Fail Quotes

[ArtemisVale]

Go for it.

Although it would help if someone can message me an abridged version so i don't have to watch the vid.

[Travis Retriever]

http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/4859157/
>>Violence is good
>>Is saying this over a medium that can't exist in the world he advocates.
Go live in the woods like the animal you are then.  Where those of us who are sane and civilized can be free to put a bullet in your head should you harm us.  Freedom does NOT mean free to hit others, it means freedom from the initiation of force.

[AnCap Dave]

http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/4859157/
>>Violence is good
>>Is saying this over a medium that can't exist in the world he advocates.
Go live in the woods like the animal you are then.  Where those of us who are sane and civilized can be free to put a bullet in your head should you harm us.  Freedom does NOT mean free to hit others, it means freedom from the initiation of force.

>Tell a guy to go live in the woods
>he goes to a furry website

He'd probably take you up on that offer.

[Travis Retriever]

>Tell a guy to go live in the woods
>he goes to a furry website

He'd probably take you up on that offer.

You know what I mean!   But yeah, I guess I walked right into that one, huh?

He also seems to be one of those twats who thinks freedom/amurika = freedom to do whatever you want as seen here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/5344423/ and here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/5478881/
It is not.  It is freedom from first strike aggression.
And really, "HUR DUR WE MURIKANS HAD TO HELP YOU EUROPEANS!"?
Um, no.  WWI:  it was going to end soon anyways.  The only thing our government did was make the victory so one sided that it allowed the horrible Treaty of Versailles to be signed, thus sowing the seeds for WWII.  As for WWII? Well, again, never would have happened without our government getting crazy about it.  I mean, really, solving problems the way we did back when we lived in caves? Shameful.

[tnu]

AnCaps are Deontological thinkers. Anarchists are Utilitarians.

That's another reason why AnCaps aren't anarchists. - Brent Lengel

Okay, so since Anarchists are Utilitarians - we're interested in a specific end. Rules are only a means to reach that end. Rules are just tactics. Therefore as soon as a rule does not have the intended effect that rule is done away with because it's no longer a useful tactic.

You can't for instance, when talking to anarchists, play lawyer and "trick" your way into having private ownership over the means of production. Which AnCaps try to do all that time.

Like I remember a conversation I had with one guy who was like:

"Can I give gifts in an AnCom society?"

and I was like:

"I don't see why not"

and he said:

'Okay, I give my factory to my son, as a GIFT. CHECKMATE."

Which is when I facepalmed.

If you want to see how Anarchists make the distinction between what type of property is personal, and what type is private you need to look at the scale and the effect that property has on the community.

If your ownership of that property oppresses others or causes a serious problem for the community, you're not going to get to keep it. if it doesn't cause a problem - why the fuck would anyone care whether you owned it or not?

How do we decide which is which? Democracy within a framework of specific guidelines.

This is very different from the Liberal Capitalist approach of making laws and then enforcing them in a blunt-force kind of way. It's less authoritarian and a more nuanced way to approach public policy.

Which is why you can talk about the NAP or Self-Ownership or any other number of rules and axioms till you're blue in the face and none of us will care.

[Travis Retriever]

Not sure if fail, but I suspect it is:


Source:  http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_883_40-myths-we-believe-now-due-to-tiny-mistakes-years-ago_p2/

[MrBogosity]

Not sure if fail, but I suspect it is:


Source:  http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_883_40-myths-we-believe-now-due-to-tiny-mistakes-years-ago_p2/

No, it mentions religion in one other place: In Article VI, where it says that no religious test shall ever be required for holding public office.

And as I pointed out in my Constitution Lectures, the phrase "separation of church and state" might not literally be there, but the concept sure as hell is! I read out Jefferson's entire letter in the video.

[tnu]

[MrBogosity]

Whereas having the government do it is a-ok.

(They DO realize he's talking about adoption, right?)

[tnu]

Well this was posted and made by anarcho-communists.

[Travis Retriever]

Well this was posted and made by anarcho-communists.

I'm shocked! (I lied.)

[tnu]

Question to AnCaps: how does Anarcho-Capitalism deal with depravity & people with diminished capacity for consent?

Like for instance, take Michael Vic. Style-Dog Fighting. Is cruelty to animals kosher so long as the dogs being forced to fight to the death are owned by those making them fight?

Similarly, what about people with mental disabilities or otherwise impaired abilities to consent: say members of NAMBLA bought a bunch of Children on the free market and and indoctrinated them to consent to sex with older men?

Similarly, the Russian Mafia is alleged to pit homeless drug-addicts against each other in organized "Bum Fights" in Long Island. The addicts agree to fight for drugs & food.

In all cases you have a diminished/non-existent ability for informed consent. How would AnCapistan address problems like these, or would it even consider them problems?

Any takers?

[Travis Retriever]

Any takers?

WTF is with an-comms and all these 'gotcha!' questions? Do these guys have actual arguments or not?

[tnu]

They do seem to bekind of important question then againi'm the greenest one here so eh.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Question to AnCaps: how does Anarcho-Capitalism deal with depravity & people with diminished capacity for consent?

Like for instance, take Michael Vic. Style-Dog Fighting. Is cruelty to animals kosher so long as the dogs being forced to fight to the death are owned by those making them fight?

Similarly, what about people with mental disabilities or otherwise impaired abilities to consent: say members of NAMBLA bought a bunch of Children on the free market and and indoctrinated them to consent to sex with older men?

Similarly, the Russian Mafia is alleged to pit homeless drug-addicts against each other in organized "Bum Fights" in Long Island. The addicts agree to fight for drugs & food.

In all cases you have a diminished/non-existent ability for informed consent. How would AnCapistan address problems like these, or would it even consider them problems?

The problem is they're putting these things in a vacuum and not looking at the whole picture of how such events could come to pass.  Why are said addicts starved and drug addicted?  Solve that problem and the bum fights don't happen anymore.  If you can't be bothered to look into the root causes of such things, then you really don't care all that much about it and would do well to just STFU with your faux moral indignation please.

Property rights do NOT allow you to own another person.  Ancoms really need to put that myth to bed already.

Animal abuse is a classic symptom of sociopathy so any DRO would ding you as "high risk to offend" which would have consequences for you for sure.  Not to mention the whole social ostracism thing.  The only reason Michael Vick got a pass and was allowed to play again is because the NFL has political connections and thus is shielded from public scrutiny.  Anyone wanna point me to a wal-mart that rehired an animal abuser?