Anarcho Capitalisim

This

Back then people sued companies for polluting their shit, until the US gov intervened and fucked everything up.

The difference is the people will be able to chose the laws they want. They can pay the companies they want to provide protection. The government does not serve the people. We give them money and they can spend it how they want.

Horseshit, any healthy society needs as much economic regulation as they do social regulation, letting greedy businessmen plan things is a big part of the shit show we have today.

Economic conditions must adjust to the unique situation of each nation, somewhere like America for example can have a fairly decentralized economic system whereas some place like Greece or Italy would have to be more controlled from the center.

This. I really enjoy economics but at this point it's just going to divide the community.

But when that happens I'm going Distributist

Agreed.

anclaps have no solution for border control. why would someone patrol the border if they arent being paid by someone? why would a private border patrol bother to guard the whole border competently? who would pay them? you would eventually have a government once again taxing people to protect the borders from spics trying to sell their herbs.

of course, similar logic applies to airplane immigration control. why would an airplane company feel obligated to keep out non-citizens, theyll just scan your luggage for bombs and have armed guards on board each flight to protect their investment.

government isnt as efficient as it could be, but it does lots of shit that has to be done. arguing for no government at this point is begging for a muslim-spic-chink invasion.

If immigration is an issue for you, remember that you can pay a company to protect the boarder. It would bee a small monthly fee. If you have enough people paying, you would have a boarder patrol.

That way you can voluntarily give to the institutions you want. Taxation in it's current form is texbook theft.

AnCaps are libertarians.

Libertarianism is an entry-level drug for socialism and marxism.

AnCap benefits huge corporations.

AnCap is a paradox. There can never have capitalism in an anarchic society. Capitalism requires a minimal working government to work.

Holla Forums is that way, retard.

Fuck my life.

0/10

...

how do you know if theyre patrolling it properly if there is no oversight? you might as well throw away your money, which is basically what your last sentence implies will happen. also you didnt even bother mentioning airplane companies sorting out non-citizens because it would be fundamentally anti-anclap. why spend more money to sort out non-citizens when you could build more planes and sabotage your rivals.

dont forget that your country will be the target of literally every other country now that there is no government, so dont forget a private military that may/may not protect you will also be grabbing your shekels. speaking of, how will they protect you if other military companies are also flying planes all the time near you? it would take just a slight deviation from their flight path to bomb you, and of course your hired military doesnt want to spend money protecting a dead man.

In ancap society there is no public land. Wetbacks are trespassers. Each community, however small, can enact and enforce its own immigration policy.

You failed your post and your life too.

National Socialism (eh you still elect a new leader every 5 years)

and who would you buy those exclusive rights from? the govt?

Monarcho-fascism

sure

But the govt doesn't own the air.

Nah, fuck your AnCap BS.

You failed to sage again.

that's what they want you to believe

how many people do you know who will invest in their own tanks that will always be ready on standby? not to mention actually being brave enough to be in a tank crew going into combat, and doing it competently. and of course hiring a paramilitary company to defend you instead is just impractical, unless you are a rich corporation owner yourself.

literally everything anclaps want leads to societal collapse, which is disadvantageous when there are still other societies who will invade you the moment you announce there is no government

You are on your way to becoming an ancap.

I don't even care anymore.

...

Communities would pool their resources together to fund a miliary if/when it makes sense. But only in an opt-in basis, as they see fit.

No NatSoc has socialist policies, ie welfare and healthcare and old age pensions.

These don't help people, but in fact provide incentives for dysgenics, as proven here in the states. You can argue, well that's because of the spics and niggers, and you'd be half correct, but it also rewards low IQ whites as well, we're talking about the 70-90 range, which are in line with niggers and spics in terms of average IQ.

Instead of letting these people die or starve at worst, or prevent them from having a stable financial state to have children at best, you subsidize them with welfare and you incentivize r-selected vermin from breeding.

Old age pensions are proven to fuck over the younger generations and should be done away with. People should be encouraged to save, but don't take shit out of their paycheck, give them the equivalent of an IOU, and then tell them DON'T WORRY THE YOUNG WILL PAY THAT IOU. It doesn't work.

Free healthcare makes the healthcare providers raise the prices because, hey who gives the shit the government's paying and the tax payers will pay whatever the fuck the government tells them to pay.

The nationalist foreign policy and even foreign trade policies are good, but the economic policies, except for the regulations that prevent degeneracy which I happen to agree with, and the social policies and pants on head retarded and do not work.

NatSoc and AnCap are left-leaning theories. They're both cancer and need to go.

Or you can carry a fucking gun and kill the rapist who's trying to violate your property rights.

No neither are retard. AnCap and NatSoc are both right wing theories, they've always have been.

Go read a book, idiot. Different flavors of shit are still shit.

Only left leaning in terms of social programs. Everything else is right leaning.

Hell fascism in general doesn't fit in the left-right paradigm, hence why it's the third position.

...

Are you saying NatSoc isn't fascism?

I'm not even preaching a system of government that is remotely socialist.

Lolbergism and Ancap are great newfag filters. Atheism too.

communities of what size? obviously small rural communities will be wiped out and replaced by monsanto-like corporations, but "pooling their resources" on a large scale basis is essentially taxing under a different name. i also doubt a small town would be willing to spend most of their earnings to fund military training, equipment, and exercises for a few neighborhood jocks who probably would panic at the first sign of opposition.

anclaps are just corporate shills who want to believe everyone can be the boss, or die trying. why would a small regional military stand a chance against a chinese/russian invasion? the answer is they wont. and literally noone has mentioned that foreign militaries will instantly invade a country that declares it has no government, striking before any of these supposed paramilitary companies or local militias actually exist.

NatSoc is Socialism. If you put your people into welfare and beneficial programs in lieu of others, you're making your own people lazy and unproductive. Why would you produce more when you have everything handed to you? It's like you're promoting "DON'T GIVE MONEY TO THEM, GIVE IT TO ME BECAUSE MY RACE".

NatSoc depended on expansionism to support itself. It is a theory that does not support itself without the strife of others. In a sense, it's a different flavor of Zionism, the whole thing Holla Forums loathes. This being said, there are good policies from NatSoc which are needed today, but advocating full tilting is as retarded as advocating marxism or fascism. All of these are failed theories.

I already pointed that out

We have IDs you know.

These are actually good because they point out your dissatisfaction with such a scenario. Obviously you wouldn't subscribe to a security company and the joke relies on others seeing the absurdity too. Nobody would pay for that. Which is why it would never work.

Instead of individual protection, a security company would focus on keeping areas free of violence and offer umbrella protection to those who may not even be paying. Sounds like more of a community-run organization rather than a company though.

Didn't saw that. Well we're both preaching the same stuff. I agree with your points.

...

>>>Holla Forums

The only people who claim to be AnCap live off their moderately popular youtube channels where they talk about being AnCap.

Yeah, I don't understand why some of these retards say, HURRDURR WHY DON'T YOU CARE FOR YOUR RACE, when you vehemently oppose the socialist policies of NatSoc.

Nigger, IF YOU DID CARE you wouldn't incentivize the worst of the worst. You would incentivize the best, the brightest, the strongest of your race and make them having tons and tons of babies.

Sorry but I don't see an argument.

I'm glad you enjoy these epic memes user, here you'll find more of them :)
knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/anarcho-capitalism/photos

One simple trick to make your post about socialism.

How new are you, You dont understand any eceonomic concept hat the NSDAP plataform applied let alone the economical fundaments of the NatSoc, Talking about Money Welfare and productivity in a modern context and using those terms when talking of a system where money and interest is obsolete is absolutely hilarious. You just look like either naive or illitearte.

Money
From the deluge is born a new world, while the Pharisees whine about their miserable pennies! The liberation of humanity from the curse of gold stands before us! – Dietrich Eckart
Money has been described variously as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, a store of value, and a method of deferred payment. However, a National Socialist economy strictly defines money as a measure of productivity. In Hitler’s words, “If a farmer should ask me what is the value of the goods that he produces, I should reply, the value of the work that they enable a town labourer to do.”
Such a definition of money necessarily rejects the backing of currency by gold, silver or any other physical material. Material-backed currency by definition submits itself to dependence on the quantity of the material in existence, and to entanglement with currencies of other economies backed by the same material. For example, a currency backed by gold would find its unit value changing as a result of a new gold mine being discovered, even if the gold mine were located in Israel another country! This is unacceptable to a National Socialist state which insists on total monetary independence, and on foreign trade by barter only. Between 1933 and 1936, National Socialist Germany’s gold reserves decreased from 937 million to 72 million Reichsmarks, the difference having gone to purchase raw materials of real economic value from a labour perspective; in that same period unemployment was wiped out.
Labour-backed currency alone precludes any shortages or excesses of money in circulation, as the quantity of money in circulation would never have any justifiable reason to be other than directly proportional to the quantity of production within the country. What happens in other countries henceforth becomes economically irrelevant to a National Socialist state. Conversely, a National Socialist state can never be plausibly blamed by other countries for manipulating their economies, as it has explicitly relinquished all means by which it could do so. Like the Neolithic Aryan subsistence farmer who grows all his own food and to whom gold coins are a meaningless idea, so a National Socialist economy that attains what Hitler called “national subsistence” can feel confident about its economic future and earn the trust of others in a way that the gold-bound states can never know.
What each of us receives must first have been produced by another; no one can receive more than the others have produced. Thus the problem of currency is no artificial one, but merely a question of production, a question of the organization of work and of the distribution of the results of work. – Adolf Hitler
Furthermore, a National Socialist economy must be one that prevents monetary gain through lease or financial speculation of any kind, which is always reducible to the Jewish idea of profit by possession, the principle behind usury whose mathematically certain conclusion is concentration of all money in the economy under the ownership of the usurers. (“The reason why the Jews and their fabrications find such credence becomes apparent if you take a look at a country like Switzerland. In that country, Tom has milk interests, Dick follows the prices of the grain market, and Harry exports watches.” – Adolf Hitler) The advantage of a labour-backed currency in this case is that it prevents usurers from disguising their gains behind inflation or other temporal distortions. In a National Socialist state, identification of usurers will be a trivial matter of spotting non-producers who are able to remain solvent.
How could money multiply itself? – Alfred Rosenberg
The essential cause of the stability of our currency was to be sought for in our concentration camps. The currency remains stable when the speculators are put under lock and key. – Adolf Hitler
The principle that labour should only be employed where necessary in a National Socialist economy completes our understanding of the role of its money. This strictly rejects any use of labour in the production of unnecessary commodities or of any commodity in excessive quantities. The people’s primary concern is assisting in the ennoblement of themselves and others, not producing commodities with which to derive maximum pleasure. A National Socialist economy does not merely oppose excess and espouse moderation, but opposes the very core of consumerism, thereby espousing frugality in all aspects of daily life as an Aryan ideal in its own right.

...

Are you retarded or just pretending?

great post, but you forgot to sage the anacap thread 9/10

I'm not advocating against neither. I'm saying going full retard and doing anarchy won't solve problems, but simply create more, as well as going full marxist. There is always a need for government, but the problem is that society allows it to self-promote and self-inflate to the point where the government rules for itself and for who has the biggest dosh to pay their corruption (corporations). The solution is not to end government, but to make it as simple as possible, and make it small but efficient.

You cannot remove money from a society. This is utopic crap. Interest is good, as long as it is highly controlled and supervised. It gives incentive for those looking to fund their own initiatives. With no interest, there's no way to make the banks willing to lend money for those willing to make their business flow. Banks need to be supervised to not let this mentality go overdrive, and anarchy will make this worse, not better.

Your last paragraph screams self-righteous utopic sophistry. No one in their own right mind would adopt that policy. If you replace Aryan with The People and quote it as Karl Marx it would end up the same. Stop going so much to the far-right that you end up at the far-left.

also i just remembered, but isnt one of the big fucking selling points of capitalism is that its worked so far throughout most of history since its been regulated to some extent? why do you need to collapse society as we know it to make anclapism work when what we have now works fairly well. its the same fucking reason communism failed in every form its manifested. governments are the result of society wanting leaders to lead them better than they could themselves, so getting rid of them entirely is just hubris.

NatSoc will break any people willing to enforce in just a couple generations. Once everything is handed and regulated and just spoonfed to you because of something you were inherently given through birth makes you grow weak.

Took the words out of my mouth. Fuck ancaps, fuck natsoc and fuck anything remotely left-leaning. Work for your dreams and realizations. If you're white, black or asian, as long as you're working for it, you're defending western values. If you want your race to be inherently superior because race, you're promoting selfishness, entitlement. Statistics show whites are mostly better at shit because as shitty as the system is, it still shows to educated people that are willing to sweat for your shit you'll get rewarded, sooner or later.

Its not removing money from society but redefining the role that money play in Directed economy
.
You seem to still using modern framework and refusing to understand that the NatSoc economics differs fundamentally from all of these by refusing to treat consumption, and hence productivity, as valuable in itself.

Directed Economy
It is the high task of our national economy to direct the consumption power of our people along lines which can be satisfied out of the resources of our own national production. - Adolf Hitler
A National Socialist economy is not centrally planned, but centrally directed. Central planning involves taking demand for granted and then using the state to regulate supply. Central direction involves determining adequate supply and then using the state to limit demand. Hence a National Socialist economy should not be confused with a mixed-market economy, which is a fundamentally capitalist economy with state intervention in subservience to implicitly capitalist values. Hitler himself had no role in micromanaging the economy of National Socialist Germany, but rather was responsible for preventing the economy (and hence those who would seek to manipulate it by investments) from leading astray the state.
A National Socialist government guarantees zero unemployment by making it duty of the state to assign a living-wage job to anyone and everyone who wants one. Private businesses, whose task is not to put people to work but to be a reliable provider of their professed products/services, are justified in not hiring more employees than they need to provide their product/service in the required quantity (and no more than this quantity). It therefore falls upon the state to create public works projects – typically in infrastructure, community service or any other field that passively benefits the country as a whole - capable of absorbing all the workers that the private sector cannot absorb, as demonstrated in the Reichsarbeitsdienst and related programs of National Socialist Germany. Note that such assignment should never be compulsory upon anyone, but merely be an offer that is always open. This is not to say that community-minded private businesses cannot also help absorb the unemployed – they could readily do so (and would be actively encouraged to do so by a National Socialist government) by splitting each full-time job into two or more part-time jobs for corresponding fractions of full-time wages until all competent workers have been absorbed. It is mindblowingly simple when you think about it.
Hitler warned that: “The basis of Jewish commercial policy is to make matters incomprehensible for a normal brain.” Certainly, Jewish collective success throughout history has consistently correlated with the economic complexity of the society involved, hence the ZC propaganda throughout the colonial era to convince the complex economic societies of their “superiority” over the more economically simple (so-called “Third World”) societies that they colonized, in order to discourage the former from learning from the latter. In opposition to this, a National Socialist economy consciously aims to be as simple as possible, both in production and in trade. An economy that is too complex to be understood by non-experts is too complex, and it is the responsibility of the state not only to prevent the national economy from becoming more complex than is necessary, but moreover to constantly seek ways to simplify it further.

Its not utopic when it was pretty much implemented and functional during the third reich, Seems like you are totally oblivious to the work of Feder let alone a single economic policy that was implemented and tested during the third reich. I invite you to read his work, it was the theory and the backbone behind what was finally implemented when they rised to power.

archive.org/details/GottfriedFederTheGermanStateOnANationalAndSocialistFoundation

Man, I remember when I was 14

Moving the conversation away from economics huh.

Having to resort to hypothetical arguments about human nature because you didnt know jackshit about natsoc policies like you claimed here is hilarious

You can't simplify current economy. When you go NatSoc, the economy of your own yard works differently then the rest of the world. No one will trade with you. No one will want to trade with someone that doesn't follow international law.

The Reich functioned while Hitler managed to conquer territory. We don't know how it would have worked if Hitler had no spoils from wars to fund his program, because there was no lasting timeframe to confirm it. I'd say, for the sake of proving it doesn't work, NatSoc should be implemented just so you and other desilusional LARP'ers would understand that going full right and full left do not work. You can't adopt everyone; you can't rely on your own production and money to fund your own utopic paradise.

LOL how did I move away? You have no arguments left; your little dream doesn't work. You want to tell me that national socialism isn't socialism because reasons. I don't claim to say NatSoc is inherently worse/better than just socialism; NatSoc in itself, in paper, is a better political program for today's world than just socialism. But it's just a different brand of marxism. No socialist program survives without exterior funding, be it from war spoils, bank lending, tax increase. This has been proven time and time again. If your best example of NatSoc is the Third Reich, which lasted 12 years and 6 years after implementation went to war and used war spoils to fund their operations. We don't know how the Reich would have gone without those wars, and I'm not even going into the discussion if those wars were caused by Hitler or not. It's a fact that when you're at war and you conquer territories, the conquerings will have spoils that the winner will use.

I say let there be a Fourth Reich. And let it stay isolated from the rest of the world. If it thrives, good, then your entire socialist utopic dream works. If it doesn't, it's just another brand of socialism falling down on it's own failed theories.

remind me again how many natsoc countries there are/were, please. i mean the most prominent natsoc government obviously failed because it isnt around now, inb4 muh occupied government but i do hope you can point to some other natsoc governments that were at least successful for a decade or two. otherwise youre just shilling for something that was less adopted than marxism/communism and just spouting theoretics at us.