Questions to Anarcho-Capitalists

I consider myself an Anarcho-Capitalist libertarian. However, there are a few questions that I would like some answers.

  1. How will children (and minors) be protected from their parents without the help of government? (I.e. private property, incest, etc). Would children/minors have the same private property rights as adults?

  2. Would there a standing military force that protect our borders?

  3. What would you do with criminals in the absence of police/jail?

  4. How will radio frequencies be handle?

  5. What about roads and bridges?

  6. How can you handle pollution in the absence of judicial courts?

  1. http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/fourteen.asp

  2. A “border” is just a term used to describe the geographical monpoly held by a government.

  3. http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/thirteen.asp

  4. http://mises.org/daily/1662

  5. http://mises.org/books/roads_web.pdf

  6. http://mises.org/daily/2120

You’re still in the process of learning that so much of what you’ve learned simply isn’t so. In fact, many of the things you’ve mentioned were handled privately before government ever got involved in them.

But in another regards, anarcho-capitalism is not as far removed from experience as you may think. You understand how voluntary relationships work. The point is to force governments to act like everyone else already does. True, that obligation precludes government as we know it, but that gap would be filled by private institutions, something you no doubt have experience with.

  1. How we come to own ourselves - Kinsella

  2. No more military socialism - MNR

  3. Punishment and proportionality: The Estoppel Approach - Kinsella

  4. The Spectrum Should be Private Property - B. W. Marcus, http://blog.mises.org/10433/why-airwaves-electromagnetic-spectra-are-arguably-property/, Radio Free Rothbard

  5. Blocks book, but also. Anarchy in the Streets by B. Shaffer

  6. Freemarket Environmentalism by Walter Block, Conservation and Property Rights - MNR

Essentially all the problems you mentioned though; have been created by the state.

1) How will children (and minors) be protected from their parents without the help of government? (I.e. private property, incest, etc). Would children/minors have the same private property rights as adults?

I would first say that any child that can demonstrate that they have “legal capacity” (from the common law… understanding the consequences of their actions) can be treated as an adult. As for minor children, consider this.

In an AC society the law would be formed through contracts presumably with private law enforcement agencies. I would expect it to be a violation of this contract to abuse or neglect minor children. People who violate this contract could be held accountable and concerned citizens could sue for custody of the child as long as they can prove the transgressions beyond a reasonable doubt. Again I would suspect this all to be done contractually.

2) Would there a standing military force that protect our borders?

This is tough to say. There are alot of people who make the claim, “if there is a demand for a military, the market will provide one”, but I’ve done alot of reading and have yet to find a coherent example of how this might happen on a for profit basis. My theory is that a demand for collective defense is not germane to the free market. It only arises because of some government taxing its citizens and using the money to create a military and threaten free individuals. Would firms people/firms pay for military services despite the free rider problem? Maybe. But less so in times of peace.

I definitely think voluntary militias would play a major role in defending an anarchy. Also, you might see someone start a “National Guard” as a non-profit funded by voluntary contributions. If we didn’t have to pay taxes, I could certainly see people voluntarily giving 1 or 2% or more of their income to such an agency. Remember the U.S. government spends just under 4% of income on the military despite the massive tax bill.

3) What would you do with criminals in the absence of police/jail?

There’s no reason to expect that there wouldn’t be police and jails. Consider this. My house gets burglarized, I call up my law enforcement agency, they start and investigation and find the criminal then make an arrest. The contract I signed with my agency will define the adjudication process (which court, burden of proof, etc.) and if the person is found guilty he would be punished according to the terms of my contract, presumably including jail time. My agency would pay the jail to house the criminal for the specified period of time. Of course the punishment could also be restitution but ultimately this would be determined by the preferences of market participants.

4) How will radio frequencies be handle?

By using lockean homesteading. The first person to broadcast on a frequency in a particular area will become the owner of that frequency.

5) What about roads and bridges?

  1. Read Walter Blocks paper on private roads. 2. They would be provided by entrepreneurs just like every other service. Toll roads and bridges are the easiest to imagine being privately owned, but there are also other examples, such as the roads that run through private housing developments which are privately created and managed by home owner associations. And lastly, given technology, why couldn’t we have an easy-pass type system which scans your pass each time you pass under a traffic light or something similar? This would allow for congestion pricing as well.

6) How can you handle pollution in the absence of judicial courts?

As I said before, there would be courts. The way I envision it, when you sign a contract with your law enforcement agency, the agency would promise to enforce rulings issued by certain courts. If you sue someone for pollution and the court rules in your favor, your law enforcement agency would enforce the court ruling. Another possibility is the court might enforce its own ruling, or outsource the enforcement. But there would be courts.

The market will take care of it.

But seriously, it seems you’re still stuck in a central planning mindset. You have to recognize that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to the problems you mention. A more appropriate way to approach the issue would be to ask “What are some ways that people under anarchy could solve these problems?”

Explain to me how you can consider yourself an ancap while you still have those questions?

Having questions can mean he’s simply trying to understand those topics better. He’s not saying he’s defaulting to aggression.

That is correct. I believe in voluntary contracts between parties and not force.

Does anyone know of any AnCap specific forums?

https://forum.freecapitalists.org/forums/

http://freedomainradio.com/BOARD/forums/

http://www.anti-state.com/

http://www.vforvoluntary.com/forum/

Nielsio -

I am not sure if the first link was a joke or not. If it was a joke, it was sort of funny, if not, then I’m not sure why you linked to this site. I think its obvious that I already know about it, also its not AnCap specific, there are some minarchists about, and most topics don’t really deal with AnCap per se

It was my way of saying I do regard it as an ‘ancap forum’. All the main scholars here are ancap, and so are most of the people who participate. And then there’s the fact that most of the ancap literature that exists can be found on this website.

^Minarchists are definitely a minority on this forum.

Also, what about arms? I believe in the right to bear arms. However, would there be an arms limition in an Anarcho-capitalist society? (Meaning that madmen won’t be able to buy tanks and such)

Can you name some anarcho-capilist societies (or very close to) in the past/present? (There are probably none in the present time)

Also, what about arms? I believe in the right to bear arms. However, would there be an arms limition in an Anarcho-capitalist society? (Meaning that madmen won’t be able to buy tanks and such)

In a hypothetical state-free world, nukes would be banned because they simply can’t be used without harming innocent people, thus there mere possession (unless you are in the process of dismantling it or something) constitutes a threat. I make the case for private defense agencies owning nukes in a world which still has nuclear states in the disarmament thread.

Things like tanks or RPGs can be reasonably targeted without causing hundreds of square miles of radiation, so there is no possible libertarian restriction on their ownership. You must understand though that there are extra-juridical (outside of the law) means. There could be a huge contractual chain of disincentive for established weapons producers who want to just sell arms to any madman.

Can you name some anarcho-capilist societies (or very close to) in the past/present? (There are probably none in the present time)

Medieval Iceland is a good place to start. Someone recently cited Ireland as being anarchist for 1,000 years but I missed the link and don’t know much about it. There are instances of private law in today’s world as well. There’s a video somewhere on this site about Guatemala. Somalia and Argentina are basically anarchic, but it really isn’t an instance of a “libertarian free society”. Nobody there is educated on the subject and hold these values, or they don’t hold enough power versus warlords.

Can there be a written “Constitution/Magna Carta” in an Anarcho-Capitalist society? (Basic human rights and such?)

What about international waters/air space? What if there are disputes on unclaimed (or unclaimable) grounds? How will disputes be settled? (What about conflicts in outer space?)

Regarding the limitation of arms question, I was thinking in an Anarcho-Capitalist society, there would probably be public notification of who owns what and where - since all lands would be privitized? (RossLand - do not enter if you feel uncomfortable around so-and-so?) Or perhaps there would be contracts between the seller and buyer to limit the usage of the product (then again madmen don’t really care…I still think this is quite a tough question to answer)?

Regarding the limitation of arms question, I was thinking in an Anarcho-Capitalist society, there would probably be public notification of who owns what and where - since all lands would be privitized? (RossLand - do not enter if you feel uncomfortable around so-and-so?)

The provision of security and justice, especially military defense, are what most people would call important things. So yes, I think there would be significant demand from the public for knowledge of, say, there being a bomb testing facility in a certain area. Legal codes could still be very specific yet immensely smaller and simpler than something like the US civil code (more than 10,000 pages, I believe, of irrational and contradictory law). There’s some very important philosophy behind this concept of notification which I don’t have time to get into. Basically, we must acknowledge various forms of “social acts”. One would be “titling” or making public that one owns X patch of land with certain exact boundaries. It isn’t a necessary requirement of ownership, but private land title services would likely develop in order to preemptively avoid conflicts.

Or perhaps there would be contracts between the seller and buyer to limit the usage of the product (then again madmen don’t really care…I still think this is quite a tough question to answer)?

Yes, this is like I said about extra-juridical measures. Consumers may be willing to pay half a cent extra for their box of corn flakes knowing that their farmers are members of a hypothetical “Safer World Certification Agency”, one role of which is to verify that farmers only acquire fertilizer from chemical companies which restrict sale of their products to legitimate businesses and not madmen.

Libertarians don’t propose that adopting their legal system guarantees a peaceful Arcadian paradise, just that its way of handling problems is superior to other alternatives. Yes, madmen can get hold of deadly weapons. We seek to end the supposed legitimacy of professional liars who win popularity contests held every few years controlling nukes and huge armies subsidized by theft (taxation).

Can there be a written “Constitution/Magna Carta” in an Anarcho-Capitalist society? (Basic human rights and such?)

All human rights are property rights, and libertarianism attempts to fully maintain property rights. Without states, there really is no place for constitutions. Various police firms would make their standards known to potential consumers, so people aren’t left in the dark in that sense.

What about international waters/air space? What if there are disputes on unclaimed (or unclaimable) grounds?

Countries don’t have rights, including to own property. Only individuals do. Still, large segments of a free society may cooperate with international claims, if only out of fear of violence. Another segment, say a private military, could rightfully attempt to liberate victims of state hegemony.

I don’t see what you mean by “unclaimable”. Disputes would be settled with respect for homesteading. You should read this.

“1) How will children (and minors) be protected from their parents without the help of government?”

You think the government currenctly protects them? Regardless in a free society, a child’s care would be up to the family, specifically the parents. As to what could be done about it, well if you feel your neighbors are doing awful things to their children, I guess you could always go on over and shoot them. Of course, their extended family might take revenge and come over and shoot you. It could get ugly.

“Would children/minors have the same private property rights as adults?” It would depend on their ability to understand property rights.

“2) Would there a standing military force that protect our borders?” You think there will be borders once the idea that government is a criminal organization becomes widely accepted? I don’t.

“3) What would you do with criminals in the absence of police/jail? 4) How will radio frequencies be handle? 5) What about roads and bridges? 6) How can you handle pollution in the absence of judicial courts?” This is like someone living in the 18th century asking how food will be distributed in the 21st century. We don’t know how the market will resolve these issues. All I can say is I do know that they will get resolved.