Ancap games

Id say something like Rust, and thats merely just when its interacting wih other people
>Someone walks on your land
>entire runs to your roof and an AK linebattle starts on your roof and some random naked dude walking within 300m of your compound

Attached: 1555219465331.png (567x709, 371K)

Metro 2033 series. I guess you do not play as ancap yourself, as you are following the orders of Rangers and can't change factions, but the Metro itself in anarcho-capitalistic condition.

except half the place is filled with fascists and commies

explain

Cool

Kenshi

Victoria 2 of course

Bioshock 1.

Morrowind if you go Telvanni

Eve is the true ancap experience.

Explain Anarcho-Capitalism to me

Attached: 206.png (600x446, 201K)

The simplest way to describe AnCap is individuals are vastly superior to planning their own affairs than institutions such as the state and that the state in its nature is always oppressive and works solely to perpetuate its own existence through means of exploitation such as taxation.

Free Cities

>have comfy city in Rimworld
>get raided
>win raid and capture the survivors
>remove their limbs/organs and anything we can take without killing them
>sell limbs/organs for profit
>inject each survivor with Luciferium, a highly addictive and expensive drug
>give all the survivors peg legs and release them, and let them escape to their tribe
>time passes by
>get raided again by same tribe
>win raid, and some of the victims were the Luciferium addicts with peg legs, and they drop 5 Luciferium each!
>repeat process on survivors
Profit!

So what's not Ancap about those games?

Slavery, genocide, and debauchery. No state does not mean no authority.

>individuals are vastly superior to planning their own affairs
Wouldn't you have to reinvent everything by yourself then? Clothes, speech, walking on 2 feet, that sort of stuff only exists due to collectivism.

But that doesn't mean those couldn't happen

Attached: 1549421317954.png (128x128, 9K)

these niggas want to jerk it off to cp

You're a fucking idiot. By your own logic, we'd all still be in the stone age because there would be no collective force needed to advance. All things begin with the individual.

>Believing corporations will take care of you without government
>No police, because everyone will take care of yourself
Lmfao, imagine being this retarded.

Autism

Really

>all things begin with the individual
You have never EVER made something entirely by yourself, without the help of another person. You didn't learn to walk or speak by yourself. You attended a school with others in your age in a building made by other people, reading books written by other people, being in a school system made up by other people.
You don't process all the food you're eating, you don't clean the water you're drinking.
The group is nothing without the individual, the individual is nothing without the group.

>The group is nothing without the individual, the individual is nothing without the group.
Based, fuck Marx and fuck Mises.

Attached: 1554340872752.jpg (334x506, 22K)

There is no singular force known as "the group" There are individual people who collaborate to accomplish a common goal.

Not him, but people misunderstand the type of individualism that libertarians actually support. Libertarians support methodological individualism, which means they believe individuals make decisions, have rights, and are responsible for their own actions. They don't believe that people have to atomize themselves and be completely self-sufficient, that's just a strawman.

Attached: 1549704294160.png (3729x4010, 1.28M)

If you have the money to hire thugs who will force people to work without pay or die, then what's the problem?

Eve Online.

>individuals are vastly superior to planning their own affairs than institutions such as the state
Counterpoint: Most people are retarded and would destroy society without even realizing it if there were no rules telling them what is and isn't acceptable.

See

The boomers in fallout new vegas are ancap af.

Three or more people coming together is a group
I'm not arguing that individuals don't have rights or can't make decisions (a common strawman from libertards), I'm arguing that corporate intervention is inevitable and unavoidable when governmental institutions get disintegrated.

Doesn't disprove what said.

Isn't ancap just kinda meaningless anyway? Even if you completely abolished the government tomorrow, what would stop people from just eventually forming another government again? Seems like the only way to make it work long term is if everyone were ancap and a completely rationale actor in the economy.

>have leader(s)
>tribalists
>ally with one of the 4 forces or perish

>get off my property
>no roads
>have resisted overbearing imperialist governments

The surreal thing about ancaps is that they would accept the government if they could unsubscribe it at any moment, but I'd yet have to see an ancap wanting to move to some shithole like Somalia or the Russian tundra which would make living as ancap possible.
They all want to stay in their cozy homes, keeping their work, driving their cars, they just hate the government because they have to pay taxes.

>meme
>it's an old airport so it's actually full with roads
>only resisted because the other players are retarded

>some shithole like Somalia or the Russian
found the american

Society is what determines acceptable laws, the law does not determine morality. This wouldn't change under Anarcho-Capitalism, you would just instead have a polycentric legal system instead of a monopolistic one. I don't know why people paint libertarians as people who hate cooperation when capitalism requires cooperation. Even Hayek said that "society is greater than the individual in so far that it is free."

>If you hate capitalism why do you contribute to capitalism
This is the level your argument is at.

>loli art never
Those faggots over on infinitychan need to get their priorities in order.

I can't really see how leaving laws and legislation in the hands of private courts is a good idea

Social welfare has improved in Somalia since the government collapsed.

My imagination will paint a much better picture than vector art ever will.

>they shoot you on sight
>the roads are shit
>they were able to resist because the governments were ineffective to get them to play along so they just did their own thing

It's not perfect, but neither is the current system. Private courts already exist in most developed countries anyways (although they are usually regulated by the government). If you have the time, watch this video.

youtube.com/watch?v=jTYkdEU_B4o

Ancaps advocate for a world without governments, the bar wasn't high to begin with

You retard, I said Russian TUNDRA and there's fuckall there

Most African governments are corrupt, doesn't mean the alternative for the rest of the world is better. Ancaps could try to overthrow every corrupted african regime for all I care

Free Cities

>Most governments are corrupt
ftfy

Animal Crossing.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN I PUMP A GIRL FULL OF TESTOSTERONE AND FORCE FEED HER JIZZ FOR FIVE YEARS GODDAMNIT /cruisecontrol

Ok then go show my how important the individual is and grow youre own food, come back to me when you have been living off food you have grown for atleast a month

faggot

why are you speaking in english then
say some thing in russian to prove it

To some degree, every institution, individual or group that can exert power is corrupt.
Doesn't mean we should overthrow our current system to give even bigger corrupt scumbags more power.

>if you don't speak russian you're an american
Did you forget to take your meds? Or do you think you'd have to be russian to know there's fuckall in the russian tundra?

Institutions within Anarcho-capitalism would probably be susceptible to corruption, nothing is perfect, but governments amplify corruption by having a monopoly on force. For example, bribing easier because politicians/law makers don't pay with their own money, but with tax money.

Believe it or not we do have laws that can help enact reform in our government to stop corruption, we just lack the political will to do so because people have become so cynical to politics they stop caring and become ignorant to the mechanisms put in place that help them get these changes enacted. That and people have this expectation that all politicians are just corrupt which are incredibly low standards. I'd suggest we try some real reform first before we go tearing anything down first, we got the tools so why not use them?

Corruption has nothing to do with it, although I would find it difficult it argue any system would be more corrupt than our current one. The issue is, the current system says that certain individuals have a right to do things (imprisonment, taxation, warfare, etc) that no one else in the society can. People don’t realize how little effect it is to run a revolution. 10-30% of the population is all you need. The issue is, if you can make people believe that the government is necessary, then suddenly they have power. And the only people that wish to wield such power over other people in such a method are entirely sociopaths.

This is akin to a a bunch of slaves saying they will vote in a new slavemaster. You have given up all rights in the situation. The only thing stopping he government from doing whatever they want to you is that you’re not perceived as a threat.

based unknowing marxist poster

brainless retards that think they're too smart to be exploited by others envision a utopian society

That's another problem with democracy. It encourages people to stay rationally ignorant of politics. Why should anyone waste time learning about serious issues on their own time and money when the chances their vote will affect anything is abysmally small? I recommend reading the Myth of the Rational Voter.

Unless you’re a welfare nigger, half of your income is being cannibalized before you can spend it, even before inflation can get at it.

Literally the most ancap game out there.

In order to subscribe to ancap philosophy, that the government doesn't have any valid privileges or responsibilities and does not represent the nation's collective governing body.

Which means they are not obligated to give up their power for nothing in return either. If you reject the state vs citizen dichotomy, then all you're left with is entity vs entity. So the only way of actually creating an ancap society is either to secede or to go to war.

Why the fuck would a government negotiate with an implicit non-citizen? Ancaps are weirdly entitled like that. They want all of the perks of an organized society, but none of the responsibilities.

All states are abolished and every form of government must be created through private contracts, so every man lives by his own form of constitution essentially. You can therefore recreate and join into your ideal society through a series of contractual agreements. It's an extremely radical political philosophy that advocates for total individual freedom as it's commonly agreed upon among such people that the individual is impossible to fully comprehend and is therefore immoral to infringe upon with a more collective jurisprudence.

It's an esoteric political philosophy that will never be practice en masse , although you might be able to argue that there are tens of millions of people around the world who practice forms of anarcho capitalism without knowing it as they already exist within a community similar to what ideological anarcho capitalists want.

Attached: 1552084336727.jpg (960x554, 121K)

>ancap society is achieved
>biggest corporation fields an army and creates a state, since a state is the most efficient form of doing business

Attached: Thinking_Face_Emoji_large.png (480x480, 101K)

Goddammit this was supposed to be about video games

Attached: 1359661376702.png (550x427, 63K)

If the government does not exist, you’re merely negotiating with the local gang of thugs, not something imaginary called government. You didn’t follow your conclusion through.

>that the government doesn't have any valid privileges or responsibilities and does not represent the
*The state

Anarchists , of any color, are opposed to the creation of a monopoly on power - statism. There are still governments within an Anarcho capitalist society as there is in any anarchist society, it's just that their form of denying a monopoly on power comes from private property and the ultimate abolition of state of power as we know it in the 21st century. There would still be a government , however. It's just that people would govern themselves in a more localistic fashion.

Imagine if Apple tried to enforce laws.
Say, Jailbreaking could put you in jail for real.
See the difference? There is no built in reverence for corporations. You can’t make a state function without reverence, you simply do not have enough enforcers.

>it was supposed to be about video games
We both know this isn't true.

We're talking about rimworld, kenshi, and Rust though?

The only game I haven't seen brought up yet is EVE online which is probably the ultimate ancap game.

It cant work, there has to be a government or things will fall apart. But the government should be as small as possible and step aside in order to foster the creativity of humanity.

fee.org/resources/i-pencil/

Attached: 1553641829603.png (620x452, 279K)

Citystate

Attached: ancapistan.png (1922x1079, 3.13M)

>you’re merely negotiating with the local gang of thugs, not something imaginary called government

Yeah, and they have all the power unless you have your own military to counter them.

>although you might be able to argue that there are tens of millions of people around the world who practice forms of anarcho capitalism without knowing it as they already exist within a community similar to what ideological anarcho capitalists want.
Yeah in Somalia

Dragon's Dogma pawn system is essentially a fantasy slave merchant simulator.

Attached: dragon dogma ost.jpg (600x595, 79K)

I'd rather negotiate with one gang of thugs that's too big to care about the ordinary man and has a veneer of accountability, rather than a countless number of gangs cannibalizing each other. This time, without any of the history, ideals, national consciousness, traditions, etc.
Literally worst of both worlds between right and left political philosophy.

I'm not saying apple would still be selling smartphones.
I'm saying they'd simply form a state because being a state is the most lucrative business there is.

>fuck man governments are so evil you have to pay taxes and they have the monopoly on forcing their will on me
>you know what's way better dude, we just like abolish all laws and everyone is making a contract with each other to not di the things that laws said we're not allowed to do
>also if they breach that contract we will force him before a judge who will exert the will of everyone else
>or we don't have such a court and contracts and you just pay your local gang of thugs protection money I just wished they were obligated not to kill me when they feel like it

In an ancap society , Apple would most likely be broke apart. Anarcho capitalism is an esoteric political philosophy that the absolute majority of people have never heard of or understand for a reason.

An Anarcho capitalist society can't be created through statism, a monopoly on power. Corporations like Apple are like the Standard Oil of the 21st century as they rely on state power to exist, even if they're not a total monopoly. If there were something like an Anarcho capitalist uprising , then different Apple manufacturing plants would be, essentially, seperated through extreme privatization in order to destroy the current state powers like the US and China.

>putting "faith" into spooks like money to prevent your "society" from collapsing
lmao @ all of you

Attached: loli_stirner.jpg (613x771, 49K)

the concept of a spook is a spook

Abolishing the monopoly on force means that private entities will have legitimate ways of applying, selling or purchasing force.
Which means that several sizeable private entities will be able to use force on you, according to their own sets of laws, as there is no centralized power.

Which means you'll effectively be under the rule of several entities that can act on you by force, instead of just one.

I think his point was that Apple wouldn't be able to enforce laws against jailbreaking even if they wanted to. Not only would nobody respect those rules, Apple probably wouldn't try to enforce them anyways because it would cost more than to just let people jailbreak.

If Apple could exert more power by being one corporation, no fairytale delusional shitheap ideology like anarcho-capiralism could force them to stay apart other than with a heavily regulated static government

>If there were something like an Anarcho capitalist uprising , then different Apple manufacturing plants would be, essentially, seperated through extreme privatization in order to destroy the current state powers like the US and China.
Apple manufacturing plants not a state property, so you cannot privatize them.
Not to mention without state none will be able to enforce anti-monopoly laws.

>Those driving skills
I take it that a women is playing this game?

Even if property rights are arbitrary spooks it doesn't mean people can't reciprocate them anyways.

>tfw you don't like your neighbor so you buy all the land surrounding his house and declare that you will shoot him if he trespasses.
>people are powerless to stop you outside of limp-wristedly "voting with their wallets" which they may-or-may-not even be able to do depending on how you make your money.
>tfw he calls his law enforcement service™ to help him
>tfw you aren't subscribed to the same one so they can't do shit about it
>tfw you bought the gold subscriber package for your own, larger law enforcement service™ protecting you from any and all retaliation from his law enforcement service™
>tfw you hire a hitman to take him out since his call for help sent radio waves over your property without permission

Attached: zuz.jpg (547x402, 24K)

If an ancap society was achieved, a new state will pop up after a short civil war, because it's simply an insecapable fact that the first entity to centralize and consolidate its power will have a massive advantage over smaller entities that don't.

Divide and conquer and all that.

anarcocapitalism mixed with primitivism

spontaneous order through voluntary exchange amongst a collective != a state-organized collective

Ancaps are inherently criminals as they dont believe that current nation states are legitimate means of ruling. People who live by a strict code away from state power , perhaps who work with money given under the table under contractual agreement away from the state's eye, are arguably working in favor of anarcho capitalists. Also, anarchists in general although collectivist anarchists might disagree.

Idk man, anarchism is a huge meme ideology in general. Autistic to degrees you wouldn't be able to understand

Is Ancap, Ancom and Egoism the three biggest meme political ideologies?

In Ancap society Apple could kill people who jailbreak and seize their property via Death Squads if they include that in their TOS

Anarcho-capitalism is a sub-ideology of primitivism

Anarcho-primitivism and anarcho-transhumanism

Isn't any anarchy just a transitional stage until a new state forms?

>ancap society is achieved
>get ready to start muh homesteading and enjoy freedoms
>all previously public properties are immediately privatized by apple, google and amazon
>have to pay a Subscription Fee(tm) to use roads and drink water
lmao

But user, don't you know, you can't have roads without the state!

>In Ancap society Apple could kill people who jailbreak and seize their property via Death Squads if they include that in their TOS
So Apple would waste billions of dollars on agencies that go around killing people who jailbreak their phones?

>So Apple would waste billions of dollars
Yep to establish Apple sovereignity over certain territories

Everything is transient.

Attached: nothingendsthumb[1].jpg (250x392, 39K)

I mean they could, if they kept their power together in some sort of free fall and were able to collect means of violence in the form of an army. Vae victus and all that. I was just using apple as a theoretical to what an ancap uprising would look like - there would still be a mass reorganizing of society it's just that it would occur through private contracts and Constitutions.

If, emphasis on the if. Any entity that tried to centralize power beyond "reasonable" means would be opposed. Again, ancap is a meme esoteric ideology usually only found in favor of by extreme libertarians. It's not going to have a general uprising just a mass of people who hope for x,y, or z. You might argue that the black market is ancap but the black market isn't going to suddenly unite and try to instate en masse decentralization of power.

How many do you see that actually try to put their ideology into practice in the every day?

Ace Combat 3 and Armored Core.

if it ensures that they'll earn more money by preventing or intimidating people from jailbreaking then yes, absolutely.

The point is they could and would if it's profitable to seize the property of jailbreakers

Just like how the US government wastes billions of dollars on agencies that go around killing people all over the world who interfere with their business. Because it fucking works, you retard.

Because violence is the real form of power.

Eco-Fascism

>Apple manufacturing plants not a state property, so you cannot privatize them.
No, it just relies on different states so what it relies on state power will be privatized. That's what ancaps are.

Probably, power will always centralize no matter what over time, not infinitely as different nation states and empires collapse or fall into civil strife over time, but power does centralize as a general rule. Anarchists essentially just want to disrupt the process temporarily in order to achieve what they see as a more ideal society for a given amount of time.

It's not more profitable. They have to pay fees for the agencies, hazard pay, etc. which would end up costing more money than if they just let people jailbreak their phones. They'll just continue doing what they're doing now, tell people to stop and make preventative patches.

Thanks for proving my point I guess, this is why monopolies on force are bad.

>No, it just relies on different states so what it relies on state power will be privatized.
So basically all business supposed to be privatizzed, by whom..?

>It's not more profitable.
it does because ancap society will allow corporation to establish total control over their property

oh, you play against the chinese?

Attached: ancapgaige.png (474x302, 190K)

Nope

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hebrew_Israelites
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

>Implying it's a bad thing ancaps heavily endorse shit like crypto because of their hatred of state fiat money

>by whom
A theoretical mass uprising of ideological ancaps in a given area. I'm not saying this will realistically happen , I'm just using a theoretical to explain the ideology.

Most ancaps I've ever known of or heard of have been a pretty mixed bag. You have molyneux who was a fairly succesful entrepreneur, you have Rothbard who was a successful albeit controversial intellectual , then you have waves of misc criminals and a few white nationalist who subscribe to it. So, yeah, probably never going to happen.

Nope.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity

B)

>Molyneux and Rothbard
>The lamest ancaps
David Friedman shits on them both.

The US doesn't have a monopoly on force, on a global scale, though.
They can go and bomb some shithole in the middle east as long as they can get away with it, because it's profitable.
You think being oppressed by a government is so bad, imagine being oppressed by entities that don't answer to any government.
You want to trade the position of being a protectorate of a force monopolist, to being its competitor.

I think ancap philosophy is just a consequence of amerimutts thinking that USA is the whole world.

I'm pointing it out again because your IQ seems to be below 70:
In order to abolish corrupt governments, anarcho-capitalists want to give everyone the ability to be as corrupt as possible while directly enabling literal crime syndicates but OH WAIT that won't happen because if violence is monopolized all the other ancap actors will have the power to monopolize violence

The mere existence of Pandora violates the NAP.

>It's not more profitable.
According to what precedent? This kind of thing has happened before with shit like Coca-Cola hiring mercenaries to kill union members in Columbia.
using force to protect revenue is one of the biggest complaints that the Ancaps have about the state. Thinking that large companies with the resources to do so wouldn't do the same given the opportunity is ludicrous.
This is why nobody takes you delusional niggers seriously

Attached: 1537768035427.jpg (366x477, 42K)

>The US doesn't have a monopoly on force, on a global scale, though.
The definition of a state is a a monopoly on force in a given geographical territory.

>imagine being oppressed by entities that don't answer to any government
Nigger governments already don't answer to some higher government. If the government wanted to they could kill you right now. The same complaints you make about anarcho-capitalism aren't even alleviated by statism. We live in a might makes right world, and the government doesn't have some exclusive powers that protect you from that, all it is is an organization of people. What if your government gets overrun by another? Where are your rights now?

>anarcho-capitalists want to give everyone the ability to be as corrupt as possible while directly enabling literal crime syndicates
The fuck are you even talking about?

Isn't De Beers like one of the most famous examples of corporations hiring mercenaries to kill people and everything, blood diamonds and such. They also had something like a 90% monopoly on the diamond trade at one stage too.

I'm talking about this specific example with Apple and jailbreaking phones. They lose literally no money and in fact, people don't even need to jailbreak phones anymore. Any potential losses would be near zero, while hiring an army to kill people who jailbreak would cost billions of dollars. The costs are higher than the gains, they get nothing out of it. Your problem is is that you compare them to a state and assume they have the same powers, but they wouldn't because all the money they receive are from people voluntarily patronizing them, they cannot amass an army to do retarded shit like policing jailbreaking. Why do you think there aren't any significant punishments right now for jailbreaking? Because it's insignificant.

The South African government is the one that makes the contracts with De Beers. If there is a monopoly, it's being propped up by the state.

>The definition of a state is a a monopoly on force in a given geographical territory.
Does that mean having security on a private property makes you a state? I agree that it does, hence my point: instead of being oppressed by one state, you want to be oppressed by several states.

A state is less likely to kill someone who pays them taxes rather than someone who is trying to break into their oil market, you dig?
> What if your government gets overrun by another?
That's why it's in my best interests to support my government, so that doesn't happen. It'd suck to be on the receiving end of the US foreign policy.

>If the government wanted to they could kill you right now. The same complaints you make about anarcho-capitalism aren't even alleviated by statism. We live in a might makes right world, and the government doesn't have some exclusive powers that protect you from that, all it is is an organization of people.
The government isn't some faceless AI but individuals who can only act upon laws while there are consequences for individuals in that government who disregard laws.
One of the fundamental differences between a governmental body and a private individual is that the government can only act within the limits of laws while private persons can do everything that isn't forbidden by laws.
Ancaps are all about abolishing governments abd laws and instead want to make contracts without legal basis with every other person which is just a way less efficient and sound way if having laws.

The south african government literally nationalized their diamond mines and give nearly exclusive access to de beers. Every cartel or monopoly you can think of is propped up by a state in one way or another.

Free markets produce goods and services of vastly greater quality, at lower cost, more voluntarily and, with greater stability than any government. So anarcho-capitalism posits that there be a free market of security and law, replacing those government services with security and law produced by the market. Security and law in this framework generally go hand in hand, so under their framework you would pay a security business to protect you and you contractually agree to their legal framework.

>government can only act within the limits of laws
Factually and historically wrong.

>Ancaps are all about abolishing governments abd laws
Ancaps support governments and laws, not states. Just look up polycentral legal systems.

That sounds like a fallacy.
Of course a state is going to prop up a monopoly, they're the most powerful organization around. That doesn't mean that with the abolishment of the state, the second most powerful organization wouldn't also organize a monopoly. Or even possibly become a state themselves.

>Free markets produce goods and services of vastly greater quality, at lower cost, more voluntarily and, with greater stability than any government.
[citation needed]

I don't know if you don't have any reading comprehension or just choose to appear dumb but the issue is that with ancap policies they could do that without government interference.
Imagine how the mafia would act if they could completely disregard laws.

That is in fact one of the defining axioms of governmental law.
Ancaps oppose statism ie power concentration yet they have zero tools to stop it after they went ancap

I love how Ancap's only defense against the concept of monopolies is that there hasn't been an ancap area so far where one has been present.
Given how rare anarchism is globally all these niggas have to say is
>nuh-uh that'd never happen because i said so
and the argument is over, since their ideal government literally only exists on paper.
You can bet your ass that once any company got big enough they're start taking measures to reduce competition, eventually snowballing into a monopoly with nobody to stop them. but since anarcho-capitalism is an unfeasible meme ideology you can never actually point to any real world examples.

Attached: 1535702513662.jpg (1599x999, 180K)

It's true until someine inevitably abuses the system by obstructing market clarity and market entrance and establishes himself as a monopoly which always happens because that's simply how power works.
Isn't that why Rapture inevitably failed? I thought it was presented pretty well in Bioshock
>free market opens
>market flourishes
>corruption takes over
>someone tries to strangle the market to cull the corruption
>everything is fucked up until another free market opens

>Imagine how the mafia would act if they could completely disregard laws.
They already disregard society's rules. People like this would still exist in Anarcho-capitalism, but governments make it fucking worse. Black markets only exist because the state bans things. If you actually think anarcho-capitalism would instantly result in people being defenseless and criminals everywhere you are retarded and completely ignorant of the society you already live in.

Attached: 1497815734556.jpg (960x1000, 169K)

>Roads
>ancap
Yikes.

Sounds like it'll just be easier to legalize and regulate *most* things rather than getting rid of the government altogether

If they mafia worked like nigerian child soldiers they would all get shot within weeks by SWATs, instead they work their way around legal obstructions and have to bend over backwards to secure illegal deals. Without the government they'd be the first to gut you of you're one payment behind your protection money.

I think their argument against what you just said would be something like: there was a point in history where every nation existed with slavery and that you're equivalent to the person who say that "society will crumble and slavery will be reimplemented immediately if you try to remove it." and "A society without slavery can only exist on paper." Yet here we stand today with a functioning society where slavery has been nearly eradicated worldwide.

Another possible argument might be to consider that, imagine you have a chart where you have economic freedom vs. quality of life, many different well respected institutes out there have their own flavor of this, but generally there's a strong positive correlation with economic freedom and quality of life. I attached a shitty little chart I made in ms paint to illustrate this. Generally tankies want you to believe that in spite of this correlation, there's some kind of massive jump in Quality of Life in that red region. Ancaps want you to believe that the blue region has a high Quality of Life.

Technically neither of those extremes have ever been tried, nor can they probably ever be tried, but they argue that it's far safer, more ethical, moral, better consequentially, etc, etc, to try to push society in the blue region, given the trend.

Attached: quickchart.png (1618x1398, 43K)

>Ancap
You're like 3 years too late to this meme. Not only are you a retard but you're a late retard as well.

Why would a society that managed to get rid of the "most powerful organization around" allow the second most powerful organization to take its spot and oppress them in the same exact manner? Societies and institutions turn out based on what people want. People are starting to unironically support 1984-esque thought policing and you're going to end up with it.

Attached: 1553722842358.png (1348x1243, 317K)

To be clear, I made one small mistake in my explanation. Which is that, the correlation isn't Economic Freedom vs. Quality of Life, but rather, the change in the rate of the quality of life over time. So for example, if a communist state falls, the quality of life will still be shit in the beginning, but the trend in quality of life will increase greatly.

The answer is unironically marxism.
And by marxism, I mean the idea that material conditions define the way society operates. Prior to industrial revolution, human labor was the most valuable resource around, so yes, if you toppled a feudal state or ancient empire, another one would re-emerge immediately, complete with slavery and all. Because there do not yet exist MATERIAL CONDITIONS to abolish it and transition to the next social order.

Ancap society will become possible when there are appropriate conditions for it: namely something along the lines of post-scarcity, in which an individual is 100% independent not because of meme ideologies, but because they have the technology to provide for themselves and defend themselves without relying on any third party.

Communism fails because it is an attempt at realizing marxist ideas without the appropriate conditions.

x3 is pretty ancap if you think about it.
>build drug production facilities and start selling drugs
>buy police license
>shoot down your own customers for having illegal contraband
>salvage drugs from the wrecks and sell them again
in earlies versions it was also possible to accidentally ram asteroids into competing stations in order to destroy them. this didn't count as a hostile action and the ai didn't care at all.
making bank buy selling captured pilots into slavery and producing your own weapons in order to eradicate entire species from existence because you feel like it is a completely viable strategy.

Attached: X3_-_Reunion_Coverart.png (252x350, 186K)

You have it backwards, communism requires post-scarcity to function, capitalism would most likely lead to post-scarcity. That's why fully automated luxury gay space communism is a meme and why marx admitted the conditions under a dictatorship of the proletariat would suck ass until "real" communism begins.

>Are there any other games where you can play as ancaps other than fallout 3. Only in that game you can buy slaves. Detonate mcnukes

Mercenaries 2

>OP trying to desperately slander what it is to be a Voluntaryist

My guess is that its probably just a joke in good jest, kind of like the Ancap memes.

Instead it should be the individuals exploiting eachother?