Though then again I tend to avoid debates with folks on discord unless I know for certain they are politically literate

@Farseer Selna Vesha Maybe you should have that discussion with our resident an-cap apologist @Fitzydog

Is he a literal ancap?

He is many things

He is our resident Furry

*Puts on monocle* No, but I understand the AnCap brain quite well

(bakeon is)

@Puma bakeon dindu nuffin wrong

@Deleted User you’re only saying that since you are also a furry

@Puma no hablo espanol, beaner

If they don't understand why private property requires a state they are either ignorant of liberal praxis or unaware of the implied violence required to make private property distinct from mere occupation

Wich is why I called you an apologist @Fitzydog and not an an-cap

*screeches in Amerimutt*

@Farseer Selna Vesha They are fully aware of the violence necessary. Violence is the only legitimate way that individual rights are protected.

I wonder... If I just push it enough, maybe people will think I am part Mexican

I can be the first white member of La Raza

@Puma I mean, san diego is basically mexico

@Deleted User both true and untrue

San diego has to much military to truely be Mexican

But the moment Miramar shuts down, then well, tough luck kiddo

Private property rests on an objective standard , which is why it requires a monopoly of force to protect, all sorts of problems arrise when there are multiple valid authoritative entities all protecting private property in their own way

What's worse, being a fucking commie or a paddy?

A communist paddy

@Farseer Selna Vesha Perhaps, but we have yet to actually see what would happen. People don't like confrontation or violence, and will usually seek out ways to avoid such. I'd rather at least have a *choice* in the matter, rather than be forced at gunpoint to accept someone's "Protection"

@Fitzydog oh most of us communists expect it to turn into neo feudalism if it were actually attempted

cromwell dindu nuffin wrong
change my mind

Yeah, I could see that. Except it'd be less based upon geography in the 21st century

Which would make us allies with liberals again just like we were against the previous feudal system

Funny times

It'd be a voluntary feudal system, with different 'lords' competing for 'serfs' and their business.

Really, it'd just be a really expansive insurance company in the end

With no laws against slavery , I would expect those in poverty to end up selling themselves into such condition "voluntarily"

The old social vs classical liberal split

Some people are citizens of 'All-state', some are citizens of 'Geico', but they're neighbors.

Depends how the 'owners' are contracted and if they are allowed to do such.

*buts thats illegal under the NAPs REEEEE*

@Puma NUKES VIOLATE THE NAP

<:high_iq:382980759012638731>

How is it, the proposed slave owner didn't violently coerce them into slavery , they made a "mutually beneficial trade" otherwise the trade wouldn't have occurred t.ancap

NAPs are like Anarcho-Communism, if nobody is around to enforce the NAP/preventing of capitalism, does jt really exist?

Really, the only way to exploit the 'loopholes' in AnCapistan, would be if you were like a Rockefeller and owned a vertically integrated company that had complete control over your entire life

True anarchists are an interesting bunch, ancaps aren't really anarchists because they literally have nothing to do with classical libertarian theory

Ancaps are ok with hierarchy, which is literally the one thing all anarchists agree is bad