this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
342 points (96.7% liked)

World News

39041 readers
2686 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I never signed no no-aggression treaty and as ancaps don't consider social contracts valid I'd say I'm free to to whatever the fuck I want.

[–] Coki91@dormi.zone -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What are you on about?

Are you confusing principles and ideals of an ideology for an instated regime? Or what's your point here

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I didn't say anything about any regieme. I was speaking plain and simple Ancap ideology which is so obviously broken (as I demonstrated) that it's funny. It's a collection of soundbites, sounding good to neoliberal edgelords, masquerading as principles, which break apart as soon as you connect them up because they contradict each other. As, to wit, the "everyone is bound to non-aggression" and "there's no such thing as a social contract" thing. I don't even have to bring up that private property is violence in itself.

[–] Coki91@dormi.zone 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't know who's interpretation of Anarcho-Capitalism you are following, but since ther has never been an Anarcho Capilist government in the world (which sounds ironical) it's all just ideas and interpretations, of which seem you are grabbing the worst of the pile.

Rothbard's definition includes in the fundamentals of the Contractual Society being voluntarily approached and free of violence or harm, which is to say that if you do not respect the inalienable rights of the others, you are violating the Contract for being in that society, and you are rightfully gonna be aprehended. There is no contradiction

Also, to what you said about "demonstrated" something, mind linking to what you have? There's nothing around here like that

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

voluntarily approached and

So I must have the opportunity to live outside it. How does Ancap theory limit land ownership, and the defence of that land by force? If you don't then nothing about Ancappery is voluntary.

free of violence or harm,

Then there must not be capital accumulation: For resources are power and accumulation of power corrupts even the most virtuous mind.

which is to say that if you do not respect the inalienable rights of the others, you are violating the Contract for being in that society, and you are rightfully gonna be aprehended.

So if you, or ancaps collectively, own all the land which prevents me from exercising my inalienable right to not be part of any of their fiefdoms then they are violating that contract, and will be rightly apprehended by their goons.


I think the social contract thing came into the general anarchist vs. ancap discussion because social contract theory leads to a lot of things Ancaps don't want, such as universal welfare, so people at least on the internet started dismissing it entirely. But it just so happens that you made your own contradiction so I didn't need to recourse to that, you built a contradiction into your description of ancap fundamentals: Congratulations, you back a political suicide cult.