Reddit Posts
Mentions
Brother, if you go against a corporation gaining power you're violating the NAP. The current form of capitalism is just the most efficient one for making riches, it's called neoliberslism, and it still very much is capitalism proper. You should read some books from the other side if you want a proper critique of capitalism.
Don't talk about "capitalism in the real world" when there isn't any place where anarchism exists. Governments produce monopolies so no wonder why they're constantly violating NAP with society being only able to complain about it. >My personal problem with these types of ideas is that they always operate in a theoretical vacuum, making assumptions of how people will act all along the way. fair enough but there's still nothing the government does that can't be made by a simpler, smaller organization(s). i dont see the issue with overthrowing the government, its tasks can still be made >and requires complex solutions here we call that "inefficiency", or whatever you mean because you left that to open interpretation what do you mean the current system is the most effective? there's a direct correlation between the government regulating less the economy and the economy growing even more, so why should the government intervene at all? what issues will arise that can't be solved without a government? >Often operating on idealist assumptions, and ignoring human nature. you mean socialism? because capitalist anarchism is based in the human nature, which is basically incentives
You keep referencing these companies that are in charge of making these decisions. This is where the assumptions are doing the most heavy lifting. Capitalism in the real world violates NAP constantly. The incentives are often at odds with each other. My personal problem with these types of ideas is that they always operate in a theoretical vacuum, making assumptions of how people will act all along the way. When the reality is that a human society is incredibly complex and requires complex solutions. Additionally, every social system humans have ever had have always been corrupted by power and greed. And these idealist solutions never truly consider how to address human nature. Our current system attempts to wrangle that (not very well these days) however it's been much more effective than anything else we've ever really seen. The same goes for the other end of the spectrum as well. Often operating on idealist assumptions, and ignoring human nature.
society decides what violates NAP and what doesn't even if there's no consensus. If I walk nude on my own yard some people will say it does violate NAP and some will say it doesn't, so instead of coming to a binary result we reach an agreement to avoid escalation, for example between two different justice companies. It's that simple.
To be honest, I don't really think I'll be the person to shoot down your entire ideology, but here goes. Th e principal reason is that the non-aggression principle is redundant: In order to know what counts as aggression, you need to have a theory of rights. But if you already have a theory of rights, then you don't need an additional "non-aggression principle". With a theory of rights, you already know everything you need to know about what you may or may not do. It's actually quite telling that the NAP is mostly used in non-academic circles. Indeed, the way the NAP is wielded by non-academic libertarians reveals just how unaware non-academic libertarians can be of their own assumptions (which is to be expected among non-academic or lay audiences). Again, the NAP only has content given an underlying theory of rights. So, if someone frequently asserts the NAP, it must be because they already have a particular theory of rights in mind. I also think these assumptions extend past the simplicity of the NAP. Modern society is incredibly complex, and an overly simple principal of capital making all of the decisions will be exploited. It's the same way a fully socialist society won't work either.
he is right. the idea of NAP is just a common natural rule, because even laws cannot stop people from killing each other.
> the only rule needed is the NAP (non-agression principle). anything else is useless because I shouldn't care about you doing something that doesn't harm anyone or anything Oh you sweet summer child. If it were only that simple :)
the only rule needed is the NAP (non-agression principle). anything else is useless because I shouldn't care about you doing something that doesn't harm anyone or anything >infrastructure that is made by private companies >the environment that needs to exist for that person to be able to build that thing, which is... money. the government gets its money from taxes so we already have that buying power to create things >there is so many things that the government does, and has done that are essential to our entire society functioning everything the government does can be made by smaller organizations which don't necessarily have to be a single one
Edit: Just to be perfectly clear ... SQP->0.01 Kelvin = space-porn NAP -> 4 Kelvin = state of the art on industrial size TODAY. "Operating Temperature: Superconducting chips require extreme dilution refrigerators cooled to \(-273.14^{\circ }\text{C}\) (10 millikelvin), which is colder than deep space. PsiQuantum's chips operate at \(-269^{\circ }\text{C}\) (4 kelvin). This higher temperature allows the use of standard, high-capacity industrial cooling systems (cryoplants)."
Ooooo but, its NAP TIMMEEEE!!! Yesssssss. LOL
No it did not. Ross was a strict Libertarian & followed the NAP so anything involving a victim was prohibited.
I wouldn't want marketplaces for crimes that have a victim, and Silk Road disallowed any goods or services that involved a victim. Doing drugs is a victimless crime & should be legal from an ethical & moral perspective anyway, so I see nothing wrong with drug marketplaces that follow the NAP (Non Aggression Principle) like Silk Road did.
Hey girl, I want to violate your NAP
BOME, $NAP, SLERF are r/cc's favourite coins
Lol $NAP is dumping like a mf.
tldr; Over the weekend, Solana's network activity surpassed Ethereum's due to a surge in interest for Solana-based memecoins, leading to a trading volume of $3.52 billion, which was $1.1 billion more than Ethereum's. However, the network struggled with the increased activity, experiencing a 50% transaction failure rate for a period. The frenzy was largely driven by the rapid rise of new memecoins like Book of Meme (BOME) and $NAP, which saw their market caps soar in a matter of hours. Concurrently, Solana's price increased, making it the fourth-largest cryptocurrency by market cap. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
get some $NOS too, new one and can be bought like $NAP
Don’t. It’s done. Do $NAP
Last warning to hop onto $NAP🚂
$NAP on Solana is gonna go crazy guys
Oooh. Well since we're looking at history. Oh! You're an ancap! That makes sense and aligns with your opinions and attitude. I find most ancaps don't feel that the NAP applies to personal attacks, so that tracks.
Most libertarians are specyists. They don't consider the NAP for precursors of steaks and burgers.
Communism can't exist without a monopoly on violence (i.e. The STATE) The idea that you can use the STATE to organize society along the lines of communist ideology, then have state shrink into nothing, is also an absurdity. People would go right back to 'personal self-interest', profit motive, and private property because that's how humans are hard wired. We're not the Borg. We're humans, as flawed as we are. I see you don't understand the NAP either, or the concept of initiation of violence versus the retaliatory use of violence in restoration of justice only when life, liberty, or property has been violated.
The Nancy Pelosi ETF (NAP): sit back, relax, and watch your portfolio beat the S&P 500 by double digits every year, guaranteed.
Financial freedom is pure non-coerced NAP. That's bitcoin. I only support republicans as much as their economic philosophy is correct and that's the important part. You decry "trickle-down-economics" but to suggest otherwise is to ignore 1/2 of every transaction. You see a rich guy. I see a guy who created wealth that people wanted more than the money for in their own pocket so they traded it. They enriched the guy who was doing what they wanted, offering them wealth in the form of goods and services. The rich guy served society. Society chose to enrich him in kind. Government offers no such choice. It only takes and promises value with no consequence for failure. I hired Trump as my president because I knew he'd champion businesses that I can choose to support or not, not government that takes by force. No government can take my bitcoin and no government can counterfeit it to pay bills I would never agree to pay for. No government can grab it to pay for wars. Big government requires confication of wealth because no person would coose it. Now if you say "some people choose to pay taxes because they appreciate government services!" I ask only 2 questions: 1) How much extra taxes did they pay over-and-above the minimum required and 2) If these services are so good, why force people to pay for them? We can discuss roads, the military, police, justice, imprisonment and fire safety as better-done by governments. The rest I would like a free market for including healthcare and education. And bottom line, without the economic activity preceeding government itself then gocernment would have nothing to tax and nothing to defend. The vilification of profits is a cynical election ploy to win over those who have not considered that they choose to enrich the rich meaning the rich traded them trye wealth and prosperity by thier agreement. And, Of course, we aren't discussing crony capitalism as capitalism which is another form of government failure dnd corription.