You know, you’re probably right. And frankly, Proudhon is about as relevant today as he was when he was alive. Not at all.
But I think people know what anarcho-capitalism is, even if the anarcho bit may be misleading. To those who know, those zany leftists who think that you can voluntarily replicate a tyrannical and unnatural social order and call it libertarian, they seethe when someone brings up AnCap, and even worse, that the Saint of the Left [sic], Murray Newton Rothbard identified as one (must have been during his LSD phase, I know, I know [;)]).
I agree with you on a lot of things, but not on your current spin that the state might have some legitimacy. I am as anti-state as ever. States are simply unnecessary, and willbe even more as time progresses. The same with the left, which gets more anarchonistic each day.
Well, I’m generally for what mutualists call “socialism”, and I’m also pretty much for what an-caps call “capitalism”. Those words are supposed to opposites, and yet I can qualify as being both. That’s why I think that they have zero utility.