Anarchism

[The Grand Nudger]

Public roads, water lines & the like would absolutely still exist!

No, they most emphatically would not, you would have to pay the tariff I set and enforce with my rifle (and that of my amigos..... all, likely, more violent, better armed, and better trained than yourself). Who you gonna call to help you out? That's right, nobody. I mean hell, maybe we could be persuaded to protect you from the likes of ourselves and others...provided you pay the tariff.

So, because government is gone, somehow roads wouldn't exist? I'm surprised this wasn't brought up sooner, since this seems to the the first thing people gravitate towards. I'm headed out for a drink, but will elaborate on this point a little later. Yes, I did attend public school, against my will. I had no say in the matter, therefore it's invalid. I am vehemently against public schools though!

Good, so your lot will be both vulnerable and ignorant, the tariff just got larger.

Contrary to popular belief, Somalia does in fact have a government. They have a parliament & a president. It is a democracy, just like the U.S., but different at the same time. I would have no interest in visiting because their culture differs from that in which I'm fond of & their climate isn't partial to redheaded individuals.

I'm partial to redheaded individuals, would you like to join my little army? No? Tariff just got larger.

The reason shit is so chaotic there, has nothing to do with government or lackthereof. Their civil unrest is due to their culture & most likely, religion(s).

And the ineffectiveness of their government.

Again, people view anarchy as "total chaos" & in certain sub-sects I would agree.

I don't, I imagine a very orderly line at my checkpoints, everyone waiting carefully (with their mouths shut and their currency out) to pay the tariff.

However, anarcho-capitalism is structured to work, in my opinion.

See the above.

That which is set into place (I've done extensive research) makes sense to me & is the only fair way of running things. Which is: Non-aggression principle,

Whoa..whoa...whoa...why in the fuck would I want to sign on-board with a principle like that? Are you seriously just hoping that people will play nice? I'm gonna tax you, I'm going to take what you have, and hell, you never know, I might just get drunk and do doughnuts on your crops in my Up-armored pickup.

self-ownership,

Enforced by whom?

voluntary association,

Protected by whom?

and natural order.

Right, tariffs and technicals. As natural an order as can be imagined.

[JefferyHale]

Contrary to popular belief, Somalia does in fact have a government. They have a parliament & a president. It is a democracy, just like the U.S., but different at the same time. I would have no interest in visiting because their culture differs from that in which I'm fond of & their climate isn't partial to redheaded individuals. The reason shit is so chaotic there, has nothing to do with government or lackthereof. Their civil unrest is due to their culture & most likely, religion(s).

Yes, Somalia has a government, that controls a few square miles of the country... That's it. Minus Somaliland (if Somalia looks like a number 7 on the map, Somaliland is the horizontal part), but no other country recognizes Somaliland as an independent state. However, Somaliland does have a functioning, central government. It's capital is Hergeisa.
Somalians have a clan-based culture. Each clan vying for control. Replace corporation for clan, and we get your ideal world. Though I do agree with you about the climate not suiting us pasty white folk (I got a nasty sunburn in Kenya after about 30 minutes in the sun).
As for roads, well I guess it's a good thing that America has them in time for the anarchy to begin. But roads have to be repaired regularly. Without a central government how would something this simple get accomplished?
I'd be happy with an admission/clarification of this being your ideal, fantasy, "if I were king of the world" world, not an actual world in which anyone would have to function. I can respect that, even if I don't agree with it. Because, pragmatically speaking, your plan sucks, especially if you aren't rich... or white (I can't overlook the racial undertones of social darwinism, sorry)

There are many successful & rich individuals who are quite wealthy & would most likely be advocates of such a system, who are not white. You're mistaking social Darwinism with ethnic cleansing I believe. I'm against Nationalism fully & find such abhorrent things utterly disgusting & contemptible. Though I'm guessing you're liberal, therefore, the race card being brought up does not shock me.

I'm far from rich. I do well, but even if I were poor (and I have been), I'd still be an advocate for the system. This isn't a system based on "well this would work great for me", but "this is what's truly fair".

Private business came first, then roads & bridges. They weren't originally developed by governments. To explain further as to how this would work in a stateless society, I will allow this video to capsulize on it.

[youtube]2x6oosvWnRs[/youtube]

[The Grand Nudger]

Correct, and the reason that governments eventually took over these roads would be......? Im wondering how you even plan to engage in private business in the first place? You gonna take my word for it when I shake your hand?

[JefferyHale]

Correct, and the reason that governments eventually took over these roads would be......? Im wondering how you even plan to engage in private business in the first place? You gonna take my word for it when I shake your hand?

Ha! Read this article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/20...-possible/

I could not explain it nearly as well as this gentleman did. As for your latter question, "yes". I don't feel I need some intervention from a forcible babysitter, such as the government. A quick way to explain that would be this. You go to a restaurant & order the filet. Now, you receive a flank steak instead. You complain & the owner says you have to pay for the flank steak at the the price of the filet. Now, would you sue or get the government involved? Most likely not. But, what you would do is tell your friends. So, what stops said owner from doing this when you visit his/her establishment? I think you can deduce where I'm going from there. This is a small example, but gives you an idea as to what I'm talking about.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm said owner, I don't give a shit what you tell your friends. As a matter of fact I'll just work you lot over for awhile, change the name on the sign (hell, change my name, why not, no ones checking or anything) and when I've finally fleeced enough of you move the next town over. Next?

(what about that article addressed anything I said to you btw? Looks like you're just continuing a conversation with yourself from directly above my post. Say it aint so.)

[JefferyHale]

I'm said owner, I don't give a shit what you tell your friends. As a matter of fact I'll just work you lot over for awhile, change the name on the sign (hell, change my name, why not, no ones checking or anything) and when I've finally fleeced enough of you move the next town over. Next?

(what about that article addressed anything I said to you btw? Looks like you're just continuing a conversation with yourself from directly above my post. Say it aint so.)

Anarcho-capitalism has nothing to do with the elimination of police. But, the way it's funded now, through tax dollars. Therefore, if you were to commit a crime against me, I would seek ramification for any damages I incurred as a result. I am also an advocate of vigilantism, if all else fails. You see, I'm not looking for a "perfectly safe" society, but a "free one". As I've stated multiple times.

It isn't so. It clearly states that government isn't the reason we have roads. The other video states as to how roads would still exist in a voluntary society. Nothing more, nothing less.

[The Grand Nudger]

Of course government isn't the reason that we have roads. It's just the reason that we manage them so well. On the other hand...you could always pay me that tariff.....

Who said anything about getting rid of police? I am the police, now pay me my tariff.

You're perfectly free to pay me my tariff.

[JefferyHale]

Of course government isn't the reason that we have roads. It's just the reason that we manage them so well. On the other hand...you could always pay me that tariff.....

Who said anything about getting rid of police? I am the police, now pay me my tariff.

You're perfectly free to pay me my tariff.

At this point, I think we should agree to disagree. I would suggest branching out though, watching some videos, reading some books, essays & the like on anarcho-capitalism. You're a statist, clearly. So, you're not going to see my point(s) & it's on par to debating faith with a xtian.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'll agree to no such thing unless you pay the tariff.

(what is, at this very moment, preventing me from forcibly extracting this tariff from you?)

[JefferyHale]

I'll agree to no such thing unless you pay the tariff.

(what is, at this very moment, preventing me from forcibly extracting this tariff from you?)

Either the privately funded police I've employed or myself.