Jump to content
SkatePerception
Sign in to follow this  
Goob

Anarcho-Capitalism, Voluntaryism, the Non-Aggression Principle, Agorism, etc.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, FLstrange said:

my concerns aren't the ideas of companies or government on their own when they operate in a beneficial way as intended, but both of them have largely negative effects when the individuals in charge of them are corruptible beings and we dont have solid methods of insuring the moral integrity of the ones in charge.

So I've thought about this a lot and there's simply absolutely no way a truly free market based on Voluntaryism and the NAP is going to tolerate violent, corrupt businesses, because if the masses, meaning literally, and I mean literally, 99% of the population (since the elites are the only people who benefit from government and are less than 1% of the population), wanted and created such a world, they would not allow a business to operate that violates the NAP. Period. A business that tries to violently hoard resources and prevent people from procuring them on their own, by themselves, from nature, and prevents competition through force so that it can jack up the prices, et cetera, et cetera, IS government. That is no longer a business; that's a criminal enterprise, which is what government is. So, basically, your whole argument is invalid, and thith converthation ith over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Goob said:

So I've thought about this a lot and there's simply absolutely no way a truly free market based on Voluntaryism and the NAP is going to tolerate violent, corrupt businesses, because if the masses, meaning literally, and I mean literally, 99% of the population (since the elites are the only people who benefit from government and are less than 1% of the population), wanted and created such a world, they would not allow a business to operate that violates the NAP. Period. A business that tries to violently hoard resources and prevent people from procuring them on their own, by themselves, from nature, and prevents competition through force so that it can jack up the prices, et cetera, et cetera, IS government. That is no longer a business; that's a criminal enterprise, which is what government is. So, basically, your whole argument is invalid, and thith converthation ith over.

if the population doesn't tolerate anti consumer business practices, its up to the people to have the level of organization to monitor every time any company does anything and punish it if it violates what the people collectively agree upon as ethical business practices. the common people also have to be able to enact the level of opposition to prevent the company from continuing doing things they dont want. the big arms companies have the weaponry, vehicles, technology, etc. already in their possession, and could make a profit using their products to protect other companies who are in need of security.  if normal citizens want to rebel against the companies they would need to extract raw resources,  research and develop, construct factories and assemble a greater military threat all in the amount of time before the companies use their already existing weapons to stop them from growing into a formidable threat. the absence of government gives conglomerates with large amounts of established wealth a free pass to operate as criminal enterprise because they can easily overpower any opposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

if the population doesn't tolerate anti consumer business practices, its up to the people to have the level of organization to monitor every time any company does anything and punish it if it violates what the people collectively agree upon as ethical business practices. the common people also have to be able to enact the level of opposition to prevent the company from continuing doing things they dont want. the big arms companies have the weaponry, vehicles, technology, etc. already in their possession, and could make a profit using their products to protect other companies who are in need of security.  if normal citizens want to rebel against the companies they would need to extract raw resources,  research and develop, construct factories and assemble a greater military threat all in the amount of time before the companies use their already existing weapons to stop them from growing into a formidable threat. the absence of government gives conglomerates with large amounts of established wealth a free pass to operate as criminal enterprise because they can easily overpower any opposition.

Did you not just read what I wrote? In a world where 99% of the population is woke, which is a requirement for the this to work, that's IMPOSSIBLE. Therefore this conversation is over. You have no argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Goob said:

Did you not just read what I wrote? In a world where 99% of the population is woke, which is a requirement for the this to work, that's IMPOSSIBLE. Therefore this conversation is over. You have no argument.

who would win one guy in a state of the art modern tank? or 99 with aks, handguns, and light explosives all of which are incapable of penetrating the tanks armor. how would civilians combat aerial threats without access to surface to air weapons? the 99% would have to be able to find a way to manufacture their ammunition from scratch if companies decide not to sell theirs to civilians that are a potential threat to them. larger numbers make less of a difference when the minority has the overwhelming advantage in weaponry especially when we are in a age were autonomous weapons and chemical warfare exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

who would win one guy in a state of the art modern tank? or 99 with aks, handguns, and weak explosives all of which are incapable of penetrating the tanks armor. how would civilians combat aerial treats without access to surface to air weapons? larger numbers make less of a difference when the minority has the overwhelming advantage in weaponry especially when we are in a age were autonomous weapons and chemical warfare exist.

They are significantly less than 1 out of a 100. They are so insignificant that without the ignorance of the masses, which they engineer, they'd be completely powerless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Goob said:

They are significantly less than 1 out of a 100. They are so insignificant that without the ignorance of the masses, which they engineer, they'd be completely powerless.

you decided on the projection of 99% not me, i was just going on what you said earlier. plus elites would have the ability to attack remotely, a person wouldnt need to be physically in the tank and instead could be in a far away heavily guarded secret location underground. they could use drones to distribute chemical attacks in locations where there are groups that unify to oppose their control. the companies would have endless tactical advantages over the common individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

you decided on the projection of 99% not me, i was just going on what you said earlier. plus elites would have the ability to attack remotely, a person wouldnt need to be physically in the tank and instead could be in a far away heavily guarded secret location underground. they could use drones to distribute chemical attacks in locations where there are groups that unify to oppose their control. they would have endless tactical advantages.

Bruh, it don't matter what they got. When enough of us wake up, the jig's up. Period. It's just over. That's really all there is to it, whether you like it or not. I mean, that's what's going to happen... It's not even arguable. I'm just stating facts. So you can cut the BS. You're not doing the world any favors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Goob said:

Bruh, it don't matter what they got. When enough of us wake up, the jig's up. Period. It's just over. That's really all there is to it, whether you like it or not. I mean, that's what's going to happen... It's not even arguable. I'm just stating facts. So you can cut the BS. You're not doing the world any favors.

you can say "but the free market would regulate itself" and "it wouldn't matter how tactically overpowered companies are, the people would just win because they have more on their side" over and over, but it doesn't make the obvious major problems they would face disappear. your expectations of how the current world would operate if government disappeared are simply unrealistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

you can say "but the free market would regulate itself" and "it wouldn't matter how tactically overpowered companies are, the people would just win because they have more on their side" over and over, but it doesn't make the obvious major problems they would face disappear. your expectations of how the current world would operate if government disappeared are simply unrealistic.

All the problems you imagined sound ridiculous and laughable to me. Refraining from robbing, kidnapping, imprisoning, murdering, and enslaving people is not unrealistic. The idea that any of those things could achieve any sort of positive, desired result is what's fucking unrealistic, and, frankly, just downright retarded. Anyone who believes that is thoroughly indoctrinated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Goob said:

All the problems you imagined sound ridiculous and laughable to me. Refraining from robbing, kidnapping, imprisoning, murdering, and enslaving people is not unrealistic. The idea that any of those things could achieve any sort of positive, desired result is what's fucking unrealistic, and, frankly, just downright retarded. Anyone who believes that is thoroughly indoctrinated.

I say this purely out of love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Goob said:

All the problems you imagined sound ridiculous and laughable to me. Refraining from robbing, kidnapping, imprisoning, murdering, and enslaving people is not unrealistic. The idea that any of those things could achieve any sort of positive, desired result is what's fucking unrealistic, and, frankly, just downright retarded. 

if greed and corruption continue exist acts like theft, abduction, imprisonment, murder, and enslavement for profit would most definitely would still happen. greed and corruption have both been around before government and would continue to exist in a post government society. unless you magically have the power to completely erase desire for wealth in men, they will continue to use unethical methods to achieve it. to insist otherwise is a unrealistic level of optimism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

if greed and corruption continues exist acts like theft, abduction, imprisonment, murder, and enslavement most definitely would happen. greed and corruption have both been around before government and would continue to exist in a post government society. unless you magically have the power to completely erase desire for wealth in men, they will continue to use unethical methods to achieve it.

Greed and corruption will be seen as obsolete means of achieving power in the future as it will be universally understood that true power is in unity and freedom. Scarcity is an illusion manufactured by government. We live in a world of abundance, where there's enough for everyone. Why the hell would anyone let anyone else fuck that up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Goob said:

Greed and corruption will be seen as obsolete means of achieving power in the future as it will be universally understood that true power is in unity. Scarcity is an illusion manufactured by government. We live in a world of abundance, where there's enough for everyone. Why would anyone let anyone else fuck that up?

resources are already hoarded by companies they are not going to give them away for free. everyone working in perfect harmonious unity without greed like a ant colony of 7 billion humans is not a realistic exception. scarcity is not illusion. everyone cant have everything they desire simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Goob said:

And it's not like people won't be able to defend themselves if necessary...

they could try, but would unfortunately be severely disadvantaged to the point of near powerlessness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FLstrange said:

resources are already hoarded by companies they are not going to give them away for free. everyone working in perfect harmonious unity without greed like a ant colony of 7 billion humans is not a realistic exception. scarcity is not illusion. everyone cant have everything they desire simultaneously.

Yes, they can, actually. So long as they don't violate the rights of others they most certainly can. Sorry. You've been lied to. I know it hurts. But admitting is the first step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Goob said:

Yes, they can, actually. So long as they don't violate the rights of others they most certainly can. Sorry. You've been lied to. I know it hurts. But admitting is the first step.

well they would process freewill so people can still decide to violate other peoples rights for a profit if they want. companies who are greedy will have a large advantage in combat over the very limited firepower of civilians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FLstrange said:

they could try, but would unfortunately be severely disadvantaged to the point of near powerlessness.

Lol. No. While crime would obviously still exist, it would be minor in comparison to now and easily managed. Most people are virtuous enough and just want to be happy and get along with others, and in a world of abundance where there's enough for everyone only a small mentally deranged fraction of the community would want to disrupt such harmony and be swiftly dealt with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

well they would process freewill so people can still decide to violate other peoples rights for a profit if they want. companies who are greedy will have a large advantage in combat over the very limited firepower of civilians.

I've already covered all of this. You're becoming redundant. You sound like a broken record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Goob said:

Lol. No. While crime would obviously still exist, it would be minor in comparison to now and easily managed. Most people are virtuous enough and just want to be happy and get along with others, and in a world of abundance where there's enough for everyone only a small mentally deranged fraction of the community would want to disrupt such harmony and be swiftly dealt with.

companies already act upon machine like logic programmed for profit. this would not change in absence of all the current regulations preventing them from earning more profit. being happy and getting along with everyone is not what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

companies already act upon machine like logic programmed for profit. this would not change in absence of all the current regulations preventing them from earning more profit. being happy and getting along with everyone is not what they do.

Well it's what they're going to do in the future, and if they don't then the free market will defend itself, i.e. destroy them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Goob said:

I've already covered all of this. You're becoming redundant.

you offer no solutions based in reality though, which you have constantly been doing to the point of redundancy. your expectation is always that everyone is always perfectly content and no one ever attempts to violates the rights of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Goob said:

Well it's what they're going to do in the future, and if they don't then the free market will defend itself, i.e. destroy them.

the market will be controlled by the most profitable companies. they wont willingly destroy themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FLstrange said:

you offer no solutions based in reality though, which you have constantly been doing to the point of redundancy. your expectation is always that everyone is always perfectly content and no one ever attempts to violates the rights of others.

My solution is sharing these ideas with people which can and will change the world which I've already proved possible in this thread. What's your solution? To just keep letting ourselves get fucked in the ass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FLstrange said:

the market will be controlled by the most profitable companies. their wont willing destroy themselves.

The market is controlled by the most profitable companies right now through government. The masses would control the market otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×