There is no chance for him to go to jail. Such sentencing will be appealed to Supreme Court and you know what will happen next.

How is that different from anarcho-syndicalism?

… and of trees in general.

Free Markets: Anarcho-individualists support free markets as a means to distribute resources efficiently. They argue that without state interference, markets would naturally adjust to ensure fair competition and opportunity for all.

Elimination of Monopolies: They believe that many forms of economic inequality stem from monopolies and privileges granted by the state. By eliminating these, they argue that individuals would have equal opportunities to succeed based on their talents and efforts​.

Voluntary Mutual Aid: While they reject compulsory welfare systems, anarcho-individualists support voluntary mutual aid societies, where individuals can freely join and contribute to support each other in times of need​.

Education and Empowerment: Anarcho-individualists stress the importance of education and self-improvement as means for individuals to improve their circumstances. They argue that an educated and informed populace is better equipped to challenge and overcome social inequalities.

Personal Responsibility: They emphasize personal responsibility and self-reliance. Each individual is seen as responsible for their own well-being and should not depend on coercive institutions for support.

Non-Aggression Principle: This principle states that individuals should not initiate force or coercion against others. By adhering to this principle, anarcho-individualists believe that a just and equitable society can be achieved where individuals respect each other’s rights and freedoms

Please note, I personally am not an anarchist, even though I find many principles attractive. I just don’t think that they will work because of the voluntary aspects and internal contradictions (e.g. no state, but elimination of the monopolies. How?)

Sure, anarcho-communists and syndicalists would like just essentially abolish private ownership of means of manufacturing, but not anarcho-individualists. I guess I should have been more clear that I meant my answer from anarcho-individualist point of view.

The anarchists will argue against wealth redistribution because it takes (forcefully via taxes) money from the richer, thus committing a larger sin of anti-freedom than giving this economic freedom for the poorer. You can not make forcefully responsible one person for another person freedoms in anarchism.

I still use Winamp 5.5 or something, before it became bloated. Still kicks the same ass. Llama’s

How many miles?

I sit corrected.

Never heard that cats were doing yoga.

Fire. The rest followed.

Indeed, it is hilarious (not)

Which territory US captured or wanted to capture?

USSR was one of many.

That does not compare advancement in pharmaceuticals at all. It only say that it has good healthcare system. Which I agree is better than in US in coverage, but that’s it. If US had universal healthcare, it arguably would be better, but it says nothing about the need to drop IP. To my knowledge US pharmaceuticals is simply leading in the world, not even comparable to Cuba. Again, comparison with USSR would be better, at least they were of comparable size, and this comparison is still in US favor by large degree.

Define “good”. If you define as equity, then yes, I agree. Nearly everyone was equally repressed in socialist countries. Realizing freedom and human potential, no. Democratic capitalism is better.

No true Scotsman fallacy.

I will also argue that with human nature as it is, building socialism without totalitarianism is not possible. Or without mind control.

The fact is that totalitarian socialism is the only one that was possible to realize.

Well EU is not far behind. But yes, if you damage country by attacking it and literally erasing towns in it, and capturing territory (the one you guaranteed to preserve and even defend by previous agreements), expect to pay.

Despite all evidence of what?

A ban on slavery is an attack on freedom of slave owners.