist, do you think a magical ghost will do this in a region with no government?

Do you know what a catch22 is? They can't come in large numbers, there is no magical transition point from 1 to many.

You don't know where I live
Nor do you understand how MSM influences peoples minds only with full government backing.

And you can't just make your example the perfect hell and deflect all arguments, nice projection and thank you for refuting yourself.

On property they bought from people like I mentioned above; your town is going to have an average mindset, saying "my entire town is going to have the same mentality as me" is not an argument.
Saying my entire town will be clueless retards is also not an argument.
Thanks for refuting yourself we have nothing further to discuss.

I'll also save you the trouble of trying to lead to a government forming in some way.
People organizing is not a government.
People choosing to do things together is not a government.
People voluntarily interacting, and not harassing those who choose not to interact or stop interacting is not a government.

You can do all the mental gymnastics you want but your sweden example and then pointing out how making up fantastical lands is not an argument did all the refutation for me.
Governments haven't stopped islam. Now if you are an islamic that could make sense that you think Islam is unstoppable.
If you are not islamic then stop pretending that islam is unstoppable, it is sad.

I've already elaborated on this in earlier posts, but for further elaboration, the Muslims coming to Europe right now as refugees aren't being aided by government, they are doing this through their own accord. This will just as easily happen in Ancapistan.
I don't care about what the government is doing in Sweden, I brought up Sweden to show Muslims have been arriving before the refugee crisis.
Except they can, see: Europe.
Even if you do live in a community thinking just like you, the vast majority don't, so the vast majority of Ancap societies are at risk of this issue. When they all fall, it doesn't matter how redpilled your community is if you're the only ones left.
And these opinions are going to stay, even after you get rid of government.
Except it's not, it's reality, again, see: Europe.
I'm saying lets take the average person and make them your town's population, this is the most realistic and middle grounded way of looking at it.
I don't care, I'm arguing about how an Ancap society can defend itself; this convo is already getting a bit tldr, I'm not about to double it's size.
Speaking of; Ancap society vs. agressive military dictatorship, who do you think would win and why?

One word; Trump.

lol

I'm already in a tldr argument, not starting this one

lmfao
you cant fucking be serious
they leave places they get settled to that dont give them gibmedats like eastern and southeastern europe
they all go for germany, uk, and sweden for gibs
they all go to germany and france for weather and givs

anarchist society, dont know what fucking caps you're speaking of
the dictatorship has power struggles, mutinies, and falls of regimes

You're completely ignoring the religious aspect; of course they'll go for easier to live in countries, but they are still doing it with Islamic colonisation of The West as the motive.

If we look at, say, North Korea though, this isn't the case. They love their dear leader.

Most of them are still going for free gibmedats
your islamic phobia is ignoring the fact most of these losers are NEETs that left behind their families and responsibilities, you failure

north koreans love leader
youre insane

Who commit terrorist attacks in the name of Allah and rape by the thousands? Typical NEET behavior amirite?
Well, they do; they have a filtered world view which makes them see Kim as the only thing stopping the evil West from ruining them. Regardless, my view is that a military dictatorship would win because they are able to raise a larger army, as not only would they have a standing army, they likely have some form of conscription, meaning the general populous is trained militarily. As opposed to the ancap society, where sure, you may have an armed populous, but their training will not match that of the dictatorship. The standing army equivalent I assume would be managed by private corporations, but how are they going to be paid for? Bystander syndrome would see to it that not everyone would give their fair share in paying the companies, and you cannot coerce people to pay without breaking the NAP, whereas the dictatorship is able to sustain a large military through taxation. On top of this, there will always be pacifists, cowards, etc. in both societies, but whereas in the dictatorship they would likely suffer more if they did not turn up, retreated, etc. in the ancap society there would be no consequences, which would damage the militia they were able to produce, whereas for the dictatorship this would not be an issue. Surely the dictatorship will be able to invade at will?

yes, literally

i'm autistic and do not get what you are getting at

...

...

LOOKS LIKE WE GOT OURSELVES A PERFORMATIVE CONTRADICTION HERE, GANG!

nothing contradictory about logically explaining a fact

If might makes right then why are you using reason?

Is it because, just maybe… reason makes right? And you are implicitly accepting that premise by utilizing reason? Otherwise it'd be worthless to engage in?

If might makes right, you can't use reason to make that claim. If you do, then you implicitly claim that reason makes right, contradicting your own argument through the very act of argumentation.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performative_contradiction

...

Not everyone is out to take your stuff, reason is always preferable, I never said might makes right is ideal or moral, just reality.
Fuck any link you post, cbf rn

It's true that people can do coercive things. But you acknowledge that it's not moral. Morality can be derived from reason. We are compelled to follow reason.

For example, there is nothing stopping me from claiming that 2 + 2 = 5. It is incorrect but I can absolutely go around believing it and claiming it. Likewise, there is nothing stopping me from enslaving and stealing, but it would be incorrect for me to do so.

Just because a lot of people are wrong doesn't mean immoral actions, and thus irrational actions, are correct. Property exists and must be respected.

If I don't have money and you do have money I reason it makes sense for me to take your money if there is no way to stop me.
In a Utopian world, yes, but we live in reality, so both you and I know that you must, to some extent, even if it is just begrudgingly following the law, respect the government if you wish to have a good chance of maintaining your land (unless you live in Somalia or some other shithole, that is). Sorry if you don't like this, but most of us do like the benefits and stability it brings, so live with it or leave (or resist it for as long as possible if you don't mind going to jail).

i will fix your post
stay mad

why?

Hey, not mad at all, more power to you if you can evade the law, most people do it in some way or other, but don't cry about how you're being oppressed by the big bag government you when the mechanisms in place used to enforce the law (which you seem to think don't exist?) catch up with you and you're forced to pay for whatever law you broke.

hey you can believe in karma all you like
however there are probably a dozen laws you broke today and no one will prosecute you for them, faggot

Not sure what karma has to do with anything, I'm talking about laws such as assaulting people, not like smoking weed, which the vast majority of perpetrators will get caught for. I never contested your second point, so not sure what you're so smug about.

To clarify, most perpetrators getting caught was referring to assault, not drugs.

and ive never said i go around assaulting people randomly
there is a difference between laws that are just to lock you away after a clear violation of another person and "laws" that just enrich corporations or make you pay more money to government
guess which ones you probably break intentionally every day despite singing the praises of Law?

Good, I hope the law doesn't catch up with you then if that is not the standard of your crime (assuming it's something like weed, jaywalking, other trivial crimes, that is) as I don't agree with said laws.
Just about no disagreement here, apart from the obvious of me supporting some taxation.
Never disputed this, some laws are bad, 100% agree. What law did I praise, may I ask? Or was I praising the concept of laws in general as opposed to hoping people figure it out on their own?

Show me the US law where it says you are required by law to file taxes aka the 10-40? Protip; you can't, you really can't. Plenty of tax lawyers have tried to find this piece of legislation and they can't. You waive your 4th and 5th amendment rights when you file an income tax. (Solomon vs US) 'In order for you to waive your rights, you must be do it knowingly and be possessed of the facts'.

FYI, more then 60 million Americans do not file their taxes. The IRS was created in order to pay for the civil war in 1863, it's abolishment was always planned until corrupt politicians began to see the government benefits of taxing people. The taxation of income is merely a means for the government to pay their long term FED loans nowadays.

Come up with a system where i can determine where my tax money goes. If they can not provide me with this service is see no point in their bullshit. My forefathers died to give me freedom, you will not take it away. I contribute and help build my local community. I invest more to sustain my local town then what tax money would have collected.

Enjoy that socialist debt tax.
The income tax is voluntary.

You're a good guy.
You are blessed by quadquads, may you ever live in success.

(checked)
Huh, I didn't even notice. Thanks for checking me user.

Is that OC? saved

I wish I could claim it as my own, but no, it is not.

8ch.net/b/rules.html
wew

8ch.net/log.php?page=1&board=b

...

...

dubs

You this read wrong so now your mine is mind

fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck

heh

I actually that read right

faggot

true

no

true

no one owns you

Your stupid and your arguments are shit.

Immigrants would get BTFO if they tried to start some shit, full stop. Libertarian society would be 1000x more proof against shitskin invasion. By virtue of the fact that in Ancapistan every individual has to look after themselves and make their own way though life, people are more intelligent and rational as a necessity. All the diversity shit, all of the immigration is caused by the state.

libertarian.jpg

...

Rights don't exist in that they are a concept. A useful concept which, if recognized in the land, prevent massive violence from erupting at all levels, reducing men to mere animals.

Governments which fail to recognize the rights of life, liberty, and property inevitably decline and fall, depending on the severity of their violations.

Similarly, individuals who ignore the rights of others will inevitably be killed.

tldr; if you don't recognize rights in others, you are a nigger. Governments that don't recognize rights are governments run by niggers.

The only rights which should exist are negative rights, i.e. the right not to be harmed. Positive rights like 'you have the right to force other people to do this for you' are retarded and should not exist.

gun rights!

...

Typos are not equal to a misunderstanding of the correct term to use; how many keys do you need to fuck up to turn you're into your?

You are an idiot. A Libertarian society is completely up for grabs. Whichever majority decides to flood into a country is allowed to do so. There's no such thing as libertarian nationalism. There's no border regulation in a libertarian country.

Nice semicolon faggot.

How much do I need to debunk this crap. Border regulation was never a thing until recently because it is unnecessary without a welfare state. Libertarian societies are self-regulating as people who don't fit in will simply leave to find a place where they do.

False. There is nothing that precludes nationalism, ethnocentrism etc. in libertarian society. We would probably see more homogeneity of cultures as they revert to their natural state. You could have your own exclusive communities with only your own race if you wanted.

Yes it was. The border, in the USA for example, was heavily regulated from the beginning until the civil rights movements in the 60's. The USA was meant to be for white Europeans only, and not for smelly shitskins. Having open borders in the USA is relatively new in the context of its entire existence as a country.

Yes, you could, but the country as a whole would have open borders. You can't rely on state control of the borders in a libertarian country. If some shitskin race decided to flood the country, they would be able to and then eventually overtake those homogeneous communities.

Sure thing buddy, and do you have an issue with my correct use of the semicolon?

...

...

government owns you

...

none