Law in "practice" in an anarcho-capitalist society

[Juan]

The right of self-determination in regard to the question of membership in a state thus means: whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory, whether it be a single village, a whole district, or a series of adjacent districts, make it known, by a freely conducted plebiscite,

That is, “democratic statism” or mob rule. There’s nothing about individual sovereignty in that line of thinking,

It is not the right of self-determination of a delimited national unit, but the right of the inhabitants of every territory to decide on the state to which they wish to belong.

That is fully statist as well. Mises thinks that subjects are ‘free’ to be ruled either by state A or state B. Mises doesn’t think that individuals have any sort of natural rights as individuals. That’s why Mises advocates taxation, and conscription. He’s only saying that individuals are ‘free’ to choose to be taxed by state A or state B.

However, the right of self-determination of which we speak is not the right of self-determination of nations, but rather the right of self-determination of the inhabitants of every territory large enough to form an independent administrative unit. If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual person, it would have to be done.

Mises is again talking about creating states. What he’s saying is that the line which divides monopolistic tyrant A from monopolistic tyrant B is to be drawn according to the ‘wishes’ of ‘subjects’.

I suggest that people interested in knowing Mises position read the whole chapter which is about “Liberal foreing policy” http://mises.org/liberal/ch3sec2.asp

It has already been pointed out that a country can enjoy domestic peace only when a democratic constitution provides the guarantee that the adjustment of the government to the will of the citizens can take place without friction.

It must always be possible to shift the boundaries of the state if the will of the inhabitants of an area to attach themselves to a state other than the one to which they presently belong has made itself clearly known,

Adam Knott’s selective quoting, selective bolding and selective interpretation is misleading.