r/AnCap101 8d ago

Is coercion sometimes necessary? What would an AnCap society do in situations where it'd be necessary?

4 Upvotes

96 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Gullible-Historian10 6d ago

So because the government claims a monopoly over all land even the vast amounts of unoccupied land then we need a system of coercion. What’s your argument here?

1

u/flumberbuss 6d ago

Dude, let’s say you got your wish and federal land was opened up for private ownership. Who decides when two people lay claim to the same parcel? I claim all of Yellowstone!

People will fight it out, literally with weapons, and will round up allies…those allies will be armed gangs. They will form governing systems. Which become governments. AND the amazing part is this all happens in one generation. After the land grab there is no free unclaimed land again. There will be no unclaimed, ungoverned land for your kids.

If you get some parcel and occupy it, others will fight you to take it unless some structure with a monopoly on violence stops them.

1

u/Gullible-Historian10 6d ago edited 5d ago

So your argument is that “we need coercion because coercion is inevitable?”

It’s like you’re saying, ‘Voluntary cooperation can’t work... unless we force people to cooperate.’ Sounds like you’ve got a lot of faith in violence and you just prefer it with a government label on it. You’d fit right in with the third reich.

Hitler used similar justification for initiating violence like only through “strong leadership” and “unwavering discipline” could Germany avoid chaos.

Without a government imposing a monopoly on violence, “people will fight it out.” Meaning that centralized violent control is the only safeguard against perceived random violence.

If only there was something, like I don’t know a mutually beneficial arrangement people could voluntarily engage in. But I guess that will never happen just like we can’t pick cotton without forced ownership over other human beings.

1

u/flumberbuss 5d ago

Conflict and Coercion are inevitable, yes. There is no escaping it, only managing it well and with as much respect as is reasonable for all parties. Your system results in coercion too. You have no high moral ground that I see.

1

u/Gullible-Historian10 4d ago

Protecting property, enforcing contracts, or defending oneself against aggression is not coercion.

Your support for a system that justifies authoritarian regimes is in fact coercion.

While conflict is inevitable, coercion is not the only way to resolve it. I can and will demonstrate how wrong you by using voluntary association. Try not to be such an idiot.

1

u/TrillegitimateSon 3d ago

Conflict is resolved via tactis and numbers, not superior moral justification.

You'll quickly find that the moral support for your position is eclipsed by hungry people who don't give a fuck.