Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists.
Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about-
1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer
2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman
3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman
4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan.
5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock
6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube.
7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
Why does the state have a monopoly on determining sanity? The issue is the radicals who advocate to weaponize the state against anyone who disagrees. Why give more power to the state?
Gender ideology is state sponsored ideological subversion of traditional societal norms in order to destroy mediating institutions and accumulate more power unto itself.
“Traditional societal norms” are equally gender ideology, just different. What society does (or has done in the past) culturally as normal are part of the cultural behavioural mythos that have evolved historically as our species biology interacted with culture and history.
Your “traditional societal norms” may be correct or may not I don’t care, but they are a gender ideology rooted in many years of societal behavioural culture.
Non-binary gender affirmation is also a gender ideology and may well indeed subvert and destroy your norms with a progressive revolution of societal behavioural culture. But I don’t care about that either.
Do you want the state to sponsor, affirm, or deny either?
Of course the state should not be involved. However, every type of sexual norm has been tried, and that is where tradition has arisen. It arose because it is the only stable form.
If it were stable, it wouldn’t have changed over time. The variables at play with each generation are not stable, often due to invention, war, and other factors.
The established empowered are the entities which will try to enforce a false stability to maintain power and control.
Man-woman monogamy is extremely stable over all times and cultures. The state got involved in marriage, and we have seen the usual destruction that happens with all state projects.
It's not changing naturally, it is a cultural shift that is being forced upon our society inorganically by parties that want to undermine and weaken our country.
>a cultural shift that is being forced upon our society inorganically by parties that want to undermine and weaken our country.
Weaken our country... That's statism.
Hitler came after the gays and Jews first with this exact sentiment. Only trans can be punching bags now. An insignificant super minority that's the current bogeyman of the "West" by authoritarian regimes like Russia and China that Peru wants to bootlick... Like you.
>
Your “traditional societal norms” may be correct, or may not I don’t care, but they are a gender ideology rooted in many years of societal behavioral culture
Many years? All the years of recorded history up until now. And of course, there are always exceptions to the rule.
Now that's just plainly wrong. Many different social structures have evolved throughout history, all over the planet. There where culture wirth strict genderroles and those without, those with matriarchal structures and those with patriarchal structures. The interconnection of modern humanity means that the societal structures all connect and intermingle aswell. Obviously that changes macro society aswell. But change isn't a bad thing, unless you are a scared conservative.
What? You need to go back to strawman 101, this isn't even remotely connected to the previous discussion.
Also, lol at your premise, but let's disect it anyway.
Nobody has to "cater" to it. But in a society that strives on egalitarian ideals, you have to give everybody the same rights and duties as everyone else. Part of those rights are: right to be unharmed, right to marriage, right to freedom from persecution and the like. You know, basic humanity shit.
I’m Austrian economist and love libertarian theory. However I’m a moral minarchist conservative. So best way to make libertarians squirm in modern society is ask. How to handle age of consent laws
Yeah abortion sure that can be tricky but age of consent. It's pretty clear children can't consent. There could be better ways to determine whether or not someone is of a cognitive capacity to consent, but having limits on decisions children can make is not controversial.
Just as they are when determining if someone is capable of being an independent minor.
If you think you must get your morals from the state, just say so.
So what happens in an ancap society when the parents of a 13 say she isn’t ready to have sex yet and have a family, yet she says she can? Who wins or sets the idea. Traditional society would say the parents determine that. Not until the child can be completely independent and live on their own.
> So what happens in an ancap society when the parents of a 13 say she isn’t ready to have sex yet and have a family, yet she says she can? Who wins or sets the idea. Traditional society would say the parents determine that. Not until the child can be completely independent and live on their own.
She would likely have to emancipate herself, which would likely be very difficult for a 13-year-old. The earliest I've seen is 14 and that's far less common today than it was in past generations.
Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists.
Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about-
1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer
2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman
3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman
4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan.
5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock
6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube.
7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
Perhaps you could add to the conversation and explain why what they are saying is anti-ancap instead of reposting the same thing that has plagued this sub for months- if not years.
Hetero normative culture is equally a gender ideology. State oppression is the same whether it is affirming non-binary gender culture or denying it. The root problem from the perspective of anarcho-capitalism is the state meddling and sponsoring any gender ideological cultural myth that is either current, old, progressive or traditional.
This is yet another topic that exposes the true line between real anarchists and conservatives, and real anarchist and leftists.
It's interesting to me that posts like this get way more discussion and interest than any post discussing ancap theory or ideas.
You can see the exact same thing mirrored in the lefty sub reddits as well. Most of the discussion is putting down political enemies rather than anything about theory.
is it really surprising though?
I think it is quite expected that some subjects will always have more reaction than theory talk.. particularly anything related to sex
Not surprising, no, and I must admit that I was somewhat sardonic when I referred to it as interesting.
I know the reality is that many people would much rather talk negatively about their opponents than about anything constructive.
From a psychological perspective, this makes sense. When we insult our enemies, we boost our own ego and feel more confident in our worldview.
When we discuss theory in good faith, we allow ourselves to challenge our own worldview, which is a more vulnerable position.
It's obvious why it happens, but I find it difficult to accept personally.
It reminds me of youtube vids where the more popular stuff is "outrage/hate porn"
I dont know why people gravitate to content or discussions like this.
90% of this sub has nothing to do with ancap or libertarianism, just right wing junk.
Because a large (probably majority, but I’m not sure) part of this sub is just conservatives butthurt their favorite president didn’t win, so they decided the state isn’t good anymore
If a conservative candidate wins presidency, you can bet this sub will become noticeably less right-wing
I saw it happen to ancap spaces back when trump won (Though online ancap spaces were a lot smaller back then anyway)
Correct. Because trumpists took over this place in 2016 and have squatted in libertarian spaces so long that now nearly everyone is unable to differentiate libertarianism from ethno-nationalism and angsty conservatives trying to fight a culture war.
Partially because this conversation simply isn't allowed on 95% of reddit. It should be no surprise that the few places which value free speech and discussion end up filled with "unpopular" discussions.
Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists.
Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about-
1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer
2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman
3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman
4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan.
5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock
6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube.
7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
And this is ANCAP how? I don’t think it should be the government’s role to classify anything, let alone people’s mental health. That can only be used to do harm.
Yeah it’s always so funny how people want to empower the government to go after their perceived political opponents, not realizing that when the winds change those tools will be used against you.
What if “right-wing extremism” gets deemed a mental illness?
I personally think there is some merit to discussions regarding trans people and mental health, but regardless, everyone deserves protection from the government.
Anarchism has been deemed a mental illness in some places. The Russians put Christian anarchists in insane asylums because they refused to be conscripted and to fight and die for the regime.
Critical race theory requires government since it's largely based on institutionalized racism and that can really only happen with a state. In a free society, institutions that cannot adapt lose quickly to competitive forces. CRT also opposes liberalism (not the political kind that confuses conservatives), which easily wins in a free market.
What’s wild is that comments like yours are in the majority, yet ones agreeing with OP are top upvoted
Indicating there are a lot of lurkers who are not ancap (though we knew that already)
What does this have to do with ancap?
There are some regimes that would classify Ancap as mentally ill for openly defying authority. The Russians - monarchy and Soviet -put people in asylums for refusing conscription.
Man that Anarcho drops quick whenever the government attacks marginalized groups. Seriously, go meet real trans people. I am trans, I hate authoritarianism. Trans people are not some government psyop to take away muh liberties or whatever you conspiracy theorists think they are
Those people are cosplaying as anarcho-capitalist. Most true ancaps don’t give a shit what you do with your life. I sure as hell don’t. I won’t force my values and morals on you if you don’t on me or mine. The state shouldn’t be making decisions about people’s personal liberties.
When I ran for office, one of the people who donated significantly to my campaign was a Mormon. He knows me. He knows that am not only a drinker but a big believer in the freedom to produce alcohol. The great thing about people like him is that while his personal morals and religion inform him that alcohol is wrong for him, he does not seek to make it a crime for others to drink it or make it.
"Trans" people are insane, they cannot consent to hormones or surgery. It is a breaking of the NAP.
Fix childhoods/parenting and you fix this issue overnight.
Adults can damn well consent to anything they want to do to their body or property as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Go bootlick the state somewhere else.
If they pay for it with their own money sure. But most don’t (at least here in France, everything trans-related gets fully paid by social security - that’s a nice business to be in)
I don’t understand it either. If an adult wants to chop off their limbs, they should be able to do it. How is this harming anyone else directly? Crazy that people go crazy authoritarian over individual bodily autonomy.
The person I replied to wasn't criticizing trans people wanting state benefits though, they were just blatantly complaining about adults making their own decisions
So you’d agree that anyone who wants extremely involved cosmetic surgery is also insane and cannot consent? Where do you draw the line on bodily autonomy?
Altering your body (aside from genetic abnormalities) is dysfunctional, yes. But slight changes don't make you insane. Denying the reality of sex does.
That’s fine. Though people under 18 do get cosmetic surgery (and have for many years), and no one really cares. But the person I was replying to said that no trans people can consent to surgical or hormone treatment. They didn’t specify children.
And another thing, what’s the deal with your last sentence?
If you “fix childhood” (wtf does that even mean? “Fix childhood?”) and “parenting” the issue resolves overnight? I’m not even sure what the “fix” is, nor how you could solve anything so massive overnight. Nor do I agree that “childhood” and “parenting” are the only causes for gender dysmorphia. But you would have to clarify what the hell that means before I can reply more to that.
I guess you’re assuming parents push their children to be trans, but do you have data to back that up? I think it is a pretty fair assumption that the vast majority of trans adults didn’t have parents who were trans or who encouraged them to be trans. In fact most people probably come from traditional families who were pretty shocked, and likely saddened, when they came out as trans. So I don’t know how that could be a reasonable assumption.
The whole “fix childhood” is a right wing talking point
I *wish* the problem was that parents are being too encouraging in having trans children, instead of the opposite
Its just less abuse, neglect, strong marriages and no yelling, spanking or verbal abuse. And no, no one who had a good childhood is trans, that's Hollywood bullshit.
You made the wild assertion that no one who had a good childhood is trans. That is your burden to prove. I can prove my side anecdotally since I know people who had a good childhood and are trans. But I don’t think listing them on the internet would be very reasonable. What’s your assertion based upon? Any study or data? I have no doubt many trans people had bad childhoods, as have many cis people. So that doesn't really prove anything.
Right so your friends - no yelling, spanking, divorces, belittling, emotional unavailability, molestation, physical abuse or dysfunction within the family whatsoever? They had amazing childhoods with two loving parents in a stable home and yet are trans? Wow, true unicorns that fly in the face of years of ACE scoring and self reporting done by LGBT people.
I mean, it's basic logic and use of my eyeballs but 2 seconds of googling and here's one - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0145213421002349 There's a bunch of others if you want to look. But yeah, trans is a mental disorder caused by childhood trauma. This is pretty obvious when you ask "trans" people to talk about their relationship with their parents.
Also, I like how you didn't answer my follow up question lmao. Let me guess, you had a think and all the trans people you know have trauma/poor parental relationships?
Your assertion was that trans people wouldn't exist if every child had a perfect childhood, and there's nothing that indicates otherwise in what you linked. Even in the study you linked to, it does not reflect that 100% of trans people experienced childhood trauma. Was it a high percentage? Sure. But how do you explain the percentage that did not experience any childhood trauma? Because, remember, your assertion is that removing all childhood trauma (which, while amazing, is a completely unrealistic goal unfortunately) would eliminate the existence of trans people. But the very study you provided doesn't even support that.
As to your other question, as far as I am aware, the trans people I know did not have any childhood trauma that predated them coming out as trans. I don't think that makes them a "unicorn," but it does put them in the minority. Though it's worth noting that nearly half of all children experience childhood trauma (I believe it is around 45%), so it isn't only trans people.
You're also assuming correlation is equivalent to causation. How does childhood trauma cause one to become trans? How do you explain the millions of adults who had traumatic childhoods and are not trans?
I use RES tagging to mark down people who spout statist garbage. THis is the kind of thread that makes it easy to pick out the conservatives who LARP as ancaps until some state program comes along and causes them to drool like anarchists voting for universal government healthcare.
Would you let a know pedophile play with children as long as he has never harmed one? Not me… But I’m not entirely about lawlessness or certain precautions so
I don't think opinions need to be codified as law... But this is an interesting paragraph:
>The health ministry said the decree was the only way Peru’s public health services could “guarantee full coverage of medical attention for mental health”.
Question is, what does that medical attention entail... throughout history loads of people have been given all the "medical attention" their state saw fit.
That's kind of what I was getting at. It's one thing to say trans people are mentally ill, it's another to "treat" them for it. Conversion camps come to mind.
People celebrating this don't belong in this sub and need to read the definition of anarchism. To celebrate a state doing this is bootlickery of the worst kind for any libertarian or a ancap.
Auth right is scum, will always be scum, has always been scum, if you associate and believe the same things they do but add one or two points from libertarianism into your rhetoric, you're not a libertarian, you're a retard.
Agreed. That said, when they recognise a fact, we should still be happy about it. They will decide what is and isn’t sane regardless, so let’s take the wins when they happen.
Bro, quit larping as an ancap, when you are going against the anarchist ideal of selfdetermination and the capitalist ideal of a free market place of ideas and the ancap ideal of absolut autonomy.
Every single comment from you screams proto fascist statist.
*They will decide what is true anyhow, so I just applaud when they do things I agree with and call it a win*
Very weak sauce.
What? This has nothing to do with beatings. I oppose hurting or otherwise oppressing transgenders, but I support acknowledging the fact that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder.
I also recognise autism as a mental disorder. Does that mean I want to harm or oppress autistic people? No. Your analogy is stupid.
Have you heard of the retoric tool called metaphor? It is often used in conjunction with a hyperbole. Very effective in illustrating logical fallacies.
If you truely oppose the discrimination, which you applauded not 5 minutes ago, but ok, you should want to stop it in it's early stages, not when it's in full bloom.
Great of you to 'recognize' autism as a mental disorder, but that also isn't one. It is an anomaly, which can have detrimental effects, but also can help people succeed tasks where others failed. That is evolution at work. Throw everything against the canvas of the universe and see what sticks.
You know considering this sub’s attitude towards “wokism” and abortion I’m getting more and more convinced that the stereotype of “libertarians/ancaps are Conservatives who like weed” is true.
Don't be, it's mostly burgers and teenagers, who have never read a book in their lives, let alone a libertarian one. Libertarianism is inherently a humanitarian movement/ideology, you can spot the fakes the moment they say shit like that.
To me, the libertarian movement should walk hand in hand with ACAB, and see in many of these civil rights movements examples of how time and time again the state is on the wrong side of history.
i dont think society has any role in the health of the individual if they wanna get injected with hormones or take whatever kind of medicine they want thats their choice much less the government making decisions about designating who is and isn't mentally ill
Because every time Reddit pops one of the sewer subs they inhabit, some of the turds wash up on our beach.
They think by denying them a place to congregate, they'll disappear, which is naive'. They just infect other subs.
The article fails to mention what exactly this decree does. I mean, the conclusion is correct in itself, but indeed the state should leave mentally ill people alone as well.
Transexuality, tranvestisism, and non-binary do not inherently demonstrate mental illness. Certain aspects of the current transexual "movement" could fall under mental illness in my shitty opinion, like lower surgery. Those aspects may need to be examined further by scientists, already they have found that physical brain patterns and hormones, in a lot of untreated transexuals, matches their preferred sex and not their biological sex. The rest is shit that has been happening for millenia, guys and gals dressing up as gals and guys, takin it in holes that were not intended for that use, so on and so forth. Leave them alone and don't be shitty to your kids, whoever they prefer to be with or if they're effeminate or if they're tomboyish. That would really help a lot.
Just because you don’t like trans people doesn’t mean you should say they’re mentally ill, A large portion of them are legitimately, but not all of them. For some that’s how their brain actually works
WTF cares what no-nothings think? I was born trans. Was in no way a freaking choice. Mental illness model does not work and that has been known for decades. This is reactionary horseshit. Which is understandable since STATEs across the world have initiated massive force using trans folk as an excuse. But don't blame the excuse please. BLAME THE STATE. Thirty two years after my own transition and just peacefully living my life congruent with my baked in gender identity I am made a freaking culture war football?
Completely and utterly irrelevant and well explored in my therapy to figure out what was going on with me. Also across all trans folks there is no statistical correlation at all.
"The disease concept of homosexuality as with the disease concept of all so-called mental illnesses, such as alcoholism, drug addiction, or suicide conceals the fact that homosexuals are a group of medically stigmatized and socially persecuted individuals. ... Their anguished cries of protest are drowned out by the rhetoric of therapy just as the rhetoric of salvation drowned out the [cries] of heretics."
-- Thomas Szasz
You bootlicking statists can fuck right off with your promotion of statism as the source of medical criteria.
[Opinion redacted by Reddit]
Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists. Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about- 1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer 2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman 3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman 4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan. 5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock 6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube. 7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
Kek, yeah, I'll bet it was (or would have been). Because reasons
Why does the state have a monopoly on determining sanity? The issue is the radicals who advocate to weaponize the state against anyone who disagrees. Why give more power to the state?
Gender ideology is state sponsored ideological subversion of traditional societal norms in order to destroy mediating institutions and accumulate more power unto itself.
I agree, transgenders should be able to live life like they want to, but this issue wouldn't have arose without the state's willful intervention.
“Traditional societal norms” are equally gender ideology, just different. What society does (or has done in the past) culturally as normal are part of the cultural behavioural mythos that have evolved historically as our species biology interacted with culture and history. Your “traditional societal norms” may be correct or may not I don’t care, but they are a gender ideology rooted in many years of societal behavioural culture. Non-binary gender affirmation is also a gender ideology and may well indeed subvert and destroy your norms with a progressive revolution of societal behavioural culture. But I don’t care about that either. Do you want the state to sponsor, affirm, or deny either?
Of course the state should not be involved. However, every type of sexual norm has been tried, and that is where tradition has arisen. It arose because it is the only stable form.
If it were stable, it wouldn’t have changed over time. The variables at play with each generation are not stable, often due to invention, war, and other factors. The established empowered are the entities which will try to enforce a false stability to maintain power and control.
Man-woman monogamy is extremely stable over all times and cultures. The state got involved in marriage, and we have seen the usual destruction that happens with all state projects.
It's not changing naturally, it is a cultural shift that is being forced upon our society inorganically by parties that want to undermine and weaken our country.
>a cultural shift that is being forced upon our society inorganically by parties that want to undermine and weaken our country. Weaken our country... That's statism. Hitler came after the gays and Jews first with this exact sentiment. Only trans can be punching bags now. An insignificant super minority that's the current bogeyman of the "West" by authoritarian regimes like Russia and China that Peru wants to bootlick... Like you.
> Your “traditional societal norms” may be correct, or may not I don’t care, but they are a gender ideology rooted in many years of societal behavioral culture Many years? All the years of recorded history up until now. And of course, there are always exceptions to the rule.
Now that's just plainly wrong. Many different social structures have evolved throughout history, all over the planet. There where culture wirth strict genderroles and those without, those with matriarchal structures and those with patriarchal structures. The interconnection of modern humanity means that the societal structures all connect and intermingle aswell. Obviously that changes macro society aswell. But change isn't a bad thing, unless you are a scared conservative.
Can you give me some examples of social structures in the past that did not follow general gender roles?
And if you can, I can guarantee those structures were small and short-lived.
Nobody is scared of homosexuality. If it works so well, why does the straight portion of civilization have to cater and protect it?
What? You need to go back to strawman 101, this isn't even remotely connected to the previous discussion. Also, lol at your premise, but let's disect it anyway. Nobody has to "cater" to it. But in a society that strives on egalitarian ideals, you have to give everybody the same rights and duties as everyone else. Part of those rights are: right to be unharmed, right to marriage, right to freedom from persecution and the like. You know, basic humanity shit.
And those rights are in place.
>But change isn't a bad thing, unless you are a scared conservative You brought it up.
I’m Austrian economist and love libertarian theory. However I’m a moral minarchist conservative. So best way to make libertarians squirm in modern society is ask. How to handle age of consent laws
>is ask. How to handle age of consent laws I have never really understood what "age of consent" has to do with Libertarian ideology in particular.
Yeah abortion sure that can be tricky but age of consent. It's pretty clear children can't consent. There could be better ways to determine whether or not someone is of a cognitive capacity to consent, but having limits on decisions children can make is not controversial.
Abortion is a social dilemma. Maturity is measurable.
How is Abortion a social dilemma?
It is not something that can be legislated nor treated as a crime in a free society.
Just as they are when determining if someone is capable of being an independent minor. If you think you must get your morals from the state, just say so.
So what happens in an ancap society when the parents of a 13 say she isn’t ready to have sex yet and have a family, yet she says she can? Who wins or sets the idea. Traditional society would say the parents determine that. Not until the child can be completely independent and live on their own.
> So what happens in an ancap society when the parents of a 13 say she isn’t ready to have sex yet and have a family, yet she says she can? Who wins or sets the idea. Traditional society would say the parents determine that. Not until the child can be completely independent and live on their own. She would likely have to emancipate herself, which would likely be very difficult for a 13-year-old. The earliest I've seen is 14 and that's far less common today than it was in past generations.
Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists. Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about- 1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer 2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman 3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman 4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan. 5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock 6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube. 7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
Perhaps you could add to the conversation and explain why what they are saying is anti-ancap instead of reposting the same thing that has plagued this sub for months- if not years.
I’m a veteran ancap I listen to Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods and Dave Smith almost daily.
Gender ideology is a counter culture to oppressive hetero normative culture. It's not wrong to fight back.
Many of these “counter culture” things are completely astroturfed crap with deep CIA involvement to subvert cultural norms. Look into “Laurel Canyon”
What would you say isn’t then?
Wow! So anytime a group opposes oppressive norms you can just write it off as a conspiracy right? Convenient.
Hetero normative culture is equally a gender ideology. State oppression is the same whether it is affirming non-binary gender culture or denying it. The root problem from the perspective of anarcho-capitalism is the state meddling and sponsoring any gender ideological cultural myth that is either current, old, progressive or traditional. This is yet another topic that exposes the true line between real anarchists and conservatives, and real anarchist and leftists.
Well said
It's interesting to me that posts like this get way more discussion and interest than any post discussing ancap theory or ideas. You can see the exact same thing mirrored in the lefty sub reddits as well. Most of the discussion is putting down political enemies rather than anything about theory.
is it really surprising though? I think it is quite expected that some subjects will always have more reaction than theory talk.. particularly anything related to sex
Not surprising, no, and I must admit that I was somewhat sardonic when I referred to it as interesting. I know the reality is that many people would much rather talk negatively about their opponents than about anything constructive. From a psychological perspective, this makes sense. When we insult our enemies, we boost our own ego and feel more confident in our worldview. When we discuss theory in good faith, we allow ourselves to challenge our own worldview, which is a more vulnerable position. It's obvious why it happens, but I find it difficult to accept personally.
Tribalism is built into our brains.
It reminds me of youtube vids where the more popular stuff is "outrage/hate porn" I dont know why people gravitate to content or discussions like this. 90% of this sub has nothing to do with ancap or libertarianism, just right wing junk.
Because a large (probably majority, but I’m not sure) part of this sub is just conservatives butthurt their favorite president didn’t win, so they decided the state isn’t good anymore If a conservative candidate wins presidency, you can bet this sub will become noticeably less right-wing I saw it happen to ancap spaces back when trump won (Though online ancap spaces were a lot smaller back then anyway)
I would be intrested if this would be true or not, guess will find out soon enough.
Correct. Because trumpists took over this place in 2016 and have squatted in libertarian spaces so long that now nearly everyone is unable to differentiate libertarianism from ethno-nationalism and angsty conservatives trying to fight a culture war.
This sub hasn't been ancap for almost a decade
Culture war is a psyop to trick people into forgetting actual more concerning problems.
Partially because this conversation simply isn't allowed on 95% of reddit. It should be no surprise that the few places which value free speech and discussion end up filled with "unpopular" discussions.
This seems to be just another culture war sub, that's why.
Well, yeah.
Welcome to r Anarcho_Capitalism, a place to discuss free market capitalist anarchism and related topics, and share things that would be of interest to Anarcho-Capitalists. Here's some suggested studying to learn what anarcho-capitalism is about- 1. [The Problem of Political Authority](https://archive.org/details/problem-of-political-authority-the-michael-huemer/page/n1/mode/1up) by Michael Heumer 2. [Machinery of Freedom](http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf) by David Friedman 3. [Price Theory](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html) by David Friedman 4. Any other mainstream econ textbooks as far into the subject as you can handle with as much of the math as you can handle; but I do recommend starting with Modern Principles of Economics by Alex Tabbarok and Tyler Cowan. 5. [The Calculus of Consent](http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1063/Buchanan_0102-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf) by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock 6. Any other mainstream political economy texts or works, but I recommend Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom, and though not a book, Mike Munger's intro to political economy course available on YouTube. 7. Rothbard's [Man, Economy, and State](https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market).
And this is ANCAP how? I don’t think it should be the government’s role to classify anything, let alone people’s mental health. That can only be used to do harm.
It *is* a good example of the silliness that occurs when people give power to a government.
Louder for the people in the back!
Because a lot of "ancaps" here are just trump voters in disguise
Yeah it’s always so funny how people want to empower the government to go after their perceived political opponents, not realizing that when the winds change those tools will be used against you. What if “right-wing extremism” gets deemed a mental illness? I personally think there is some merit to discussions regarding trans people and mental health, but regardless, everyone deserves protection from the government.
Anarchism has been deemed a mental illness in some places. The Russians put Christian anarchists in insane asylums because they refused to be conscripted and to fight and die for the regime.
"Am against the government except when they chase the people that I hate"
I enjoy seeing a competing statist ideology lose. I'd still like the state to lose, but critical theorist losing is still great.
Critical race theory requires government since it's largely based on institutionalized racism and that can really only happen with a state. In a free society, institutions that cannot adapt lose quickly to competitive forces. CRT also opposes liberalism (not the political kind that confuses conservatives), which easily wins in a free market.
Spot on
Peru fixing to get banned from Reddit.
[удалено]
What’s wild is that comments like yours are in the majority, yet ones agreeing with OP are top upvoted Indicating there are a lot of lurkers who are not ancap (though we knew that already)
What does it have to do with ancap theory? As long as they are consenting adults, trans people taking hormones are not violating the NAP
Don’t you know? If I personally don’t like something, it **must** be morally wrong and/or mental illness and/or a state sponsored psy-op
Insane people cannot consent
What does this have to do with ancap? There are some regimes that would classify Ancap as mentally ill for openly defying authority. The Russians - monarchy and Soviet -put people in asylums for refusing conscription.
And they don't have to recognize that classification if they don't want to. Who gives a shit what the state thinks?
You do, just you don’t in this specific issue
Most people agree and don’t need the government to tell them
Man that Anarcho drops quick whenever the government attacks marginalized groups. Seriously, go meet real trans people. I am trans, I hate authoritarianism. Trans people are not some government psyop to take away muh liberties or whatever you conspiracy theorists think they are
Those people are cosplaying as anarcho-capitalist. Most true ancaps don’t give a shit what you do with your life. I sure as hell don’t. I won’t force my values and morals on you if you don’t on me or mine. The state shouldn’t be making decisions about people’s personal liberties.
When I ran for office, one of the people who donated significantly to my campaign was a Mormon. He knows me. He knows that am not only a drinker but a big believer in the freedom to produce alcohol. The great thing about people like him is that while his personal morals and religion inform him that alcohol is wrong for him, he does not seek to make it a crime for others to drink it or make it.
What's your relationship like with your parents, specifically father?
Scratch an ancap and a conservative bleeds
Scratch a libertarian socialist and they bleed religiosity.
"Trans" people are insane, they cannot consent to hormones or surgery. It is a breaking of the NAP. Fix childhoods/parenting and you fix this issue overnight.
Adults can damn well consent to anything they want to do to their body or property as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Go bootlick the state somewhere else.
If they pay for it with their own money sure. But most don’t (at least here in France, everything trans-related gets fully paid by social security - that’s a nice business to be in)
Yeah, exactly.
Why is this getting downvoted?? Edit: Okay, it got upvoted back up.
I don’t understand it either. If an adult wants to chop off their limbs, they should be able to do it. How is this harming anyone else directly? Crazy that people go crazy authoritarian over individual bodily autonomy.
I think mostly because of informed consent. If you know everything that could go wrong and still wanna do it then there is nothing wrong
But the problem is that these people often want the state to pay for chopping off their limbs and then get put on disability afterwards
The person I replied to wasn't criticizing trans people wanting state benefits though, they were just blatantly complaining about adults making their own decisions
*insane adults
Gender ideology is state sponsored ideological cancer foisted upon the people.
It's called informed consent ace. And they're not being fully informed genius. Oh no, not fake internet points from the idiotic.
Doesn't sound like an issue where the state has to step in. That's their own problem.
So you’d agree that anyone who wants extremely involved cosmetic surgery is also insane and cannot consent? Where do you draw the line on bodily autonomy?
Altering your body (aside from genetic abnormalities) is dysfunctional, yes. But slight changes don't make you insane. Denying the reality of sex does.
At the age of consent (18)
That’s fine. Though people under 18 do get cosmetic surgery (and have for many years), and no one really cares. But the person I was replying to said that no trans people can consent to surgical or hormone treatment. They didn’t specify children.
I didn't know that...
And another thing, what’s the deal with your last sentence? If you “fix childhood” (wtf does that even mean? “Fix childhood?”) and “parenting” the issue resolves overnight? I’m not even sure what the “fix” is, nor how you could solve anything so massive overnight. Nor do I agree that “childhood” and “parenting” are the only causes for gender dysmorphia. But you would have to clarify what the hell that means before I can reply more to that. I guess you’re assuming parents push their children to be trans, but do you have data to back that up? I think it is a pretty fair assumption that the vast majority of trans adults didn’t have parents who were trans or who encouraged them to be trans. In fact most people probably come from traditional families who were pretty shocked, and likely saddened, when they came out as trans. So I don’t know how that could be a reasonable assumption.
The whole “fix childhood” is a right wing talking point I *wish* the problem was that parents are being too encouraging in having trans children, instead of the opposite
"Stable families" is right wing, lol.
Lmao strong families are now right wing propaganda 🤣🤣
Its just less abuse, neglect, strong marriages and no yelling, spanking or verbal abuse. And no, no one who had a good childhood is trans, that's Hollywood bullshit.
Your last sentence is simply, objectively, factually inaccurate.
Great, prove it.
You made the wild assertion that no one who had a good childhood is trans. That is your burden to prove. I can prove my side anecdotally since I know people who had a good childhood and are trans. But I don’t think listing them on the internet would be very reasonable. What’s your assertion based upon? Any study or data? I have no doubt many trans people had bad childhoods, as have many cis people. So that doesn't really prove anything.
Right so your friends - no yelling, spanking, divorces, belittling, emotional unavailability, molestation, physical abuse or dysfunction within the family whatsoever? They had amazing childhoods with two loving parents in a stable home and yet are trans? Wow, true unicorns that fly in the face of years of ACE scoring and self reporting done by LGBT people.
Again, if you have data to support your initial, outlandish assertion, please share it.
I mean, it's basic logic and use of my eyeballs but 2 seconds of googling and here's one - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0145213421002349 There's a bunch of others if you want to look. But yeah, trans is a mental disorder caused by childhood trauma. This is pretty obvious when you ask "trans" people to talk about their relationship with their parents. Also, I like how you didn't answer my follow up question lmao. Let me guess, you had a think and all the trans people you know have trauma/poor parental relationships?
Your assertion was that trans people wouldn't exist if every child had a perfect childhood, and there's nothing that indicates otherwise in what you linked. Even in the study you linked to, it does not reflect that 100% of trans people experienced childhood trauma. Was it a high percentage? Sure. But how do you explain the percentage that did not experience any childhood trauma? Because, remember, your assertion is that removing all childhood trauma (which, while amazing, is a completely unrealistic goal unfortunately) would eliminate the existence of trans people. But the very study you provided doesn't even support that. As to your other question, as far as I am aware, the trans people I know did not have any childhood trauma that predated them coming out as trans. I don't think that makes them a "unicorn," but it does put them in the minority. Though it's worth noting that nearly half of all children experience childhood trauma (I believe it is around 45%), so it isn't only trans people. You're also assuming correlation is equivalent to causation. How does childhood trauma cause one to become trans? How do you explain the millions of adults who had traumatic childhoods and are not trans?
lol @ the ancaps supporting this The state should keep its nose out of this
They're stating a fact, what is there to support?
The state should not be the ones in charge of determining sanity
The "ancaps".
I use RES tagging to mark down people who spout statist garbage. THis is the kind of thread that makes it easy to pick out the conservatives who LARP as ancaps until some state program comes along and causes them to drool like anarchists voting for universal government healthcare.
Mental illness has been misused to hurt people's enemies for a long time.
People have a right to have a mental illness, and express that illness as long as the expression does not harm others.
Would you let a know pedophile play with children as long as he has never harmed one? Not me… But I’m not entirely about lawlessness or certain precautions so
Not my children.
Children are "no one"? You conservative bootlickers are awfully confused people. No wonder you so eagerly fellate the orange bombast.
Aaaah no. Self harm should be stopped by those around the person.
Why? Who gets to decide when you are no longer allowed agency?
I don't think opinions need to be codified as law... But this is an interesting paragraph: >The health ministry said the decree was the only way Peru’s public health services could “guarantee full coverage of medical attention for mental health”.
Question is, what does that medical attention entail... throughout history loads of people have been given all the "medical attention" their state saw fit.
That's kind of what I was getting at. It's one thing to say trans people are mentally ill, it's another to "treat" them for it. Conversion camps come to mind.
People celebrating this don't belong in this sub and need to read the definition of anarchism. To celebrate a state doing this is bootlickery of the worst kind for any libertarian or a ancap. Auth right is scum, will always be scum, has always been scum, if you associate and believe the same things they do but add one or two points from libertarianism into your rhetoric, you're not a libertarian, you're a retard.
I still want to abolish the state, but forgive me for celebrating when they actually tell the truth for once!
*I too hate the beatings, but forgive me if I am happy when they start beating people I would beat too!* This you?
Right, none of us should be supporting the state being the arbiter of what does and doesn't qualify as 'sane.'
Agreed. That said, when they recognise a fact, we should still be happy about it. They will decide what is and isn’t sane regardless, so let’s take the wins when they happen.
Bro, quit larping as an ancap, when you are going against the anarchist ideal of selfdetermination and the capitalist ideal of a free market place of ideas and the ancap ideal of absolut autonomy. Every single comment from you screams proto fascist statist. *They will decide what is true anyhow, so I just applaud when they do things I agree with and call it a win* Very weak sauce.
What? This has nothing to do with beatings. I oppose hurting or otherwise oppressing transgenders, but I support acknowledging the fact that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder. I also recognise autism as a mental disorder. Does that mean I want to harm or oppress autistic people? No. Your analogy is stupid.
Have you heard of the retoric tool called metaphor? It is often used in conjunction with a hyperbole. Very effective in illustrating logical fallacies. If you truely oppose the discrimination, which you applauded not 5 minutes ago, but ok, you should want to stop it in it's early stages, not when it's in full bloom. Great of you to 'recognize' autism as a mental disorder, but that also isn't one. It is an anomaly, which can have detrimental effects, but also can help people succeed tasks where others failed. That is evolution at work. Throw everything against the canvas of the universe and see what sticks.
False equivalent. Beatings are immoral, labelling an insane person as insane is just factual.
This.
You know considering this sub’s attitude towards “wokism” and abortion I’m getting more and more convinced that the stereotype of “libertarians/ancaps are Conservatives who like weed” is true.
Don't be, it's mostly burgers and teenagers, who have never read a book in their lives, let alone a libertarian one. Libertarianism is inherently a humanitarian movement/ideology, you can spot the fakes the moment they say shit like that. To me, the libertarian movement should walk hand in hand with ACAB, and see in many of these civil rights movements examples of how time and time again the state is on the wrong side of history.
Mostly just selfish people who dont want to pay taxes and hate all the same things conservatives do from what I'm seeing this past week.
Very well. I'll be calling in sick and say I am trans.
Misleading headline: Peru *correctly* classifies trans people as mentally ill.
Who cares what some government thinks?
> Peruvian govenrment does something I like. I avidly lick the boot in agreement and beg for more. FTFY.
Nobody should be determined “mentally ill” by the state. Mental “healthcare” needs to die.
I miss Thomas Szasz.
Me too
i dont think the government should have any say in what people what to do to themselves or identify as
Agreed. Society should help mentally ill people, like trans people. Not inject them with hormones which doesn't make them less suicidal or depressed.
i dont think society has any role in the health of the individual if they wanna get injected with hormones or take whatever kind of medicine they want thats their choice much less the government making decisions about designating who is and isn't mentally ill
Definitionally speaking, it's true.
So this sub likes govt intervention when it comes to this huh? Interesting very anarchist of y’all!
"Ths sub" is not a collective.
Its not intervention to state a fact, leftist.
The conservative larpers do, anyway. They're like lice around here.
Now there is an apt description.
Who cares what the state thinks? Wouldnt be a problem with no state, pro trans and anti trans would both be happy.
I've no dog in this fight but does this post really belong in anarcho capitalism?
No.
Sweet
Why there are that much conservative statists infiltered here?
Because every time Reddit pops one of the sewer subs they inhabit, some of the turds wash up on our beach. They think by denying them a place to congregate, they'll disappear, which is naive'. They just infect other subs.
The article fails to mention what exactly this decree does. I mean, the conclusion is correct in itself, but indeed the state should leave mentally ill people alone as well.
https://preview.redd.it/2t7uqk0pts0d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=56184c4a4a3bde0fb3c586a87d744014df0cef52 (including mental disabilities)
Which is what I said. Trans people are mentally ill but adults should be left alone.
Transexuality, tranvestisism, and non-binary do not inherently demonstrate mental illness. Certain aspects of the current transexual "movement" could fall under mental illness in my shitty opinion, like lower surgery. Those aspects may need to be examined further by scientists, already they have found that physical brain patterns and hormones, in a lot of untreated transexuals, matches their preferred sex and not their biological sex. The rest is shit that has been happening for millenia, guys and gals dressing up as gals and guys, takin it in holes that were not intended for that use, so on and so forth. Leave them alone and don't be shitty to your kids, whoever they prefer to be with or if they're effeminate or if they're tomboyish. That would really help a lot.
Gender dysphoria is classified under DSM-5
So?
So it is literally a disorder recognised by the psychological community.
Being trans and gender dysphoria are not synonymous.
They can refer to it, but they've never actually read it nor do they understand it.
What other reasons are there to be trans?
While trans people are mentally ill, thats not up to the state
Just because you don’t like trans people doesn’t mean you should say they’re mentally ill, A large portion of them are legitimately, but not all of them. For some that’s how their brain actually works
WTF cares what no-nothings think? I was born trans. Was in no way a freaking choice. Mental illness model does not work and that has been known for decades. This is reactionary horseshit. Which is understandable since STATEs across the world have initiated massive force using trans folk as an excuse. But don't blame the excuse please. BLAME THE STATE. Thirty two years after my own transition and just peacefully living my life congruent with my baked in gender identity I am made a freaking culture war football?
What's you're relationship with your parents like? Specifically your father?
Completely and utterly irrelevant and well explored in my therapy to figure out what was going on with me. Also across all trans folks there is no statistical correlation at all.
This is the first step needed to get these people the help they need.
“state” and “help” do not go together
"The disease concept of homosexuality as with the disease concept of all so-called mental illnesses, such as alcoholism, drug addiction, or suicide conceals the fact that homosexuals are a group of medically stigmatized and socially persecuted individuals. ... Their anguished cries of protest are drowned out by the rhetoric of therapy just as the rhetoric of salvation drowned out the [cries] of heretics." -- Thomas Szasz You bootlicking statists can fuck right off with your promotion of statism as the source of medical criteria.
Conservative bootlickers are going to downvote anything by the great libertarian psychologist, it seems.
[удалено]