one of them commited it

and the other one put themselves in a position where they knew it was likely to happen

I understand the reason.

If I may ask what is everyone's political leanings? I myself am a minarchist (borderline ancap).

I'm in your boat. Used to be an AnCap, but I like borders too much lol

Lol

I like to think of myself as a social libertarian

but economic more conservative leaning

although I feel like I shouldn't form opinions on stuff I haven't spent a lot of time looking into

so for the most part I have little opinion

Fair enough

@Fitzydog I figured you may of been a ancap once you mentioned Stefan Molyneux

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the sentiment and the logical consistency, but it presupposes that the rest of the world operates on similar axioms to yourself

*Logical Consistency* as it ignores the human nature.

Ideally it does not matter what the rest of the world thinks.

A AnCap society only needs to town or city to operate.

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki But dis-similar from socialism, in that the more people who apply it, the more positive society gets.

You can't complain about *too many* people who mind their own business and don't impede on your own

@Onyxdood wrong, as without the rest of the world agreeing, it would last seconds

Either due to internal, or external threats

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki im not sure I follow

As again, it ignores human nature to want more, be it land/power/prestige, ect.

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki No, it takes that perfectly into account. It ignores people who *don't* do that, like radical islam

Ancapianism is based on the need that all agree 100% to the 'Non-Agreession'

No because all it takes is someone with enough money to buy an army to take over everything.

Or an outside state to do so

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki Every modern person in the west already abides by the NAP, tbh.

Because there is a state enforcing it.

^

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki That's the same logic that God is why people are moral

I agree with a outside state, but someone simply buying a huge would be stopped before it got out of hand.

Wrong

The state holds the monopoly of power, so protects the peoples property rights and so on. When a state doesnt you have essentially mexico, with cartels running things

Either in shadows, or directly

The state is the exact opposite of the NAP

The state hardly does anything to protect your property, in a practical day-to-day sense. You do

Wrong, the state holds laws that protect your right to personal property

While also violating the same rights

If your home is broken into, the police investigate and so on.

If you say 'Taxes are a violation of property' grow up

@Goblin_Slayer_Floki But in the end, it's not the laws that *prevent* damage or theft of your property. It's YOU and your actions.