Subreddit Rules:

Jamming any kind of signal is actually really easy, whether it’s radio or cell phones or WiFi. All you need is a transmitter strong enough to just bombard the airwaves. That’s how it works; military communications jammers are just ‘noise generators’ and receivers can’t parse through all that junk to get what’s really important.

So in an AnCap society, what stops me from buying and making use of such a device for the sole purpose of screwing over everyone around me?

This doesn’t violate most definitions of the NAP- I’m not harming your person or your devices, I’m just making your devices useless in a radius around my house. This sort of thing would even happen naturally on radio frequencies if enough people had powerful enough transmitters to cover entire towns.

So how can you stop me without yourself violating the NAP? Or regulating me and my purchases against my will?

I mean geez, I could make money off of this too! I could offer people a subscription service to turn the jammer off!

Let’s say I have a guest at my house. A small disagreement leads to an argument and I murder them. I drag their body into a closet to hide it.

The next day, someone from the private security company they were subscribed to knocks on my door. They know that their client was last at my house, because the neighbors all confirm this. When he looks through my door, he sees blood on the carpet.

Can this private security company enter my home without my consent and search my house based on reasonable suspicion? Would the courts in an ancap system be able to issue warrants like they can now?

N Korea have borders with pro- communists China and Ex- communists Russia plus open Asian sea border ( The Sea of Japan (also known as the East Sea) Plenty of food possibilities ? why starvation ?

2. Capitalism: you choose what to eat and how much!

3. Anarcho - socialism: food starvations ?

Let’s say in 100 years, we achieve anarcho capitalism in the US. I accidentally fall into a time machine and wake up in the great land of Ancapistan. The second I get out of the machine, I immediately get mugged. My primitive 100 year old iPhone gets stolen.

Although primitive, I want it back. The problem is that I am basically faceless here. I have no work history here, no friends, family, or any connections since they are all dead, and no money in this new world.

Who will find the guy that did this, retrieve my iPhone, and make the guy pay restitution? Normally you could say that whatever security company I’m subscribed to would do it, but in this scenario, I don’t even know what that is and have no money to pay for any security or courts.

This question extends to the poor and the homeless of Ancapistan who cannot pay for any courts or security services

USSR was experience same dilemma and problem during 1920-30 famine. Known as a The Law of Spikelets or Law of Three Spikelets was a decree in the Soviet Union.

The law provided a severe punishment for stolen collective and cooperative property: "execution with confiscation of all property and replacement in mitigating circumstances with imprisonment for at least 10 years with confiscation of all property."

Amnesty was prohibited in these cases.

The practice to prosecute both corrupt officials and also those who gleaned the grains (or spikelets) left behind in the fields after the entire harvest was officially collected and counted.

The decree was accepted and harshly, sometimes overly harshly used during the Soviet famine of 1932–33.

The punishment was 5 to 10 years of concentration camp time.

In the first half of the year after the announcement of the decree, (by January 1, 1933) 150,000[5] people were convicted and 3.5% of them (782) were sentenced to death. 60.3% of the defendants were convicted to 10 years in prison,

Instances where such deeds have become legalized in the eyes of political authorities: the mass killings of indigenous populations, mass killings under totalitarian regimes, State-mandated rapes such as the rape of Nanking etc..

Natural law merely posits that all of these atrocities were murder and rape even if they were legal under each respective regime.

It similarly argues that no amount of "the common good"-reasoning can justify other kinds of physical interferences - that current legal regimes permit unjustifiable deed and prohibit permissible deeds. https://liquidzulu.github.io/the-nap/

The NAP is in other word a legal principle above all political legal codes: it is the objective law which truly describes what is permissible and impermissible to do.

Been on my mind lately but I figured I talk about this. I come to think deeper about this issue and I always think that it would make sense for Marxist ideology idiots to support this. If a working class must be equal then that means everybody must be forced by the will of the state to have a utilitarian Style necessity for employers to give you what everyone should be worth versus what you should be evaluated on based on performance in a competitive market. Other than that minimum wage is trash and very stupid to say the least. So I'd say Marx would be the stupid idiot himself saying yes to this racist progressive policy.

Private Court A declares abortion legal within a given territory, but Private Court B declares abortion illegal within the exact same territory.

Because both courts have an equal jurisdiction over the territory, both courts have equal authority to interpret the Non-Aggression Principle according to either a pro-choice or pro-life ethical stance.

But if abortion is both legal and illegal simultaneously, this is an impossible contradiction, and makes no logical sense.

How are legal contradictions resolved without granting a single legal system a monopoly over governance of a given territory?

Short answer for me is: hell no and screw the commie ideology of anti human environmentalists😂

My main issue with this is primarily due to the approach of the issues they promote but I don't think it's gonna work with ancap philosophy simply due to recurring conflicts that will arise out of it. Let's discuss about this.

The concepts of both "negotiating a wage" and even the basic concept of "liquidity/fungibility" relies on that wage being based on a currency that keeps something close to its value for at least the rest of the fiscal quarter if not the duration of the job. Ancap seems like if considered logically, could only end in a state with no anarcho- and all cap once the dust settles and new heirarchies form and cement themselves as the new power-structure/world order.

Despite all the "lmao, you think the USD is a stable currency?" memes y'all are going to lob at me, a %5 annual inflation rate is a LOT more stable than NFTs, Bitcoins, or any other failed experiment in "anarchist money", and only becomes less stable if/when the An in Ancap makes progress in dismantling the state, same as the liquidability of any given product. Otherwise people would be accepting bitcoin wages for legal services enmass today. They're not doing that because most functioning members of society prefer the stability of actually knowing their money will still be good tomorrow instead of gambling it.

Even the very concept of capitalism, that being "people achieving a net-good by pursuing personal financial self-interest" inherently requires a state capable of using taxes, incentives, and law-enforcement to manipulate self-interest into aligning with the public interest, otherwise those are two different concepts and when forced to make a choice, self-interest will take priority over public interest.

The enforceability of contracts, the social contract of private property, and the regulations that prevent blatant fraud all rely on a firm governing body able to enforce them whether political or corporate.

If anything, most of the major failings of corporatism are simply the end result of capitalism over-powering government to the point that it cannot effectively do its job and prevent individual companies from effectively becoming their own tin-pot dictatorships. What was once a good dog on a leash is now a snarling wolf demanding blood.

Bailouts that necessitate inflation and deregulations that lobotomize anything stopping them from developing monopolies that make them the only "free choice" you can make are simply the end result of our current political process being for sale via legitimized bribery, something that would inevitably happen under the hypocritical fantasy that is Anarcho-Capitalism.

You could actually make the case that America already IS the closest thing to Ancapistan that exists in the modern world, since an anarchist state is an inherit contradiction. The motto is "be ungovernable" not "Agree to governing so we can maximize production". The "Boss" is, in effect, a voluntary master who gets you to volunteer by offering incentives. Antithetical to the cry of "No Gods, No Masters".

The only logical explanation for anarcho-capitalism is the same as the explanation for anarcho-fascism or anarcho-feudalism. Neither concept is genuinely anarchist, it simply USES anarchism to dismantle the governing structure it's competing against so it can flourish unopposed. This usually ends in a purge of anarchists once they've paved the way for the authoritarian version of the ideology that "anarcho" was initially stuck to the front of.

When someone says that the government has a "monopoly on violence," in my understanding, that means private individuals cannot take matters into their own hands and legally avenge crimes, but must defer to the police and court system. The result is that accused criminals are entitled to due process, that the evidence for their crimes must be presented in court, a duly-appointed judge or jury decides on their guilt, and their punishment is appropriate.

Without this monopoly on violence, does that mean private individuals can take the law into their own hands? For example, if my neighbor parks his car too far over and damages my landscaping, can I burn his house down? If someone rapes my daughter, can I imprison him in my basement and torture him for several years? If there are no police, who does an old lady with no friends or relatives call if someone robs her and she can't afford to hire a vigilante? What happens if someone makes a mistake and avenges themselves against the wrong person?

I want to translate (from English to my native language) and publish books about the stateless societies and anarcho-capitalism in both theory and practice, I think it might be an efficient way of spreading our views. What are the most interesting publications that cover these topics?

I've already bought Friedman's 'Legal Systems Very Different from Ours' and 'Machinery of Freedom', and Scott's 'The Art of Not Being Governed'. My main focus is the legal system without the government, I can also consider a book about social security (e.g. pension or fire insurance) without the taxes. It doesn't necessarily have to be written by a libertarian author, it might just be an anthropologist, sociologist, etc.

I remember what I think was a Thomas Sowell quote about the deregulation of the flour milling industry in Europe, and how it freed up capital to do other things. But I can’t seem to find the quote and am not sure if it was Thomas Sowell. Anyway, thanks ahead of time

Are there any home owners in this sub who also subscribe to this "anti-capitalism" idea?

From my understanding I'm a capitalist for owning my own home because I own private property.

So even if I lived in a hut, would I still be a capitalist if I owned that hut?

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTFAvTpWh/

Does anyone know where I can find AnarcoChris’s old YouTube videos and why he stopped posting on YouTube?