Not that successful if they were annexed by Italy of all countries lmao
Edit: also apparently you can still comment despite being banned? Well, that gives me an excuse to flesh out my comment.
I don’t know if you’re aware but the prevalent system in 1400s Italy was feudalism lmao, with some free cities where a bourgeois class developed. These bourgeois organised themselves in guilds, and hired “free” workers that worked on the daily. Capitalism wouldn’t come around for another 300 or so years. So how could a city of 300 illiterate peasants (lmao really found a great example there) be ancap (and invent capitalism in the early Quattro Cento!) when it was surrounded by feudalism lmao. Also 300 people come on, everyone knew everyone else in that hamlet. That’s smaller than some high schools, that’s smaller than some universities at the time. You could house the whole population of this “republic” in a single army barrack. The fact they weren’t invaded is precisely because they were so irrelevant to Italy that no one really wanted to bother with it. It would cost more money to field an army to grab Cospaia than you’d get out of them. The best way Cospaia sums up anarcho-capitalism is perhaps when it was created by a clerical error, a pure accident lmao. And the best way you sum up anarcho-capitalism is when you try to claim it has historical backing and isn’t just the fever dream of some very weird fascistic tendencies.
This is why people say ancap is a meme ideology (and yet it could have never been capitalo-marxism), because you have no idea what you’re talking about and just have a very strong feeling that it would work out for the best if we just gave ancap a chance.
But really the funniest part of your comment has to be the mises link. I read it. It left me with more questions than I had going in. They’re really just preaching to the choir.
You better argument is based in when the ancap term was coined? Also you seem kind of in foght or fly mode, man, you are not going to win amy aword figting on internet with a random guy, don’t make this a homo sapiens version of two chimps throwing shit to each other.
400 years is plenty more than some red examples I must say, and with orders of magnitud less people to defend it, so that look like a overwelming succes for some pesants half starved.
The fact you read the article is something that kind of make up for the tribal defending you do of your believes, and even more if you have more questions now, would be far more productive and interesting if you just share them.
In fact will be really interesting since your perspective will undoubtedly be different and so will do you questions.
Anyhow, I honestly enjoy a book recomendation despite the context, so 👍 tks.
Not that successful if they were annexed by Italy of all countries lmao
Edit: also apparently you can still comment despite being banned? Well, that gives me an excuse to flesh out my comment.
I don’t know if you’re aware but the prevalent system in 1400s Italy was feudalism lmao, with some free cities where a bourgeois class developed. These bourgeois organised themselves in guilds, and hired “free” workers that worked on the daily. Capitalism wouldn’t come around for another 300 or so years. So how could a city of 300 illiterate peasants (lmao really found a great example there) be ancap (and invent capitalism in the early Quattro Cento!) when it was surrounded by feudalism lmao. Also 300 people come on, everyone knew everyone else in that hamlet. That’s smaller than some high schools, that’s smaller than some universities at the time. You could house the whole population of this “republic” in a single army barrack. The fact they weren’t invaded is precisely because they were so irrelevant to Italy that no one really wanted to bother with it. It would cost more money to field an army to grab Cospaia than you’d get out of them. The best way Cospaia sums up anarcho-capitalism is perhaps when it was created by a clerical error, a pure accident lmao. And the best way you sum up anarcho-capitalism is when you try to claim it has historical backing and isn’t just the fever dream of some very weird fascistic tendencies.
This is why people say ancap is a meme ideology (and yet it could have never been capitalo-marxism), because you have no idea what you’re talking about and just have a very strong feeling that it would work out for the best if we just gave ancap a chance.
But really the funniest part of your comment has to be the mises link. I read it. It left me with more questions than I had going in. They’re really just preaching to the choir.
You better argument is based in when the ancap term was coined? Also you seem kind of in foght or fly mode, man, you are not going to win amy aword figting on internet with a random guy, don’t make this a homo sapiens version of two chimps throwing shit to each other.
400 years is plenty more than some red examples I must say, and with orders of magnitud less people to defend it, so that look like a overwelming succes for some pesants half starved.
The fact you read the article is something that kind of make up for the tribal defending you do of your believes, and even more if you have more questions now, would be far more productive and interesting if you just share them. In fact will be really interesting since your perspective will undoubtedly be different and so will do you questions.
Anyhow, I honestly enjoy a book recomendation despite the context, so 👍 tks.