The Ancap-Ancom Divide.

[Ripoll]

It's kind of implied what with the whole 'absence of a state' bit.

So, you are doubling down on his strawman?

People can certainly band together to ease the burden, but it wont be that welfare providing, safety net kind of thing only a state can truly provide on an effective scale. Also how do you address infrastructure?

[Anarcho-Communist Collectives]

What's the point of anachro-communism, I thought communism itself was an anarchist thought?

Why add the anachro- bit

The addition of "anarcho" indicates the rejection of state governance and coercion by force inherent in Bolshevik Communism (e.g. USSR/CCCP).

I thought communism itself was an anarchist thought?

Theoretically, yes. Marx's philosophies regarding history purportedly lead to "Statelessness/Classlessness/Propertylessness." On the surface this is Anarchism/Anarcho-Communism. However, greed and lusts for power destroyed the Revolution from within and replaced one repressive regime (e.g. Tsar) with another (e.g. Bolshevik).

[Conserative Morality]

So, you are doubling down on his strawman?

I've yet to have met an anarchist who could meaningfully explain to me the mechanisms through which anarchy prevents simple, basic rights from being violated without creating a state in the process.

[Skeckoa]

^^^ this, which leads me to my next question. When does the anarchstic government get to the size and point to where it becomes a state?

I'm not exactly sure what an ancom would say here. An ancap would prob say something like : as soon as you begin forcing people to pay for its maintenance without their consent.

[Ripoll]

Not if the infrastructure required to transport the materials and protection of that infrastructure is nonexistant.

A state is not needed for that.

What would replace the state's role?

[Natapoc]

What's the point of anachro-communism, I thought communism itself was an anarchist thought?

Why add the anachro- bit

The addition of "anarcho" indicates the rejection of state governance and coercion by force inherent in Bolshevik Communism (e.g. USSR/CCCP).

I thought communism itself was an anarchist thought?

Theoretically, yes. Marx's philosophies regarding history purportedly lead to "Statelessness/Classlessness/Propertylessness." On the surface this is Anarchism/Anarcho-Communism. However, greed and lusts for power destroyed the Revolution from within and replaced one repressive regime (e.g. Tsar) with another (e.g. Bolshevik).

The dictatorship of the proletariat did not turn out so well. Neither did transition stages or vanguard parties.

[Shilya]

I'm not saying they wouldn't want to build them.

I'm saying they can't. Do you know how hard it is to build a modern harvester, or a tractor? We can build these nowadays because we have a huge amount of state-sponsored infrastructure behind them, that standardize and regulate quality, that make it possible to trust and rely on suppliers. There are thousands working behind the scenes to make one tractor happen, and if a few of them don't stand in line, the whole thing can break down.

If you have the necessary amount of organization, standardization and regulation, as well as the necessary infrastructure to get all the parts and materials in one place, I'm pretty sure you already have a state.

You do realize factories would still be run, would still order materials, and would still produce things?

Stop strawmanning. A business will order shit, they will take that shit, and turn it into better shit, just like it has always been.

I'm not strawmanning, I'm looking more than one year ahead. How do you plan to maintain this degree of standardization, organization, required quality and cooperation without a central authority? Do you think people won't try to fuck each other over, now without a government that would otherwise punish them for it? That people won't fall to short-term greed and press the maximum profit out of the short scale, then let everything behind them go to hell as they move on with the profit they've made, looking for the next opportunity?

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

[The New Sea Territory]

So, you are doubling down on his strawman?

People can certainly band together to ease the burden, but it wont be that welfare providing, safety net kind of thing only a state can truly provide on an effective scale. Also how do you address infrastructure?

Stop derailing the thread.

[Natapoc]

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

Have you ever negotiated with suppliers? I have.

Your ideas of the role of the state in such situations will change quickly if you ever do.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

You do realize factories would still be run, would still order materials, and would still produce things?

Stop strawmanning. A business will order shit, they will take that shit, and turn it into better shit, just like it has always been.

I'm not strawmanning, I'm looking more than one year ahead. How do you plan to maintain this degree of standardization, organization, required quality and cooperation without a central authority? Do you think people won't try to fuck each other over, now without a government that would otherwise punish them for it? That people won't fall to short-term greed and press the maximum profit out of the short scale, then let everything behind them go to hell as they move on with the profit they've made, looking for the next opportunity?

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

BECAUSE THEY WONT GET REPEAT BUSINESS.
You keep assuming people just want to suck everybody else dry. They dont. People realize that all that wealth they got by screwing people over will come at a price: no one will ever trust them again. They will forever be considered a thief and a fraud.


Meanwhile, a legitimate business will build a good reputation as a supplier. They will make a good steady profit.

[The New Sea Territory]

So, you are doubling down on his strawman?

I've yet to have met an anarchist who could meaningfully explain to me the mechanisms through which anarchy prevents simple, basic rights from being violated without creating a state in the process.

Then you are completely ignorant to any anarchist philosopher who set pen to paper, or you have a definition of "state" that is incorrect.

[Conserative Morality]

Then you are completely ignorant to any anarchist philosopher who set pen to paper, or you have a definition of "state" that is incorrect.

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

[Shilya]

I'm not strawmanning, I'm looking more than one year ahead. How do you plan to maintain this degree of standardization, organization, required quality and cooperation without a central authority? Do you think people won't try to fuck each other over, now without a government that would otherwise punish them for it? That people won't fall to short-term greed and press the maximum profit out of the short scale, then let everything behind them go to hell as they move on with the profit they've made, looking for the next opportunity?

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

BECAUSE THEY WONT GET REPEAT BUSINESS.
You keep assuming people just want to suck everybody else dry. They dont. People realize that all that wealth they got by screwing people over will come at a price: no one will ever trust them again. They will forever be considered a thief and a fraud.

They'll be considered a thief and a fraud... by the guys they fucked over, and maybe the guys those guys know. But conmen often operate very very long for a reason, the information doesn't spread that well. There's always a sucker that hasn't heared of you yet.

Which brings me back to the initial point. You're on your farm, filling up your tractor with the latest delivery of gas. You start it, drive a while, it breaks down. Who's to blame? The gas delivery, the tractor manufacturer, no one? Either way, your tractor is broken, I guess that's that now. Sure hope you have enough spare cash to afford another one.

[Skappola]

I'm not strawmanning, I'm looking more than one year ahead. How do you plan to maintain this degree of standardization, organization, required quality and cooperation without a central authority? Do you think people won't try to fuck each other over, now without a government that would otherwise punish them for it? That people won't fall to short-term greed and press the maximum profit out of the short scale, then let everything behind them go to hell as they move on with the profit they've made, looking for the next opportunity?

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

BECAUSE THEY WONT GET REPEAT BUSINESS.
You keep assuming people just want to suck everybody else dry. They dont. People realize that all that wealth they got by screwing people over will come at a price: no one will ever trust them again. They will forever be considered a thief and a fraud.


Meanwhile, a legitimate business will build a good reputation as a supplier. They will make a good steady profit.

Snake-Oil sellsmen have been remarkably successful despite selling completely useless products, and many large corporations screw over their customers all the time. Many people can simply move into new markets or, if they are a large corporation, they can cover up how they screw others over. Or, if a single company becomes a monopoly (which is very likely in any Anarchist system), they can simply force people to buy their product, since they can't go anywhere else. Many of these things are already happening with a government, without a government it'll be even worse.

[The New Sea Territory]

Then you are completely ignorant to any anarchist philosopher who set pen to paper, or you have a definition of "state" that is incorrect.

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

This isn't the thread. I've tried to keep this thread form spiraling violently out of control like all anarchist threads.

there's also this radical new thing called "google".

[Conglomerate of Iron]

Then you are completely ignorant to any anarchist philosopher who set pen to paper, or you have a definition of "state" that is incorrect.

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

A murderer would be shot dead by victims or brought to civilian court by militia or private defense force.

A thief would have the goods taken back, and would forever be shunned.

And so on.

[Anarcho-Communist Collectives]

The addition of "anarcho" indicates the rejection of state governance and coercion by force inherent in Bolshevik Communism (e.g. USSR/CCCP).



Theoretically, yes. Marx's philosophies regarding history purportedly lead to "Statelessness/Classlessness/Propertylessness." On the surface this is Anarchism/Anarcho-Communism. However, greed and lusts for power destroyed the Revolution from within and replaced one repressive regime (e.g. Tsar) with another (e.g. Bolshevik).

The dictatorship of the proletariat did not turn out so well. Neither did transition stages or vanguard parties.

The largest threat which seems to have faced Anarcho-Communist movements has been from without in the form of Bolshevik Communism. Take the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939 for example. In areas like Catalonia the worker's revolutionized their towns and cities under Anarcho-Communist guidelines with impressive results in increased food and manufacturing output. However, the worker's Anarchist Revolution faced a concurrent Counter-Revolution from the Bolshevik Communists, with the latter of the two focusing its efforts on undermining the worker's' hard-won results.

[Ripoll]

I'm not strawmanning, I'm looking more than one year ahead. How do you plan to maintain this degree of standardization, organization, required quality and cooperation without a central authority? Do you think people won't try to fuck each other over, now without a government that would otherwise punish them for it? That people won't fall to short-term greed and press the maximum profit out of the short scale, then let everything behind them go to hell as they move on with the profit they've made, looking for the next opportunity?

Without a central force holding all this together, the whole thing will slowly fall apart. Turns out no one can trust a supplier 1000 miles away if they can't enforce a contract in court, with state force.

BECAUSE THEY WONT GET REPEAT BUSINESS.
You keep assuming people just want to suck everybody else dry. They dont. People realize that all that wealth they got by screwing people over will come at a price: no one will ever trust them again. They will forever be considered a thief and a fraud.


Meanwhile, a legitimate business will build a good reputation as a supplier. They will make a good steady profit.

Some people will abuse it, some people wont the difference is that no one can step in and execute the law if someone does abuse it. All we can do is cross our fingers that most people choose the ethical approach to business.

[Conserative Morality]

This isn't the thread. I've tried to keep this thread form spiraling violently out of control like all anarchist threads.

there's also this radical new thing called "google".

Google is your answer to challenges to anarchism? Very weak.

[Conserative Morality]

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

A murderer would be shot dead by victims or brought to civilian court by militia or private defense force.

A thief would have the goods taken back, and would forever be shunned.

And so on.

Can you explain to me how this court and system of coercion is meaningfully different from a State?

[Skappola]

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

A murderer would be shot dead by victims or brought to civilian court by militia or private defense force.

I would just like to point out that vigilantes & Mobs often lead to Witch-Burnings and riots when left unattended to.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

BECAUSE THEY WONT GET REPEAT BUSINESS.
You keep assuming people just want to suck everybody else dry. They dont. People realize that all that wealth they got by screwing people over will come at a price: no one will ever trust them again. They will forever be considered a thief and a fraud.

They'll be considered a thief and a fraud... by the guys they fucked over, and maybe the guys those guys know. But conmen often operate very very long for a reason, the information doesn't spread that well. There's always a sucker that hasn't heared of you yet.

Which brings me back to the initial point. You're on your farm, filling up your tractor with the latest delivery of gas. You start it, drive a while, it breaks down. Who's to blame? The gas delivery, the tractor manufacturer, no one? Either way, your tractor is broken, I guess that's that now. Sure hope you have enough spare cash to afford another one.

Or maybe we have this thing called the internet. So everyone knows their face.

And we have this thing called justice. Where the property they took is reclaimed.

Just saying.

[Ripoll]

Please, try where others have failed. Even just briefly.

A murderer would be shot dead by victims or brought to civilian court by militia or private defense force.

A thief would have the goods taken back, and would forever be shunned.

And so on.

and what happens if these thiefs mount up an army of bandits and trample over mostly defenseless towns because the militia is under funded taxation is non-existent and volunteer rates are low, and you cannot have mandatory drafts as well as incentives being non-existent hmmm?

Also "civilian courts" sound like salem witch trials

tyranny by the majority to put it nicely.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

This thread is getting thread jacked again. And i am buying into it.


People, this is a thread about ancoms v ancaps. Not about your ignorance of anarchism. Please GTFO if you are a silly statist with no real thought processes and just wants to force taxes on me through a barrel of a gun. Thank you.

[Ripoll]

This thread is getting thread jacked again. And i am buying into it.


People, this is a thread about ancoms v ancaps. Not about your ignorance of anarchism. Please GTFO if you are a silly statist with no real thought processes and just wants to force taxes on me through a barrel of a gun. Thank you.

Good thing that's not how taxes are enforced and we obviously do have thought processes if we are able to respond to statements in correct context.