I guess we know what government is best. I actually have a question thinking about a place where the people determine everything, if you could make one law, what would it be?
I can imagine the 'government' is just like three guys in a small office sipping coffee and playing flappy bird while their computers have auto clickers just hitting 'accept' on a thousand requests from the people asking to do stuff.
For the rich and influential it sure is; for the ones who don't have much they are subject to every whim of those in power. There is a reason the rich want less and less power for the government because if it doesn't have any, the money the rich have will buy them power and influence from the power vacuum. This also holds true in our societies with governments.
Not necesarily Maximilian Kuhn, because the goverment, is so small and limited, there is no way the rich can influence and put laws that benefit and outlaw or limit competition, so they have to compete. Also because the mayority of work is private, the private companies have to compete for the workers, these increase salaries and benefice. Also these means that because the law can be private and the state run very limited wealthfare, you are responsable for your decicion, so you have to take a good decicion, and take a career that make you to the workforce inmidiatly, as education is private, the best education, and more merits, also because the the laws are so minimals and basics, it is very dificult that companies become the corporations of today that can influence the goverment to the point they can do wathever. Finaly because the police is private, or finance by private entities, these mean police officers are well pay and they feel the incentive to actualy do their jobs. Also with no wealthfare and limited goverment, there is no bloat and because the state is minimal, there is no bloat and no necesity to raise taxes, so mayority of winnings go to the people, these means, the companies and industries, have to compete for the workers means, better benefits and better salaries, no doubt there will be abuse, but because there is jobs for everione, you dont like the job, you leave somewhere that pays better. Finaly, because nearly all services are private, run there is very few posibilities of the state hires workersjust for put because friends or family, wich avoidthe bloat
@@paradoxalJohn Your first point is the luddite fallacy. People will find ways to make money, with or without automation. I don't how a "poor" family would struggle if jobs were more common and the prices of goods and services being low due to competition. This premise relies on things being expensive in a stateless society, which isn't true. The environment would be better of privatized as individuals have a better incentive to preserve it for profit and recreation. Most pollutions are caused by governments or organizations in bed with the government. Take the Soviet Union for example.
On the upside, they also need less money. If you provide almost no services, you need almost no money to pay for them. About the only thing you have to provide is basic infrastructure and with just a little bit of sales tax you can pay for those easily enough. This wouldn't be hard to do IRL to be honest (harder than the game, but not by much).
well, anarchy is about no government, so there is no "government making money". And I am pretty sure, with such system, there will definitely be having some super rich monopolies but poverty will be like 80% of the population.
"They're waiting to be stabbed" No, they aren't. They have a frickin pistol. If anything they and the criminals are on equal terms of "don't point that thing at me and stay out of my sight"
There's also private security. You know, guys that want to protect your family and don't care how fast you drive because there's no ticketing incentive?
You're damn right. 20-25% of your own dollars doesn't seem like much being taken from you per check, but add that tax rate to every working American and then realize how much money the government takes AND without transparency, how do you REALLY know where your money is going? We let the government tax us more and more like they aren't corrupted like, comon people... don't trust the government, trust yourself. Build a culture that teaches people how to pay for their own healthcare, their own retirement, their own police and fire department, their own highways, their own schools, NOT a culture that just RELIES on the government taking your money to do it for you. Desperate people do desperate things, and to survive without help? Well, they'll find a way in an anarcho-capitalist society.
Coffee Sploosh totally agreed federal government is needed but should stay out of the way as long as capitalism is being preserved within the markets. We pay way too much into the fed through taxes, I hate these people who claim lowering taxes hurts the lower classes because “trickle down” doesn’t work. Trickle down is a strawman created to refute Raegan esque tax policies. But its proven lower taxes improves the pockets of american citizens, its funny when people say otherwise. Anyways good comment!
@@gamingsaint6238 Thanks for the reply. I got into school for 20 weeks and racked up over 6k in debt. Ridiculous. I started my own business and didn't even need 6 grand to see a profit. Give us more choice, give us choices where our taxes go where the individual as a collective decide what's most important in our communities and country.
@@thenlnlkn But it ended up a libertarian oligarchy so I think they lost their freedom when private entities could own their own police. Freedom out the window
yes, I keep coming back to watch this over and over again, because while this is not a completely accurate simulation, it does give me the warm fuzzies, free-market wise at least 😄
@@sujaykrishnanath82 You can't have anarchistic communism. Communism goes against human nature, you need to force the people into it. Anarchy is the lack of governmental control, so communism can't exist in an anarchy.
@Cradle of Chaos “yeah, what you all aren't realizing is that, in this simulation, it's just the rich exploiting the poor without limits.“ This is based on…?
In the novel, an nihilistic liberal decides to screw over the world by starting a anarcho-capitalist state expecting it to fail but his plans backfires and he inadvertently creates a utopian society.
@@RP-qe8mv lmfao did you really just use Switzerland to prove a point about government involvement? You mean one of the "European paradises" that give a plethora of free social programs to their citizens like college and healthcare? The truth is that human success isn't primarily predicated on government vs private involvement. It's mostly based on competence and trust. A system that is run fairly and without corruption is the best option. It's a fact that corruption can happen in both government and in private industry to absolute absurd degrees. So it's kind of just fundamental human nature that's holding us back from a real paradise, not some silly ideologies about "big vs small govt".
@eyan sorad as it should be. And anyone who believes otherwise is weak. And no I’m being 100% genuine and earnest. Only children and pets are loved unconditionally (and then only by their parents & family). Why should we give time to anyone who isn’t
This game is quite realistic if you think about it, upper class loves everything you are doing because it makes it accessible to start business without following certain laws in turn saving money in the long run.
He wasn't doing anything nearly as game breaking in this one as he does in other games. Gray is actually the best kind of tester for developers. The first thing I was taught by the person teaching me game design was: Try to think of every way a player can break your game, and how to stop them from doing it. You can never think of everything though, and people do strange things. Gray shows you just how he can break a game. He has a natural talent for it.
Silicon Valley is mostly Libertarian, despite our reputation. Conservatives hear we don't care about gay marriage, transgendered people and we're mostly atheists - therefore we must be liberuls. This game is showing the bias of the coders.
@@dusty2080 Yup. Several cases of sexual assaults/kidnappings happened with Uber drivers taking home drunk or just simply lone women at night. In my opinion, it is like everyone forgot the reason why Taxi Drivers had a lot of regulations and licensing.
@@Briskrainbow0 That idea was backwards to begin with. Hitchhiking has had a bad reputation for being risky for decades, and for good reason. But getting into an unlicensed cab is effectively the same thing; only you get to pay for the privilege of being in danger.
More specifically he created Orlando. A city of nothing but high rises, hotels, beaches, and amusement parks you had to devastated the local wetlands to build.
@@ScarrVett This kinda system would end up enslaving anyone who can't make enough money, are you saying women can't make money? Brawn would mean nothing here, brains would be everything, are you calling women stupid? That government involvement in these kinda things creates gender equality is a myth. In my country which have lots of government involvement with this, studies have found that the genders self segregate despite the government trying to prevent it. The only field that naturally ended up with a 50/50 gender ratio was politics. Truth is, just because some women likes fishing it doesn't mean that there are tons of women that secretly want to fish. And just because some men like styling hair, it doesn't mean there are tons of men that secretly want to style hair. Men and women simply don't like working together that much either. What the study found was that when the government force more women into a certain field men will leave that field. That is because this kind of capitalist system works on exploiting our natural instinct to compete, and men aren't in competition with women, they compete for women. And in the same way, women are not in competition with men, they compete with each other for men. Work was never really about making money, money was always just the rating system that told other people if you're mating material. Capitalism is essentially just the modern way of hitting each other with sticks and rocks to see who gets to have babies. In this system you won't be enslaved for being a woman, you will be enslaved for being poor. You can argue that men will try to keep women poor out of self interest, but men are just half the population, so it's not like women couldn't try to do the same to men. The only real advantage men have over women is physical strength, while women have the advantage of being more socially aware, and I'd dare to say that being more socially aware is a better advantage in a modern society such as this. Very few men are scared of using their physical strength against women, they're scared that woman will use her social influence to make other men punish him for doing so. So it's possible that in such a society with no government interference both violence and manipulation would become illegal, or both would be legal, both of which would actually make it more equal than our standards. Today, it's illegal for men to use his advantage, but it's not illegal for women to use her advantage, so I'd argue that women already have far more power than men in modern western society and it's just taking some time for the full effect of this to show. All a woman has to do is act scared and innocent and helpless and most men will happily use violence against other men to defend and protect her without even knowing the story, when it becomes clear that women are not so innocent and have equal or more power than men, this will change and men will stop having the desire to use force against other men. When this happens not only will we become more peaceful and end all wars, but women won't be able to get away with manipulation anymore either, and then we'll have accomplished the goals of feminism. It'll be a much more boring world, but a much safer one too as sexual drives will basically have been rendered inert and with it will go things like greed, power, control, and so on, and then we can finally build our perfect utopia and focus on more important things like finding spiritual enlightenment, protecting nature and creating art, while most work will become a thing of the past. That's why I'm a feminist despite that I think that most of modern feminism currently is just being ridiculous.
Daniel I'm not calling women stupid, I'm just saying that it's *possible* for an anarchist society to go by an extreme patriarchal structure for something like that to happen. There wouldn't be an institution to enforce "possible borderline enslavement of women", but maybe there's no institution to prevent that IF it's allowed and socially acceptable.
@@MrJH101 True, even though his intention was to DESTROY make everything fall apart... in this case... instead of the world falling apart, breaking the game.... he did the exact opposite....
Otaku-chan Anime yep, this was a case of extreme irony. There have been countless leaders who always started off wanting to perform many great things, but ended up doing some real horrifying or brutal acts when they had power. And then we have Gray here, the anarchist who just wanted to see the world destroy itself for a few selfish laughs, but ended up making it better somehow without even intending it to work out that way. ...I guess it’s true what they say, “Nobody in politics truly gets what they want.”
@@MrJH101 I... honestly don't know whether to be impressed that he managed to unite people despite the fact that he actually want to make them suffer or disappointed that he didn't get his way to make everyone suffer... what do you think?
@a fantasy I think it was technically a win-win for him no matter what. Good stratagems always seek out the best possible outcomes. Great stratagems have outcomes where it’s never a loss either way.
+Skyler's Animations don't wanna be homeless? either get a job or don't gamble your house away in the first place. no government intervention required.
"This biggest problem with this friggin' anarchy is there's no way for the government to make any money." That's the point. Anarchy means no government. It's rather self-evident that when there's no government, that non-existent government won't need any money.
@Tyler Reese I agree that anarchy means 'no rulers.' Another way of saying that is 'no government,' or perhaps a better way to say that is 'no state,' but we tend to use the terms 'the state' and 'the government' interchangeably. Money is necessary for any economy with divisions of labor and divisions of labor are necessary for any economy to progress beyond a mere 'cave-man-like' economy. Depends on what you mean by equality. Equality of opportunity is a laudable goal that is nearly achieved (though the progressives are fighting hard to against it.) Equality of outcome is an idiotic idea that cannot be achieved in a society more advanced than a 'cave-man-like' society ... and even in a cave-man-like society it's not really possible, it's just that the differences between become minimal.
@Tyler Reese First of all, I said _laudable_ NOT _laughable._ I agree the 'the government' and 'the state' are not the same thing. They are, however, used interchangably in our society, which is what I said. The government is the apparatus. The state is the people who control that apparatus. At least that's how it was explained to me. There's so much wrong with your second paragraph, I don't even know where to begin. First of all, 'money' is not the worthless pieces of paper we are now forced to use. 'Money' is simply a common commodity that is widely accepted which can be used as a means of exchange. The alternative to money is barter and barter CANNOT support a complex economy. If being a doctor and being a ditch digger both paid exactly the same we'd have allot fewer doctors. A main problem with the utopian type societies like what you describe is the problem of incentives. We have TVs and cars and cell phones and cargo ships and so forth because someone invented them in an effort to make a profit. Without that incentive, who would take all the risks necessary to invent new products? Russia had exactly this problem. There's a sickness going around our society right now which is the idea that rich people are rich because they're evil. No doubt some of them are, and no doubt, some of them use their riches in nefarious ways, but rich people get rich in the first place because they offer something to society that society wants, something that improves society. You say 'they need us, we don't need them' and you're right as long as you don't mind giving up cars, computers, grocery stores, and all the other things they invented/produced/etc. I've started a business. I sacrificed to save up money then risked that money to start up a business. Then I hire someone to help out and your argument is that I should give them the same wages I make myself? Why? What did they sacrifice? What did they risk? Think it through, if my employees got an equal share of everything, why would I sacrifice to save and then risk that money in the first place? The very first economy set up by European settlers in the new world was a communist economy. No one had any incentive to work. Consequently, 90% of them died the first winter because they had no stores of food, no stores of firewood, etc. There are 500 settlers and my job is to chop firewood. Because I have to share equally with everyone, for every 1000 pieces of wood I chop, I get to keep 2. How much wood am I going to chop? Not much. The second governor of that colony changed it over to a capitalist economy and it thrived from then on. The last thing I want to point out is that anarcho-communism (or anarcho-socialism) is an oxymoron. Whose going to force a school to take someone who can't afford to pay the tuition? All forms of socialism (like communism) require a totalitarian form of government to force people to give up (share equally) whatever they've produced. The only fair way is to let each one benefit from their own labors. This means those who work hard will have more than those who don't, and thus there will be people in different economic tiers (or classes if you prefer.) Those who produce/invent something that society wants they are rewarded, incentivizing others to produce/invent. When you don't benefit from your own labor, you have no incentive to labor.
@@Lord_Volkner Cool comment, I agree with you. But why anarcho-communism is not possible? There can be a anarcho-communism commune without government where people would enter voluntary. They would just kick out of that commune by its members if they don't agree with the rules. Despite I don't like communism and prefer capitalism as well, I think there are people for whom it is suitable. You're right about the problem of incentives, but I think there are people who can work productively in socialism society too.
@@danilpopkov8211 There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? One of the major fallacies of all forms of socialism is it's fundamental assumption that people are all equal; we're not. Some people are deligent, some of not, some are hard working, some are lazy, some are clever, some are dim-witted and so on. Let's imagine a socialist society for a moment. The hard-working people get paid the same as the lazy people. Before long, the hard working people are going to pack up and leave. Now we just lost the productive members in society. The only way to prevent this is to prevent them from leaving. There are two ways to do that: provide incentives (pay them more) or compulsion (force them to stay.) If we take the first route, that is, if we pay each one according to how much value they add then we're no longer a socialist society; we're back to capitalism. If we take the second route, we need an authoritarian state to force them to stay. But let us imagine that we force them to stay, what incentive do they have to keep working hard? Again, we're back to incentives or compulsion. One is the antithesis of socialism and the other is authoritarianism. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron. But now let us take the route you refered to, getting rid of anyone who doesn't measure up. Now we're Stalin with slave labor camps (or gulags as they were called in Russia,) or Hitler with concentration camps or Mao with death camps. And who gets to decide who measures up and who doesn't? Well, you have to have a centralized authority for that, which is the exact opposite of anarchy. Socialism requires an authoritarian/totalitarian centralized body (state) to function. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron. For a good look into how these things actually worked in the real world, I highly recommend _The Gulag Archipelago_ by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. You can find a free audio version of Vol 1 here: archive.org/details/TheGulagArchipelago Vol 2 here: archive.org/details/107GulagVolTwo and Vol 3 here: archive.org/details/103GulagVolThree
@@Lord_Volkner "There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? " maybe respect, glory, curiousity(in case of inventions), whatever. I actually don't care about that, just wanted to mention that there are some people who are not motivated by money only, so if we actually had the freedom of association, I think it is possible that a couple of such communes would arise. In addition to that, there could be cooperative forms of business, where intial capital is provided equally by all of the workers and all of them have equal responsibility. As far as I know, there are forms of socialism which don't suppose having the strong government.
When the happiest good ending is hidden behind the Evil route (The intent to create the most chaotic lawless society ended up producing one of the free-est most prosperous society of all)
gold-and-black-anarchy Anarchy is inherently left wing. Abolishing the state compatible with left wing values. More government doesn’t equal left wing. Ronald Reagan massively increased the state in most respects (military, war on drugs,etc.) and he definitely wasn’t on the left. Anarchy can not be capitalist or right wing because capitalism and right wing politics are about establishing hierarchies and it creates inequality. Left wing politics are about dismantling hierarchies and increasing equality. Communism is a moneyless, classless and yes STATELESS economic system. Capitalism is the definition of an unnecessary hierarchy and anarchy is inherently opposed to unnecessary hierarchies. Under so-called “capitalist anarchy” the most powerful corporations would effectively become the new state and therefore it can not be anarchist by definition. Being an anarchist (among other things) means opposing capitalism and the state simultaneously. Socialism (worker ownership of the means of production) and Communism (I already defined this) are meant to dismantle hierarchies, at least ideally, and are completely compatible with anarchism. And yes some self proclaimed communist countries had states (the USSR, Mao’s China) however, not all types of communism are completely anarchist (such as Marxism-Leninism) and the state is supposed to wither away by the time those societies transition to full communism, which would probably take decades, also those states tend to become corrupt and turn away from communism back to capitalism (China is the perfect example of this.) Anarchy can not be right wing by definition. Also capitalism is what really enslaves people and steals from them. If you don’t work under a capitalist system you won’t have money to buy food and you starve. This coercion is effectively slavery. Also in the third world it’s not at all uncommon for people to be literally enslaved at gunpoint, such as cobalt mining in the Congo. Capitalist anarchism, also known as fake anarchism only opposes the government and allows corporations to become an even worse government simply because it doesn’t call itself the government. And it will be worse because corporations make money of exploiting people so they have a financial incentive to make things worse. True anarchism opposes all unjustified hierarchies and no matter what, whether it’s capitalism, the state, or anything else. That is all.
gold-and-black-anarchy Maybe you should read it, everything in my comment is correct. Also I don’t support the Democratic Party, I’m not even American, and the Democratic Party definitely isn’t anarchist, so I have no idea why you brought it up like it’s a response to what I wrote. Anarchy opposes unjust hierarchies, such as capitalism and the state alike. I’m not trying to pull the wool over your eyes by secretly shilling for the state, I have no reason to do that. Also I don’t plan on dying anytime soon, so the world will have to deal with my correctly explaining anarchy for at least a little while longer.
Jean-Luc La Rue You ever hear of a little thing called “anarcho-capitalism”? It’s socially anarchist and economically, free markets rule. 0 government intervention. It’s beautiful.
I don't know why you think they wouldn't approve as well. Everyone like lower taxes. Most poorer people still have at least a car, and I'm sure they'd love to pay less on it as well.
Josny13 Since you failed to realize and/or read the reply to “Liz Price”.. This comment was poking fun at some of the “logic fails” and the fact that people find it funny that the upper class approves
I think the most amazing part about this is that he could continue to anger the lower classes without any problems because the lower classes didn't exist in the city at all! Everyone was middle or upper class!
A soon to be richer Ancap: "I'll pay to fix the roads between my business partners so we can trade more easily, and enjoy going to see each other more. I'll also do it to make trucking and logistics easier so the cash flows more freely"
> ''our people are starting to become a lot of middle and upper class, which leaves not enough people to work the regular jobs'' > capitalism: suffering from success
You have to understand that once you realize the media always blows negative stories out of proportion because it gets more sales, that few people actually go on crime sprees relatively speaking. So why exactly would there suddenly be nothing but crime and chaos?
@@ChangedMyNameFinally69 Nah. If the banana republics in central america have shown us anything, Capitalism works really well. It just isn't very fun for most people in the end.
Not really. This game was made by a classical liberal who follows *PragerU* of all things. I'm not going to take a video game as a model on how to run society, lol.
"Every one is working together and makes a ton of money because the government gets nothing" There. I think you found the solution to all problems. All of them.
Indeed Albedo, indeed, but in the hipotetical case you have a minimum goverment with no intention to expand, of course again, imposible, human nature, those who have more want more, that is why is imposible to ever have a good goverment, human nature
The people wanted better roads. Went to the road construction crews worked out a deal and bam new roads built faster and better than anything current crews could do.
I have watched graystillplays for about two months and last night i was listening to a podcast that mentioned the time a game youtuber played this game and tried to break it by making no laws and going full anarchy, i thought to myself "that sound like something gray would do" and look what popped up in my feed today.
"It turned from a Libertarian Anarchy into a Libertarian Oligarchy without me even doing anything -- it just happened" Lol yeah that tends to happen XD
@@aaronthebarbaric7733All of that wealth is concentrated. Stop acting like some religious oligarchy is somehow the bastion of equity. Lol Wikipedia, easy there boomer sperg.
Gray: In the anarchy, water is a secondary thing, it doesn't need to exist, it doesn't provide any sort of capitalistic gains Minutes ago: let's make a beach!
Honestly whoever made this game did their research. Of course, full anarchy isn’t good, but a free market, less regulations, and less taxation, can lead to more being done, as people have more to spend.
Wait so when the government controls everything everyone is lower class but in an anarchy everyone is upper class? Is this game trying to tell us something
@@dopplervocals Denial is the first phase of grief... But by all means keep telling yourself you're free if it makes you sleep at night. Be sure to emphasis to yourself that you are "free" next time you go to church. Next time you buy from Best Buys or Amazon. Next time you use the "free" services provided by Google and Facebook. Next time you swallow a pill that came from a box that has the name of a large pharmaceutical company written on the side. Next time you pay taxes to a man who lives on the opposite end of the continent.
@@OnionChoppingNinja You are not forced to go to church. You are not forced to use Amazon. You are not forced to use Facebook and Google. You are not forced to use medicine from large companies. But yes, taxation is still theft.
usually the stereotype for istan places are just places with a bunch of muslim immigrants. In the video he did allow immigrants to come in unfacilitated which is why he called it "ancapistan," just as you would say sweden is swedistan because it has a bunch of immigrants(muslim in particular which is why they use "istan" because it means something in their language i believe).
@@johnjames7668 Ancapistan as a name is used by ancaps for their ideal country a bit ironically. But they do use it. "-stan" - means country/land/government as in Eng-land, Deutsch-land etc.
John james are you spazmoided? Literally every ancap I've met (and I've met a lot) has referred to their society as 'ancapistan'. Stop trying to explain other people's jokes then throw a hissy fit when you get proven incorrect
It's a little of both, really. With no government to enforce laws, the only rules are those that society agrees on together. Namely, nonaggression towards others unless that person commits aggression against you first. Typically that's about the only thing all humans can agree on. Anything else would have to be a local case by case basis.
@@BandNerdcp except that with free trade and no regulations, there will be greater competition from within and from without. So power will remain fragmented. No need to ask the government for permission = no special interests granted
@Brutus Tan you say I sound socialist and am just saying Marxist "claptrap" as if you weren't just quoting neolib slogans You can say that class oppression doesn't exist as much as you want, it won't change the reality that it is the only way in which big corps can profit but ok, you say that I'm just wrong by association ignoring the entirety of the argument so I guess that there's nothing I can say to change your mind
we've been experiencing our streets here getting smaller because SOMEBODY wanted to give a lane to bicycle riders, and guess what those lanes are empty pretty much all day long and traffic is that much worse
You DO realize that this is a GAME, right? As such, its determinations and outcomes are directly biased by the wishes of the creators. You could enter any combination of parameters on the interface and whatever the programmers have chosen to cause the game to interpret those choice, that's what you would get. I would love -- LOVE!! -- to know exactly WHO has financed the development of this game, and also the political biases and news outlets favored by the creators. I suspect that this game is most likely in line with say, a climate report from Exxon-Mobil that talks about how great burning fossil fuels is for the environment and the atmosphere.
if we taxed the richest people in america it would take the government like a year to spend it all at the current rate of spending. the rich arent that rich when you compare it to how much the government needs to run it
Exactly, of course there's no way the game designer is a libertarian anarchist that choose to make this kind of policy the best possible for its game, real life MUST be like this game, right?
2:54 The Reason why The Upper class Loves This So much Is Because They're The Only ones who can afford Tanks RPGs And Any kind of Weapon or War You Can Think of
"What do they learn in those private schools? Praise the flag?" What flag? It's Anarchy. So you said you expected people to riot in the streets because it's anarchy. That's a general misconception. What would they riot *against*, exactly? They can do whatever they want. They get whatever they want. There's no reason to riot.
more that there is no poor in that city because of the gentryfication of it, the city houshold cost so much only middle class and rich peoples live there, the poor live in another city
@@kurokami5964 even in the end there were a lot of lower class in that city, btw, when Gray checks the Arkology (the pyramid-like house at 14:52) there's like 60 lower-income households in there, out of 400 total. That's like 15% of all households in what looks like the most expensive building in the city.
Just because you can commit a murder and no government would come to lock you up, doesn't mean the people wouldn't come for you. People are free to exact their own revenge or establish their own private security to punish and incarcerate enemies of the public.
at 4:21, your upper class people have organized their own private police force for if the market demands it and government doesn't provide it, then people will voluntarily pay for it. Ditto for fire departments and roads.
@John Doe And don't forget the fire bomb raids were about as bad as the nukes. They didn't nuke Tokyo because it was already destroyed by a firebomb raid. Killing much more civilians than the nukes.
i have to assume robots are doing the shitty jobs. or is janitor now going to pay a living wage? or does this simulate individuals holding two jobs? two low class jobs would probably pay a person into being almost middle class.
@Roger Dodger The problem with that is your model doesn't actually work out that way IRL. Why? Because people aren't one-size-fits-all robots nor are we all that logical. Our actions are based on emotion more than anything else. If you take all regulation out you end up with a few exceedingly wealthy people on top, with their yes-men and flunkies and back-stabbing schemers under them who manage all the poor working schlubs who get nothing. Such societies actually ENCOURAGE fairly high unemployment as a means of keeping wages suppressed and people desperate enough to do pretty much whatever they want for a bit of money. Is that logical for any kind of long term profit? Hell no. But does it make Bob On Top feel lots more secure in his wealth and to his mind, keep others from doing something better and taking his wealth and/or position/status? Yep. Oh, and those few people on top? They, in the interest of securing their positions, start making all kinds of rules that the commoners have to follow to make sure they stay working and don't cause too much trouble. And then, since they want the best for their kids, make sure all their wealth and power is passed down to their children. Welcome to the birth of aristocracy.
@Ace Saylor Yes, an utopia in a video game which doesn't simulate all things that are at play in real life. But your an an-cap, so of course you're just gonna point at it and say "Look anarcho-capitalism works!" You noticed how it flipped from being a libertarian anarchy to an oligarchy? That is what would happen in real life. You should look at how people live in oligarchies, it's not very pretty.
I guess we know what government is best. I actually have a question thinking about a place where the people determine everything, if you could make one law, what would it be?
gray i was first i came here with no likes no dislikes no views im gonna be the first person to ever like this vid, but there is 7 comments...
“Best government ever👏👏👏”
!
0:55 I lnow you'll never read this but you could have put it's free real estate there, maybe next time?
Everyone has to have a pot of coffee a day or they die
"Water has no capitalistic gains"
Bottled water - "Am i a joke to you?"
Birki gts Nestle would love this
You destroy your own water, and then make a business out of importing water.
Your own water has no capitalistic gains.
He found out the hard way that water does have capitalistic gains. Beaches, swimming pools, boating, etc.
Nestle be like
He said after his first good moneymaking building was a beach
Traffic, beaches, little to no laws, hotels...
You built Florida
more like California
Joe Figueroa Cali and FL are the first and fourth highest GDP states in America
More like Miami
As a Citizen of Florida. Our laws are more like guidelines.
Isabel Kyle no he created Miami.
Nobody : “So should we-“
Upper class: “OH DEAR GOD YES”
Long as they make money from it, they don't care xD
😍
Rob Fowler ?
Athena Wild ummm you’re pretty?
Rob Fowler oh, thank you☺️
I can imagine the 'government' is just like three guys in a small office sipping coffee and playing flappy bird while their computers have auto clickers just hitting 'accept' on a thousand requests from the people asking to do stuff.
As it should be.
AMERICA!
Libertarians and Anarchists:
"I see this as an absolute win."
The Lintnerd :))
We do😂😂
@@kasedunn3895 I know we do.
Yeet
The AnCap army will rise
I like how this was meant to be like destructive and evil but it turned out to be like one of the best places I've ever seen
For the rich and influential it sure is; for the ones who don't have much they are subject to every whim of those in power. There is a reason the rich want less and less power for the government because if it doesn't have any, the money the rich have will buy them power and influence from the power vacuum. This also holds true in our societies with governments.
Not necesarily Maximilian Kuhn, because the goverment, is so small and limited, there is no way the rich can influence and put laws that benefit and outlaw or limit competition, so they have to compete.
Also because the mayority of work is private, the private companies have to compete for the workers, these increase salaries and benefice.
Also these means that because the law can be private and the state run very limited wealthfare, you are responsable for your decicion, so you have to take a good decicion, and take a career that make you to the workforce inmidiatly, as education is private, the best education, and more merits, also because the the laws are so minimals and basics, it is very dificult that companies become the corporations of today that can influence the goverment to the point they can do wathever.
Finaly because the police is private, or finance by private entities, these mean police officers are well pay and they feel the incentive to actualy do their jobs.
Also with no wealthfare and limited goverment, there is no bloat and because the state is minimal, there is no bloat and no necesity to raise taxes, so mayority of winnings go to the people, these means, the companies and industries, have to compete for the workers means, better benefits and better salaries, no doubt there will be abuse, but because there is jobs for everione, you dont like the job, you leave somewhere that pays better.
Finaly, because nearly all services are private, run there is very few posibilities of the state hires workersjust for put because friends or family, wich avoidthe bloat
@@paradoxalJohn Your first point is the luddite fallacy. People will find ways to make money, with or without automation.
I don't how a "poor" family would struggle if jobs were more common and the prices of goods and services being low due to competition. This premise relies on things being expensive in a stateless society, which isn't true.
The environment would be better of privatized as individuals have a better incentive to preserve it for profit and recreation. Most pollutions are caused by governments or organizations in bed with the government. Take the Soviet Union for example.
Try living in it.
@@paradoxalJohn that would be cool
11:57 “the only problem with anarchy is that there’s no way for the government to make any money” ... yeah
I see that as a solution, not a problem
On the upside, they also need less money. If you provide almost no services, you need almost no money to pay for them. About the only thing you have to provide is basic infrastructure and with just a little bit of sales tax you can pay for those easily enough.
This wouldn't be hard to do IRL to be honest (harder than the game, but not by much).
Anarchy means no government.. exactly which government is profiting?? Lol
well, anarchy is about no government, so there is no "government making money".
And I am pretty sure, with such system, there will definitely be having some super rich monopolies but poverty will be like 80% of the population.
@@1090Ideas Ah ok that makes more sense lol
"They're waiting to be stabbed"
No, they aren't. They have a frickin pistol.
If anything they and the criminals are on equal terms of "don't point that thing at me and stay out of my sight"
The last criminal to openly try met a Glock 18. And was squeegeed off the pavement.
There's also private security.
You know, guys that want to protect your family and don't care how fast you drive because there's no ticketing incentive?
@@TheAttacker732 Based AF
*_"Introduce a little bit of... anarchy"_*
My god, the joker was right all along!
the joker doesnt know the first thing about anarchy.
@Antiope4 Anarchy in the non-political sense does mean total chaos, lawlessness. But for this video, it's about anarchy as a political system.
@@Shijaru64 Anarchy will always end up in turbo capitalism
@@frodehp43 Totally agreed.
Yes, the Joker is the god of the new world, he shall make the new Soviet Army.
You can’t spell “Flawless” without “lawless”
Now THAT'S a great joke
True
And you can't spell Slaughter without Laughter.
That works on *1* level
this didn’t work and i’m sad.
"we built the city up as an anarchy, and god we made a lot of money doing it" - Gray 2019
11:51
My favorite quote of 2019 I’d love for this to be used in the real world
That line could very well be in a movie. Brilliant!
He has my vote next election
Phantomsinferno CAPITALISM RULES
"The people are all wealthy because the government doesn't make any money."
Say that again real slow...I'm almost there.
You're damn right. 20-25% of your own dollars doesn't seem like much being taken from you per check, but add that tax rate to every working American and then realize how much money the government takes AND without transparency, how do you REALLY know where your money is going? We let the government tax us more and more like they aren't corrupted like, comon people... don't trust the government, trust yourself.
Build a culture that teaches people how to pay for their own healthcare, their own retirement, their own police and fire department, their own highways, their own schools, NOT a culture that just RELIES on the government taking your money to do it for you. Desperate people do desperate things, and to survive without help? Well, they'll find a way in an anarcho-capitalist society.
"Just a couple people that totally got off, bro." -Dennis Reynolds
Coffee Sploosh totally agreed federal government is needed but should stay out of the way as long as capitalism is being preserved within the markets. We pay way too much into the fed through taxes, I hate these people who claim lowering taxes hurts the lower classes because “trickle down” doesn’t work. Trickle down is a strawman created to refute Raegan esque tax policies. But its proven lower taxes improves the pockets of american citizens, its funny when people say otherwise. Anyways good comment!
@@gamingsaint6238 Thanks for the reply. I got into school for 20 weeks and racked up over 6k in debt. Ridiculous. I started my own business and didn't even need 6 grand to see a profit. Give us more choice, give us choices where our taxes go where the individual as a collective decide what's most important in our communities and country.
@@spaulding304 THANK YOU
Tried to create a lawless State...instead wound up creating Dubai lol
Yeah but with like freedom
And coffee 👌
@@thenlnlkn But it ended up a libertarian oligarchy so I think they lost their freedom when private entities could own their own police. Freedom out the window
@@eagle3676 now the police are either private armies or security guards
i live in dubai and laws here haunt you at midnight
@@Aadvait lol
*"OMG there's a hotel down here? I didn't do this, this just happened"*
free market in a nutshell
yes, I keep coming back to watch this over and over again, because while this is not a completely accurate simulation, it does give me the warm fuzzies, free-market wise at least 😄
@@hyperlanceitex6149 accuracy of name employee in building:
loli as a lolita the is a from russian people
You know anarchy is anarchy. The only thing that separates anacho communism and anacho capitalism is voluntarism.
@@sujaykrishnanath82 anarcho communism doesn't exist and is a contradicting ideology.
@@sujaykrishnanath82 You can't have anarchistic communism. Communism goes against human nature, you need to force the people into it. Anarchy is the lack of governmental control, so communism can't exist in an anarchy.
"The problem with anarchy is that there's no way for the government to make any money."...yup. You hit the nail on the head.
Government should have as little power as possible.
@@frankcastle4715 government shouldn't even exist!
That's no problem
@@bitzelijoschaevci3444 careful what you wish for. The government is a pain until you need it.
@@bitzelijoschaevci3444 it should
"Sweet baby Jesus of the oil" is the most beautiful American sounding response I have ever heard
Love how he tire to destroy everything with anarchy, but all the people banded together and made everything work!
like it always has
Wish humanity was like! We all can’t agree on anything.
@Firelord Eliteast67 yeah, what you all aren't realizing is that, in this simulation, it's just the rich exploiting the poor without limits.
@Cradle of Chaos
“yeah, what you all aren't realizing is that, in this simulation, it's just the rich exploiting the poor without limits.“
This is based on…?
@@cradleofchaos4923 na it seems more like, that there is a trickle down effect, that unlike in the real world works.
Tried to create capitalist hellscape, accidentally created utopia.
This sounds like a fascinating setting for a novel.
u right :O
It's been done already. Futuristic Violence and Fancy Suits. It's not a bad book but it's hard to get into at first because of the main character.
@@PenTheMighty Why?
In the novel, an nihilistic liberal decides to screw over the world by starting a anarcho-capitalist state expecting it to fail but his plans backfires and he inadvertently creates a utopian society.
Probably what would happen in real life, too
"I'm gonna create a lawless city"
*Creates the metropolis from Halo*
No he made florida
@@sparecreeper1580 florida metropolis from halo then
I broke down and bought this game cause of this video I have almost 80 hours played thanks a lot
Is the game any good? I like games in this genre.
I see this as an absolute win
At 18 when I first registered to vote, I jokingly registered as an anarcho-capitalist. I'm sure I'm still on a watch list somewhere.
Dead Im dead
Anarcho-capitalists are not real anarchists
@@Protomanbeawsome correct they are not.
@@Protomanbeawsome they're anarcho-capitalists lol
Dead Im dead well at least we know, an caps are weird folks
Anarcho-capitalists are not even people
Drinking game: Take a shot whenever the Upper Class is okay with this
Nah man, i kinda like my liver
shut the up
😂😂😂
You gonna be drunk AF!
@@FBI-real shut the up
11:50
"The biggest problem with anarchy is there's no way for the government to make any money."
This statement is deeper than it has any right to be.
That's why everyone prospers!
"problem"
There's literally no government though.
@@RP-qe8mv lmfao did you really just use Switzerland to prove a point about government involvement? You mean one of the "European paradises" that give a plethora of free social programs to their citizens like college and healthcare?
The truth is that human success isn't primarily predicated on government vs private involvement. It's mostly based on competence and trust. A system that is run fairly and without corruption is the best option. It's a fact that corruption can happen in both government and in private industry to absolute absurd degrees. So it's kind of just fundamental human nature that's holding us back from a real paradise, not some silly ideologies about "big vs small govt".
What he did is he owned public places and had fees they paid that way
“Welcome to Ancapistan where every man can be a king!”
yesss
@eyan sorad nah
@eyan sorad *BIOSHOCK INTENSIFIES*
@eyan sorad as it should be. And anyone who believes otherwise is weak. And no I’m being 100% genuine and earnest. Only children and pets are loved unconditionally (and then only by their parents & family). Why should we give time to anyone who isn’t
@eyan sorad *M I N A R C H I S T !!!*
Suffering from Success: Government Edition
The fact this was so successful was so beautiful lol
Gray: literally gives everyone codes for nuclear bombs
The game: *the upper class liked that*
Me: i hear a nuke comeing WAIT I SEE A NUKE COMEING AHHHHHHHH RUN RUN AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Recreational nukes
“The biggest problem with this friggin anarchy is there’s no way for the government to make any money.”
Um. I don’t think you know what anarchy is.
Is great.
anarchy good
The Shitstorm Starter
The government wouldn’t exist
The best would be libertarian because it has a free market but it still has funds to maintain rights because of course we can’t have no laws
Gray created anarchy goddammit
This game is quite realistic if you think about it, upper class loves everything you are doing because it makes it accessible to start business without following certain laws in turn saving money in the long run.
Same applies to lower class
It also makes the status of upper class accessible by the lower class.
I can just imagine game developers feeling very depressed after watching gray as the game they made for normal play is being fucked up.
Seems normal to me.
As a dev myself I love seeing people play my games in ways I’ve never thought of
He's not really doing anything particularly crazy. The game just seems to be really easy.
He wasn't doing anything nearly as game breaking in this one as he does in other games. Gray is actually the best kind of tester for developers. The first thing I was taught by the person teaching me game design was: Try to think of every way a player can break your game, and how to stop them from doing it. You can never think of everything though, and people do strange things. Gray shows you just how he can break a game. He has a natural talent for it.
Silicon Valley is mostly Libertarian, despite our reputation. Conservatives hear we don't care about gay marriage, transgendered people and we're mostly atheists - therefore we must be liberuls. This game is showing the bias of the coders.
Gray: sure anyone can be a taxi driver
Me: Thats what uber is
Just take away any required permits or background checks and you're all set
@@dusty2080 That's what Uber was before they got sued.
@@Briskrainbow0
Oh yeah, was that the thing related to kidnapping/assault?
@@dusty2080 Yup. Several cases of sexual assaults/kidnappings happened with Uber drivers taking home drunk or just simply lone women at night. In my opinion, it is like everyone forgot the reason why Taxi Drivers had a lot of regulations and licensing.
@@Briskrainbow0 That idea was backwards to begin with. Hitchhiking has had a bad reputation for being risky for decades, and for good reason. But getting into an unlicensed cab is effectively the same thing; only you get to pay for the privilege of being in danger.
Simcity: Intense micro-management required
Citystate: Things just.... happen
They "happen" according to how the game programmers have decided that they will "happen". This is NOT REAL LIFE.
Anthony Davis calm ya tits. It is real life.
Anthony Davis not really the less regulated private property is and the less amount of taxes are charged the more successful the country is
@@andrespinilla8611 No its not thats lies the rich tell the poor so the poor accept horrible conditions and don't complain
@@pimp963 why do the poor need to rely on government? can't they take responsibility for themselves
Gray: *trys to create a city without rules*
Gray: *actually creates Florida*
The apple never falls too far from the tree huh.
More specifically he created Orlando. A city of nothing but high rises, hotels, beaches, and amusement parks you had to devastated the local wetlands to build.
Sounds like Los Santos
Where are the alligators
"Gender Equality, you guys figure it out!"
My sides XD
bames jond Possible borderline enslavement of women ;u;
@@ScarrVett This kinda system would end up enslaving anyone who can't make enough money, are you saying women can't make money? Brawn would mean nothing here, brains would be everything, are you calling women stupid?
That government involvement in these kinda things creates gender equality is a myth. In my country which have lots of government involvement with this, studies have found that the genders self segregate despite the government trying to prevent it. The only field that naturally ended up with a 50/50 gender ratio was politics. Truth is, just because some women likes fishing it doesn't mean that there are tons of women that secretly want to fish. And just because some men like styling hair, it doesn't mean there are tons of men that secretly want to style hair. Men and women simply don't like working together that much either. What the study found was that when the government force more women into a certain field men will leave that field. That is because this kind of capitalist system works on exploiting our natural instinct to compete, and men aren't in competition with women, they compete for women. And in the same way, women are not in competition with men, they compete with each other for men. Work was never really about making money, money was always just the rating system that told other people if you're mating material. Capitalism is essentially just the modern way of hitting each other with sticks and rocks to see who gets to have babies. In this system you won't be enslaved for being a woman, you will be enslaved for being poor. You can argue that men will try to keep women poor out of self interest, but men are just half the population, so it's not like women couldn't try to do the same to men. The only real advantage men have over women is physical strength, while women have the advantage of being more socially aware, and I'd dare to say that being more socially aware is a better advantage in a modern society such as this. Very few men are scared of using their physical strength against women, they're scared that woman will use her social influence to make other men punish him for doing so. So it's possible that in such a society with no government interference both violence and manipulation would become illegal, or both would be legal, both of which would actually make it more equal than our standards. Today, it's illegal for men to use his advantage, but it's not illegal for women to use her advantage, so I'd argue that women already have far more power than men in modern western society and it's just taking some time for the full effect of this to show. All a woman has to do is act scared and innocent and helpless and most men will happily use violence against other men to defend and protect her without even knowing the story, when it becomes clear that women are not so innocent and have equal or more power than men, this will change and men will stop having the desire to use force against other men. When this happens not only will we become more peaceful and end all wars, but women won't be able to get away with manipulation anymore either, and then we'll have accomplished the goals of feminism. It'll be a much more boring world, but a much safer one too as sexual drives will basically have been rendered inert and with it will go things like greed, power, control, and so on, and then we can finally build our perfect utopia and focus on more important things like finding spiritual enlightenment, protecting nature and creating art, while most work will become a thing of the past. That's why I'm a feminist despite that I think that most of modern feminism currently is just being ridiculous.
Daniel I'm not calling women stupid, I'm just saying that it's *possible* for an anarchist society to go by an extreme patriarchal structure for something like that to happen.
There wouldn't be an institution to enforce "possible borderline enslavement of women", but maybe there's no institution to prevent that IF it's allowed and socially acceptable.
It's not definite, but it's possible
well considering that "gender equality" means equality of outcome you can't have an anarcho-capitalist system with socialistic policies
Gray is totally a better manager of the people. HE UNITED THE PEOPLE.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Gray, on the other hand, had no good intentions. In fact, he had no intentions for people at all.
@@MrJH101 True, even though his intention was to DESTROY make everything fall apart... in this case... instead of the world falling apart, breaking the game.... he did the exact opposite....
Otaku-chan Anime yep, this was a case of extreme irony. There have been countless leaders who always started off wanting to perform many great things, but ended up doing some real horrifying or brutal acts when they had power.
And then we have Gray here, the anarchist who just wanted to see the world destroy itself for a few selfish laughs, but ended up making it better somehow without even intending it to work out that way.
...I guess it’s true what they say, “Nobody in politics truly gets what they want.”
@@MrJH101 I... honestly don't know whether to be impressed that he managed to unite people despite the fact that he actually want to make them suffer or disappointed that he didn't get his way to make everyone suffer... what do you think?
@a fantasy I think it was technically a win-win for him no matter what. Good stratagems always seek out the best possible outcomes. Great stratagems have outcomes where it’s never a loss either way.
*"No additional tax, I want to see every single vehicle giving mother nature the middle finger..."*
As it should be.
Based af
"Homelessness? No support. Deal with it."
Big oof lmbo
Also gets lower class support
+Skyler's Animations
don't wanna be homeless? either get a job or don't gamble your house away in the first place. no government intervention required.
@@voltagedrop5899 ahh I wish i was as young and naive as you :')
people who say lmbo instead of lmao are big gae
@@piggi5xtheawesome973 Actually I doubt their sexual orientation is determined by their level of swearing
"Welcome to Washington+More Coffee, here's your complimentary catgirl and AR-15. Now git off my property."
"hippity hoppity get out my private property"
LMAO
"Free stuff? Sounds like communism *shoots you dead*"
Your paying. Not my taxes :)
@@RainbowManification not free, *complimentary*.
"This biggest problem with this friggin' anarchy is there's no way for the government to make any money."
That's the point. Anarchy means no government. It's rather self-evident that when there's no government, that non-existent government won't need any money.
@Tyler Reese I agree that anarchy means 'no rulers.' Another way of saying that is 'no government,' or perhaps a better way to say that is 'no state,' but we tend to use the terms 'the state' and 'the government' interchangeably.
Money is necessary for any economy with divisions of labor and divisions of labor are necessary for any economy to progress beyond a mere 'cave-man-like' economy.
Depends on what you mean by equality. Equality of opportunity is a laudable goal that is nearly achieved (though the progressives are fighting hard to against it.) Equality of outcome is an idiotic idea that cannot be achieved in a society more advanced than a 'cave-man-like' society ... and even in a cave-man-like society it's not really possible, it's just that the differences between become minimal.
@Tyler Reese First of all,
I said _laudable_ NOT _laughable._
I agree the 'the government' and 'the state' are not the same thing. They are, however, used interchangably in our society, which is what I said. The government is the apparatus. The state is the people who control that apparatus. At least that's how it was explained to me.
There's so much wrong with your second paragraph, I don't even know where to begin. First of all, 'money' is not the worthless pieces of paper we are now forced to use. 'Money' is simply a common commodity that is widely accepted which can be used as a means of exchange. The alternative to money is barter and barter CANNOT support a complex economy.
If being a doctor and being a ditch digger both paid exactly the same we'd have allot fewer doctors. A main problem with the utopian type societies like what you describe is the problem of incentives. We have TVs and cars and cell phones and cargo ships and so forth because someone invented them in an effort to make a profit. Without that incentive, who would take all the risks necessary to invent new products? Russia had exactly this problem.
There's a sickness going around our society right now which is the idea that rich people are rich because they're evil. No doubt some of them are, and no doubt, some of them use their riches in nefarious ways, but rich people get rich in the first place because they offer something to society that society wants, something that improves society. You say 'they need us, we don't need them' and you're right as long as you don't mind giving up cars, computers, grocery stores, and all the other things they invented/produced/etc.
I've started a business. I sacrificed to save up money then risked that money to start up a business. Then I hire someone to help out and your argument is that I should give them the same wages I make myself? Why? What did they sacrifice? What did they risk? Think it through, if my employees got an equal share of everything, why would I sacrifice to save and then risk that money in the first place?
The very first economy set up by European settlers in the new world was a communist economy. No one had any incentive to work. Consequently, 90% of them died the first winter because they had no stores of food, no stores of firewood, etc. There are 500 settlers and my job is to chop firewood. Because I have to share equally with everyone, for every 1000 pieces of wood I chop, I get to keep 2. How much wood am I going to chop? Not much.
The second governor of that colony changed it over to a capitalist economy and it thrived from then on.
The last thing I want to point out is that anarcho-communism (or anarcho-socialism) is an oxymoron. Whose going to force a school to take someone who can't afford to pay the tuition? All forms of socialism (like communism) require a totalitarian form of government to force people to give up (share equally) whatever they've produced. The only fair way is to let each one benefit from their own labors. This means those who work hard will have more than those who don't, and thus there will be people in different economic tiers (or classes if you prefer.) Those who produce/invent something that society wants they are rewarded, incentivizing others to produce/invent. When you don't benefit from your own labor, you have no incentive to labor.
@@Lord_Volkner Cool comment, I agree with you. But why anarcho-communism is not possible? There can be a anarcho-communism commune without government where people would enter voluntary. They would just kick out of that commune by its members if they don't agree with the rules. Despite I don't like communism and prefer capitalism as well, I think there are people for whom it is suitable. You're right about the problem of incentives, but I think there are people who can work productively in socialism society too.
@@danilpopkov8211 There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? One of the major fallacies of all forms of socialism is it's fundamental assumption that people are all equal; we're not. Some people are deligent, some of not, some are hard working, some are lazy, some are clever, some are dim-witted and so on.
Let's imagine a socialist society for a moment. The hard-working people get paid the same as the lazy people. Before long, the hard working people are going to pack up and leave. Now we just lost the productive members in society. The only way to prevent this is to prevent them from leaving. There are two ways to do that: provide incentives (pay them more) or compulsion (force them to stay.) If we take the first route, that is, if we pay each one according to how much value they add then we're no longer a socialist society; we're back to capitalism. If we take the second route, we need an authoritarian state to force them to stay.
But let us imagine that we force them to stay, what incentive do they have to keep working hard? Again, we're back to incentives or compulsion. One is the antithesis of socialism and the other is authoritarianism. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron.
But now let us take the route you refered to, getting rid of anyone who doesn't measure up. Now we're Stalin with slave labor camps (or gulags as they were called in Russia,) or Hitler with concentration camps or Mao with death camps. And who gets to decide who measures up and who doesn't? Well, you have to have a centralized authority for that, which is the exact opposite of anarchy. Socialism requires an authoritarian/totalitarian centralized body (state) to function. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron.
For a good look into how these things actually worked in the real world, I highly recommend _The Gulag Archipelago_ by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. You can find a free audio version of Vol 1 here:
archive.org/details/TheGulagArchipelago
Vol 2 here:
archive.org/details/107GulagVolTwo
and Vol 3 here:
archive.org/details/103GulagVolThree
@@Lord_Volkner
"There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? "
maybe respect, glory, curiousity(in case of inventions), whatever. I actually don't care about that, just wanted to mention that there are some people who are not motivated by money only, so if we actually had the freedom of association, I think it is possible that a couple of such communes would arise. In addition to that, there could be cooperative forms of business, where intial capital is provided equally by all of the workers and all of them have equal responsibility. As far as I know, there are forms of socialism which don't suppose having the strong government.
Last video: "Everyone is poor and diseased but they're happy"
This video: "Everyone is rich and prosperous and happy"
When the happiest good ending is hidden behind the Evil route
(The intent to create the most chaotic lawless society ended up producing one of the free-est most prosperous society of all)
Game developers:Create nice game with good features
Gray: *Fucks it up*
*thAt's juSt ThE gRaY wAy brO*
Lel Memes why does this seem stolen
"I want every single vehicle to give Mother Nature the middle finger" XDXD
You should try one where you start with anarchy and change it all in a split second to strict as hell government
Kris Murrell Aka every Democracy 3 playthrough ever 😛
So Venezuela.
pretty much every democratic country right now.
Everybody leaves and now you have a concrete desert. Good job.
@@xiconp1993 That's why fascists love walls. They don't just keep people out.
“The problem of this anarchy is the government doesn’t make money” YES
That's a good thing
There is a confusion between the word Anarchy and Chaos..
No matter the confusion, as a civilian you're fucked ...
@@Spongebob0911 I mean, civilians would have the power. I think that's the exact opposite of what you're imagining.
gold-and-black-anarchy Anarchy is inherently left wing. Abolishing the state compatible with left wing values. More government doesn’t equal left wing. Ronald Reagan massively increased the state in most respects (military, war on drugs,etc.) and he definitely wasn’t on the left. Anarchy can not be capitalist or right wing because capitalism and right wing politics are about establishing hierarchies and it creates inequality. Left wing politics are about dismantling hierarchies and increasing equality. Communism is a moneyless, classless and yes STATELESS economic system. Capitalism is the definition of an unnecessary hierarchy and anarchy is inherently opposed to unnecessary hierarchies. Under so-called “capitalist anarchy” the most powerful corporations would effectively become the new state and therefore it can not be anarchist by definition. Being an anarchist (among other things) means opposing capitalism and the state simultaneously. Socialism (worker ownership of the means of production) and Communism (I already defined this) are meant to dismantle hierarchies, at least ideally, and are completely compatible with anarchism. And yes some self proclaimed communist countries had states (the USSR, Mao’s China) however, not all types of communism are completely anarchist (such as Marxism-Leninism) and the state is supposed to wither away by the time those societies transition to full communism, which would probably take decades, also those states tend to become corrupt and turn away from communism back to capitalism (China is the perfect example of this.) Anarchy can not be right wing by definition. Also capitalism is what really enslaves people and steals from them. If you don’t work under a capitalist system you won’t have money to buy food and you starve. This coercion is effectively slavery. Also in the third world it’s not at all uncommon for people to be literally enslaved at gunpoint, such as cobalt mining in the Congo. Capitalist anarchism, also known as fake anarchism only opposes the government and allows corporations to become an even worse government simply because it doesn’t call itself the government. And it will be worse because corporations make money of exploiting people so they have a financial incentive to make things worse. True anarchism opposes all unjustified hierarchies and no matter what, whether it’s capitalism, the state, or anything else. That is all.
gold-and-black-anarchy Maybe you should read it, everything in my comment is correct. Also I don’t support the Democratic Party, I’m not even American, and the Democratic Party definitely isn’t anarchist, so I have no idea why you brought it up like it’s a response to what I wrote. Anarchy opposes unjust hierarchies, such as capitalism and the state alike. I’m not trying to pull the wool over your eyes by secretly shilling for the state, I have no reason to do that. Also I don’t plan on dying anytime soon, so the world will have to deal with my correctly explaining anarchy for at least a little while longer.
Jean-Luc La Rue You ever hear of a little thing called “anarcho-capitalism”? It’s socially anarchist and economically, free markets rule. 0 government intervention. It’s beautiful.
Gray: what should we call a citystate with no laws?
Me: the purge
Gray: Washington + more coffee
Wellll a few MILLION dead in the middle East and tens of millions here because of the FDA is pretty much the Purge right? Pledge allegiance baby
No additional taxes on cars
Middle Class: *Absolutely Approves*
Upper Class: *Approves*
Lower Class: ...
I don't know why you think they wouldn't approve as well. Everyone like lower taxes. Most poorer people still have at least a car, and I'm sure they'd love to pay less on it as well.
Can't disapprove if there is no lower class 🤷♂️
Liz Price
This comment was poking fun at some of the logic fails of this game
Lower Class: what car??
Josny13
Since you failed to realize and/or read the reply to “Liz Price”..
This comment was poking fun at some of the “logic fails” and the fact that people find it funny that the upper class approves
I love how he just relaxes all the laws and accidentally builds Dubai.
is this what Ron Swanson knew would happen all along?
He knew someone would play a videogame?
@@Ayelis nah, i meant this is why he hated the american government system
I was actually thinking exactly this😂
@Ludvig Lindén ahh interesting. Do you think it would really work?
@Ludvig Lindén will do!
I think the most amazing part about this is that he could continue to anger the lower classes without any problems because the lower classes didn't exist in the city at all! Everyone was middle or upper class!
> Talks about anarchy
"Oh cool this should be interesting"
> Capitalist oligarchy
"ohshitancaps"
Maybe it's an oligarchy because all the population are high class
To be fair every democracy is an oligarchy because large corporations run the government
@@whiteduck5563 True, at least are current representative democracies are run by politicians and their wealthy friends
@@whiteduck5563 I mean, yes.
I thought this was weird because how can there be an oligarchy without a government? It just sounds like an insanely wealthy and prosperous society
Gray: "oh no. The roads"
Ancaps: *nervous sweating*
Our only weakness
Ancaps: Tolls for everyone! You pay a toll! You pay a toll! Everyone pays a toll! Except that guy in the helicopter. He pays landing fees.
A soon to be richer Ancap: "I'll pay to fix the roads between my business partners so we can trade more easily, and enjoy going to see each other more. I'll also do it to make trucking and logistics easier so the cash flows more freely"
See photos of American cities before the income tax....
He should of named it “It’s Free real-estate”
yes!
Should’ve or should have
No He should named it FLORIDA CITY
e *state*
It's costly real e
"So the last time we made a city where the goverment owns everything"
Soviet Anthem: *starts playing*
Don't know why I clicked but am glad I did.
Same.
> ''our people are starting to become a lot of middle and upper class, which leaves not enough people to work the regular jobs''
> capitalism: suffering from success
"The worst part about anarchy is there's no way for the government to make any money"
11:50
Ancaps: The -worst- best part about anarchy is that there's no way for the -government- tyrant's institution to -make- steal any money
@@Adri9570 that sounds more accurate.
@@Adri9570 so without government who would protect you from enemy army’s
@@Sir_Guardus privatized defense
I love how you expect it to be all crime and chaos, but instead the rich found their dream home.
I know its unbelievable, lol.
Sounds accurate. Give people the ability to do their own thing, and you would be surprised on what they can do.
You have to understand that once you realize the media always blows negative stories out of proportion because it gets more sales, that few people actually go on crime sprees relatively speaking. So why exactly would there suddenly be nothing but crime and chaos?
The rich is more heavily taxed and people still whine about these low-crime producers giving people too many jobs and salaries.
@@dragoneye6229 Pretty sure those employees working in this city are just slaves.
>Create Capitalist anarchy
>Everything goes pretty good
>Bernie Sanders has left the chat
Capitalism only works in a simulation.
@@ChangedMyNameFinally69 Nah. If the banana republics in central america have shown us anything, Capitalism works really well. It just isn't very fun for most people in the end.
@@Audiodump So it sucks then
@@ChangedMyNameFinally69 I mean...it has less genocides than communism.
@@Audiodump This nonsense again?
Socialist: *SCREAMING IN CONFUSION*
This statement brings me great amusement and joy.
Not really. This game was made by a classical liberal who follows *PragerU* of all things. I'm not going to take a video game as a model on how to run society, lol.
@@matthewlinus4691 Now that's a hilarious thing to learn five seconds after learning this game exists.
@@matthewlinus4691 its a game dude, chill, this is like saying that the sims is bad simulator, because it allows you to kill your sims
Me :
"Every one is working together and makes a ton of money because the government gets nothing"
There. I think you found the solution to all problems. All of them.
Not the governments.....at first.
Just imagine if the people of this country realize we have a central bank...
CommandoDude, that's some A+ government fearmongering/brainwashing, my dude ;)
"Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem!"
I think you win.
Limited goverment, limited and doing only the necesary for the existence of the nation, so a minimalistic aproach
Krysnha minarchy
@@Krysnha Which is unsustainable because governments always expand their influence
Indeed Albedo, indeed, but in the hipotetical case you have a minimum goverment with no intention to expand, of course again, imposible, human nature, those who have more want more, that is why is imposible to ever have a good goverment, human nature
This isn't Anarcho-capitalism, the roads are state funded!
The people wanted better roads. Went to the road construction crews worked out a deal and bam new roads built faster and better than anything current crews could do.
Sure, but it's close. The game designers realized you have to let the player do *something*, even if they chose as little government as possible.
Lol, yeah if the player plays as the state, then the player can't play an AnCap society.
Many interesting replies. I wonder what kind of results would arise from a pure anarcho-capitalist *simulation* in that case.
@@T--xo2uq sit at keyboard
watch game
I have watched graystillplays for about two months and last night i was listening to a podcast that mentioned the time a game youtuber played this game and tried to break it by making no laws and going full anarchy, i thought to myself "that sound like something gray would do" and look what popped up in my feed today.
"It turned from a Libertarian Anarchy into a Libertarian Oligarchy without me even doing anything -- it just happened" Lol yeah that tends to happen XD
Triggered*
that's when a government is created lol
The governless evolved into a government.
@@aaronthebarbaric7733 Saudi Arabia has a $20,796 per capita income...
@@aaronthebarbaric7733All of that wealth is concentrated. Stop acting like some religious oligarchy is somehow the bastion of equity. Lol Wikipedia, easy there boomer sperg.
If Ron Swanson was the mayor of a city.
Especially since he works for the government.
@pavo6503 No, because he does zero work lol. It's why he works for the government, to ensure that they don't do anything at all.
Not to worry everyone. Ron Swanson has a permit!
And it just says, "I can do what I want"!
Gray: In the anarchy, water is a secondary thing, it doesn't need to exist, it doesn't provide any sort of capitalistic gains
Minutes ago: let's make a beach!
And more beaches, and a marina.
And a Ski Slope... a lot of ski slopes.
Honestly whoever made this game did their research.
Of course, full anarchy isn’t good, but a free market, less regulations, and less taxation, can lead to more being done, as people have more to spend.
The less interference that exists the faster things improve only bad thing is exploitation improves too
Government is good at three things,
Stealing your money,
Taking away your liberty,
And killing people.
They suck ass at everything else.
@@errorcringyname4044 Government is exploitation
@@jamesdean4836 Well done
Free market always lead to oligarchy and wealth inequality
Wait so when the government controls everything everyone is lower class but in an anarchy everyone is upper class?
Is this game trying to tell us something
They know free markets are always superior.
SonicMaster Sword - all heil capitalism
This game was clearly designed by Austro-libertarians, because who the hell else knows who Ludwig von Mises is
You know this is a game right?
FBI open up!!!
you are in possession of knowledge that shouldn't get out, you are under arrest.
Freedom is a beautiful thing.
freedom is an illusion. Some countries just do a better job then others maintaining than illusion
@@OnionChoppingNinja This is exactly what a slaves owner would say. I don't trust you.
OnionChoppingNinja it’s not an illusion lmao, clearly your brain has been grasped by the inexplicable brain washing of a government
@@dopplervocals Denial is the first phase of grief...
But by all means keep telling yourself you're free if it makes you sleep at night.
Be sure to emphasis to yourself that you are "free" next time you go to church. Next time you buy from Best Buys or Amazon. Next time you use the "free" services provided by Google and Facebook. Next time you swallow a pill that came from a box that has the name of a large pharmaceutical company written on the side. Next time you pay taxes to a man who lives on the opposite end of the continent.
@@OnionChoppingNinja You are not forced to go to church. You are not forced to use Amazon. You are not forced to use Facebook and Google. You are not forced to use medicine from large companies. But yes, taxation is still theft.
Gray discovers Anarcho-Capitalism and founds Ancapistan on accident
usually the stereotype for istan places are just places with a bunch of muslim immigrants. In the video he did allow immigrants to come in unfacilitated which is why he called it "ancapistan," just as you would say sweden is swedistan because it has a bunch of immigrants(muslim in particular which is why they use "istan" because it means something in their language i believe).
@@johnjames7668 Ancaps call their perfect society Ancapistan.
No they call them utopias. I will assume you are just trolling/being sarcastic.
@@johnjames7668 Ancapistan as a name is used by ancaps for their ideal country a bit ironically. But they do use it.
"-stan" - means country/land/government as in Eng-land, Deutsch-land etc.
John james are you spazmoided? Literally every ancap I've met (and I've met a lot) has referred to their society as 'ancapistan'. Stop trying to explain other people's jokes then throw a hissy fit when you get proven incorrect
🤣 11:51
"The biggest problem with this fricken anarchy is there's no way for the government to make any money."
You got it all wrong, Anarchy/Voluntaryism does not mean no rules, it means no rulers.
It's a little of both, really. With no government to enforce laws, the only rules are those that society agrees on together. Namely, nonaggression towards others unless that person commits aggression against you first. Typically that's about the only thing all humans can agree on. Anything else would have to be a local case by case basis.
Except that as we saw in this video, companies become the rulers.
@@BandNerdcp except that with free trade and no regulations, there will be greater competition from within and from without. So power will remain fragmented. No need to ask the government for permission = no special interests granted
1queijocas No subsidies either, and since there’s no bailouts from the (non existent) government, there can’t be any monopolies.
None of you have played the Crackdown series, huh?
Congratulations, you just invented Hong Kong in 1990 :)
@Garalithic Perez r/whoosh
@@nefer-trebeledfomp-4129 then your hookers have shitty ass implants
ok i have no idea what this game is but anything letting you choose between "Austrian" and "Keynesian" is something i will instantly buy. Mises FTW
Dude the second I heard Tim say the name greystillplays I got a huge smile and I knew exactly what video he was going to mention
I watched this video because of Tim.
same here
@@gsgunawan80 may i ask which video was it?
@@mizuki4002 th-cam.com/video/WlPPCAQzMSA/w-d-xo.html
*big corporations start having too much economic power*
*anarchy turns into oligarchy*
"Wow, what a plot twist"
B-But the free market's gonna fix that.
@Brutus Tan Uber drivers aren't robots yet, and as I heard from them, they are severely underpaid, so we're still talking class oppression here
@Brutus Tan Could you please explain how what you just said is relevant to either my comment or the comment I replied to?
@Brutus Tan you say I sound socialist and am just saying Marxist "claptrap" as if you weren't just quoting neolib slogans
You can say that class oppression doesn't exist as much as you want, it won't change the reality that it is the only way in which big corps can profit but ok, you say that I'm just wrong by association ignoring the entirety of the argument so I guess that there's nothing I can say to change your mind
@Brutus Tan also, did you just imply that it is hard for bigger companies to compete with smaller ones? Wtf
To quote Borderlands-
“What a great day for capitalism!”
"Remember, no refunds."
"Violence doesn't solve anything, except for the things it does"
"catch a guuuuun! ugh, never doing that again!"
"your cash ain't worth a thing if you don't spend it!"
huh, i'm pretty sure those are also used in stellaris when using the... slick corpation? adviser.
I wish there was a city building game where whenever you want you could go down, walk around, and interact with your city GTA sandbox style.
Me too
I would love that XD
I'm pretty sure there is but I cant for the life of me remember the name
There was Streets of Simcity and Simcopter, though no walking I'm afraid
It was called Metropolis 2 for the ps2. Was a dam good game when I was little
Michael Malice, is out there somewhere just like “Yeah, I told you.”
You do notice the government runs the roads, and its the most problematic part of the city.
we've been experiencing our streets here getting smaller because SOMEBODY wanted to give a lane to bicycle riders, and guess what those lanes are empty pretty much all day long and traffic is that much worse
BA$3D
Ancap af
You DO realize that this is a GAME, right? As such, its determinations and outcomes are directly biased by the wishes of the creators. You could enter any combination of parameters on the interface and whatever the programmers have chosen to cause the game to interpret those choice, that's what you would get. I would love -- LOVE!! -- to know exactly WHO has financed the development of this game, and also the political biases and news outlets favored by the creators. I suspect that this game is most likely in line with say, a climate report from Exxon-Mobil that talks about how great burning fossil fuels is for the environment and the atmosphere.
@@anthonydavis9662 I could make the same case about biases with the Democracy games (2 and 3 in particular)
I would vote for Gray if he ran for president.
Gray 2020!!!
2024
@@Bluesonofman Did you just assume -his gender- that he will run in America? 😂 🤣 🤣 😂
Imagine he ran for president, scary and nice.
ever heard of John McAfee? ;D
Running for president damn it.
This video: **Exists**
Every source of authority and law: “I’ll allow it.”
You should've ended this by suddenly charging the maximum amount of taxes possible, just to watch that profit number glitch out.
no, the rich people would just move out and the city would collapse. We call this the Laffer Curve.
Ben or more well known as democrat intervention or “white flight.”
if we taxed the richest people in america it would take the government like a year to spend it all at the current rate of spending. the rich arent that rich when you compare it to how much the government needs to run it
@@duhj also the rich wouldn't be able to invest on their own business so you would make everyone that use their services poorer.
>anarchy
"everyone is middle class and upper class now"
hmmm
we might just be onto something here...
Checkmate socialists. Game wrecks epic style
The poor died?
YEP
Libertarian Anarchist here... that's exactly it, man.
Exactly, of course there's no way the game designer is a libertarian anarchist that choose to make this kind of policy the best possible for its game, real life MUST be like this game, right?
It's human greed that's the problem. Jesus saves. Find Him quickly.
You should name the next city state New Joyzee, I'm sure you could come up with some ideas for a citystate like that.
“I guess the problem with this frickin’ anarchy is that there’s no way for the government to make any money.”
That’s the exact opposite of a problem.
*this is the content I signed up for......I love this stuff😂*
Agreed
The content I signed up for has been kicked to the curb.
RIP My Summer Car
“Welcome to a ski slope, next to a ski slope, next to a ski slope.” - Gray
Me: Ah, so Utah then? 😂
Or Vancouver Canada lmao
Basket Case Jace Gaming Colorado
New Mexico
True
Hell yeah man
“The more you enslave the people, the more they love you” - Gray 2019
Proof that Libertarianism is a superior ideology.
haha, yes, because everyone is a masochist.
Who came here after Timcast IRL stream?
Me lol
Which episode was this?
I heard about this on timcast and immediately thought "I wonder if gray played that game" then I find out "oh he was talking about gray specifically"
@@thebigkbear9881 same!
This popped into my feed the day after i watched that episode of Tim's podcast.
Nice profile picture
2:54 The Reason why The Upper class Loves This So much Is Because They're The Only ones who can afford Tanks RPGs And Any kind of Weapon or War You Can Think of
"What do they learn in those private schools? Praise the flag?"
What flag? It's Anarchy.
So you said you expected people to riot in the streets because it's anarchy. That's a general misconception. What would they riot *against*, exactly? They can do whatever they want. They get whatever they want. There's no reason to riot.
more that there is no poor in that city because of the gentryfication of it, the city houshold cost so much only middle class and rich peoples live there, the poor live in another city
@@kurokami5964 eventually there would be no where to go/people wouldn't leave and would just cause mass issues with crime.
@@kurokami5964 even in the end there were a lot of lower class in that city, btw, when Gray checks the Arkology (the pyramid-like house at 14:52) there's like 60 lower-income households in there, out of 400 total. That's like 15% of all households in what looks like the most expensive building in the city.
yeah so id say they are "poor" only because they are in the lower income braket but objectivly they are not poor to be able to live in such housing
Just because you can commit a murder and no government would come to lock you up, doesn't mean the people wouldn't come for you. People are free to exact their own revenge or establish their own private security to punish and incarcerate enemies of the public.
at 4:21, your upper class people have organized their own private police force for if the market demands it and government doesn't provide it, then people will voluntarily pay for it. Ditto for fire departments and roads.
Off to the gulag with you, comrade.
@@scrutchplate2512 take a ride on my helicopter commie
Ben
No one wants to travel in your slavery
@@cezarcatalin1406 There is no slavery when voluntarism rules
9:44 Welcome to a ski sloaps next to a ski sloap next to a ski sloap...
This is how Switzerland works
Expectation:ALL OUT WAR!!
Reality:Peace. ALL OUT HAPPINESS
Government is boring. Capitalism is fun
@John Doe And don't forget the fire bomb raids were about as bad as the nukes. They didn't nuke Tokyo because it was already destroyed by a firebomb raid. Killing much more civilians than the nukes.
"Look at this crap!" (bulldozes down an entire forest) lmao
The childlike wonder of him discovering how good life is with the government staying out of it is great.
i have to assume robots are doing the shitty jobs. or is janitor now going to pay a living wage? or does this simulate individuals holding two jobs? two low class jobs would probably pay a person into being almost middle class.
@@sebcw1204 plus it ended up an oligarchy so I assume all the freedoms are lost and corporations own their asses now
When a state is communist, they start out OK, but end in debt. It is the complete opposite with capitalism.
@xellossaxon No, this has to do with the libertarian/authoritarian spectrum, not the economic right or left.
@Roger Dodger The problem with that is your model doesn't actually work out that way IRL. Why? Because people aren't one-size-fits-all robots nor are we all that logical. Our actions are based on emotion more than anything else. If you take all regulation out you end up with a few exceedingly wealthy people on top, with their yes-men and flunkies and back-stabbing schemers under them who manage all the poor working schlubs who get nothing. Such societies actually ENCOURAGE fairly high unemployment as a means of keeping wages suppressed and people desperate enough to do pretty much whatever they want for a bit of money. Is that logical for any kind of long term profit? Hell no. But does it make Bob On Top feel lots more secure in his wealth and to his mind, keep others from doing something better and taking his wealth and/or position/status? Yep. Oh, and those few people on top? They, in the interest of securing their positions, start making all kinds of rules that the commoners have to follow to make sure they stay working and don't cause too much trouble. And then, since they want the best for their kids, make sure all their wealth and power is passed down to their children. Welcome to the birth of aristocracy.
"animals? you can do whatever the hel you want with em" lmfao
I have lived in Washington my whole life. This is an accurate simulation.
Ace Saylor
Exactly
@Ace Saylor idk about utopia, but it definitely got big
@Ace Saylor Yes, an utopia in a video game which doesn't simulate all things that are at play in real life. But your an an-cap, so of course you're just gonna point at it and say "Look anarcho-capitalism works!"
You noticed how it flipped from being a libertarian anarchy to an oligarchy? That is what would happen in real life. You should look at how people live in oligarchies, it's not very pretty.
Nigga this is *D u b a i*
so it was perfect and everyone was happy?