Making counter signal memes

so i found an old deleted folder filled with these type of drawings, or "smuggies" if you're a redditor. they're fun but i can't think of anything to make, so i'll take requests, if you've ever heard of some dumb shit someone said online and want to make an image to easily rebut it.

Other urls found in this thread:

8ch.net/b/res/7232561.html#7233247
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

make one of a disgusting pedo talking about women being able to make their own decisions and fapping while typing on his keyboard.

Do Dysnomia screaming "MORE RULES MORE RULES MORE RULES MORE RULES MORE RULES MORE RULES MORE RULES"

here


i made fun of dysnomia multiple times a while ago when he used to derail threads with his capcode

...

Disgusting.

Explain to me how you know that, r/T_D

Eh, wanna help finish this one off for me OP? The sites I planned to have go in this order:


and finally 8ch. If you want to reimagine it that's fine by me.
Also there's a trend starting on Holla Forums where they post pictures of random cuckchan and plebbit users in MAGA hats because of the faces of Holla Forums thread a while back, so if you could make one calling that shit out it would help.


shoo shoo Holla Forums

sure, give me a minute.

Ooooh he said it! He actually did it!
Can't wait for that boy to get them triggered! Ooooh man!

Here's one that will let you instantly win any argument.

here you go dear

I honestly am trying to find any humor left in political shitflinging over the burger election but it's just become so fucking stale and I really wish faggots would just move the fuck on and find something new to shitpost about.
God I wish there was a decent alternate imageboard that wasn't fucking dead.

Make one where he says "i am a faget" and he has a lenin hat

Well there's always 420chan…
Waitnyou said decent, right. Back to the drawing board.

Make one like this but for leftypol

but we can all agree that Lain is pretty great right

Who?

I love how meta countersignal memes are getting.

Saw you in another thread poorly trying to defend yourself as an ancap. Did you actually get so mad you starded drawing strawmen instead of realising the flaws in your ideology?

hello i am retarded and i can't read

whoops

Ancap memes are the funniest thing.
Post more.
I want there to be a comedy video game set in an ancap world in the style of these memes

anybody that tried to actually make a fleshed out ancap world for comedy would soon come to the realization that it actually works perfectly well. read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress

If you're trying to claim it's not you I'll let you know the thread is still up. You made those a while ago,don't kid yourself.
8ch.net/b/res/7232561.html#7233247
Also kys tripfag.

DERP!

Haha you miserable losers have been decimated by this meme over the last two years. Why can't you find other ways to win hearts except subversion and sabotage?

This is the most intelligent thing I've ever had the privilege of laying my eyes upon. We should nominate you for the Nobel Prize(all of them).

Of course, real life ancap would effectively be a monarchy and those have been proven to work much better than the system we use, but the shit in ancap memes is funnier than real life.

yeah, that's what i'm saying… that i made them a while ago. you just claimed that i didn't make them a while ago, i made them today after i "got so mad", which i am disputing by pointing out that i said in the OP that that's not the case, dumbass. why are you taking your autism to another thread?

fuck

Don't get butthurt at memes, user.
I like the idea of anarcho-capitalism but ancapball is too good.

Recreational nuke manufacturers would contend otherwise

It's /polk/ reading list all over again…

...

while you're reading 60s sci fi books read the illuminatus trilogy tbh
the point is that that book explains in detail how an ancap society would function in real life. if you want actual political theorists try rothbard, or friedman, or hoppe.

The resources would be so tightly controlled by a few small kingdoms companies that nuclear weapons wouldn't be feasible to make.

dysnomia, you need to start banning plebbit memes. please?

Not with a free market

Surprised it's not the tripfag, this is as intelligent as those retarded memes get.
Seriously, anyone who mocks people with these deserves to get shot.

stfu faggot derpposting is the best meme ever

(You) deserve to be shot. (and raped first)

I'll be doing both

...

have you read any one book ever written by an ancap? before you google anything: no, you haven't, and you're about as fit to talk about what would happen as someone who hasn't read the gommie manifesto is fit to talk about marxism.
tbh if ancaps are to get any political foothold we'd better start contesting all the meme claims thrown at us daily

it's a good sign that you know you're a redditfag. it's a bad sign that you keep on posting it. stop. reddit maymays are the shittiest in the world.

wtf is a "maymay" lol you need to get outside more dude

Okay smartass, how are you going to keep companies from controning said resources? It's not like they will fight for regional power until the end of time, some will be more powerful than others.

lol this

Lol libtard

Actually a completely free market would, rather ironically, be incredibly dominated by a single digit number of companies.
The only reason this doesn't happen in our capitalist system is because there are regulations and restrictions on how much power one company can have except for banks :^). Companies can still get extremely powerful (e.g. Disney), but they could never reach governmental levels of power due laws against monopolies and unfair competition.

On the off chance this isn't bait.
There would be no government so the constitution would be meaningless. The end.

Actually, in the current capitalist system, the government ensures that monopolies cannot be challenged by creating barriers to entry (OSHA, gun control, worker's rights). When the government disappears, competition can suddenly occur.

The Constitution is always valid

This. It should also be illegal to be gay, atheist or muslim.

Have you read Marx? If not, you should be able to see how "you haven't read this book!" as an argument is silly.

"second amendment" as shorthand for "right to own firearms"
everybody knows this


thank you. tbh i'm in favor of a transitional period that takes all the idiots that think market regulations don't help big corps to reeducation camps to learn basic economics


yes…
i was a commie for a while

Start the helicopter boys

Yes goyim, if we give MORE powers to corporations, they will become WEAKER!
Fuck worker's rights, if they don't like being fired for joining a union, why don't they just become CEOs?

...

Diseconomies of scale are what stop companies from growing large. Regulation is what favors it.

I don't think you understand. Everyone, not just corporations, gets more power, meaning that they're now free to compete in an open market.

Also, unions are inherently immoral and are basically rape and theft rolled into a single package. It's unjust, non-voluntary control over another entity

you are really dumb. the point is that regulations give power to corporations, not remove them, b/c they prevent competition from small businesses, so removing them isn't corps give more power… it's removing power.
you literally don't know what you're talking about. you haven't even been to econ 101 bc you're probably in junior high. your entire lexicon is memes.
says it more succinctly than i could.

Monopolies can't exist in a free market

How the fuck do you expect an ANARCHIST society to implement regulations?

Common consensus and a set of universal principles

You could've just said "no" and it would have packed the same punch.
How do you expect this elusive free market where no company outgrows the other to sustain itself?

and companies that privately check for standards and certify only companies that meet their regulations. like a private EPA.


holy fuck, monopolies can't exist in a free market because the think that CREATES monopolies is regulations, which come from the state. you are really dumb.

If that's how it works why is there still crime user? We have common pronciples on what's right and wrong!

I suggest you learn about economics before you attempt to debate others on the topic.

I'm going to use a tripcode because you seem to actually want to discuss this. I'm not that user.

Why do you think ancap will ever actually work? If there is anarchy what is going to stop anybody from not making it exactly how it is right now?

Because in our current society, a bastardized set of common principles (Collectively known as "the law") are enforced through violence. In a libertarian/ancap society, people agree on a common set of universal principles because they are beneficial to all. If you want to enjoy the benefits of these principles, you must accept and abide by them first.

Yeah faggot I'm sure if we revoked minimum wage laws and environmental regulations companies would pay their employees more and we'd live in a lush green paradise on earth!

Fuck outta here dumbass nigger

Serious question: Who will build roads in ancapistan?

If we revoked minimum wage laws and environmental regulations we would definitely get rid of black people.

the people. if somebody tries to aggress upon them by creating a state with a monopoly on coercive violence, they could respond in self defense. either with their own means, or via a private company.


no. and "ayncraps" is a lame insult, get a new one.
if we revoked all regulations there'd be no hoop for small companies to jump through, so it'd help small companies. with more companies because of the free market, the amount of options of people looking to be employed/consumers would maximize, so people would be able to find the best possible working conditions and pay for their ability, with nothing crippling the free market.

"minimum wage" is theft

Imagine this: one company in a cerain region gets ahed of the others, say because the ceo is a one in a million genius. Now the company is making more money than it's local competition, so it can afford to have better deals, everyone shops there, it's even better than it was before, starts defeating said competition and taking their place.
You get this snowball effect where eventually it owns virtually all the land and property in the given area because the previous owners were either driven to bancrupcy or sold their property. (or they conquereed it because uncle joe with his shotgun isn't going to stop armed guards knocking his door down but let's say that can't happen somehow)
Now the corporation holds a monopoly in that area, no?

How would patents be handled in Ancapistan? Could a privatized patent system exist?

Didn't Hitler forbid workers from striking?

I'm going to use a tripcode because you seem to actually want to discuss this. I'm not that user.

Why do you think ancap will ever actually work? If there is anarchy what is going to stop anybody from not making it exactly how it is right now?>>7233710
But will they? If people can't even agree on a political view how are they going to agree on something that is beneficial to all?

Think about it for a minute. You can't even get someone to agree with you in this board, not even in this thread, and Holla Forums is the prime example of what anarchy would be.

Apparently private companies would, but then would there be public access to roads, or would there be a fee to use them? What about cars?

What about people that can't afford these things, how would people travel by foot, designed walk-ways? Then we have the same privatized problem, or do people just walk through nature.

What about the ones that want it to be the way it currently is? What if they have capitalized on more than you, and thus have more power to rule over you.

The people could respond in self defense, but would they? What if the private corporation pays them to do otherwise?

Yes. Pretty much. Basically the people that are going to do this type of thing are going to find one way or another to do it, no matter what.

Hey, if you're still here then make one of Mark and R.O.Bfag.

Something along the lines of "Well, of course R.O.B is allowed! He doesn't break any rules, it's not roleplaying!"
While R.O.Bfag is in the background making babyfaces and holding his shitty toys.
Bonus points for giving mark easily visible pitstains and an "I 💝 lub nintendo" shirt.

And I'm sure most thieves would disagree.

Under what definition?

Natural law is bullshit. It depends on the situation, like if I stole it insulin from some rich bloke so I can keep a kid with diabetes alive it'd be good.

sure. what's wrong with that? the company succeeded, and if it started losing quality people would stop coming to it, so it'd have to sell land because it wasn't making money, so with the new land competition would arise.
even then, that's extremely unrealistic. a company can't provide everything for every market in a region. And if it did, then it'd own the housing as part of that, right? so the entire area would be private land and the people living there would be voluntarily living in a private-owned community.

there'd be a private police

as long as they don't have a monopoly on violence they aren't ruling over you. as long as you can defend yourself, or get someone, something or somepeople to defend yourself for you, how would they institute a state over you?
then.. it's voluntary? we encourage voluntary governments or communes or private societies.

Spook.

max get out

But you just said they would have a private police.

What's to stop them from going further and creating a private army, starting wars, etc.

How do you think North America was started? As far as I can tell this ideology is no different than the current system, other than the fact that it claims there are no rules rather than having invisible ones that don't apply to those with power.

What's wrong with a monopoly? That the company doesn't need to compete, so it can do whatever it wants. The prices can be high and the products shit but people will buy them because they have to. (you'd buy a computer even at theice the price if it was your only option, it's better than nothing)
Not to mention the workers will be fucked, looking forward to thise 10h work days just so you don't starve?
Oh, and that private police you mentioned? Essentially mercenaries. And who will the work for, the most powerful company in the area or some plebs with fuck all wealth?
Seriously though, I read your post 3 or 4 times now and I don't get it. What will make sure the company doesn't exploit everyone? People can't choose another company since they don't operate there, they can't move since the company owns all the roads and provides all the vehicles.

Yes, but you'd also have a private police. there wouldn't be a monopoly on violence.

As an aside, there'd likely be a private court company that would certify only companies that'd agree contractually, in some way backed by force, to show up in court if they did anything breaking that court's law system.

Because the free market would adapt, and someone with lots of power looking to make a profit would sell protection. If they can amass a private army, a community can come together and pay for a private army to resist.
This conversation seems to be going: think of a troubling situation that could happen in an anarchic world. The free market would adapt and find a solution to the oppressed party, because money is the greatest motivator, and things would stabilize.

Except it is a social construct.

drop dead, rin

Not if there was a monopoly holding my company back from earning enough to buy one that can compete.

There will be if I can afford one. Who will stop me?

Why, how?
What if I'm selling protection to you from my own army so that I can profit more and expand my army? I'm a monopoly after all, I can do that.

W-w-what? So taht retarded company would be making money how? Extortion?
Say I own a company with 90% of the wealth in the area. What's stopping me from hireing all the mercs (private police) in the area and ciezing the property. Boom I am the law now, it was so hard.
I can buy more merceneries than anyone in the area, I will always win.

hahahahahahaha

how would a monopoly of private police form? without regulations, any guy willing to patrol another guy's property/a community with a gun or show up with a gun after being called could create a tiny little private police company for himself. how would a monopoly arise?

other people and companies that have weapons. how would you get a monopoly on violence in the first place? you know what that means, right?

because people want money. if there's a niche to be filled, somebody looking to profit will always fill it if it is physically possible.
in the form of a private army that a community could come together and pay for.

why would people buy protection from the same army that's attacking them? that's just blackmail: pay us or we'll take you over. they could, if they'd like, but considering there'd be no incentive for the company to actually keep their promise and stop attacking it'd be very foolish. on the other hand, a third party private police (or any for-hire company) would have to keep their promise because because word would spread and no one would buy from them if a client payed them and they didn't do work etc. etc.

I'm beginning to think you don't actually know what a monopoly is. they don't just form spontaneously; something has to make them, like a market regulation. you can make a bomb at home and 3d print a gun, in what world would there be a monopoly on armies?


paying people to go to court?

the rest of your post is really retarded and has already been addressed countless times by every ancap alive, much less in this thread, and you seem like a fucking idiot so I won't bother.

how would a monopoly of private police form?
Let's say we are in a situation in which a small company has provided very well and has become quite successful, many smaller companies are trying their best to compete as well as they can, however, without information to the public getting out, many of these smaller companies which claim to be competition are actually all stemmed from a much larger one that runs them.

Over time this company gains much power and more people have become part of it and have begun to produce different things such as, say, food, water, guns, housing, and so on, all of this is privately owned. After a while, this company becomes a much larger community of people, all of these people, part of said community are loyal to the company because it does so well. Of course this company is going to want to preserve how well it is doing, and continues to multiply the process.

without regulations, any guy willing to patrol another guy's property/a community with a gun or show up with a gun after being called, but being a much smaller community with much less influence and power wouldn't be able to compete at all and would be entirely wiped out, or converted to become a part of the much larger one in return they get a small fraction of assest and are able to continue making their own money as long as a majority of it goes to the root of the company tree.

True, they could create a tiny little private police company for themself, but it would never be able to compete against such a monster.

We do not live in an ideal world, or perhaps the ideal world is one where equality will never truly exist. It's evolution, anyone with an advantage of power will use that advantage to get more power, and those with a disadvantage of power will never have the power to compete.

By the time another company has developed weapons they would be far inferior weapons to mine. My company is already the size of many other companies which create firearms and we had much more power to create much better firearms than any other company, we stopped anyone that showed any signs of fighting back in every way we can, using firearms, using our money as influence, and so on.

Would they be able to afford a private army that is capable of challenging mine? Would their army be above the influence that my monopoly has, ie, able to purchase that army and turn it into mine.

If so, the army must be a part of a monopoly of equal size. Now this is where it really gets interesting, because we have two monopolies that both have private armies, that are fighting eachother, but for what purpose, if one monopoly is destroyed then another monopoly that is bigger than each of them arises, and that isn't even taking into consideration that there may be a 3rd company which sets out to capitalize upon the conflict between the two. War is very profitable. War has existed for as long as humanity can remember history and this will not change.

Do they know any better? Our company is private, we had no reason to tell them any of the stuff which would stop our profits. By definition of a private company, we are private. What we do is our own business, if you want our product you can buy it, if you don't you can find some other shabby product, that we also own.

It's anarchy. We can perform blackmail if we have the power to do it without being stopped.

No they don't. You're fighting a snake with many heads and if you cut one off two grow back.

i want to see the reply to this.

sorry, i only noticed it until now

420chan also has a shitload of political shitflinging the last time I checked (which was admittedly back in December).

Even after it died it clearly haunts you very much.

This argument is flawed because there's an upper limit to how much money really matters in a situation like the one described. ISIS, for example, are just 30,000-110,000 towelheads with guns and bombs driving around in, in some instances, hijacked cars and toyotas and shit, and yet they're still a formidable threat. this is because of the same reason the right to keep arms is important in the US today for preventing tyranny, even though the state has nukes and missiles at their disposal: the upper limit to what actually matters combat-wise is what could actually be taken into a war situation as we're describing. You don't need the millions of dollars of a hypothetical private war conglomerate to be a threat, just like ISIS doesn't need to military-industrial-complex the size of America's for mass-producing weapons of mass destruction to be a threat and consistent global nuisance. Holding power indefinitely, especially against a population that is most likely each independently armed as individuals ignoring the private sector, would be generally too difficult to be ultimately profitable. A company thinking of doing this would have to think of the risks: ancapistan is extremely decentralized and it is unlikely that at least 1 private police/military company that isn't owned by the secret conglomerate doesn't exist. So, entirely beyond the size of the company it'd remain very difficult for a complete takeover to sustain itself (not that this isn't like traditional warfare where money directly correlated with power. in a traditional war setting, if you have enough money to just nuke 'em you pretty much win the war, but in this scenario things are very different because you're taking over the land for the value of the property itself, and a wasteland that you just nuked doesn't have very high value), and if it failed that company and everyone involved in it is pretty much irrevocably screwed. the larger the scale of this takeover gets the less likely it is for it to be possible- so, assuming that this is happening only or a regional scale, what's to say an entirely different megacorp wouldn't see the oppurtunity for profit and intervene? "It'd be a global monopoly", you respond, but given the nature of how the monopoly came to be the more global it is the more frivolous an idea it is- if the monopoly came to be out of many different smaller companies all as sockpuppets for the real big company, it'd be nigh impossible to actual achieve a global monopoly of violence through that method. A monopoly involves complete ownership of the means of production, for example De Beers owning all the mines for getting diamonds globally. As long as the means of production of violence, e.g. the individual parts of a bomb or gun or any other mechanic that could be used to do damage in combat, are open to the public, there isn't really a monopoly. So, establishing that there could still be effective pushback, and less of an end net incentive to do the whole operation in the first place, you may respond "Well, okay, then the private-military-conglomerate would just pay off every emerging potential opposition to join it in return for some of the assets!" However, this argument hinges on the idea that not a single institution or company of resistance will decide not to join them. First of all, wherever there's a niche in the market it'll be filled, and "providing legitimate defense in case the whole takeover thing doesn't work out" is a market niche. Additionally, the risk-reward of joining vs. not joining actually leans towards them not joining the conglomerate- if they do, they'll get a fraction of the assets of the takeover, but if they don't and are successful in defeating the conglomerate, they'll be universally appreciated in the region and will occupy the space that the previous private police occupied before it turned evil. So there'd be less incentive for the opposition to convert than for it to not convert. $

Is there?
Are you sure?

Any of your political ideology garbage would never work. You're a woman.

Except they do, because we're funding them.

:(

Have you learned anything from history?

Except it's literally like that. RIGHT NOW.

t. Holla Forums user whose ideology has been tried all over the world and killed millions and can't see any flaws in it, who meanwhile thinks that ancap ball memes that are made by people who don't even understand the basic principles of the NAP are irrefutable rebuttals of voluntaryism

we're talking about violence, not diamonds or banks. violence is easy, you can buy a copy of the anarchist cookbook and fuck up a local park irreversibly. it's pretty much impossible to get a monopoly on capable violence on a global scale.

When did you ever think I was talking about violence?

I'm talking about monopolies. You said they can't exist in an ancap society, and they can, and violence is a fraction of the tools available to achieve one.

A group of people with enough intelligence who want to get something done WILL find a way to get it done. It's human nature.

Make one about how AJ Poster spams and posts in trap threads but has actually viewed more gay porn than most anons and is secretly gay.

we, or me and !!SdcP3rCACc if you aren't him, were talking about a monopoly of violence, as in a monopoly of coercive force like the govt has now or private armies/police. i don't know what you're talking about now and it's probably stupid. of course we have monopolies right now, because of cronyism.

i just had a pretty lengthy conversation about how people would defend themselves against the threat of violence etc etc.
how the hell would you achieve a monopoly through violence in ancapistan? what does that even mean??

this is irrelevant vague nonsense and has nothing to do with the topic tbh

Uh, no. I wasn't talking about 'monopolies of violence'. I was talking about monopolies in general and how if you achieve one you can use violence to keep it in power or to help start it if you're crafty enough.

I don't know how you strayed off topic, but yea… tl;dr a monopoly can exist in an anarchist society, as is evident by the one we're currently witnessing.

Yes we are. There are no rules except the ones all of you decided to impose on yourselves.

Then why are they allowing one to persist, why are they so docile and powerless against it?

If any of your ideology were to be true, it would have already happened.

On the contrary it already happened and you are currently living in a reality where it is currently present, OR you wouldn't have the desire to change the way society is run in the first place.

First. Learn history
Second. Learn the present.

Then you will realize you have no control of the future.

jesus christ dude, you argue like dysnomia. i'm not gonna even go through all this "lol we already live in anarchy xd" shit

you… do realize the US government was formed voluntarily, right?