Compliant, sure, use whatever term that means "preventing revolt" you wish.
-
-
The point is then unless you allow households to chose their own lords, the democratic tendency cannot be removed, since there is no escape for the minority. Only anarchy can protect political minorities by allowing them to chose their own lords.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Anarcho-capitalism is what we have right now only the single protective agency decided that taking over all territory and ruling unopposed is more profitable for them - then it broke down into being controlled by its employees.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @0x49fa98
then its no longer anarcho capitalism lol I can just as easily state we are living in "failed feudalism" if we want to pretend that words don't have meanings
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"Feudalism" describes a system of governance. Ancap is a hopeful description of what a ruler will do if interested in profit (but of course, power is above profit in the hierarchy of concerns). I'm a monarchist - I can say "we don't have a King and we'd be better off with one".
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @0x49fa98
"Ancap is a hopeful description of what a ruler will do if interested in profit" IDK what definition you're referencing here, but this is absolutely NOT what that means. Anarchy (no rulers) and capitalism (free markets) have very specific definitions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ok, so you have ancapistan where there are protective agencies that compete and control military force. Now one decides that he'd rather be warlord of the place for various reasons. He or a competitor will succeed eventually at this ambition. Nothing keeps ancap ancap.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @0x49fa98
Winner-take-all is not how markets work IRL. Even the largest companies rarely have more than 50% market share unless they've been granted monopoly power in a given area. Any agency that tried to become a government would be kept in check by other agencies and their customers.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Power is better when there aren't rivals for it so rivals will fight and reach accommodations - leader A becomes a lieutenant for leader B. Firms are kept in line by a market b/c they operate in the kiddie pool of what the state permits - no competition via violence.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @0x49fa98
Sure everyone would love having absolute power, achieving it and maintaining it is a whole other issue that can only be done through violence, and violence has very real costs that are impossible to bear forever, unless you can externalize them via theft/taxation
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But you don't have to bear the costs forever. You need a very short war which demonstrates which "protection agency" is stronger then everyone in the other agencies defects to it. Then the agency is free to tax at it's pleasure.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.