You are a tax payer, a protection money payer, because the state mafia tells you, that you owe them protection money. That is everybody's debt, and this is the root of the so called economy. The selfsufficient communities are forbidden and destroyed by the church and state complicity. Without a community which is taking care for the seniors, you are dependent on your savings.


Yes. A (monogamous pairing-) family is not a community, and therefore not selfsufficient. (famulus = house slave)

Trading is not bad. The cause of trading is bad: DEBT. The first debt is debt ex nihilo: the tribute (census) to the state mafia; it is driven by organised violence of the Church and State. All of the following debts are derivatives of this first debt.

That's simple: No gods, no masters! Don't accept them, and Anarchism will return, which has been replaced by feudalist, capitalist and socialist collectivism within the last 10'000 years. I support Bitcoin as one of the tools which have the potential to destroy the economy.

Capitalism is not an idea. Capitalism is Debitism (Paul C. Martin). Or read the Anarchist, David Graeber: "Debt". The Barter Story is Science Fiction. Capitalism is not about Barter, it is about Debt.

Capitalism is a collectivist period within a cycle. It's ending now.

http://thevelvetrocket.com/2010/04/21/paintings-of-the-day-the-course-of-empire-by-thomas-cole/

Yes, that's the idea, that Bitcoin (cryptography) could replace trust and state power.


Yes, in theory. In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice - in practice there is.
Do you feel a deep sense of community in this forum? I don't.

The blood community is not an idea, it is the organisation, in which the homines sapientes lived until it was destroyed and replaced by hypercollectives under organised violence, around 10'000 years ago.

The fact, that collectivism beyond Dunbar's Number is dysfunctional, doesn't mean that you won't love and trust some strangers, foreigners and aliens.
The same is true with the patriarchal monogamous pairing families (constructed also around 10'000 years ago). Some of them are not dysfuntional. But a system, in which functionality is not the rule but the exception - is a system, which is dysfunctional.
Therefore, collectivism is dysfunctional, both the socialist and the capitalist expression.




Workless income for violent offenders (church and state).

The selfsufficient blood-community is a historic fact (hundredthousand and more years). The fraternal bonding within clubs, nationalists and other groups are a perverted replacement of that natural feeling of human being.

Because, when love (and trust, which only exists within blood communities)
is gone (with the destruction of the blood communities by organised violence)
it has to be replaced by something, which is justice (judiciary)
which is force (state protection for the 'protection money payers')


Communism is the only natural life style for the homines sapientes. But it doesn't work beyond Dunbar's Number. Nothings works beyond Dunbar's Number.

No, it can go one way only, but you don't know which one it will be.

+1

Gallup: Democrats even more dumb than Republicans:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163043/americans-disapprove-government-surveillance-programs.aspx

'LOL-answers' and 'name-calling-answers' are typical in communications within an anonymous hypercollectiv, as this and other threads show. There is not much natural respect towards members outside of your blood community. That's also the reason why you need organised violence to enforce someone to interact economically (capitalism) with foreigners, strangers and aliens.

'Cause when love is gone, there's always justice.
And when justive is gone, there's always force.
And when force is gone, there's always Mom. Hi Mom!

So hold me, Mom, in your long arms. So hold me,
Mom, in your long arms.
In your automatic arms. Your electronic arms.
In your arms.
So hold me, Mom, in your long arms.
Your petrochemical arms. Your military arms.
In your electronic arms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VIqA3i2zQw

LOL. Not a single one. Hundreds of examples of religious, paternalistic, collectivist(-ic) interactions of dependent 'protection money payers'. Zero self-sufficiency and independence.
Self-sufficiency and independence (freedom) is there, where you produce for yourself (blood-community), but not for the hypercollective.

Pre-patriarchal communities were matrilineal/anarchal. There is no such thing as a matriarchy.

5. It is important to understand (and draw conclusions) that Paleolithic communities were egalitarian; there was no hierarchy (which is translated as „holy reign“), no domination, no rulers, no chiefs and no warfare violence, as archeology revealed and social science explains. Therefore the Paleolithic division of labour according to gender, i.e. between the female gatherers and the male hunters of a given cooperative, was a collective division of labour and not individual: A woman was not gathering for „her husband“ , and a man was not hunting for „his wife“ as is frequently misunderstood. The collective of women is gathering nutrition for the whole cooperative; her work is public work, not privatized, not domesticated or domesticised Likewise the collective of males hunt for the cooperative as a whole which is composed of the female and the male collectives. „Food- sharing“.

http://gerhardbott.de/das-buch/summary-in-english.html

Because they don't know the history of Paternalism/Patriarchy/Society/Citizenship, which replaced matrilinear Anarchy. Mater semper certa est / pater semper incertus est; that's the reason why patriarchy/patrilinearity needs organised violence (church and state) to come in place.
They don't know about it, because the universities are brainwashing the brains with paternalistic BS. Rousseau seems to be the first and only Philosopher who knew the difference between society and community. Smith/Hobbes/Keynes/Lenin/the Austrians et al. didn't, and with them their readers. They don't realise, that these 'different' schools of economics represent the same: economics, which is always state based violence. Without this organised violence, a growing economy is absent. Neverthless: they call trees and animals (living creatures) as Capital. That's a joke, but a sordid one, which has its roots in christian collectivism: „subdue the Earth“ = destroy nature, torture the animals.

Glad to meet you there. The 'fight' against the collectivistic religion (Lenin, A. Smith, Th. Hobbes) must go on.

Hey ktttn, I see, nobody is able to answer your question, neither in that thread nor in this one.
Ancap is as utopian as communism has been. A nice Utopia, but never realised in reality, because the homines sapientes are neither communists nor capitalists beyond Dunbar's Number. Within Dunbar's Number, you are a member of a self-sufficient blood-community, nothing less and nothing more, because self-sufficiency means self-suffuciency; which is the opposite of the communist/capitalist dependency and paternalism (division of labor). Beyond Dunbar's Number, in the entire history the former homines sapientes have always been (transformed) suicidal warriors against the planet, against each other and against themselves: The Sixth Great Extinction (Pyrocene).

And if you are a capitalist collectivist (collectivist capitalist) at 60, you are somebody without any knowledge about history.

I know all these utopian and ahistorical arguments of the so called ancaps very well, and I found, that most of these enthusiasts are employees, not self-employed. They even don't realise, that they are enslaved. They are too busy to think, while the real homines sapientes in the non-business-doing communities in the rain forests are dancing and living. This enthusiasm with production, markets and trade within a worldwide hypercollective has its origin in the christian labor (slave-) ethos, and the ancaps are unfortunate victims of this collectivist religion which is destroying the planet with exponentially increasing speed. Collective, suicidal folly in perfection. The opposite of this collective, sucidal folly is represented by tribalism, where we find no growth and no expansion, either economically or territorially.

Uuhhh, out of time! Yes, you see the difference to the communities in the rainforests? They have plenty of time, because they are not busy!



We can discuss in German, or French, no problem!
Cheers, good luck and good business!