A bit debatable on the individual level but that’s likely what it would lead to. Some ancaps are weirdly anti-corporate though. They think somehow big powerful corporations were created by the state. Which is true in some cases but clearly not in others.

It's just latter-day feudalism. Their program is to Make Landlords Lords Again.

Kind of seems like that’s what they’re getting at but I find this linguistic deception so irritating that I can’t even tolerate the implicit suggestion here that the top dude might be some kind of anarchist.

Same vibes as when they got mad at Green Day for trashing Trump. Like they never paid attention at all.

Anarchism is about opposition to all oppression and unjust hierarchies. If you are pro-capitalism, pro-patriarchy, pro-white supremacy, or pro-nationalism, you aren’t an anarchist. Sorry.

And if you aren’t any of those things, what affinity do you have with the political right?

Having “less government” eventually crosses a threshold into having “no functional macro government at all”.

What you do after that threshold is entirely open ended.

I think that is where you leave what anarchists define as anarchism. It doesn't end there, it's not open ended. If you end up with some town or camp that is ruled by a leader and/or a priesthood and police force to keep law and order, it's not anarchism. If you can own land and impose your vast property rights so others don't have anything, you're not anarchist.

Exactly how a voluntary collaboration of anarchists is supposed to work to avoid quickly growing small systems of power again (chiefs or warlords) I never figured out so don't ask me. Best answer is that "because the people already overthrew the existing power structures they will have an easier time preventing future power structures". So I think they assume the belief system is powerful enough so that once people are indoctrinated, they would reject any systems of control again. How such an indoctrination is achieved and maintained would be my next question.

Of course there are theories like anarcho-syndicalism. And I think in generally anarchism is understood as merely being of a mindset that any authority has to justify itself or be abolished, but necessary authority is not. So you'd still pay taxes for roads and schools.

Left-wing does not necessarily imply a centralized or planned economy.

You’re thinking of the liberal/conservative spectrum as a line, which is common simply because political parties have a stranglehold on things and you vote for representatives instead of directly voting for policy. The side effect of voting for representatives is that it inherently ties social and fiscal policy together, because you as an individual don’t have any choices that diverge from that left/right line.

But political policy is really closer to a graph with an X/Y direction. Social policy on one direction, and fiscal policy on the other. You’re thinking of liberal social and financial policy, which is communism. Socially liberal but fiscally conservative is anarchism.

Ancaps aren't anarchists any more than buffalo have wings. Anarchism is the rejection of hierarchy, and capitalism is inherently hierarchical.

Ancaps aren't really anarchists, they just coopted the word.

That's exactly what was meant.

Amazon's Human Resources Department buys all the land around where you stand, kills you of you violate the NAP by trespassing, and then barters for your unending indentured servitude in exchange for food and water.

Anarcho-capitalism is like taking the worst parts of feudalism and chattel slavery, but with fewer human rights.

You can not be an anarchist while supporting the hierarchical system of capitalism. Full stop.

No one said they are the "true enemy". US "Libertarians" (another stolen term) are largely irrelevant and just propped up by billionaires like Peter Thiel. They are the court-jesters of the oligarchs and deserve ridicule for being so naive and not noticing it. "Natural allies" for what? In boot-licking?

Books banned, women and children forced to give birth against their will, total depredation of the environment, oligopoly, corruption, conspiracy theories, propaganda, and fascism.

Other than the book banning, that sounds like your average libertarian to me.

I’m just talking about word definitions here. If you support hierarchical dominance of some humans by others, you aren’t an anarchist by any reasonable definition.

That doesn’t mean we can’t cooperate on certain issues, though of course I’ll have to use my judgment as far as whether that collaboration does more harm than good, as I do in all cross-ideological collaboration. But our ideological differences are not very trivial so I don’t agree that we are natural allies either.

If you’re tired of having this argument just stop calling ancaps anarchists. It’s not accurate and even big papa Rothbard admitted as much in unpublished writings.

Have you seen any of the Mad Max movies?

Civil War

Oh? I saw the trailer and figured it was some bs like that 2012 apocalypse movie. Didn't think it would be a fun watch.

Civil War

I would hesitate to call this only an inconsistency; it's really more of an example of cognitive dissonance.

I feel like we shouldn’t bully the dead husk of niche ideology. It must feel terrible to have virtually zero support for your politics and frustratingly pace around in the anonymous niche web communities because everyone in real life would just laugh.

It must be hard to have such views and grasp at straws daily reading some same scraps of Wikipedia with examples where for 56 days the system worked as intended.

Standard libertarian/ancap combo.

The presence of a thin blue line flag and a valknut symbol indicates that they are neither libertarian nor ancap.

I would if I could.

I live in Southern Oregon and it's gotten to the point that I'm actually a little surprised when I don't see them side by side on pickups or flagpoles. On the way through Camas Valley or somewhere between the 5 and the coast, IIRC, there is a flagpole that has those, a thin green line flag and a Trump flag, just to really confuse everyone.

It's truly baffling. Perhaps not that they don't seem to understand, at the most fundamental levels, what they are so passionate about, but that they are so eager to let everyone know.

I'm not sure. I've honestly never seen it prior to this post. My knowledge of its use as a symbol of white supremacy comes from its Wikipedia article, so there's a high probability of my ignorance on it.

Ancaps have different weights of the main criteria (which are the same set).

Both employ voluntarism and, well, lack of hierarchy. But there's such a thing as voluntary hierarchy. For ancaps voluntarism takes priority here, for the rest it doesn't. All the differences stem from that single point.

Other things aside, I think ancaps think about guns more often, so, eh, the pic would be inverted.

this comment having a single upvote is a crime

I'm referring to the ignorant people who blindly follow the capitalists because that's most "An"caps and right "libertarians". Many people like myself fell down the pipeline when we realized that the government is fundementally a source of evil and the ideal society is one based on mutual cooperation rather than coercion. The problem therefore is that "An"caps have only figured out half of the problem, they understand the evils of government but not the coercive power of the capitalist class. The group you described can be simply referred to as the capitalist class as they hold no true morals or political ideology.

Jesse plemoms was the bad guy, figure it out bud.