Comments by "The french are harlequins" (@thefrenchareharlequins2743) on "Turns out, Anarcho-Capitalism ISN'T "Anarchy" (RE: LiquidZulu)" video.

  1. 1) Same person who "sets" the law of motion; law is in fact ascertained, and indeed one of these laws is that murder is illegal. 2) It is the supreme legal ideal, that is the subset of morality dealing with who gets to direct what scarce means, few ancaps will deny that there is any philosophy besides law 3) Yes, because it would not seem from the scenario given that they have contractual capacity. 4) Anyone who wants to. Anarchism is legitimised like any other system, public opinion be it active support or passive acceptance. 5) Well, the main justification is that reason is preferable to force, so when one deals with scarce goods, he should not impose his will anyone but rather convince them that it is indeed the correct thing to do. 6) I am not sure what is meant by this.
    1
  2. Oddly enough TIK, usually we ancaps consider governments as not inherently coercive whereas states are
    1
  3. No anarchist opposes hierarchy, unless I have been misdirected to believe that you want Usain Bolt disabled so as to get rid of the running hierarchy?
    1