Meh. The thread's kinda dead, man. You had your chance; everyone's gone home. Face it, you lost this one.
By definition, quitting is not "winning."
Since you have no response, I must assume you're admitting defeat. Shame you're too much of a coward to come out and say it.
No, I just can't be bothered responding to your endless nutty responses any more. It's OK,
we get it!
Then kindly stop pushing your statist drivel.
Since you apparently didn't read those responses there, I'll repeat them here:
In other threads you were never able to answer the problem of 'justice' in a Stateless society, and your religious worship of free markets relies on the faulty premise that markets are more fundamental than laws.
Justice... I assume you mean for all, yes? Not just the State? Competing arbitration and mediation firms will ensure that those best able to provide that justice will profit more, thus "floating to the top."
You were also unable to answer the question of what happens to people who try to live under a different moral code if AnCap gains popularity.
I felt I answered that quite well. as long as they don't try and force that moral code on others, for instance, by trying to take their property, then they will be respected. In other words, if they live peacefully, they will be treated peacefully. A commune can certainly exist peacefully within an AnCap society, but an AnCap community would not be tolerated in a communist society.
Furthermore, you were unable to answer why the dogma of 'private property' is somehow superior to the dogma of 'community', and why everyone should be required to embrace one and completely reject the other.
As I said above, it's superior because it allows peaceful coexistence, while "community" would not allow someone "own" something.
"Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff." - Frank Zappa.
To say nothing of being based on a rational and self-consistent philosophy, ie self-ownership.
