/vt/ - Virtual Youtubers

>>21026025
>a few plutocrats disagree with their decision?
Yes, I'd imagine so. Most plutocrats would be fine with it, be it by standing by or aiding it, but don't think that /nasfaqg/ is some limp-dicked libertarian state with NAP. I'd imagine it being closer to being pretty hardcore Nietzschean in terms of its approach; this means that if an individual has garnered enough will-to-power and means to enforce it to lay down his own rules and his own terms, he can do that, against everyone and any rule who'd say "thou shalt".

The thing that would be sacred would be the ability to rise up, that is, meritocracy and competitiveness. You cannot deny another man a way to rise to the top and profit, for that would make you a tyrant rather than an anti-tyrant.