MenKlash

I’d prefer the term statism, but I agree with you.

The taxpayers and the taxmen.

In other words there’s no hope

Privatize everything.

That’s just FIAT money in action.

VLLC!

The idea of a “social contract” is flawed in the sense that it is not a contract at all, as it is unilateral in nature.

Voting and taxation do not necessarily imply explicit consent with how government (the monopoly on violence) works.

The dilemma is how you define harming others and what implies being intolerant to an idea rather than a person holding that idea.

Fair enough. You’re still not replying to my opinion anyway.

I can infere that you’re a very close-minded person. You’re criticizing the “tone” of my opinion instead of its content.

You’re literally accusing me of “russian propagandist” instead of replying to my personal argument.

Argumentum ad hominem.

I’m a citizen by coercion of the government, not by voluntary means.

A “social contract” cannot be used to justify the existence of an oligarchy of politicians and its actions because they will initiate force against those who do not wish to enter into that contract.

In fact, the so-called “social contract” is not a contract at all because it is unilateral in nature. Voting and taxation don’t necessarily imply consent with how government works, as there is no explicit consent of every citizen.

Such indiscriminate uncritical love of representative democracy is a threat to liberty itself.

Not a fan of Trump, but there was never a “social contract” in the first place.

Under TRUE capitalism the market is free but regulated as needed.

The market can’t be free if it’s regulated. Any intromission of the State in any voluntary exchange is stepping in the natural rights of its citizens.

We don’t live in real capitalism, there is no regulation, the oligarchy has captured the agencies that were supposed to regulate the market.

The agencies are the oligarchy. The politicians and lobbyists benefit each other by the existence of regulations, taxation, subsidies, FIAT money, intellectual property, public licenses, monopolical privileges, etc.

Yes, we don’t live in “real capitalism” (that is, in a free-market setting), we live in a corporatocracy.

Part of a larger quote, but I agree with it.

I don’t like representative democracy.

It would appear that democracy benefits the rulers, as democracy alone has provided the most consistent means for those formerly in power to sleep and die in peace. And the same holds for the courtiers, nomenklatura, and apparatchiks. These sycophants need no longer dread midnight’s knife and muffled cries, and the subsequent crowning of a new king. The elite and bureaucracy can retire to their farms and while away their passing years without fear — their riches and posterity intact. As I see it now, democracy is not to the advantage of the demos, it is to the advantage of the power elite. Something to think about.

Regardless of the socio-economic system imposed, commerce always persists because natural rights are inherent to human beings. Even in socialist systems, grey and black markets are going to be there.

Your (socialist) distinction between “personal property” (consumer goods) and private property (producer goods) is purely arbitrary. The difference between consumer and producer goods is totally subjective, as it depends of the individual using that good.

Each people as its own goals, they can use various means to achieve them and their knowledge, preferences and skills are not the same.

By “ideal capitalism” I think you meant praxeology (Mises’s Human Action) and Austrian Economics.

People are not perfect, and if they make mistakes, they should be the ones responsable for their own actions. This does not happen by the existence of FIAT money, subsidies, taxation, positive rights and every regulation the Monopoly of Violence does in our private lifes and commerce.

“Commerce” is only possible if both parties are willing to respect each other’s natural right to have private property and each other’s right to express consent (voluntary exchange). By trading these goods, there is a mutual benefit (social cooperation) that emerges from wanting to satisfy their own self interest.

I think this is pretty capitalist for my taste. (And please, it’s not the same as corporatocracy).

The temptation and crucial flaw of a totalitarian mind are that everyone must play a part in a superstructural battle between good and evil. Standing on the sidelines or taking a neutral position on present topics is not allowed; one may not merely observe or ignore the madness played out among the power hungry.

Everyone needs a take; everyone needs to “be informed” on the grand, irrelevant events of our broken times. Everyone needs a flag in their profile picture—a not-so-grand gesture indicating that they support the “latest thing.”