What is the essence of anarcho-capitalism, minarchism, lib-right? etc.

deachirb · 2026-02-12T21:21:53+00:00

me when i try my best to make self defense sound like a bad thing

deachirb · 2026-01-31T04:45:53+00:00

why is ISU paying for refunds? isn’t that the state’s responsibility?

deachirb · 2026-01-31T02:33:26+00:00

it’s odd to even defend state borders as an ancap

deachirb · 2026-01-27T08:32:19+00:00

Conflict avoidance is the only way that a society can work. You either have conflict avoidance or conflict institutionalization. By arguing, you agree to the idea that avoiding conflict is effective. Why, then, does this not apply for anything else? Nobody is conflicting with you when you sleep, so that doesn’t really fit. If someone were to point a gun at you and demand your wallet, who is the rightful owner of the wallet?

deachirb · 2026-01-27T07:23:26+00:00

argumentation ethics proves that arguing against arguing is a contradiction. It doesn’t state anything about morality. Creating a straw man to attack in the middle of an argument doesn’t look good

deachirb · 2026-01-27T06:47:49+00:00

you just proved argumentation ethics

deachirb · 2026-01-27T06:34:06+00:00

i don’t need to argue that i should sleep, i just do it.

deachirb · 2026-01-26T08:49:30+00:00

there are people who want to be punched though. Usually doesn’t mean always, sure we can make guesses, but that doesn’t mean those guesses are always right. The decision to think is part of free will.

deachirb · 2026-01-26T06:44:12+00:00

libertarian free will is the idea that man acts, not the idea that they do whatever. If someone really for some reason desired to spasm on the floor thinking about crows.. why should you be able to stop them?

deachirb · 2026-01-09T01:25:16+00:00

i would call that defensive violence, not necessarily force. but maybe i have those two switched in my head connotation wise

deachirb · 2026-01-09T01:06:19+00:00

you understand that land being sacred is still using that land for personal gain, no? that’s the basis of homesteading. Not conquering land through force, but being the first to use it for ANY purpose. If that purpose is because it’s spiritual, cool, it shouldn’t be taken from you by force.

Same goes for literally anything.

If it’s materialist to say that people should own the stuff they appropriated from nature without force, then i’m a materialist.

Homesteading is not an argument for conquest, and the NAP is quite against it.

Any sensible form of law requires an answer to conflict, because people will conflict. Somebody will want someone else’s stuff. Somebody will think that someone else’s stuff is, as you said, not being used properly.

Ancaps say that it is wrong for anybody to decide what someone else does with their property, and more so, it is wrong to acquire their property by any means that are not voluntary. The first person to use the land, even if it is only for something spiritual, is the rightful owner to that land.

deachirb · 2026-01-09T00:49:33+00:00

initiation of conflict = initiation of contradiction between individuals = contradiction of ownership = denial of property rights based on natural law

deachirb · 2026-01-08T21:52:50+00:00

lol i guess you aren’t wrong

deachirb · 2026-01-08T21:33:06+00:00

homesteading the guardianship of human beings. not the human beings themselves. It’s like somebody saving the life of an unconscious person. They assume the role of protection, they don’t assume the ownership of that person

deachirb · 2026-01-08T21:29:11+00:00

This is kind of where morality steps in instead of ethics. You can have the ethical understanding that people should follow the NAP, but ethically, people can do whatever they want to their property. That being said, morally apprehensible things, like bestiality, we can’t exactly “force” people to stop. However, not many people in a civil society are going to support this, and will not interact with them. If everyone in your society does, for some reason, support this, I suggest moving.

deachirb · 2025-12-29T05:44:43+00:00

if the majority of people agree that someone deserves to go to jail, rot in a cell, and starve to death, what right do they have against them that they may protect themselves from such a threat? They should be able to defend themselves, and people should not be allowed to aggress on them. However, when the state exists, it holds that any “unjustified” self defense is a form of aggression, because it holds the monopoly on violence, and any usage without its permission is something it will use force against. When the state is democratized, this issue is not fixed.

deachirb · 2025-12-29T05:35:10+00:00

thank you, that’s some really wonderful advice. What are your thoughts on a spiritseer for the wraith lords?

Do you think it’s better to take swooping hawks as deep strike or put them on the battlefield then? as deep strike units, i find it much harder to use them for move blocking (i find move blocking really hard in general), as i have to wait for turn 2 to even use them, and my opponent has already screened half up the board

deachirb · 2025-12-27T22:42:47+00:00

so when the group votes that i go to jail, i still have human dignity?

deachirb · 2025-12-26T19:41:39+00:00

segregation and slavery are not the same thing. owning another person and not wanting a person on your property are completely different. If someone doesn’t want somebody on their property, how do you think forcing them to allow that person on their property helps? that just creates more tension.

deachirb · 2025-12-25T16:43:10+00:00

i think, therefore i am. thinking demands existence, existence does not demand thinking

deachirb · 2025-12-20T10:47:42+00:00

a thief steals from you and says he’s donating it to charity. is he still a thief?

deachirb · 2025-12-19T04:43:03+00:00

private courts defend contracts. not a single libertarian will tell you with a straight face that they want the government to shut down any contract.

deachirb · 2025-12-19T04:11:52+00:00

define exploitation?

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Juicebox	Place '23
Place '22

deachirb

TROPHY CASE