Prove it using logic. This was already answered in one of my sources so I still fail to understand why you underestimate something that has an affiliation with Anarchism. So many terrible prejudices...

I can't say I do embrace it. However, I think having no state intervention is better than having a lot of state intervention. I still think a minor amount of interaction from the state should exist, mainly to help people and not much else.

Moderator cut: image removed

This guy also argues political debates on the internets. You can see from his appearance the general IQ of such people.

Your "sources" are a pro-Anarcho-Capitalist info site and an informational Wikipedia article any Tom, **** or Harry can walk in or edit. Useful sources in such discussion are ones that provide an in-depth look at what it it is and what the pros AND cons are. Ergo, come back when you've trawled a library with a Dewey decimal index in hand looking for books that provide detailed information on the subject, along with information sources on alternate ideals. Furthermore, stop saying "have you read my sources" until a) you provide actual sources, and not a fluffy load of nonsense and b) you've actually properly read up on the subject yourself and have a good understanding of it and surrounding debate potentials.

Yeah you're way smarter than him. I believe that. Does he think he is some kind of comedian? He obviously has a low IQ too, look at his appearance!! This is so on topic also. I mean this picture IS online... I can't take anything serious. Thank you. I mean that's not nonsense.

That guy went to harvard you ****ing moron.

I don't understand why you obviously don't know how to debate. So far we have only had a few people actually state your opinion. You were not one of them seeing that all you did was criticize my sources, including wikipedia, (which is extremely elitist of you.)

Seriously, share your opinion or get the **** out of the thread. I want people who are willing to state the opinion and/or their argument. Both of those sources provide great books for you to read such as, The Machinery of Freedom, Man, Economy, and State, and The Economics and Ethics of Private Property.

While I am an anarcho-capitalist and support it I do see its faults and I will admit that this style isn't a perfect way to live. For one, it will be hard for justice to be served because there will not be anything that will truly have a monopoly on force.

So there you have it. Present an argument or GTFO.

Probably because wikipedia CAN be edited by everyone and isn't really considered a legit or credible source.

Well actually theres nothing pre-judged about it. We know what anarchy is. You can talk about the conceptual basis all you want, but at the end of the day its a lack of government.

That being said. Companies will eventually monopolize an industry. We know this because it has happened. Talk theory and statistics and the normal curve all you want. Thoery isn't reality, and the reality is, we've had and continue to have monopolies.

Tell me who interupts a monopoly if there is no government?

The people. You can willingly choose not to support a company. You can willingly start your own company. It doesn't seem that hard to comprehend really.

holy **** why didn't I think of that? In that case argument over.

We're talking about a companey thats attained such a level of power and money it can afford to drive out competitors by any means needed. Post WWII we have the oil companies bombing trolly car lines in Ohio. Walmart is constantly accused of destroying mom and pop stores.

And the people have the ability everytime. And they do nothing. Microsoft and Google are poised to rule the planet, and whos to stop them?

You underestimate the power of comfort.