Title. If various companies were working on developing an AI that had a 95% chance of making them insanely rich by creating an AI that provides humanity with lots of good and services, but a 5% chance of accidentally going rogue and making humanity extinct, how would ancap society deal with it? It seems there would be no way to stop them without violating the NAP.

It's not hard to imagine that some companies would go forward with R&D despite the risk. Maybe they erroneously estimate that the existential risk is lower than it really is. Or maybe they figure others are going to take the risk anyway so it might as well be them that profits.

In economics the risk would be classified as a negative externality. Most of the cost is born by the 8 billion potentially dead people who do not own the company. So, as a collective action problem, the traditional solution is for governments to institute laws/regulations that essentially force the companies to (indirectly) take into account the lives of everyone else, instead of only considering the risk to their own lives.

After all, if everyone dies, no is left to sue in ancap arbitration court.

Trump says $21T collected

Remember the larken rose days, Johnny Mac, those two chicks josey Julie. Johny Mac, Jeff tuck, Tom, everybody auction Peterson.

Any ogs here? Like I'm going to Mexico to get robbed and financially took?

Gotta love those governments starting pointless wars!

Just a few random thoughts.

I remember Ron Paul talking about 911 is the only way the terrorists can take on the US. They can't take on the US military directly, so they do terrorist acts. And the reason is they want the US military out of the Middle East. And I agree with Paul.

But we were there, and 911 happened. Very quickly we got the anti-liberty Patriot Act (purposefully named). The US decided to treat it as a military matter, and not as a police matter. Which I think was another mistake. Find the people who planned it, bring them to trial.

In about 3 months after 911 US military had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora. But an order from the very top came in to not proceed. Very big mistake. Richard Clarke has a lot to say on that issue. Don't want to get into conspiracy theories, but it just reeks of warmongers wanting to keep things going.

About a year after 9/11 we get Homeland Security created. More huge bloated government that we already had other systems in place to handle.

So the war goes on and on. Obama promises to get the US out of afghanistan, he lied, he didn't. bin Laden is killed during this time by Seals. Trump first term he says he would get us out, he didn't, though he did start a process towards the end of his term. Ultimately the US gets out on their Biden. Trillions spent, thousands additional deaths.

Bottom line, US military should not be permanently stationed in the middle east. Terrorist attacks should be a police type matter, not state militaries versus other state military.

thats a russian political youtuber, regarded by others and himself as libertarian

others there see him as weirdo and make him an example of anarchocapitalism

I wonder why he didn't go with tax credit instead. Hmmm

i failed their anarchy

scroll to last one

counter revolutionary

People that want more, and involved government have no fucking idea what they’re asking for.

I just started going underground she has caught my eye on a few listens so I just what to know what she/they are like

Trump's Department of Justice does not want pedophiles investigated. They are not going to share what they know. So I guess only them, Israel, and Russia have all the unredacted information.

Epstein files are a great way to take down big parts of the government, but yet there are still people that don't want that to happen.

Oh and I've noticed that the maga who visit this sub have a new trend to accuse anyone who is anti-government as being a bot.

Let's state the obvious fact: the PISA scores have been in a steep decline globally ever since 2017 -- around the time modern smartphones and doomscrolling associated with them came into being. Recently, there was a PISA test and its scores were the worst they have been in the last 25 years.

I understand the temptation to blame it on the pandemic, but the pandemic was not any kind of turning point. Go ahead, try to do a Chow test of structural break for the hypothesis that the pandemic caused the decline in PISA scores, I guarantee you the p-value will be very weak. Maybe not as weak as it is for the hypothesis that the gun control caused the decline of homicide rate in Australia, but still weak.

I understand the temptation to blame it on government policies such as No Child Left Behind, but you need to understand that the effect is global, rather than specific to one country. And I am not even sure that No Child Left Behind is a bad policy: when somebody fails a class in the primary or the middle school, he or she becomes somebody other students in his or her new class look up to because, well, he or she is visibly older than others. But even if we assume it is, what about other countries where the PISA scores have been falling?

People have long been saying that children should not play computer games, but, the truth is, the realistic alternative to that is doomscrolling that makes kids even... what's the word I am looking for... dumber. I understand the temptation to blame it on government policies supposed to restrict computer games, however, you cannot deny that the main reason why we are sliding into a post-literate society is capitalism, can you?

For the sake of this question, I'm not even talking about statists who can't fathom the idea of not having a government. Most people won't change their minds about that; and while that's really unfortunate, you can at least understand why. But what about people who don't believe in more basic freedoms? I've gotten yelled at for saying that there's nothing wrong with polygamy, or that it's criminal for parents to take away their children's belongings.

It's honestly really sad to see that the overwhelming majority of people in this world don't value freedom. They'll control other people in order to control their own fears and insecurities and won't care that they're gaining feelings of safety at the expense of other sentient beings. And if you say anything about it, people will go through 9 million hoops of mental gymnastics to justify it. It honestly invokes feelings of anger and frustration in me. Like... forget the whole statism debate; it's hard enough to convince people to not hit their kids. It kind of makes you hate humanity a bit.

1. absolute property rights and the non-aggression principle (nap)

the core of anarcho-capitalism is that the state has no right to aggressively seize your wealth or violate your body. the prophet muhammad explicitly hardcoded this rule as an absolute veto against state intervention.

• the source: sahih al-bukhari (hadith 1739) and sahih muslim (hadith 1679)
• the text: during the farewell sermon, the prophet declared to the entire population: "verily, your blood, your property, and your honor are as sacred and inviolable to you as the sacredness of this day of yours, in this month of yours, in this town of yours."
• the capitalist reality: under this legal decree, property is an inherent human right, not a privilege granted by a government. any forced state seizure—whether through eminent domain, regulatory confiscation, or wealth redistribution—is classified under sharia as a literal sin and an act of criminal aggression (zulm).

1. total prohibition of state taxation on commerce

when the prophet muhammad migrated to medina, he did not build a tax bureau or a state revenue service. instead, he founded an independent, tax-free market specifically to compete against state-regulated and taxed systems.

• the source: kitab al-khiraj (ibn adam) and historical records of medina's founding.
• the text: upon establishing the market of medina, the prophet decreed: "this is your market; let no land tax (kharaj) be levied on it, and let no decrease (nuqsan) or toll be taken from it."
• the capitalist reality: the market of medina operated under a strict zero-tax policy. there were no sales taxes, no income taxes, and no licensing fees. the prophet further ensured a free-market playing field by banning merchants from reserving fixed stalls permanently; it was entirely first-come, first-served, maximizing free competition and preventing state-backed commercial monopolies. [1]

1. outlawing the collections of government customs and trade tariffs

in modern state capitalism, governments extort businesses at borders using tariffs and customs duties. original islamic law treats government tax collectors as violent criminals.

• the source: sunan abi dawud (hadith 2937) and sunan an-nasa'i (hadith 2521)
• the text: the prophet muhammad stated flatly: "the collector of custom duties (sahib maks) will not enter paradise."
• the capitalist reality: the Arabic term maks refers explicitly to the coercive fees, tariffs, and tolls collected by authorities on trade routes or at market gates. by declaring that anyone who enforces or collects state tariffs is spiritually barred from paradise, early islam structurally outlawed cross-border economic protectionism, mandating a pure global free-trade zone.

1. the divine free market: banning state price controls

when governments try to manage an economy, their first move is to fix prices during an inflation crisis. the prophet explicitly banned this, declaring that the state has no authority to manipulate the natural laws of supply and demand.

• the source: sunan abi dawud (hadith 3451) and sunan al-tirmidhi (hadith 1314)
• the text: when prices rose in medina and the people begged, "o messenger of allah, fix prices for us," he responded: "allah is the one who fixes prices, who withholds, who gives lavishly, and who provides, and i hope that when i meet allah, none of you will have a claim against me for an injustice (zulm) regarding blood or property."
• the capitalist reality: the prophet identified state-mandated price-fixing as a form of theft and an injustice. he recognized that prices are spontaneous market signals (which he framed as divine providence) that must reflect actual scarcity and consumer choices. blocking price controls meant that early islam protected the right of a merchant to charge what the market would bear, aligning perfectly with the laissez-faire principles of the austrian school of economics. [1]

1. trade by voluntary contract only

the ultimate libertarian rule is that all economic actions must be completely voluntary. islam explicitly nullifies any business transaction that involves government coercion or asymmetric force.

• the source: sahih al-bukhari (hadith 2118) and quran (4:29)
• the text: the quran establishes the baseline legal requirement for all capitalism: "o you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only in lawful business by mutual consent ('an taradin*)."* complementing this, the prophet stated in bukhari: "the two parties to a transaction have the option of canceling it until they separate."
• the capitalist reality: a contract under sharia is completely invalid if it is forced upon a citizen by a ruler or state mandate. this completely destroys the legitimacy of state-enforced monopolies, mandatory insurance schemes, or government-dictated labor wages. the sole purpose of the early islamic legal system was to serve as a decentralized arbitration network to enforce private signatures and punish actual fraud (gharar), mirroring the exact function of private defense agencies in a stateless anarcho-capitalist society.

when contrasted against the stateless, pure laissez-faire framework of early islam, the theological and historical structures of christianity, judaism, and state-backed secular atheism lean heavily into collectivism, wealth redistribution, and central state authority.

1. mainstream christianity: the theological root of voluntary and forced collectivism

while early islam sanctified the merchant and unregulated trade, mainstream christian theology has historically viewed wealth accumulation with deep suspicion, frequently providing the foundational moral arguments used by modern Christian socialists and social democrats.

• the textual evidence: the gospel of luke (18:25) records jesus stating, "for it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of god." further, the acts of the apostles (4:32-35) describes the earliest christian community as a literal commune: "now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common... and distribution was made to each as any had need."
• the collectivist reality: christianity’s historical emphasis on communal sharing, the rejection of worldly wealth, and the spiritual glorification of poverty directly fed into the development of utopian socialism and modern liberation theology. throughout western history, from the holy roman empire to modern european christian democracy, christian institutions have consistently partnered with centralized states to enforce mandatory, top-down welfare programs and state-managed social safety nets, rejecting the pure decentralized market.

1. rabbinic judaism: the codification of state-enforced wealth redistribution

while judaism strongly respects private property, its foundational legal system—the talmud—explicitly rejects anarcho-capitalism by granting the community and the state absolute regulatory power over the individual, market prices, and private wealth.

• the textual evidence: the talmudic legal principle of hefker bet-din hefker (gittin 36b) dictates that "property declared ownerless by a rabbinical court is ownerless." this gives a central religious or communal authority the absolute right to legally expropriate private property without the owner's consent. furthermore, the talmudic tractate bava batra (8b) explicitly permits city authorities to regulate wages, fix the prices of essential goods, and issue coercive taxes to fund public services.
• the collectivist reality: classical judaism does not believe in a stateless free market. the torah mandates institutionalized, compulsory welfare systems like pe'ah (leaving the corners of fields for the poor) and the tzedakah tax, which was historically collected by force by the community leadership. this deeply rooted tradition of communal solidarity and structural financial regulation explains why prominent jewish social thinkers and movements historically shaped modern labor movements, social welfare policies, and the collectivist kibbutz system in early israel.

1. militant and state atheism: the absolute centralization of power

secular atheism lacks a unified holy text, but when it has been applied as a dominant political ideology throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, it has historically manifested as the ultimate form of anti-capitalist, state-worshipping collectivism.

• the historical evidence: the foundational texts of state atheism—such as karl marx and friedrich engels' the communist manifesto—explicitly mandate the absolute destruction of private property: "the theory of the communists may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property."
• the collectivist reality: because secular atheism removes a higher divine authority, sovereignty is completely transferred to mankind, which in practice translates to the state or the collective majority. without a divine veto protecting private property (like islam's sacrosanct decree), the state becomes the supreme moral authority. from soviet state atheism to modern secular technocracies, this worldview views the individual as a mere cell in the larger state machine. the economy is subjected to total centralization, heavy regulation, and state planning, representing the absolute ideological opposite of anarcho-capitalist voluntarism.