>A kills B>A kills CB is more important and liked more and wealthier than Cin ancap, will A get bigger fine for killing B than for killing C ceteris paribus?

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: bacce701719e643⋯.jpg (68.59 KB, 540x532, 135:133, domino pizza.jpg)

Anonymous 10/10/18 (Wed) 15:22:48 No.91811

>A kills B

>A kills C

B is more important and liked more and wealthier than C

in ancap, will A get bigger fine for killing B than for killing C ceteris paribus?

Anonymous 10/10/18 (Wed) 15:36:20 No.91813

>>91811

There really isn't one answer ceteris paribus, as there isn't a unified, monolithic legal system in ancapistan. Whoever represents C will try and secure a judge that favors C, whereas whoever represents A will try and secure a judge that favors A. Market forces dictate they'll tend to settle on a judge that's ambivalent towards A and C, either by picking a judge they both agree on, or by each picking one judge who work together to recommend a third. The result won't be perfect every time but it averages out towards impartiality.

Anonymous 10/10/18 (Wed) 22:10:10 No.91829

>>91811

>fine

>in anarchism

Nothing is fine in anarchism.

Anonymous 10/11/18 (Thu) 16:48:40 No.91863

>>91829

everything is fine in anarchism

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 00:11:49 No.91890

File: eb57f1f6fc2d112⋯.jpg (17.18 KB, 255x255, 1:1, smug.jpg)

>>91863

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 02:25:13 No.91901

File: 4f56302945413cc⋯.png (68.58 KB, 292x269, 292:269, buddy.png)

>>91829

>>91863

This is pretty much the problem with anarchism in a nutshell.

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 08:06:01 No.91908

>>91901

It's fine.

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 11:43:14 No.91909

>>91901

go back to pol

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 16:38:50 No.91916

>>91813

>Market forces dictate they'll tend to settle on a judge that's ambivalent towards A and C,

How's that exactly? If A has more money he has less need to settle. Surely then they will settle at a position more favourable to A.

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 17:34:29 No.91924

>>91916

>How's that exactly?

Because they need to both pick a judge they agree with. If a judge will not be neutral he won't be accepted by the person he's against.

Anonymous 10/12/18 (Fri) 17:40:33 No.91926

>>91924

To sum up, it's not about money but about consent and compromise between parties. You could try to buy some advantage but the system is not built around following the highest bidder and so you'll gain very little and it's better to just try to use the money to make the deal between both parties without 3rd parties involved because if there's no victim there's no crime.