LIBERTARIAN FLIPS THE FUCK OUT ON SAM SEDER'S SHOW

youtube.com/watch?v=Ul0qfEL_Zog

Are lolbertarians totally batshit or what?

Me in the back btw.

kek

How would land management work in an anarchkiddie society?

What's to stop me from coming over to your house with a gun and shooting you and taking your property.

As far as i understand it anarchists recognize that there is such a thing as society and community.

Land should not be privately owned. If you live on the land you manage it.
Everyone under anarchism will be heavily armed.
What's to stop someone from shooting you and taking your property in any other situation?

There wouldn't be any real incentive to "steal" property, as property would already be held in common ownership. There isn't an issue with scarcity of housing (both theoretically in a communist society OR today, at least when it comes to house-per-individual): if you need a house, you get a house so long as you live in it and use it on a daily basis.

What's stopping you from doing that today? You could bust down your neighbor's door and paint the walls pink with their brains RIGHT NOW and only they themselves would be capable of stopping you. The police would only be there to mop up the mess when your done anyways. At least in an anarchist society, said neighbor would very likely be armed to a similar degree as yourself, and you'd still get strung up by your community if you did manage to go through with senseless murder.

Wow that was enjoyable. Anybody got other examples of ancap meltdowns?

militia with guns

Yes.

Holy shit, this is better than I thought it would be, totally watch it. He can't answer a simple fucking question, I'm not running for anything but I could do a far better job defending communism.

That is because communism is not built on basic contradictions.

But even so, if I was asked a question I didn't have an answer for, there are better ways to deal with that than sperging out…

That's a lowkey way to say "feudalism".
If land "ownership" is ultimately decided by which council could exercise more power in that specific area then it is not the individual that owns the land, but the council(feudal lord).
This fucking guy.

...

Of course there is: Someone has land that I want to use and don't want anyone else to use. If I can take it by force and prevent others from taking it from me then why shouldn't I? We will never live in a society were everyone is 100% equal and all fights end in a draw, eventually someone will rise to the top and intimidate others into doing what they want. This is the current situation in Africa with warlords.

I fail to see how police coming and arresting you as a representative of the community and the laws it wants to enforce and the community itself coming to punish you are inherently different.

Somebody put "non-aggression" on that

To entertain the idealistic dream of "libertarianism" in the American sense requires a suspension of disbelief akin to that which the audience of an action film must affect. If you think about it critically it is impossible to escape the conclusion that it is completely fantastical.

A person can only work so much land. There is no need to take more than a persin can work himself. Remember that use is what determines ownership to a real anarchist.

Africa is almost entirely capitalist and forced to export most of their goods on the global market while being weighed down by debt forced on them by core nations.
Under a post-scarcity economy you can't have warlords because there would be no point to try and steal resources.

This only cements the fact that property requires states.

I saw that, I haven't laughed harder in a long time.

ARE YOU SAYING THAT FREEDOM DOESN'T WORK???

Mate, men are evil, they will steal and rape until they're dead, this is why we still have Capitalism.

If you fail to see the difference, why do you think one would be less effective than the other? Either way the same threat of violent reprisal for your actions exists, why would this break down under anarchism but works fine with the police in your mind?

Say what you will, that man has one spicy memerino.

Not an anarchist, but I always thought non-individualist anarchism argued more for community rule than non-coercion. There's still the coercion of people around you, which keeps you from raping, stealing, etc. It just lacks hierarchies, so no single person or group is inherently put above another. The wider community can still enforce itself on individuals thought.

Absent the class system, community rule would be as different from the police force as current management structures are from workers councils, though in both cases they'd be primarily doing the same work.

Most of what I know about anarchism I read a long time ago though, so I could well be wrong.

His point is precisely that there is no difference. You are proposing a system that is ultimately no better than what is currently in place.

Anyone have that webm of that libertarian candidate spazzing out "I'm and "" libertarian!11!!"? Shit's hilarious.

What if I like your land better than mine and decide I want to live on it instead of you?

I am a very greedy persin. How do you prove I can't use it?

self described greedy persins get a tickit on this train.

Train is mine, now.

We did not always have capitalism, and there is no reason to believe that we always will.


What can you do to take it? Kill me? Do not think that the rest of the commune is going to be keen on a murder.


What does proof have to do with it? There are no property deeds. If you can't work it all, then you can't work it all.

I am pretty sure they were batshit to begin with