I am a “Real Anarchist” not an “Anarcho-Capitalist”

Anarcho–capitalism (also known as “libertarian anarchy” or “market anarchism” or “free market anarchism”) is a libertarian and individualist anarchist political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market. Ref “Anarcho-capitalism (ancap) is a fringe political ideology that prioritizes the freedom of the individual from state coercion and advocates market-based solutions to all social needs. Anarcho-capitalists believe that compulsory taxation is a violation of individual liberty, and that law enforcement, courts, and all security services should be provided by voluntarily-funded competitors, such as private defense agencies. Anarcho-capitalism is mainly furthered in the public sphere by American reactionary think tanks; its visible supporters mostly congregate online. It has never constituted a socially active movement or organized political power base. It’s one of the youngest philosophies to try to place itself under the umbrella of “anarchism“, having only existed as a discrete philosophy for a few decades, although antecedents date back to the nineteenth century. Ancaps are as much anarchists as Christian Scientists are scientists. Traditional anarchist movements originated on the left, and do not consider anarchy and capitalism to be compatible, and thus consider anarcho-capitalism not to be an authentic form of anarchism. Ancaps have proven to be one of the greatest tools for anarchist unity in living memory, as more or less every single major anarchist group and tendency stands united in despising them. Needless to say that socialists, communists, social democrats, liberals, and centrists aren’t exactly fans of them either and will more than often unite even with the aforementioned anarchists to beat up on the ancap. Even Conservatives (even and especially of the Neo variety)...

Need for “Religion”?

Why Do So Many See a Need for “Religion”? Religious belief is really nothing special, in fact it can be said that religious belief is a geography issue and not because of any truth in the belief. This is evident in how 73% of the world’s religionists live in countries in which their religious persuasion makes up a majority of the population Pew Research Center studies show. So, stop thinking you were somehow blessed to be born into the one true religion. Ref What power would religion have if indoctrination of children was illegal? What support would religion really have if its power was seen as requiring the indoctrination of children? What should it really take for one to justifiably or reasonably believe, as in the sense of what is thought to be necessary to move from propositions for beliefs to a sensible standard of reached knowledge? What amount of a stumbling block to reason would religion be if it was understood as mainly a group of indoctrinated victims who were prayed on as children who then continue the indoctrination of their children? And what threat would religion be if people finally acknowledged that all religions need indoctrination to survive and thrive as well as see them for what they largely are which is myths and propaganda? Some religious believers try to say that they can use logic to prove god(s) but don’t be fooled by this argument from a false premise as there is no evidence, not just no evidence of existence, there is not any evidence to even think about what a god could or could not be...