• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 07:38
CET 13:38
KST 21:38
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
HomeStory Cup 24 - Info & Preview16WTL 2023 Winter - Week 8 & 9 Recap6WTL 2023 Winter - Week 7 Results/Week 8 Preview7WTL 2023 Winter - Week 6 Results/Week 7 Preview1Solar wins Code S Season 3 (2023)16
Community News
ESL Open Week #203: Solar, MaxPax, Dark win3ESL Open Week #202: Dark, Clem, MaxPax win2EPT Winter Regionals - Serral, Astrea, Oliveira win3EPT Winter Regionals - Replay Pack7ESL Open Week #201: Cure, Clem, MaxPax win3
StarCraft 2
General
HomeStory Cup 24 - Info & Preview David Kim, Blizzard vets to work on new RTS ESL Open Week #203: Solar, MaxPax, Dark win WTL 2023 Winter - Week 7 Results/Week 8 Preview WTL 2023 Winter - Week 8 & 9 Recap
Tourneys
HomeStory Cup 24 (Dec 1-3) [AfreecaTV Pro Series] Classic vs Ryung [WTL 2023] Winter - Week 9 INu's Battles#6 [ Cure vs ByuN ] [AfreecaTV Pro Series] herO vs Cure
Strategy
Where do I go to find pro replays of new patch? Simple Questions Simple Answers TL Strategy Spawning Tool Build Thread
Custom Maps
Could someone fix the 1V1 OBS arcade game? "Macro mechanic energy exceeded limit" The Serral Problem: Where is active zerg play? Cyclone redesign Proposal video
External Content
Mutation # 391 Explosive Hunt Mutation # 397 Locked and Loaded Mutation # 396 In the Name of Love Mutation # 395 Call of the Void
Brood War
General
HunCraft: Genocide [H] [I] Replay Duration Tool Request Cosmonarchy BW match commentaries! Queen's phantom pain blacksheepwall.tv
Tourneys
Platinum Anchor Qualifying S2 China Seasons League 2023 Winter (CSL Season 11) 800$ Proleague North America vs Latam [BSL17] Grand Finals - Sunday 18:30 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Firebat vs Hydra? [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player TvT notes I took on 1-1-1
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines 2 Nintendo Switch Thread Diablo IV
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion TI 2023
League of Legends
[Summer Split] LoL Esports General Discussion
Heroes of the Storm
[Show] Heroes Chop Shop - Designing New Heroes
Hearthstone
Is Hearthstone Gambling?
TL Mafia
Winter Warfare Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread Liquid Arcanon News [0]Paper [410]TL.net/forum/mafia Appeal Disambiguation 1.02 Everybody smurfs for TTT mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine YouTube Thread US Politics Mega-thread [h]Mobile Phone Service/Devices
Fan Clubs
Pet Fan Club The Flash Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion Anime Discussion Thread Series you have seen recently...
Sports
2023 - 2024 Football Thread 2023 NFL/CFB Season NBA General Discussion Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Thread
Tech Support
Simple Questions Simple Answers Really need help with this - Starcraft crash Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Dark Theme! Ask TL Staff Anything The Automated Ban List
Blogs
The StarCraft O…
TheStarCraftObserver
AI, Gaming, and Human Skil…
Hildegard
Hypercoven RTS (25 Updates of)…
a11
about the LAN tournament on t…
sHER1N
10044444
Vivax
I composed another piano so…
Jubinell
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 2181 users

A Case for Anarchism - Page 6

Blogs > CaptainMurphy
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4 5 6 All
geometryb
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
United States1249 Posts
March 14 2008 20:24 GMT
#101
wouldn't the definition of an anarchocapitalist society be one without government? perhaps you could explain how the absence of government during hurricane katrina would be different from your society. there's nothing inherent about a natural disaster that creates chaos because it only creates the destruction of property. The people there still retained their property rights and they haven't changed except they have less stuff. There was supply (even though its lower) and demand and everything. or perhaps it would hinge on the notion that people are unwilling to be immoral, which is X_X.

The Secret Army: while 1 DRO can afford it in 10 years, 10 DROs can do it in 1 year.

Independantly Wealthy+Defense DROs: how would defense DROs grow? by having more men and more weapons to defend more peoples. this doesn't have to be secret at all. it would be raising an army in plain daylight. why didn't the rest of the world gang up on the united states during it's arms race? how were empires ever allowed to amass their armies?

The Question of profit: saying it's unprofitable doesn't make it unprofitable. it was profitable for GB to take over india and hongkong, for USA to take over indian territories, etc etc.
also, the comments on that page are pretty good also.

world government have emerged (i guess you could think of it that way) when the roman empire conquered some gross portion of the world. likewise with the mongols. when you let states(the players in an anarchy) act rationally, there will not always be the means to prevent armies to use to conquer other states (the other players).

is Machevilian bad? if it was trading 1 american for 1 million japanese would it be worth it? 1 for 1? would you steal medicine from a pharmacy to save your sick daughter?

you always have the option of leaving your country. no one forces you to stay. there are many anarchic societies in the world, you could always move to an uncharted, unclaimed island. you would have all your assets with you so that you lose nothing and you would be completely unoppressed. and once you're on that island you can let supply and demand provide all the goods and services that you want. i think 5% of republicans supports ron paul, so there are maybe 7million guys just like you. somewhere out there, there's an island about the size of delaware. would you be willing to go there with 7million friends that share the same beliefs?

people voluntarily giving up power is never going to happen and it's against your morals to take it by force. so it's a bit tough for you to abolish government. but you could always move.

you're not giving up the property, the shop owner selling all of his stuff (he now has things worth everything he's ever produced and can be traded back for). he is giving up nothing except his citizenship. note that geographical location is part of his assets, the price of his shop reflects where it is.

well, in our case power is held by the people. there's a system of checks and balances so that the leaders and laws have to serve the interests of the poeple. furthermore, each person's vote counts the same if your rich or poor and minority rights are protected also. if people disapprove of their actions, they wouldn't be reelected. likewise, the only way to enforce the laws is through force. i think you agree with me on that? the government is a natural monopoly on force and law. and going by what you said earlier that monopolies are efficient, then that's good right?

you said that courts should always make wise decisions, but wouldn't free market courts (assuming that they exist) always make popular decisions because it's the community that gives them its authority and force. and also if they would need to make popular decisions in order for people to keep coming. note that popular decisions and wise decisions are not necessarily the same decision.

there's also the perspective of game theory. a coastal community will benefit from a giant wall that prevents big waves from crashing down on it when hurricanes come. how do we get people to pay for it? I want it, but i could always just let other people pay for it and then it would come for free and i benefit from it whether i use it or not. this will end in no one paying for it!
SmoKing2012
Profile Blog Joined January 2007
United States385 Posts
Last Edited: 2008-03-16 03:03:11
March 15 2008 23:57 GMT
#102
On March 15 2008 05:24 geometryb wrote:
wouldn't the definition of an anarchocapitalist society be one without government? perhaps you could explain how the absence of government during hurricane katrina would be different from your society. there's nothing inherent about a natural disaster that creates chaos because it only creates the destruction of property. The people there still retained their property rights and they haven't changed except they have less stuff. There was supply (even though its lower) and demand and everything. or perhaps it would hinge on the notion that people are unwilling to be immoral, which is X_X.

The state didn't disappear in New Orleans. There were still police, they just had to spend most of their effort rescuing people so they couldn't be policing crime as efficiently. This has nothing to do with anarchocapitalism.

The Secret Army: while 1 DRO can afford it in 10 years, 10 DROs can do it in 1 year.

10 DROs would still run in to all the problems 1 DRO would, including having to convince their customers that this is a good idea, which is a very hard sell to anyone who isn't completely gullible. Furthermore, a new DRO could arise that doesn't try to amass a secret army and thus wouldn't have to charge as much and it would get all the customers.

Independantly Wealthy+Defense DROs: how would defense DROs grow? by having more men and more weapons to defend more peoples. this doesn't have to be secret at all. it would be raising an army in plain daylight. why didn't the rest of the world gang up on the united states during it's arms race? how were empires ever allowed to amass their armies?

To raise an army would require raising rates, and getting all your customers to believe that you wouldn't turn the army on them. Both these issues would cause its customers to join another DRO.

The Question of profit: saying it's unprofitable doesn't make it unprofitable. it was profitable for GB to take over india and hongkong, for USA to take over indian territories, etc etc.
also, the comments on that page are pretty good also.

It was profitable for the government, not for the taxpayers. Government already has a taxpayer funded army. A DRO would have to build an army from customer funded money, and if it decided to launch a military campaign that would cause rates to soar, which would lose it customers and then profit and then it wouldn't be able to fund its aggressive war.

world government have emerged (i guess you could think of it that way) when the roman empire conquered some gross portion of the world. likewise with the mongols.

Those aren't world governments by any stretch. But you didn't answer my question- do you support a one world government?

when you let states(the players in an anarchy) act rationally, there will not always be the means to prevent armies to use to conquer other states (the other players).

Right. States can't prevent war.

is Machevilian bad? if it was trading 1 american for 1 million japanese would it be worth it? 1 for 1? would you steal medicine from a pharmacy to save your sick daughter?

I was asking whether you yourself are a consequentialist. Myself I am conflicted as I can see arguments for both deontological and teleological ethics, but I think anarcho-capitalism is superior from either standpoint. It is my belief that capitalism has been the driving force behind technological advances that have helped all of society, and I think any hinderance to capitalism can only hurt progress.

you always have the option of leaving your country. no one forces you to stay. there are many anarchic societies in the world, you could always move to an uncharted, unclaimed island. you would have all your assets with you so that you lose nothing and you would be completely unoppressed. and once you're on that island you can let supply and demand provide all the goods and services that you want. i think 5% of republicans supports ron paul, so there are maybe 7million guys just like you. somewhere out there, there's an island about the size of delaware. would you be willing to go there with 7million friends that share the same beliefs?

So to go back to my example, if I'm the shop owner and my store gets robbed and I go complain to you the chief of police, your response would be; "if you don't like being robbed, go move somewhere else." Ok, great.

But please don't confuse me with being a Ron Paul supporter. I support anarchism, not minarchism.

people voluntarily giving up power is never going to happen and it's against your morals to take it by force. so it's a bit tough for you to abolish government. but you could always move.

Violence is justified in self defense. That is why the nonaggression principle maintains that the initiation of violence against another is wrong. The government maintains its power through violence against its citizens, so people would be justified to abolish government using force.

you're not giving up the property, the shop owner selling all of his stuff (he now has things worth everything he's ever produced and can be traded back for). he is giving up nothing except his citizenship. note that geographical location is part of his assets, the price of his shop reflects where it is.

Again with the "If you don't like it gtfo" argument. This is the worst excuse for government aggression.

well, in our case power is held by the people.

Roffles. People aren't allowed to rob other people. That ability is exclusive to government.

there's a system of checks and balances so that the leaders and laws have to serve the interests of the poeple.

The checks and balances are all within government. They don't protect the interest of the people, they protect the interests of those in government.

furthermore, each person's vote counts the same if your rich or poor and minority rights are protected also. if people disapprove of their actions, they wouldn't be reelected.

Yea, it's a good thing we get to vote on who gets to steal our money and what they can spend the stolen money on.

likewise, the only way to enforce the laws is through force. i think you agree with me on that? the government is a natural monopoly on force and law. and going by what you said earlier that monopolies are efficient, then that's good right?

Government is not a natural monopoly. A natural monopoly can only arise on the free market. Government is a coercive monopoly. It funds itself through theft and it jails any competition. This is guaranteed to be inefficient. This is also the ONLY difference between government and anarchocapitalism.

you said that courts should always make wise decisions, but wouldn't free market courts (assuming that they exist) always make popular decisions because it's the community that gives them its authority and force. and also if they would need to make popular decisions in order for people to keep coming. note that popular decisions and wise decisions are not necessarily the same decision.

The popular decision will usually be popular because it's the right decision. If only a minority of people think the decision should go the other way, there's a good chance it's the wrong decision. But yes, there are some cases where a court won't make a wise decision if it makes all its customers upset. However, this is still better than a government court which has no more incentive than a private court to make a wise decision. Since their salaries are still paid by stealing from all the citizens, they can make a ruling based on anything as small as the lawyers attitude (my dad is a lawyer and I can tell you that things like attitude make a huge difference). The private judge is pressured to rule in favor of the people- who, by in large, will want justice. The pubic judge can rule on whatever grounds he wishes to.

there's also the perspective of game theory. a coastal community will benefit from a giant wall that prevents big waves from crashing down on it when hurricanes come. how do we get people to pay for it? I want it, but i could always just let other people pay for it and then it would come for free and i benefit from it whether i use it or not. this will end in no one paying for it!

And you've hit upon the public goods theory, which the entire OP is dedicated to disproving.

And I still haven't heard you attempt to justify why, if humans are too inept or evil to conduct themselves, it makes any sense to give a tiny group of humans the power to steal money and pass law for all the other humans, as though these people; these elected officers are any less susceptible to corruption or self-interest than the other 99% of people. Have you seen what governments do with power? All they do is pass more and more laws restricting your liberty, raise taxes (or spend on defecit, which your children are going to end up paying for), and spending more of your money to build up armies so that they can launch wars and then all their buddies like haliburton and kbr get rich. But you think it's okay to throw someone in jail who doesn't want to pay for this.
How do you like them apples, ho-bag? And how do you like those very same apples, Eggars!
geometryb
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
United States1249 Posts
March 19 2008 04:12 GMT
#103
just in case you forgot how our government works, the people elect congressmen every 2 years, senators 6, president 4, not sure about governors and mayors. anyways, if the constituents do not like the laws their elected official passed or the things they did, then he would not be reelected. he would not stay in power. the system tries to align the will of the people with what that of the elected official. i don't know if you really believe what you said, but the iraq war happened because most of the country was willing to go to war during that time, not because they wanted to give haliburton contracts. the president still needed the approval of congress and the people.

perhaps you're right. maybe law would be better if it was a big popularity contest. but, i'm not so sure about that. the beauty of government backed courts is that (my knowledge is actually only limited to supreme court stuff) judges don't have to worry about reelection or anything and can make decisions without worrying about shit. the judges have to be congressionally approved so that they must've had a good history. and they have no means of enforcing their rulings. if was a very terrible ruling, then the executive branch would just be like no. but again, i don't think there's a right answer. i guess court rulings by popularity would work too (i think that's what they did in athens a long long time ago).

if a shop owner was getting robbed and i couldn't stop it, i would advise them to move somewhere else. i think that's the smartest thing to do. i don't see anything wrong with moving some place that has what you want.

the state effectively disappeared in new orleans. no one to arrest you for breaking the law. no one to force you to pay sales tax and stuff like that. there are probably many other parts of the world associated with weak/no government that are very unstable rather than what you describe in your stuff.

i would just like to end by saying you and many other anarchists make very serious assumptions. i would rather you state the assumptions that you make rather than trying to be like "of course, things will turn out great"

1. you assume perfect competition with many firms. there's no reason for this to happen. in fact, there are very few industries that run under perfect competition.

2. you assume monopolies can't form. you assume microsoft(kind of), at&t, standard oil, etc can't form. or you argue that they are coercive monopolies that only form because of the government. that isn't true. government had nothing to do with protecting their monopolies. in fact, it was the government that trustbusted them.

3. you assume that there is an incentive against collusion and mergers. i don't there is.

4. you assume that demand creates supply. i think we went over this. i really don't think is true.

5. blah blah blah blah

i'm done.
Heggie
Profile Blog Joined March 2006
United Kingdom167 Posts
March 19 2008 16:54 GMT
#104
Captain Murphy, presumably before there was a point before the rise of modern civilisation where mankind lived in a state of anarchy?


From this state, governments have arisen.


What reason do you have to believe that this process would not occur again, and instead the result would be magical-an-cap-happy-land?
SmoKing2012
Profile Blog Joined January 2007
United States385 Posts
Last Edited: 2008-03-21 15:03:37
March 21 2008 06:03 GMT
#105
On March 19 2008 13:12 geometryb wrote:
just in case you forgot how our government works, the people elect congressmen every 2 years, senators 6, president 4, not sure about governors and mayors. anyways, if the constituents do not like the laws their elected official passed or the things they did, then he would not be reelected. he would not stay in power. the system tries to align the will of the people with what that of the elected official. i don't know if you really believe what you said, but the iraq war happened because most of the country was willing to go to war during that time, not because they wanted to give haliburton contracts.

The Iraq war happened because Bush lied about the intelligence he received. And I never said that we went to war because of halliburton; but it is clear that they have profited enormously from this.

the president still needed the approval of congress and the people.

The president only needs to approval of *some* people to spend *everyone's* money. Do you not see how immoral that is? It's like if me you and Fred Flintstone were sitting around at McDonalds and we each had a meal in front of us. Then you decided to hold a vote, and you and Fred both vote to steal my french fries with me being the only dissenting vote. I complain saying that you guys can't just vote to take my food from me, and you reply "this is democracy, it's the fairest way."

perhaps you're right. maybe law would be better if it was a big popularity contest. but, i'm not so sure about that. the beauty of government backed courts is that (my knowledge is actually only limited to supreme court stuff) judges don't have to worry about reelection or anything and can make decisions without worrying about shit. the judges have to be congressionally approved so that they must've had a good history. and they have no means of enforcing their rulings. if was a very terrible ruling, then the executive branch would just be like no. but again, i don't think there's a right answer. i guess court rulings by popularity would work too (i think that's what they did in athens a long long time ago).

If a judge in a private court makes a clearly biased decision, the defendant can appeal it. Private courts, unlike government courts, don't have the right to make laws that use violence against innocent people. The role of private courts is not to make law, but to find it. Public courts are highly politicized. Since judges, through government, have claimed the authority to rule on matters they have no business ruling on, such as what someone does in their personal life that only affects them, or what consenting individuals choose to do without using violence against any unwilling third parties, judges inject their personal opinion about what others should or shouldn't be able to do and enforce it with violence.

The worst part about democracy though isn't the judges rulings, it's government officials ability to pass law. Morality is decided by taking a vote. If enough people decide activity x is immoral, then no one is allowed to do that otherwise they will be arrested. It's like my McDonalds example. Anything can be banned as long as the people in power vote on it.

if a shop owner was getting robbed and i couldn't stop it, i would advise them to move somewhere else. i think that's the smartest thing to do. i don't see anything wrong with moving some place that has what you want.

You're missing the point. It's not about whether moving is or isn't a good idea for them; it's about you and others using the 'love it or leave it' argument to try and portray me as a hypocrite, claiming that if I don't leave then I am consenting to it. If the shop owner refuses to move it doesn't mean he condones getting robbed.

the state effectively disappeared in new orleans. no one to arrest you for breaking the law. no one to force you to pay sales tax and stuff like that.

In New Orleans, security was impossible to manage because everything was flooded and infastructure was crippled. Neither private nor public security is going to be effective in such a situation.

there are probably many other parts of the world associated with weak/no government that are very unstable rather than what you describe in your stuff.

Great argument.

i would just like to end by saying you and many other anarchists make very serious assumptions. i would rather you state the assumptions that you make rather than trying to be like "of course, things will turn out great"

Obviously we're making assumptions, you can't mathematically prove that anarchism will work.

1. you assume perfect competition with many firms. there's no reason for this to happen. in fact, there are very few industries that run under perfect competition.

I did? Where did I assume perfect competition?

2. you assume monopolies can't form. you assume microsoft(kind of), at&t, standard oil, etc can't form. or you argue that they are coercive monopolies that only form because of the government. that isn't true. government had nothing to do with protecting their monopolies. in fact, it was the government that trustbusted them.

Wrong again. I never assumed they can't form. I said they would be unlikely to form, and I also said that if they did it would be because no other firm can provide a better product at a better price.

3. you assume that there is an incentive against collusion and mergers. i don't there is.

Mergers, no. Collusion, yes; any new firm could come along and make a killing by selling the same product at a lower price than agreed upon by the colluders.

4. you assume that demand creates supply. i think we went over this. i really don't think is true.

No, I said that supply exists independently of demand but in order for the good to actually be produced, there must be demand for it. A good is not going to be supplied if there's no demand for it- there would be no profit to be made. A good will only be supplied if there is demand for it. The more demand, the more of the good produced. What do you think causes goods to be produced if not demand for them?

i'm done.

That's a shame, I was hoping you would finally get to my point about why it makes sense to give one small group of people the power to strip freedom from the entire population, or if you could address my morality argument about how you can justify extortion at gun point.

I don't know if you've been watching any of the videos I'm posting, but here is an important one that highlights one of the most basic flaws of democracy, and also how democracy hurts the poor. It's shorter than most of the others too:
Helping the Poor: Analyzing a Banana Republic
How do you like them apples, ho-bag? And how do you like those very same apples, Eggars!
SmoKing2012
Profile Blog Joined January 2007
United States385 Posts
March 21 2008 06:06 GMT
#106
On March 20 2008 01:54 Heggie wrote:
Captain Murphy, presumably before there was a point before the rise of modern civilisation where mankind lived in a state of anarchy?


From this state, governments have arisen.


What reason do you have to believe that this process would not occur again, and instead the result would be magical-an-cap-happy-land?

This has been addressed numerous times throughout the thread.
How do you like them apples, ho-bag? And how do you like those very same apples, Eggars!
XenOsky
Profile Blog Joined March 2008
Chile2087 Posts
Last Edited: 2023-09-09 04:21:23
September 09 2023 04:18 GMT
#107
dont want to bump shit but freemarket and anarchism is like zerg and protoss.


+ Show Spoiler +
couldnt stop myself
StarCraft & Audax Italiano
Prev 1 4 5 6 All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
HomeStory Cup
12:00
XXIV: Group Stage - Day 1
TaKeTV2053
ComeBackTV 519
SteadfastSC315
IndyStarCraft 240
NarutO 221
3DClanTV 135
EmSc Tv 132
Robzki 18
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Crank 324
IndyStarCraft 240
NarutO 221
EmSc Tv 132
Forgg! 55
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 30586
Rain 9646
Sea 4743
Calm 4557
Shuttle 1021
Jaedong 1007
GuemChi 716
GoRush 712
EffOrt 569
BeSt 414
[ Show more ]
actioN 397
Light 391
Tyson 327
Mini 281
ggaemo 141
Snow 132
Shinee 116
Stork 116
Soma 105
Hyun 80
ToSsGirL 76
Soulkey 70
Mong 66
Zeus 57
Sea.KH 56
Sharp 34
Mind 33
Yoon 33
Rock 19
Noble 16
zelot 14
Hm[arnc] 14
Barracks 13
Killer 9
Bale 8
ajuk12(nOOB) 8
910 6
Purpose 3
Dota 2
BananaSlamJamma1349
XcaliburYe894
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
olofmeister2485
allub286
kRYSTAL_140
Other Games
singsing1857
DeMusliM654
crisheroes166
Fuzer 137
ViBE84
NuckleDu73
NeuroSwarm72
ROOTSuperNova29
Organizations
Other Games
B2W.Neo1524
StarCraft 2
ESL.tv293
EmSc2Tv 132
StarCraft: Brood War
StarcraftVOD4
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH225
• Gussbus
• Laughngamez YouTube
• aXEnki
• Poblha
• intothetv
• Migwel
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamez Trovo
StarCraft: Brood War
• sscaitournament3
• STPLYoutube
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Ambition4290
• Jankos2229
• TFBlade686
Upcoming Events
NAKR vs LATAM
12h 52m
Korean StarCraft League
14h 22m
AfreecaTV Pro Series
20h 22m
Classic vs Ryung
HomeStory Cup
23h 22m
Hatchery Cup
1d 2h
BSL: GosuLeague
1d 4h
Doodle vs Razz
Jaeyun vs MadiNho
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
1d 11h
HomeStory Cup
2 days
Showmatch
2 days
FuturE vs Strange
FuturE vs Cham
BSL: ProLeague
2 days
Mihu vs TBD
[ Show More ]
ESL Open Cup
2 days
ESL Open Cup
3 days
ESL Open Cup
3 days
ESL Pro Tour
3 days
ESL Pro Tour
4 days
H.4.0.S
5 days
ESL Pro Tour
6 days
World Team League
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSCL Season 1
ESL Winter: Europe
META Madness #8 Qualifier #4
ESL Challenger Jonköping 2023

Ongoing

FS Mania
KCM Team League Season 1
BSL Season 17
Copa Latinoamericana S2
2023 StarCraft PC Cafe Tournament
2023 StarCraft PC Cafe Tournament: Youth
Platinum Anchor Qualifying S2
WTL 2023 Winter
HSC XXIV
ESL Challenger League S46 NA
ESL Challenger League S46 EU
ESL Challenger League S46 AP
CCT Online Finals #5
Elisa Masters Espoo 2023

Upcoming

Bombastic 25th Anniversary LAN
CSL 11: 2023 Winter
Torneo Internacional de StarCraft
IEM Katowice 2024
ESL Winter
META Madness #8
META Madness #8 Qualifier #5
PGL Major Copenhagen 2024
IEM Katowice 2024
BLAST Premier Spring Groups
ESL Challenger Atlanta 2023
BLAST Premier World Final
ESL Impact League S4 Finals
BetBoom Dacha
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2023 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.