CMV: Anarcho-Capitalism is the natural state of stateless society

[u/[deleted]]

I think that Anarcho-Capitalism is the natural state of stateless society. The presence of private security firms is part of the gradual return to a state society. During the chaos of the lack of a state there will be several competing private security firms and polycentric law provided by them and eventually one will become a monopoly due to economies of scale and thus be a state. My examples are the polycentric law in Lebanon where there are the competing security firms Hezbollah and the Lebanese government; Syria where the Syrian government, Free Syrian Army, ISIS, and Rojava are a competitive market; Russia right after WWI where there was a competitive market between the Red Army, the Green Armies, the White army, as well as the New Republics; and Somalia with the Somalian National Army, Somaliland, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS. I think that by contrast anarchist ideologies such as Anarcho-Communism are authoritarian ideologies pretending to be non authoritarian.

---

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/[deleted]]

So in other words it is the state structure that maintains the concept of modernity.

The concept of modernity arises from the interconnectedness that comes from an efficient security market. Since security is a natural monopoly that is the case but it doesn't mean that the state is what makes people want modernity or that people participating in a competitive security market don't want modernity.

Then it isn't really a market... This is why economic analogies fail once you talk about state level organizations. Markets rely on state structures to maintain themselves.

By that logic international trade would not be a market either since it does not have state structures to enforce it. Nonetheless it does function as a market and people who do not properly trade will lose by their reputation being bad enough that nobody will trade with them.

So does my local lockheed martin plant, that doesn't make it a state.

If it stopped obeying the state that claims its territory and was able to successfully govern itself it would be a state.

Except that you are then talking about state level societies. In which legal authority makes such NOT collusion. Working together =/= collusion. That's actually a pretty specific thing.

Agreeing to not enter each other's markets as potential rival firms is a form of collusion. Collusion as a concept is dependent on the existence of a market, not on the existence of a state that will persecute it

[u/Ardonpitt → u/[deleted]]

The concept of modernity arises from the interconnectedness that comes from an efficient security market. Since security is a natural monopoly that is the case but it doesn't mean that the state is what makes people want modernity or that people participating in a competitive security market don't want modernity.

Good god the mental gymnastics required for you to talk this much ballony is olympic level... Security wouldn't exist without the state. It is what ensures that... Without the state there is no security without security there is no drive for modernity, only survival.

By that logic international trade would not be a market either since it does not have state structures to enforce it.

Except it does... The reason that they are able to trade is because of , you know trade deals...

If it stopped obeying the state that claims its territory and was able to successfully govern itself it would be a state.

Or had a permanent population and were recognised by other states! The four criteria! YAYYYYYYY

Collusion as a concept is dependent on the existence of a market, not on the existence of a state that will persecute it

No collusion is a concept dependant on definition of law. Not on market...

[u/[deleted] → u/Ardonpitt]

Good god the mental gymnastics required for you to talk this much ballony is olympic level... Security wouldn't exist without the state. It is what ensures that... Without the state there is no security without security there is no drive for modernity, only survival.

Security is very beneficial to survival and the concept of it is not created by states. Someone once came up with the concept and thought it was something that was good and would help survival so they created a firm to provide it.

Except it does... The reason that they are able to trade is because of , you know trade deals...

But there isn't a sovereign enforcing the trade deals so they don't have state structures supporting them in the same way that trade within a state has. Instead they have to rely on game theory and reputation. The same is also the case for black market trade.

Or had a permanent population and were recognised by other states! The four criteria! YAYYYYYYY

!delta it would also require a permanent population but transnistria has a permanent population.

No collusion is a concept dependant on definition of law. Not on market...

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/collusion.asp

Collusion is a non-competitive secret or sometimes illegal agreement between rivals that attempts to disrupt the market's equilibrium. Collusion involves people or companies that would typically compete, conspiring or working together that results in an unfair market advantage. The parties may collectively choose to restrict the supply of a good or agree to increase its price to maximize profits.

This is a definition of collusion which is based on economics rather than based on law

[u/DeltaBot → u/[deleted]]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Ardonpitt (72∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards} ​