The market.
How does he market decide private property rights and stop someone from stealing my property?
I do not plan to attempt to enumerate or defend the doctrine of anarchocapitalism now so do not try to interrogate me. The point of my previous posts is simply that Mises (1) never engaged any variant of anarchocapitalism and (2) clearly implies that if individual secession (i.e., anarchism) were possible, “it would have to be done”.
You say laws are decided by “the market” but refuse to explain. The market is an economic system not a legal system. Without a legal system of rights I don’t have to trade with you if I can steal from you and some who have the power, will. You failed to answer these basic points.
Are you denying Mises advocated for a government? You are making wild assumptions that his rejection of anarchism does not apply to Anarcho-capitalism. Do you have any evidence he accepts a system like Anarcho-capitalism but not called that?
I already told you that I do not plan to attempt to enumerate or defend the doctrine of anarchocapitalism.
No.
He clearly attacked anarchy where ANARCHY EQUALS NO LAW SYSTEM and the doctrine of anarchocapitalism clearly implies ANARCHY WITH A LAW SYSTEM.
No.
You keep saying that but cannot answer my questions so I don’t believe you.
I never said he made concessions, however he simply was not aware of anarcho-capitalism, so his critique obviously wasn’t geared towards it. And an analysis of his critique from the perspective of a market anarchist either renders Mises completely stupid (as his criticisms had already been answered) or simply unaware. Since we already know that voluntaryism simply wasn’t known as a form of anarchistm around that time, we therefore have to conclude that he was simply unaware.
Anarcho-capitalism doesn’t assume people will agree to “your” laws at all. So no problem there.
“Anarchy”, like “Capitalism” means different things to different people.
Mises, to my knowledge, has never refuted Anarcho-capitalism. He has attempted to refute “Anarchy” according to his own definition of the term. it is clear from the quotes you’ve provided that he is refuting the common conception of anarchy associated with certain assumptions that anarcho-capitalism cleary does not make.
The market providing law and security is a difficult mental concept. So what? To most people a free market in medicine, education, etc.. is a difficult concept.
If you want to debate Anarcho-capitalism, fine! But by resorting to Mises to try to discredit it, you showed you lack of any understanding of what you are trying to debunk.
Read this quotation again:
The doctrine of anarchocapitalism advocates the existence of a police force.
The doctrine of anarchocapitalism advocates coercion in order to prevent action detrimental to society.
Sorry that sounds like an excuse. He had to be aware of this train of thought as Rothbard was working on this for sometime.
So who decides on the law?
How is the police force created and funded?
Why would people agree to this doctrine? What if they do not agree? Who decides what action is “detrimental to society”?
Again, I do not plan to defend the doctrine anarchocapitalism.
If you cannot defend it, I do not believe it makes any sense.
I never tried to convince you to believe it.
Again, I do not plan to defend the doctrine anarchocapitalism.
Then Anarcho-capitalism is a failed ideology.
Who cares? The primary point of my previous posts is simply that Mises never engaged any variant of anarchocapitalism. That point does not require a defense of anarchocapitalism. If I told you that Mises never attempted to refute the doctrine that unicorns exist, would my assertion be true only if I were able to prove that unicorns exist? No.
It’s like the lunar cycle that a minarchist has to quote Mises from time to time believing that he has unearthed something hitherto unheard of.
Liberalism was published in 1927, Rothbard was about 1 years old. However, Rothbard didn’t create it, but before him it wasn’t really known as anarchy so its irrelevant. “Anarchy” in von Mises’ day was that of the Collectivist-Socialist variety, obviously Mises wouldn’t think too highly of it.
Private law enforcement agencies, who get feedback from the market, and/or mutual protection societies. You have a large library of all of this right in front of you by the way.
Mises clearly refuted anarchism which is directly related to “Anarcho-capitalism”. This is not some tangential unrelated subject. Do you have any evidence that he supported a system like Anarcho-capitalism? Nope.