I see. So what you’re saying is, in your anarchist society, I might well be even more oppressed and abused than in one that had at least some modicum of constitutional protections and the like, because anywhere I went, except my own property (if I could acquire any), I would be subject to the whim of the property owner. They are not obligated to abide by NAP. Indeed, it would be basically just like today, except for innumerable little states instead of a few huge ones. As you say elsewhere, if you disagree with what your neighbor does, you can go to war with them and everything. Freedom of movement would be a thing of the past. What a wonderful world you propose!
JCF,
I answered your question.
How you choose to predict the hypothetical behavior of other people is a very different question.
For what it is worth, I find the manner in which many current states mete out justice to be highly oppressive.
You propose not anarchy but polyarchy, as we have now, just a lot more poly- than it is now. Such territorial monopolies of force and law would dominate the landscape, and there is no reason to think these petty kingdoms would not reform and congeal into full nation-states evenually, as those of old did. You do not propose anarchy, just more primitive forms of government.
JCF,
I am not proposing anything. All I did was answer your question. You asked how the NAP could be respected and I explained how it could be respected by somebody who saw a burglar dressed up lokking like you standing on the sidewalk in front of his recently burglarized house.
Your diversionary objection is just YOUR prediction of whether people would respect the NAP given a specific context or environment – nothing more and nothing less. We already know that people will violate the freedom of others if they can get away with it – you and other statists are proof enough of that for me.
I have a prediction of my own. I believe that without the state, thieves would starve to death as they stood around thinking how they can successfully plan a heist.
People may favour a company with a higher success rate, however they may also tend to favour the “fairer” companies in case they become a suspect.