全 7 件のコメント

[–]ImpacatusGeolibertarian 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

A fox may have some vague sense of territoriality, but that's pretty different from private property. If anything, it's more similar to what the leftists call "personal property".

I can't see the "appeal to nature" path doing much for anarcho-capitalism.

[–]subsidiarityAnarcho-Capitalist [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

I think of property, of any kind, as requiring 'claim without possession'. I have never seen evidence that any animal but humans making this kind of distinction. Other animals do not fight for ownership then forego possession.

[–]JobDestroyerCrypto-capitalist [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Bears leave their hidey holes then return for winter.

[–]ruffmadmanrosa luxemburg is bae [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

literally every animal does that. they establish a territory for a set amount of time and then abandon it to look for places with more resources.

[–]MoreLikeAnCrap [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Do ants have a concept of Government? Yes.

Do ants have a concept of Private Property? No.

Who cares what is "natural"? We're humans. By definition, we are not "natural".

Do foxes have a sense of fallacious arguments? No.

Do foxes have a sense of economics? No.

Do 3/4 foxes die before ever having sex? Yes.

Actually, Foxes are a pretty good metaphor for AnCaps.

[–]duggabbooMixed Economy Progressive [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This is why people think you guys are nuts.

[–]SaloLTu ne cede malis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Nature isn't the best place to go to form an argument imo. It's full of contradictions and examples that could fit almost any ideology.

For example: you could argue that ants or bees form a sort of commune and have no hierarchy (different types of workers but the queen or other types have no power over the others; the workers also kill the queen that doesn't do her job iirc) and manage to strive together.

It's best