More common than you’d expect 🤣
Discussion
That it!
or the other argument that it will lead to complete chaos with people killing each other left right n centre?
oh yeah so you think we re doing pretty well under the current fiat statist shitstem:
forever wars, nuclear capacity to wipe out billions of people.
what kind of retard sees the state as a success
Those things do happen in an anarchist system, but they happen no matter what government you have because nature is anarchical. People only follow laws if they want to
Why do they lose? This is the second most common argument I face
They always act like companies will amass power until they have state-like power, while implying that such power is bad. Then they will say that we should just have a state to begin with.
So they think that level of power is bad, but think that it will be good if handled by a government rather than a company.
🎯
Hard disagree. It is desireable and expected that the ideal political system would be a stable equalibrium point. In other words, the ideal system would be able to maintain its own state and would even survive and return after moderate disruptions.
If a system can be disrupted by "the Jews" then its not an ideal system. If anarchy instantly devolves into monarchy or democracy, or communism, then it isn't the ideal system.
Anarchy is in place. Black market, etc.
Ya, and if you go out into international waters then no police officer is gonna arrest you for smoking crack. Black markets and darknets are just places outside of the state's jurisdiction, not proof that anarchy is implemented within their jurisdiction.
You could argue that if a system is truly good, then it will slowly be adopted in other jurisdictions, but the existence of communist China is not proof that the American state is flawed.
To summarize, I am talking about a stable equilibrium with respect to time within a jurisdiction, not unchangingness across all of space and all jurisdictions.