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