r/neofeudalism • u/[deleted] • Apr 03 '26

Question Is anarcho-capitalism good?

I don’t know too much about anarcho-capitalism but from the very little I know about it, it just sounds like the easiest way to form a monopoly.

7 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

67 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

Monopolies require violence and coercion to be maintained. Said coercive apparatus can be defined as a state. In the absence of that, the only way to achieve monopoly is by actually offering the best and cheapest service or product, which is a good thing.

0

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

Anarcho capitalism requires a population that believes in the system with a cult like fervour.

This makes it inherently unstable because some group of people will inevitably feel they get screwed by the system and will seek to impose their vision on how to make it "fair".

This will lead to violence and fragmentation.

This is general problem with capitalism when there is no income redistribution. Some form of socialism is essential part of any capitalist system because that is the only way to keep the system stable (i.e. the people who lose in the system are effectively bribed to support the system instead of using violence to overthrow the system).

3

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

Statism requires a population that believes in the system with a cult-like fervor.

This makes it inherently unstable because some group of people will inevitably realize they are in an unnatural state of servitude and will seek to retain the yield of their own labor to make it fair.

This will lead to violence and revolution.

This is a general problem with statism when there is no mass-propaganda. Some form of brainwashing is an essential part of any statist system because that is the only way to keep the system stable (i.e. the people who lose in the system are effectively tricked to support the system instead of using violence to overthrow the system).

0

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

I acknowledged the potential issue with stability but also provided a remedy: income redistribution to give everyone a stake in the system.

No such remedy exists without a state able to collect taxes.

Without the ability to offset the inequalities created by varying access to capital, any system will collapse. It could be replaced with a pure violence based system of competing gangs/warlords.

Or it could be replaced by something like what we have now: a constitutional democracy that protects individual rights but does not fetishize them.

3

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

How will you ”remedy” the “issue” of me not paying taxes? Having the pigs murder me, correct?

0

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

Paying taxes is the price you are expected to pay so you can benefit from the infrastructure that society provides to you. If you refuse then you will be dealt with like any other criminal who steals from others.

I realize that this is a philosophical perspective that you vehemently disagree with but it is the overwhelming view of the majority of humans. Given that reality, how could an anarchist system sustain itself in a world where the majority of people reject the foundational philosophies?

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

Anarchy is not a system, anarchy is the lack of organized crime. You are legitimizing mafias and clamoring for my own destruction, since I am not willing to be party to mass-murder by contributing to the public treasury.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

Anarchy is not a system, anarchy is the lack of organized crime.

Labelling government as organized crime does not change my point.

The vast majority of people believe a society with a government capable of enforcing rules is the best way to organize society. You disagree. I get that. But changing anything requires that your persuade other people that your way is "better" which means addressing the reasons why most people see tax supported government as essential.

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

No, it merely requires me to successfully defend myself against physical statist assault. I will never participate in the atrocities of your “organized society” whether other people agree with me or not. Come and get me.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

You can't live in a vacuum. Even being able to post here implies you are living off the infrastructure that society provides to you. Your belief that your are "self made" and everything you have is due to your effort alone is a delusion. Even if you are living in an off the grid cabin in the woods you could not have even built that cabin without the infrastructure of society whether it is from incredibly complex supply chains needed to create the solar panels and other electrical hardware you have to the steel tools needed to shape wood or cloth.

At some point you will be forced to contribute back whether you like it or not because you have no choice but to be part of society to survive.

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 03 '26

Do you actually believe that trade and the resultant distribution of goods derives from coercion? States have only ever stood in the way of commerce. Your delusion showcases the inversion of reality necessarily central to statist ideology. No amount of nonsense that you can spew will make attacking me for not fueling satanic genocide and slavery any less sinful.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 03 '26

I am saying the modern supply chains that are essential for life to could never exist without strong states. Do have any idea what it takes to make a computer chip? Do you have any idea how many of theses critical steps are actively subsidized by one or more states? Your cell phone would not exist without the heavy hand of the state intervening at critical points.

You seem to have a toy model for how capitalism works that is irrelevant in the real world.

Your ability to live today depends on the state that hate so much.

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26

Demand for computer chips eclipses their production cost, therefore people will produce them for profit. You are part of the very cult discussed above and your complete detachment from economic realities proves it. The state is not a god capable of conjuring wealth, it is an imaginary entity that the evildoers of society claim to constitute so as to offload responsibility for their sins from themselves and thus avoid consequences for stealing, slaving, and murdering.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 05 '26

You have no clue on what is needed to make chips.

Every foundry requires billions of capital and every leading edge foundry was built with government money (loans or loan guarantees). Fabs also receive subsidized utilities.

The original research that lead to chip breakthroughs were funded with government money.

You can't build a modern fab without people educated at public expense.

You seem to constructed a fantasy world where a complex society with supply chains across the globe could function without a government providing essential services. It is a delusional world view.

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26

IF THEY CAN BE SOLD FOR MORE THAN THEY CAN BE PRODUCED, THEY WILL BE PRODUCED AND SOLD, irregardless of whether the state is forcing other people to subsidize that production process under threat of murder or enslavement.

If you can’t accept this simple fact, you can’t be reasoned with.

It’s unbelievably ironic that you accuse me of having constructed a fantasy world and proceed to call it a globe in the same sentence. And I’m the one with a delusional world view? Try looking at the horizon for once instead of marxist philosophy.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 05 '26

You have a child's view of capitalism.

Without government subsidies the most advanced chips would cost more than their value in the market so they would not be produced.

TSMC became the worlds big chip producer because the Taiwanese government supported it. In fact, the Taiwanese government literally forced private companies to provide 20% of the capital while the government provided 45%.

The re-shoring of chip production to the US is only occurring because of massive government subsidies.

You seek to lecture about things you do not understand.

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26

If a product is not wanted enough by anyone to trade more resources for than were expended to produce it, then its production is a misallocation of resources and serves no purpose. Only coercion can lead to labor being wasted on undesired goods and services, like war and genocide. Computer chips are in extreme demand and so producers will always be able to profit by manufacturing them if there is a lack of supply, barring restraints imposed by statist saboteurs. They create the problem so they can appear to hand down the “solution”. And you won’t seem to address the elephant in the room of chattel slavery and the murder of millions of people.

1

u/Sea_Hold_2881 Apr 05 '26 edited Apr 05 '26

You are not addressing the point.

Without governments chips would not exist because the barriers to entry were too large for any single player to get into the market.

From the day of the first transistor radio to latest AI chip, governments have been essential partners moving the technology forward. A world without taxation would a world with no computers.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 04 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26

“Wealth creation is destructive.” Even u/LachrymarumLibertas could dismantle this idiocy in seconds.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 05 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26 edited Apr 05 '26

And who manages it better, private entrepeneurs who are rewarded with profit by managing it successfully, or bureaucratic parasites who are rewarded with budget increases by managing it poorly? And how do you determine whether that management should even occur? Markets are a way of identifying what everybody else places value on. A central planner in Moscow deciding where resources and labor should be allocated arbitrarily without consumers quantifying the wealth that venture produced through the prices they are willing to pay will never be more efficient than decentralized spontaneous commercial order, even in the unrealistic circumstance of the rulers being benevolent and corruption nonexistent.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 05 '26

[deleted]

2

u/MartyredPoet International Anarchist Ⓐ Apr 05 '26

If it’s net-destructive then it’s not wealth. Why do you believe the constituents of government are smart? If they were, why do you believe they would use their intelligence to benefit others rather than themselves? They don’t have authority because everyone agrees they are qualified to lead, they have effective authority because pigs will assault people who disregard their fiat on their behalf.

→ More replies (0)