It sounds like you are talking about anarchism. You are not talking about capitalism.

This is a good post. I do agree with DVaut's overall point that 2p2 is not the place to learn politics/history/political theory; I also think it provides very real value.

I'll hop onto an open mic now and then, but coming up with decent material is harder when your life isn't 80% lounging around smoking weed.

Some may say that "ancaps" is an absurd position, a form of "anarchy for billionaires" which IS coercive.

To quote Prouhdon

Proprty is Liberty
Property is Impossible
Property is Theft

LMFAO@ this fool quoting Proudhon. ZOMG ACers are the worst. Speaking of ACism, as the 2+2 resident expert, I was presenting a series of lessons on ACism, back a while ago. Here is Lesson #8, which I've had "in the can"...


Good morning ACers & 'statist's, and welcome back to Rape Town University,

It's Friday, and it was supposed to be ACers choice today. However, all the ACers have gone missing except for Proph, and he declined to choose a topic. So... welcome to Lesson #8: Crime and Punishment.

OK, we've covered where the laws come from. There's the ACland constitution. Below that there's case law from the court system. However the vast majority of the laws peeps will be forced to follow will be written as Administrative Law by large scale landlords. Note: Small scale landowners, for example individual home owners, would probably just use the default trespassing law in the constitution instead.

OK, how are laws enforced? Well, we've already discussed the DROs. They are the equivalent of a Marshal's service, acting only on court orders, and using fundamentally offensive violence, such as evictions. The number of goons employed doing DRO work will be dwarfed by several orders of magnitude by ordinary Security goons. Security goons do fundamentally defensive violence: loss prevention, site security, and frontline rules enforcement on their landlord's property. Landlords can assemble their own Security goon army, or outsource to ADT. Likewise ADT might sell both DRO goon services (with proper court order), and also Security goon services (no stinking courts needed).

OK, so how would this all work? Let's say your landlord had a law against smoking pot. You're out front of your home, smoking a J, and the Landlord Police roll on you. It's your first alleged offense, so the goons just issues you a summons to Landlord Court. Let's say you are ultimately convicted. What's your punishment?

Here ACland starts to get a little weirder.

Over in RealityLand we have the distinction between criminal and civil court. In modern civil court, you can ask for basically three remedies: legal tender $$$$, ordering somebody to stop doing something (like stop parking in the wrong places), or ordering someone to do something (like a slumlord fixing the plumbing). However, just because you ask, and you win in court, doesn't mean the judge will give you all you asked for. That's up to the judge.

Over in ACland, we ain't got no legal tender. However, you can ask for a whole lot of other remedies: gear, gold, beatings, torture, maimings, rape, death, and enslavement, along with ordering somebody to do something, and ordering somebody not to do something. However, just because you ask, and you win in court, doesn't mean the judge will give you all you asked for. That's up to the judge.

So right away, I know the 'statist's are going to have a whole lotta questions: Like could a Landlord make a law which punishes pot smoking by death? Could the landlord just change the law on me? Could he just sneak in the death penalty into the fine print? How about travelling about, when I crossed onto another landlords property, could he have snuck a death penalty into his laws?

The answer to all these questions is "no". Why? Because of common law, and the ACland constitution. Common law implies rule-of-law, and rule-of-law requires those subject to law to have a way to discover what that law is. So landlords would have to give constructive notice to the renters. So, no sneaking laws into fine print, or changing them without notice. For extreme penalties, like death, the renters would need to initial a contract explicitly. A renter who innocently crossed into another landlord's property and violated a non-obvious law would need to be given a warning, or nominal penalty at first, etc.

OK, but what if a renter explicitly signed the death contract, but then forgot, and got convicted of smoking a J anyways. Can the landlord have him killed? Once again, the answer is "no". That's because enshrined in the ACland constitution is both the nature of, and a limit to, punishments under AC law: Double Proportional Reciprocity. A death penalty for smoking a J isn't proportional, and any such law would be ruled unconstitutional.

1. OK, let's do some examples: Get caught steeling $10, you owe the victim $20. Knock a dude's tooth out, he gets to pull two of yours out. Rape someone, they can have you raped twice. Falsely enslave someone, you can be made their slave for twice as long. Beat someone, they can have you beaten twice as long/hard. Torture someone, ditto.
   
2. But it's not always double... poke someone's eye out, it'd wouldn't be proportional to blind you completely, maybe just take an eye and an ear. Put someone in a wheelchair, well they can't put you in the chair twice, but they could cut a hand off, and then put you in the chair, etc. Also, a landlord would need to be able to escalate punishments over 2x for repeat offenders... to avoid the situation where the initial penalty isn't severe enough to stop the misbehavior. Like... on your third conviction for smoking a J, then maybe you get enslaved for a year or two.
   
3. OK, let's take a more indepth example: Proph is out drunk driving, causes an accident, and Kerowo loses a finger. Which two of Proph's fingers does Kerowo get?

You're kind've in your own world there MD, like a dog that barks until you give it a cookie.

Sure, you can try to get the ACers to put numerical values onto their loltastical emotional arguments. But ACers weren't ever going to do that, or anything else BTW. Seems like a waste of time.

The Alt-Right is definitely stealing the LTers thunder. Only so many dysfunctional haters to go around, and the Alt-Right is definitely #winning when it comes to recruiting these fools.

Sure, standard issue LTism isn't going away, not as long as the Koch bros & friends have the $$$$. Sure, it'll make "comeback". It's astroturf that obviously serves the purposes it was designed to serve, and time has proven it "works".

However, I don't see the AC sub-variant ever making a "comeback". I think it's pretty clear that the brief spike in AC chatter was an unintended side effect of the L.Ron "Revolution". L.Rockwell, and his merry band of Auburn based Neo-Confederates, were tied directly into L.Ron, while at the same time being ostracized by the Koch-opoulos and all the whatever odd schisms of mainstream LTism.

With L.Ron now forever being history, ACism will now forever be what it always was... nothing.

LOL no.

Actually, during your sabbatical, I took your old advice and actually read quite a bit of real genuine ACism. Which, since the ACers were lazy and stupid to the max... makes me the undisputed expert and authority on ACism here on 2+2.

My above post wasn't describing "my world", it was describing what ACism really is. I didn't, because who cares... but I can directly back up and document everything I've posted in all eight of my lessons. Anyone who disputes this... is simply 100% ignorant when it comes to ACism.

I don't think you can distinguish between your world and the real world, and I wish I was back on sabbatical. Block and Rothbard did not advocate rape. They did however advocate the non-aggression principle. You basically just photoshopped non-quotes and portray it as the real world, which only really works at persuading dumb people who are easily persuaded by feels and propaganda. I will come back to this point in a while.

In the same way admiralty courts never advocated fraud, and rulings were fairly uniform. Private law is already sound legal theory in the real world today, and there isn't fear of obscure laws. The only reason I'd fear weird laws would be based on a deep paradigm such as a religion.

I didn't create that meme. Blame Slancap.

Which is both (a) bog-standard LTism that is hardly unique to the ACism sub-variant at all, and is (b) a buncha childish gibberish, as you well know.

LOL no. As I mentioned last time, I can (but haven't bothered to, because no1curr about ACism anymore) document every single point in every single one of my lessons.

The problem we had here back in the bad old ACer days was... as I've mentioned... ACers are universally lazy, ignorant, and un-curious, especially when it comes to ACism itself. So basically, these 2+2 Deans of ACism were all flat out frauds, starting with #1 Borodog, and ending with #5 Proph. I now know 1000x more about ACism than they ever did... because basically they knew nothing at all, and were just pulling crap out of their butts.

If you think I got something particular wrong... go ahead and call me on that particular. Cliffs: I haven't... and you can't.

Damn.

I'd think bad laws would be far more likely in a paradigm that's very heavy on democracy. One can imagine a bunch of guys in a bar voting on who's first to bang such and such.

Aside from that, I do think that there is something of a niche, to your other point, for alternative views to the standard Republican and Democrat views, though I don't think it crimps the liberty movement. Bernie crimped the democrats somewhat as Donald Trump has crimped the Republican views. What is affecting the liberty movement right now is that there's no Ron Paul to rally around, and he was a one-of-a-kind. Donald Trump, not so much. The liberty movement is focused.

And no, I have to call you on your bluff. You have not read Rothbard.

Hahaha, this is incredibly lazy on your part, no doubt you double-down on your narcissism. This is like that scene in Casino, where you berate the dealer for keep giving you hits, and you keep busting.

Ahh the old "what you say is wrong but I'm not going to tell you what about it is actually wrong" trick. Makes talking to xTards so invigorating...

Maybe true. However, ACism isn't an "alternate view" on anything... it's just simple minded gibberish.

Well you "have to"... but then you went ahead and didn't. Again... if you think I got some particular wrong, go ahead and call me on that particular. Cliffs: you can't.

This.

However, this trick doesn't work on me. Since I used to be an ACer, and I know more about ACism than all five 2+2 Deans of ACism ever did put together... the shoe is on the other foot.

I'm looking for that magical quote from Rothbard, or Molyneux (meh on moly btw), that justifies your rape town argument, and yet still do not find it. Assuming your "blame someone else" quote is you mucking your hand at this point, because I'm calling the clock. And MD's concern trolling at this point, "use to be an ACer"... hahahaha. Apparently it's Slancap misrepresenting libertarian anarchy, not at all MD posting Slancap's meme, and kerolol is all on board with this, and yada yada.

Ahh, no true ACist raises it's head, at this rate I'll have bingo in 3 more posts...

Oh come on, show me one post where he was an ACist, just one. You cannot possibly be this dense. I mean, his whole story about being an ACist before, and just reading about it while I was away for a few years is not even logically consistent with itself. I mean, the rhythmic gymnastics of MD does have a certain poetry to it, but, I mean, HELLO in there! But, if you find just one post where MD was an ACist, just one, I take it all back.

Also, would love to hear your take on whether HastenDan is a true liberal.

I didn't make any Rape Town 'argument'. It's just a meme which I used as decoration. That wasn't part of any of the lessons. Get over that.

Or not, I guess... because it illustrates just how lazy, ignorant, and un-curious ACers really are. That meme wasn't Slancap making a Rape Town 'argument'. That was an ACer, who was claiming that ACland == Rape Town. Again... that was an ACer 'argument', not a Slancap 'argument'.

So, if the point you're trying to make by mindlessly harping on an off-topic meme is that ACers are all universally lazy, ignorant, and un-curious, and as an example this particular ACer was dead wrong about his 'argument' that ACland == Rape Town... well point made in s.

I can show you plenty of posts. But why does it matter? ACers don't do anything IRL. All you have to do to be an ACer is say you're an ACer. That's it.

But even if I hadn't, it still wouldn't make any difference. Regardless of what I called myself a few years ago... I still know more about ACism than all five 2+2 Deans of ACism put together and squared.

So... are you going to ever 'call my bluff'? So far you've avoiding doing so like it was a plague. Once, once, once again... if you feel I got some particular wrong in any of my eight ACism lessons, feel free to call me on that particular. Cliffs: You can't, and you know you can't.

HastenDan is an ******* who just trolls the forum. MD/ST is an anarchist, not an ACist, he doesn't claim to be an ACist, he claims to know the basis for ACism more than actual ACists. I don't know what you are claiming because you aren't arguing you are just denying ST knows what he's talking about. Trying being specific and maybe you won't get **** for being less informed than ST.

Before you ask, I'm a statist who laughs at ACists because whenever they try to tell a story of what ACland is like it's just laughably awful and obvious they would be the first used for food if their dream was ever made real.

I just want you to realize, and admit that these two posts are in conflict, you know SOME DAY, when you're ready... I mean, I don't know if it's short-term memory, misreading, or what, but DAMN. Also, I do not care about your views, you are not an interesting pony. So, it's more like "before never I will explain my views" which you know, well done, since we're in time clearly we are before never.

Hilarious how you don't see the concern trolling with ST, but all too willing to put HastenDan in that category. Perhaps you are skilled at holding conflicting views.

Lol, nice muck, finally.

Yeah, you must really think readers are dumb and unable to portray slancap as ancap. I'm not going to feed the troll.

Just an FYI: all that ACists really want is Rapetown. Private property rights are a distraction that they don't actually care about -- they just chose ACism because it provides the most feasible basis for creating Rapetown.

They only thing that is humorous is that you are incapable of supporting ACism because you are so busy trying to discredit the only person speaking against it. It's hard to understand how ACism was so popular when all it takes is a strong breeze to make it look stupid.

I do happen to be a busy person. I do not obsess over ACism, and the nitty arguments that I once did. There is a thing called capitalism. I think there are plenty of people who are

1. Against authority
2. Interested in entrepreneurship and being their own boss

who aren't necessarily ACists in the strictess sense, but can get along with and work with.

My enjoyment is not with locking horns with the drugged-out democracy dopes who could not conceive of an entrepreneurial idea if it hit them in the face. And in the race to create a better world, at the end of the day, the drugged-out democracy dopes are simply not sharp enough to actually accomplish anything entrepreneurial, though may cause trouble for authority.