Against private property?

Private property can make others envious and cause them to seize power to grab the property for themselves, or just to ensure that the other no longer have it. So, the way to prevent that, is to abolish the state.

Private property is natural

Private property is natural
Because nature is a place to die from starvation/thirst/exposure. So if, by investing energy, a being manages to find food (energy), it will protect that energy from beings tyhat did not. Example:
The cheetah: runs incrediblyfast – spending lots of energy – to catch a prey, then drags that catch into a tree out of reach of hungry hyenas.
The squirrel: hides nuts for eating during hard cold times
Parental love: parents are protective of their own genes
Love: partners are protective of THEIR partner (maybe, because the partner may help reproduce the genes)
Bees sacrfice their lives to protect the nest (sometimes callled hive), not out of generosity, but out of parental love. The queen is the only fertile one in the nest, all the other bees are related (share the same genes). Dawkins wrote about this, from the perspective of biology – genes, inheritance
Of course, ancoms (in the FB group Pure Anarchist Philosophies) discredit anarcho-communism by spectacularly, deliberately, even violently not understanding this.

Definite proof against government

There’s the issue of the jurisprudence from the treaty of Versailles; the German people were punished for not having stopped the emperor ftom starting WW1 – a bad thing ™. This means that, for their own protection, the people have the right, nay: the duty to stop the government whenever it does anything bad. Now, given the incurable split among the population, this means that government is impossible, because one side will oust the government for not doing enough to e.g. reduce CO2. The other side will keep government from reducing this vital ingredient of life. The third side will rise up when the government launches another (unprovoked) war. And number four will be restless when there’s not enough beligerence against “our enemies” This means that stable government is impossible, but that’s politics’ own fault becausd without politucs, the world would not have been cleaved in two equal halves as is the case now.

Sallett joins 2 Stans: More proof politics is bad

The 2 Stans (Stanley Milgram’s obedience to authority and Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment) are now joined by Jerome Sallet (Oxford U), who posited in 2011 that social interactions have grown the cerebral cortexes in groups of animals. This was confirmed by Danish and British researchers, who examined humans. (Touching on the effect of social media).
Since politics is the systematic isolation of all the inhabitants of a country, by way of divide and conquer, at first by splitting them up into different groups, later drilling down to the individual level (imprisoning them for doing nothing objectively wrong, like selling not-stolen drugs).
Add to that the effect of social atrophy (atrophy of the social instinct), and one finds that Politicians are busy denying people the chance to grow bigger brains, which may lead to stimying intelligence.

Why I’m not concerned over Greta

#Greta #Thunberg is an underage Swedish girl, abused by climate-howler monkeys to try and get away unimpeded with their climate terrorism.
Some people are very upset about this, out of concern for that the maniacs may succeed in getting away with it.
Me, not so much. There is much to be disconcerted about them willing to sink this low to have their way, but their sacrificile of the interests of an innocent little girl to their petty pleasures, is merely the definition of left-wing.
And this brings me to why I do not consider it such a direct threat to my existence:
It’s not as if she will convince anyone who’s on the wall about the veracity of #AGW. Society has already been mercilessly split in two:

  1. The left, and
  2. People afraid of the left (the right).

It’s not as if the left believes a word of it; they only identify it as a means to have their way (their horrible, sadistic, cruel and fatal way). Examplified by #AOC’s Green Leap Backward.
Once again: if they actually believed CO2 was bad they would not worship Obama the way they do.
Al Gore, or Michael Mann, or James Hansen would have said a word about his deliberate attempt to cause #ClimateChange with hus 7 wars in 8 years. The Dutch left wing would halt their attempts to prolong/worsen traffic jams (not only on motorways, but also on secondary roads: stop lights)

How to cope with howler monkeys, in a durable manner?
Obviously, shooting left-wingers, though superficially tempting, is not my preferred approach because:

  • It is immoral (with every murdered human being, a part of the killer dies also)
  • It is not durable

What one can do best, is see to it, that they can not seize political power to have their way with us.
By removing political power in its entirety:
#anarchism: yay, #statelessness.

Gaols in Ancapistan

There won’t be any. Or rather, the only crime will be stuff like shoplifting. That will probably still happen, but the shopkeepers will cope with it.
By: taking the stolen stuff back – restitution instead of retribution.
Also, shopkeepers may tell you to not smoke on the premises. If you do, you may be removed/refused service. A state has no other means at its desposal but to steal money from you, or to lock you in a cage.
In Ancapistan there may still be cages, but that’s unlikely, since there are no victim-less crime-laws to lock people up over. The owner of road won’t be bothered if you smoke behind the wheel. Even though up until the present, it’s, not banned to smoke behind the wheel of your own car, it’s not inconceivable that such a law will be imposed in the future.
More real, current example: in Saudi Arabia, women aren’t allowed to drive cars. The government decided that, because of its religious convictions. In Ancapistan, the government will not exist but the road owner will. If a road owner happens to have the same convictions as the Saudi regime, he may forbid women to drive cars. This will not achieve much, since there will likely be other road-owners elsewhere, that will not feel the same way and allow the inferior gender to pilot cars to their heart’s content. So his attempt to keep woman-kind down will be ineffectual.

Ps, for the uninitiated: ancap means anarchocapitalist.