that’s it.

and you can have that

If it hurt dopamine bad

everything else stems off of it.

without having anarchy

the state cannot function without the use of violence

voluntary governments are fine, though.

All violence by the state is justified

Well, that is one thing you got right at least

>dont initiate violence and state cause violence but if someone wnats to make a state thus use violence its ok

holy shit

that’s some circular-ass logic if i’ve ever heard it.

Consented violence is fine, until the kids pop up, then it's rape

Water, how will you achieve anarchy

without violence

you can voluntarily associate yourself with a governing body, but the state as we perceive it now functions through violence

Voluntary disassociation with government.

Well, it would be premitted under ancap "rule"

>Now
Reactionary

so states can be non violent

yet you seem to dump the entire idea of a state out the window

state and government aren’t the same term

If you've played any grand strategy game you know that NAPs don't work to solve violence

especcially in eu4

CK2 is now proofs used in Political Science

just look at the damn HRE

>video games
>basically modern politics

Water

Strategy games, generals play them

How will you achieve anarchy

voluntary disassociation from government.

As soon as their power surpasses the consequences, they will expand

and how will you achieve that

education and ideology, i get people to agree with me voluntarily.

It's realpolitik

if one morning nobody goes to work at a government job, there’s no more government.

and you think the government will just allow you to set up ancapistan

in general governments don’t just invade things.

When ancap is realised I will create a white ethno-state (voluntary) and then proceed to crush all other voluntary associations

>thinks he can convince the feds to become anarchist

<:lol:521377935672737792>

Amazing, people are so focused on dealing with the state

Remember that one guy that abdicated his chair?

i didn’t say that

How will this happen then

i didn’t say my ideas were realistic or easy to apply, but they’re a good thing to work towards.

If you don't deal with removing minorities now you'll never see ancap

if you have unrealistic ideas

Only whites are ancap

theyre shit ideas

obviously it’s more complicated than just convincing people to follow an ideology

~~you’ve gotta indoctrinate children~~

You dont see me going "IM GUNNA START A REVOLUTION AND SET UP A FASCIST USA AND THEN GET RID OF ALLLLLL THE NON WHITES THEN INVADE THE WORLD"

Is ancap still a thing even? All the ancap/minarc youtubers have become fascist or nationalist to my knowledge

because thats just fucking stupid

even atomwaffen would call me retarded

revolution only replaces government with more government.

<:brainlet:508484031625691156>

point flew completely over your head

my point is that revolution is inherently ineffective in creating my ideology, and said example doesn’t apply.

My point is that your idea of achieveing anarchy?

Its stupid

like how anarchy is stupid

if people stop participating in government, eventually they won’t have the power to control others.

every single instance of anarchy was achieved via violence

People won't stop participating in government

anarchy is stupid and bad but we don’t have a great term, voluntarist is probably more accurate.

Even egoists are better being there than helping you

Yeah but like Hegel said "*after every period of anarchy follows the ultimate tyrany*"

@Bearer Of The Curse no matter what type of government you want to employ, you have to start with people who want it.

So he is actually right on this one

and Hegel’s word is magic absolute law?

@Krille P. strange, because Marxism rooted from Hegel

and the final goal of communism is anarchy

ancoms have big retarded

same with ancaps

and voluntarists

i just think initiating violence is wrong, where’s your objection?

some evils are necessary

how so?

Did humanity grow from being hippies?

Communists are generally retarded @PunishedMuskovy
We have been objecting all night

just live and let live maaaaaaaaan

of course not, pacifism is stupid.

yet you sound like youre a pacifist

i believe violence is perfectly acceptable if used in the defense of yourself or others around you.

or a diet coke pacifist

and that is perfectly ok

What about pre-emptive self-defence?

Basically every other kind of violence good, physical violence bad

yea, eliminating something before it becomes a threat

if someone has expressed clear intent to seriously harm you and you’ve got proof they’re willing to do so, go ahead.

extinguishing the fire before it becomes a wildfire

so you wait until it affects you

How would you proof such a thing? That's not clear cut

do you remember that quote in history class? about the nazis?

it’s not clear cut with government, either.

"First they came for X, and I didnt say anything because im not X"

What about people running around shooting people under the guise of self defence?

"Then they came for Y, and I didnt say anything because im not Y"