>Do communists move? Normally when you have communists its people living in an area already that don't like their conditions, but when you make ancapistan everyone who moves in is presumably into it.
If you think of it as a community that is surrounded by different types of communities, where you are simply free to move if you don't like it or forced to if you don't respect that idea it makes more sense. But can such a community survive, knowing that outside of it a state would surely form eventually? Let's say it takes just one community to turn to a state and then try to subjugate the rest. Yeah, internally there might be less problems but what about external threats like that?
One way I think of counteracting that is nukes but that might be quite an extreme option
>I suppose this is the real question of the thread.
Well, I am of the opinion that yes, at least from my subjective point of view, owning children is bad.
>There are plenty of isolated groups of people that have been able to maintain approximately the same culture for hundreds or thousands of years.
Those were usually pretty smal or authoritarian though, and most of them cracked eventually.
>I think both Ancapistan and the "night-watchman state" will devolve into tyranny when their population is full of people who have become complacent and compliant, but the night-watchman state provides the framework for tyranny to take place--if people accept the state as a legitimate entity, then there is room to justify any actions the state takes.
Fair point, perhaps I was wrong after all. The more we discuss this and the more I think about it, the more I lean towards the Ancap option.
As for children... well, them being owned by parents is bad, but is it worse than being owned by the state? After all, most parents will be sane and want to help their children, so most children will get their independence from parents. I can't think that people who abuse their children won't be scorned by the community and hated. After all, I'm talking about how the state is necessary for the protection of children... but children are still abused in the world, and their abusers haven't been punished.
So perhaps it is only a sad fact of life that children will be abused and that parents have power over their children that children have to break away from, and it is separate from the whole question of the state.