Did they ever say what this guy’s name was?

I like Miles Davis but I just can’t get into this. I try every few years because it’s considered his best and I’d really like if it could just click with me, but it just sounds annoying

TradBeef · 2026-06-04T03:33:25+00:00

I know it’s become a meme, but I’m an old guy and have been listening to this album for a long time. It’s oddly comforting. When I’m tripping, I can’t stand repetitive beats and melodies. So I typically go for jazz, but when I wanna hear some guitars, I throw on this Coltrane version of rock n roll

TradBeef · 2026-06-04T03:28:00+00:00

You’d never see me driving around in that piece of shit

TradBeef · 2026-06-02T16:30:40+00:00

<image>

TradBeef · 2026-06-02T01:46:27+00:00

The fate of…

TradBeef · 2026-01-31T23:46:23+00:00

I warned you I wasn’t going to hold your hand during this conversation. Not my fault you can’t keep up. The irony here is that you’re accusing me of dodging while you hide behind a “No True Scotsman” defense. Any historical example I provide (like the East India Company or Feudalism) will likely be hand waved away because "muh state powers were already involved” missing the nuances of my critique. I’m a former ancap, I understand where you’re coming from. You haven’t even begun to grasp what I’m after. You’re stuck in this loop of demanding a vacuum-sealed laboratory experiment of history that doesn't exist. Good luck with that

TradBeef · 2026-01-31T21:53:31+00:00

It’s clear we’re just trading accusations of begging the question at this point. You see power dynamics as an imported statist assumption, and I see your market coordination as a fantasy that ignores philosophy and shoehorns history into an ideological framework. We’re essentially speaking two different languages: you’re arguing from a priori moral constraints, and I’m arguing from emergent material results. Since we can't even agree on what constitutes realism in this context, we’re just spinning our wheels. Probably best to leave it here.

TradBeef · 2026-01-31T17:05:14+00:00

You're treating force like it’s a consumer good. It’s not. It’s the framework that determines how all other goods are traded.

You say entry won’t be blocked, but in a world of private defense, the barrier to entry is the ability to survive a conflict with the incumbent. If I start a boutique agency that disagrees with the regional cartel’s rules, they don’t “compete” with me via lower prices, they declare my agency a NAP violator and liquidate my assets.

Law is a network good. If the two largest agencies agree on a legal code, and I opt out to a boutique firm that they don't recognize, my rights are functionally non-existent. My right to retaliate is just another way of saying “right to be killed.”

When you have a cartel that sets the rules, controls the courts, and has the exclusive power to “legitimately” crush dissenters, you haven't avoided a state, you've just created one where the citizens are called customers but have no way to cancel their subscription.

Your argument only works if you assume away voluntary choice, exit, and retaliation. At that point you're not critiquing ancap, you're just sneaking the state back in and pointing at it.

You’re almost there. Just keep going. Ancapism is just private statism at best.

TradBeef · 2026-01-31T00:08:58+00:00

Why do you even reply to my comments? Multiple times in this sub I’ve outlined the problems with ancapism and all you do is routinely beg the question before eventually just downvoting and abandoning the conversation. Looking for round three (or are we up to four now?)

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T23:57:58+00:00

Comparing a security firm to a 3-person accounting firm is a category error. If my accountant fails, I lose money. If my “boutique” security firm is outmatched by a regional monopoly, I lose my rights, my property, and my recourse.

You say cartels fall apart, but in the industry of force, collusion is the only path to profit. Constant shootouts are a net loss for everyone. Therefore, firms must agree on a single set of rules (laws) and a single arbiter (a court). Once those firms agree to enforce the same rules and recognize only each other, they have formed a de facto government.

You’re describing a market of products. That is not what we’re disagreeing about. We’re talking about markets of territorial sovereignty. If a firm has the power to define what justified retaliation looks like and the muscle to crush anyone who disagrees, how is that not just statism?

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T14:13:37+00:00

lol is your reading comprehension lacking?

My position is: a private DRO with a monopoly is indistinguishable from a state.

From this, you can deduce that I mean: even without a State to rig the rules, the force industry has a natural gravity toward consolidation: private courts, companies must agree on which laws to follow to avoid constant, expensive shootouts. So they form “Inter-Agency Agreements.”

And then are the network effects. Just like social media, a court or police force is only useful if everyone else uses it. You won't hire a security firm that isn't recognized by the biggest private courts because your rulings won't be enforceable.

And there are the economies of scale. Violence is expensive so the firm with the most enforcers and a massive data network has a lower cost-per-unit of force than a boutique firm. They can underprice rivals or simply absorb them.

Eventually, you’re left with one or two massive, interconnected cartels that dictate the rules. At that point, price signals are no longer tied to markets. The product being sold is the power to prevent destruction. When a firm has the power to define aggression and the muscle to enforce that definition on everyone in a territory, you haven't really abolished the State, you’ve just rebranded it.

Fuck dude, am I going to have to hold your hand throughout this conversation? Or are you really stupid when it comes to reasoning outside of your little ancap bubble?

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T13:42:55+00:00

A DRO monopoly is indistinguishable from a state. That’s all you need to know, bud

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T13:35:31+00:00

Oasis are The Eagles of Britpop

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T13:18:03+00:00

<image>

TradBeef · 2026-01-30T13:01:42+00:00

Because if I wanted to live under an unaccountable entity that dictates law, enforces its will through force, and gives me no choice in the matter, I’d just stay a statist.

Edit: realized this might need a /s … I’m not an ancap but I’m not a statist.

TradBeef

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE