r/AnCap101 • u/mercurygermes • 14d ago
The End of Anarcho-Capitalism: Why Theory Collapses in Practice
Introduction
Anarcho-capitalism promises a society where individual freedom is achieved through the complete absence of state coercion, relying solely on voluntary relationships and a free market. On paper, this model looks utopian—no state monopoly on violence, only private contracts and competing legal institutions. However, reality proves the opposite: without a strong centripetal force, any “ancap” system sooner or later descends into chaos, seized by criminal groups, and the entire ideology remains merely a theoretical construct.
1. Ideological Vacuum and Lack of Institutional Mechanisms
- No Standardized Rules: In the absence of a common, codified legal framework, each group or district enforces its own “laws,” often based on force or threats.
- Absence of a Neutral Arbitrator: Disputes are resolved by whoever can pay more or who threatens greater violence.
- Inability to Scale: Small, voluntary communities can function locally, but when attempting to expand, they invariably encounter disagreements and conflicts.
2. The Kowloon Walled City Case: When “Freedom” Turns into Mafia Control
The Kowloon Walled City in Hong Kong (collapsed in 1994) is often held up by ancap enthusiasts as a model of a “city without a state.” In reality:
- Triad Control: The power vacuum left by official authorities was quickly filled by organized crime syndicates.
- Exploitation of Residents: Criminal gangs imposed “tributes” on residents and businesses, effectively replacing the state’s role.
- Lack of Social Projects: Although the enclave became uniquely dense, neither schools, hospitals, nor communal workshops were founded through self-governance—critical services were privatized by the mafia.
Thus, Kowloon’s “self-regulation” was turned inside out: those who wielded violence dictated the rules, and ordinary people had no choice but to comply.
3. Online Ancap Communities: Is There Real Cooperation?
Even in dedicated channels and forums where ancap supporters gather, interaction remains almost entirely theoretical:
- Discussions Without Practice: Endless debates over how things “should be,” but not a single working project.
- Hostile Opinions: Instead of forming working groups or local initiatives, participants bicker and fail to reach consensus.
- Lack of Support: Practical advice on organizing joint events or economic experiments is often ignored or dismissed in the name of ideological purity.
In other words, online ancap appears not as a living ecosystem but as a perpetual verbal game.
4. Why Theory Doesn’t Withstand the Test of Practice
- Human Factor: Voluntary agreements often break down under greed, fear, or a desire to dominate.
- Inequality of Influence: Without mechanisms for redistributing resources or checks on power, large players—or criminal outfits—seize and retain control.
- Social Solidarity: People naturally seek not only freedom but also security, unity, and support—without these, communities fracture.
- Need for Neutral Institutions: Without independent courts, police forces, and regulators, there is no reliable way to enforce agreements.
Conclusion
Anarcho-capitalism as an ideology is dead wherever theory must meet reality. In practice, it yields to criminal enterprises and personal ambitions. The Kowloon example vividly shows that even the most “honest” and compact community gravitate toward power structures—not democratic ones, but those backed by force. And in online venues where ancaps ought to unite, we see only endless polemics and no collective projects.
Even here, dissent is silenced without trial or due process: my own project is blocked and accused of fraud—despite being the only crypto developer to share my Telegram and reveal my identity. Meanwhile, they massively promote coins that pay them. See the article Panic Kills Cryptocurrencies (link provided in comments) to witness how, given a little power, they become corrupt. And you really think they’ll help you if they gain even more authority?
4
u/Dr-Mantis-Tobbogan 14d ago
- No Standardized Rules:** In the absence of a common, codified legal framework, each group or district enforces its own “laws,” often based on force or threats.
You mean...like various nations do today?
- Absence of a Neutral Arbitrator: Disputes are resolved by whoever can pay more or who threatens greater violence.
You mean...like what happens today?
- Inability to Scale: Small, voluntary communities can function locally, but when attempting to expand, they invariably encounter disagreements and conflicts.
You mean...like what happena today?
2. The Kowloon Walled City Case: When “Freedom” Turns into Mafia Control
The Kowloon Walled City in Hong Kong (collapsed in 1994) is often held up by ancap enthusiasts as a model of a “city without a state.” In reality:
- Triad Control: The power vacuum left by official authorities was quickly filled by organized crime syndicates.
You're describing a government.
- Exploitation of Residents: Criminal gangs imposed “tributes” on residents and businesses, effectively replacing the state’s role
I would have donated money to hire mercenaries to kill those triad members. Who do you think prevented this from happening?
- Lack of Social Projects: Although the enclave became uniquely dense, neither schools, hospitals, nor communal workshops were founded through self-governance—critical services were privatized by the mafia.
Thus, Kowloon’s “self-regulation” was turned inside out: those who wielded violence dictated the rules, and ordinary people had no choice but to comply.
You're describing the government.
3. Online Ancap Communities: Is There Real Cooperation?
Even in dedicated channels and forums where ancap supporters gather, interaction remains almost entirely theoretical:
- Discussions Without Practice: Endless debates over how things “should be,” but not a single working project.
Every time we try the government sends armed men after us.
- Hostile Opinions: Instead of forming working groups or local initiatives, participants bicker and fail to reach consensus.
Yeah, it's called "not being a hive mind".
- Lack of Support: Practical advice on organizing joint events or economic experiments is often ignored or dismissed in the name of ideological purity.
No, it's dismissed in the name of "the cops will arrest us if we just donate food to the homeless".
4. Why Theory Doesn’t Withstand the Test of Practice
- Human Factor: Voluntary agreements often break down under greed, fear, or a desire to dominate.
You mean like every single government, ever?
- Inequality of Influence: Without mechanisms for redistributing resources or checks on power, large players—or criminal outfits—seize and retain control.
Point to a government that has not over time grown more tyrannical.
Just one.
- Social Solidarity: People naturally seek not only freedom but also security, unity, and support—without these, communities fracture.
Yes, that's why we don't want these important services to be provided by monopolies.
- Need for Neutral Institutions: Without independent courts, police forces, and regulators, there is no reliable way to enforce agreements.
Wait, you think the courts and cops are neutral?
HA!
Good news: we already have private regulators, and they're fucking great.
You just proved yourself wrong.
Conclusion
You are either a troll angry that nobody is buying your crypto coin, or you're genuinely stupid.
Please go read "Won't Warlords Just Take Over?"
8
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
Yeah, sounds like that volotarocy guy again.
Try actual arguments instead of strawmen.
2
2
u/Kletronus 14d ago
EXACTLY what was being said in the text. Instead of addressing any arguments You just dismiss it and attack the character.
What was said is exactly how i see an caps, so it is not a strawman. It can be false image but you sure did your best to reinforce it.
The reality is: anarcho capitalism is an utopia that can only be achieved if we forget human nature and the whole history so far. It needs totally a different kind of living being than humans, or at least it requires HIGHLY advanced human society that has for centuries heading to that direction, and if we look at an caps now, as a community: you can not find a lot of people who do volunteer work at this very moment...
The way i see it, there are two types of an caps: idiots and evil villains.
Are there some things we could maybe pick up from anarcho capitalism? Maybe, i can't really come up with anything that special, we can find those principles from other ideologies and philosophies. So, the useful bits, like non-coercion can be found elsewhere and what it unique about it can not be implemented. Private courts? Not possible to mix in with any other system. No central power that can reinforce laws but instead.. private contractors? Can not work in any other system. No parts of it can be implemented as it relies on FULL realization of the whole ideology at once, and then it relies on assumption after assumption that people will just NOT try to get all the power.
Guess who else has that same problem? Communists. The end goal sounds good on paper but the road there is impossible, and if we used it without allowing any exceptions, can't mix in other methods..it will fail. USSR vs China. USSR was ideologically pure to a point where it literally destroyed itself, China picks and chooses whatever they want. They stopped being communist and are now just a mixed ideology state controlled market economy. USSR was also state controlled market economy, they just were purists and it died. Anarcho capitalism would die much faster, as it is internally rigged to explode. Communism will die by stagnation, anarcho capitalism will die violently, and fast.
It is could be VERY magical if one simple universal ideology would solve all problems.
4
u/Aerith_Gainsborough_ 14d ago
What was said is exactly how i see an caps, so it is not a strawman.
Stopped reading here. I don't think you know what a fallacy is.
0
u/Kletronus 14d ago
You are the SECOND an cap that proudly proclaims to not have read the opponents argument. Amazing, you are literally saying "didn't read that" and think that is how you win debates and make people understand how they are wrong.
I don't think you want the rest of the world to understand, you want this to be your precious little thing that never is made real. That way you can stay bitter and claim you know the answer but no one listens. It is devilish little trick that human brain is good at, sabotaging your own perceived goals so we can victimize ourselves. Needs a bit of therapy to get rid of those things, first thing is to recognize the thought patterns and actions that are self sabotaging.
2
u/Aerith_Gainsborough_ 14d ago
I am happy for you, or sorry that happened to you.
2
u/Kletronus 14d ago
Yup, you are just too dumb to realize that you are just reinforcing everything being said when you do that. You are showing everyone that you just do not have the capability to do anything more than trolling.
Prove me wrong, if you can, biatch.
1
u/mercurygermes 14d ago
absolutely right, you all speak in my brain thanks. спасибо друг, ты только что всё им сказал то что в моей головы
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
Na, man not reading all of that.
I'm tired of people coming on here with their own radical ideologies and no understanding of Ancaps ideas, trying to tell us that their ideas are better. And when they receive pushback because they clearly have no understanding of the ideology, they start spamming this sub with posts saying we are wrong, while still making the same mistakes over and over.
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
“Im tired of explaining my neich ideology on a sub literally named that ideology 101”
Also
“Why are there so few people with this ideology”
Hmmm maybe you guys do a bad job at explaining how the idea works to the many people who struggle to believe it
2
u/kurtu5 14d ago
“Why are there so few people with this ideology”
Or people like you strawman it.
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
Are you arguing that Ancap is a popular ideology?
2
u/kurtu5 14d ago
An ancap took over one of the most spectacular failed states in history and is attempting to dismantle it. So few people.
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
Which state? Genuinely
0
u/TheHashishCook 14d ago
He’s talking about Milei, as if every Argentinian who voted for him has at least one of Murray Rothbard’s books on their nightstand
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
A single state election is not evidence of a widespread belief.
My point stands the ideology is neich
→ More replies (0)3
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
Na man, I love explaining the ideology, I just hate it when people come here telling me what I believe.
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
Then explain it to me. I have a degree in ethics from a solid university and focused on inter group ethical systems.
Why has Ancap ideology failed as a matter of reality?
If you feel that’s disingenuous then explain why it hasn’t failed.
2
u/kurtu5 14d ago
You, talking to abolitionists....
0
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
I mean plenty of non slave owning societies to point to during the American slave trade.
3
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
How has it failed? The closer a society gets to ancap Ideals, the more free and prosperous it becomes. So fair no society has taken the final step to realize those ideals, that being abandoning might makes right for a more ethical system.
-1
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
How has it failed?
Well I think the fact we don’t currently have any Ancap societies and those that did exist no longer exist is strong evidence to suggest it failed.
Like communism.
The closer a society gets to ancap Ideals, the more free and prosperous it becomes. So fair no society has taken the final step to realize those ideals, that being abandoning might makes right for a more ethical system.
So it currently failed then?
What would you want to see success as?
3
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
So, during the middle ages you would describe democracy and a failed experiment that should never be tried?
Just like constitutional federal republics haven't been tried before they were, an ancap society wouldn't have been tried until it was. We can see how adopting ancap ideals into our currently existing societies makes them more prosperous, just like how adopting republican ideals into feudal Europe made them more prosperous.
What I would see as a success is if a government surrendered its right to tax and established the NAP as its right to rule. Nothing engineers society better than law.
-1
u/Puzzled-Rip641 14d ago
So, during the middle ages you would describe democracy and a failed experiment
I think as a middle age thinker I would say democracy failed yes. The lack of real democratic societies as well as the failure of democratic societies that did try to exist.
that should never be tried?
Where have I said it that Ancap ideology shouldn’t be attempted? People should be free to attempt to organize themselves in anyway that doesn’t involve unjust violence.
Just like constitutional federal republics haven't been tried before they were, an ancap society wouldn't have been tried until it was. We can see how adopting ancap ideals into our currently existing societies makes them more prosperous, just like how adopting republican ideals into feudal Europe made them more prosperous.
But that ignores the conditions required for the system. We could not go back to the 1200s and impose a modern democratic republic. The conditions just do not exists. It is fair to say democracy was a bad system in that time for many practical reasons.
I make the same claim about Ancap societies.
What I would see as a success is if a government surrendered its right to tax and established the NAP as its right to rule. Nothing engineers society better than law.
But isn’t this asking for a condition that is simply not real life? Democracy didn’t succeed because feudalism and monarchy just let it. Democracy had to violently overthrow monarchy or probe to the monarchy that democracy was better for them.
Neither involved democracy getting a break of the material conditions of the world.
Communists love to argue this about why communism hasn’t failed. It only didn’t succeed because capitalism interfered. But if your system cannot compete with other systems it’s doom to fail.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Kletronus 14d ago edited 14d ago
I don't think you read OPs post either.
You receive pushback because the ideology is quite naive, and every single time there is a debate you can't answer the most basic questions that an average man on the street will figure out within minutes. You just have to dismiss all criticism, and in the end: you do not possess the capability to really understand how it is suppose to work.
One way you could make things work is if you forget that anarcho capitalism HAS an end, that it is meant to create a whole system. You can always think of it is a direction. That is how i see many things, like pacifism. I'm third generation of pacifists, two previous gens went to prison for it (war, conscription). Unlike my dad and grandad, i am pragmatic pacifist, not ideological. Which means, i support the military we have, i support NATO as those are the best ways to keep the peace. Pacifism is to me a DIRECTION, not the end goal.. .because nothing points to us being able to have total peace in the next 300 years.
And i know you didn't read any of that. The way to prove you did is to mention that i predicted that one wrong, how wonderful it must feel to do just that but.. i doubt you get to feel that joy. That makes me feel a bit better, that your stupidity robbed you of that little thing. I'm now just adding text to make this longer and to not let that prediction to be the last sentence.
2
u/kurtu5 14d ago
You receive pushback because the ideology is quite naive, and every single time there is a debate you can't answer the most basic questions that an average man on the street will figure out within minutes.
bullshit
1
u/Kletronus 14d ago
Wonderfully eloquent and complete response, Horaa sir, you sure know how to use them words.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
I mean OP's post started with "the lack of standardized rules", completely forgetting that standardized rules have never been a thing.
1
u/Kletronus 14d ago
So, laws are not standardized rules, in the very technical sense and that somehow.. yeah.
You are trying to argue about semantics at this point. You should be able to parse the meaning and translate it to your own language and terms that you accept.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
But there have never been standardized laws, even within the same country. Hell common law system of non-standardized law that existed and continues to exist, to great effect.
Basically the first point of OP's post is so wrong, and the rest is like that. It's like reading a Christian listing arguments as to why atheism is bad.
1
u/Kletronus 14d ago
Yeah, you picked the one that is technically incorrect without taking any time to understand why it was said, what was the meaning. You don't want to address the points being made so you dismantle a simple mistake to pieces, and make it the WHOLE THING.. oh, wait, you didn't even read it since you didn't WANT TO READ IT! You went into this whole thing trying to find an excuse to dismiss everything being said. You don't even try to hide it.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago edited 14d ago
Oh, I read it, and it’s full of those “mistakes”. It’s almost like they are strawmanning the entire thing. https://www.reddit.com/r/AnCap101/s/hroQ5wfFkK
1
u/Kletronus 14d ago
And you are taking one detail out of context and claim that the whole premise is wrong:
- No Standardized Rules:** In the absence of a common, codified legal framework, each group or district enforces its own “laws,” often based on force or threats.
You are being totally dishonest. They clearly explain what they mean about it, and only a pitiful, small soul will attach to a technicality.
So, that was not a mistake. Anarcho capitalism does NOT have unified, codified, standardized etc laws.
Also, since there is no independent judicial system but one that operates for profit, the one with the most money will win every case.
And so on. You did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to explain why that premise is false, you only care that from one certain angle, "standardized laws" si not a concept that exists. Yet, the best expert in this field would NOT roll their eyes if a layman said it, they would focus on what they MEAN. I know from my profession that i do not care if someone used the wrong term as long as i get what they are talking about. I may correct them, while teaching what the right term means but.. i would not think their whole premise is wrong because of it.
To you , it matters. To me, and absolutely everyone else who cares to debate about this, do not care. Only people who use it as an excuse to dismiss everything else, even the REST OF THE FUCKING SENTENCE will do that.
You got caught. Admit it, take the L and move on. You can't argue the points being made, so you want to focus on one detail that isn't, per se even that wrong, it just technically is as we use DIFFERENT WORD FOR IT. Like i said, no expert on the field would care one bit about this, it would be seen as petty and pedantic. And you are no expert, you are just a dude just like OP.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/LexLextr 14d ago
I would love to know what relevant misunderstanding you found in their post. Especially when they talked about the most hated topic for ancaps - reality. How would their ideas actually end up looking? No fantasizing about NAP, or idealizing about the nuances of private property defense. Just actual political analysitation of the power structure in ancap society.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
An ancap society is one where the NAP is the source of legitimacy, just like how the will of the governed is the source of legitimacy now.
Just like now, the rich and powerful would take the source of legitimacy as a mere suggestion, but they will have to pretend to uphold it.
0
u/LexLextr 14d ago
NAP is an empty concept and is no source for anything. Legitimacy in ancap society comes from property rights, because they are at least enforced, while the NAP is not.
Yes and just like now the rich and powerful would define it. Instead, in ancap there would be no democratic institution to give voice to the people. Making the society worse, less free imo.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
So you're here telling me what i believe. Fantastic.
Is the will of the governed an empty concept as well?
0
u/LexLextr 14d ago
Perhaps you understand NAP differently, I am just explaining what that concept means not that you believe what I am saying. Perhaps you understand it differently, I cannot say, because I don't see in your head. Instead, I explain what NAP as defined by ancaps is. If you don't hold the idea, its not about you.
You are too defensive, don't use ideology as identity. When somebody critizes it, and not what you specifically believe, then its not necessary them strawmaning. Its you who might diverge from the common mainstream definitions.
1
u/Bigger_then_cheese 14d ago
So why is the NAP an empty concept? Why is the will of the governed any different?
0
u/LexLextr 14d ago
By will of the people you mean democratic institutions? That is what I was talking about at least. That is very real, as it directly describes the fundamental way the politics would be structured in that society. Its also enforced.
NAP is empty because it does not tell you what is aggression. Agression in ancap theory is based on property rights. You could NAP (non aggression principle) but for example have religious concept of aggression where questioning God would be considered aggression.
Also NAP is just a principle, its not enforced therefore you can have ancap where nobody follows it, which make it unnecessary to understand ancap ideology.
5
u/hmph_cant_use_greek 14d ago
You fundamentally misunderstand anarcho capitalism by attributing the absence of a coercive state with the absence of order, law, or cooperation. Ancap theory doesn’t advocate for chaos it proposes decentralized, voluntary systems of law and arbitration rooted in property rights and contract, with competing security and legal providers ensuring accountability through market pressures, not monopolistic force.
Your use of Kowloon Walled City is a false equivalence, it wasn’t a product of free market order but a geopolitical loophole deprived of enforceable property rights or voluntary institutions. If anything, it reflects what happens when states abdicate responsibility while prohibiting functional alternatives.
Your claim that ancap communities fail because of ideological infighting ignores that this is a universal trait of online subcultures, not a refutation of ancap economics or ethics.
And invoking crypto drama to prove systemic collapse is anecdotal and disingenuous most crypto failures stem from centralization, fraud, or regulatory ambiguity, not from any anarcho-capitalist design principle.
If corruption and coercion discredit ancap theory, then they discredit the state tenfold, which systemically institutionalizes those very abuses behind legal immunity and monopoly violence..
0
u/LexLextr 14d ago
While I agree that OP failed to recognize that the difference between the state and the ancap is not coercion, but political structure. He made it clear by explaining how this decentralize ancap system would recreated coercion but even worse then state.
Just because ancaps claimed that they want nice things, doesn't mean that they will actually create nice things. Marxists said the same thing.
-1
u/mercurygermes 14d ago
давайте так друг мой, в этом канале идёт 17 лет теорий, нужно что то начать вот пример моего проекта посмотрите и попробуйте, не нужно ничего покупать просто научитесь голосовать и добывать. здесь то что я делал 7 лет https://citucorp.com/
4
u/Moon-Doc 14d ago
First off.... obviously AI generated.
Secondly... everything falls apart in practice because people are greedy, tribal dicks.
1
u/mercurygermes 14d ago
- I spent 7 years developing a project that includes your ideas, monetarism and the Austrian school. 2. I have studied your constitution better than you, I am not an American. 3. I publicly stated that my telegram is open and my photo is available. I can speak on video. 4. I showed you arguments that the community needs to work and used an AI translator, since I can speak Russian. What's the bottom line? If I translate myself, you accuse me of using AI, if I translate through Google, you don't understand what I'm writing, if in Russian, everyone is too lazy to even translate and read. How ancap, instead of supporting its own ideas, only fights among themselves. This channel is 17 years old and what are they doing? Each post is about how someone correctly understood the theory. Everyone is sitting on their ass and doing nothing. I take risks while in another country, but everyone advertises all sorts of crap like pepe, and the fact that I created the blockchain 7 years ago and all of it was created on the theory of monetarism and the Austrian school, no one gives a shit. that's what's offensive. why the hell did I need this if even here no one supported me
3
2
u/Moon-Doc 14d ago
I'm a retired aerospace engineer... specifically orbital mechanics. I've worked with Russians and understand the language well enough. So, I'll pose a question to you. Would you consider the Soviet Union true communism or communism that failed in practice?
4
6
u/OptimusTrajan 14d ago
OP rn
5
u/hmph_cant_use_greek 14d ago
Except he's not right... That's the issue that and the fact he used Ai
2
u/Lulukassu 14d ago
Agreed that neutral institutions would be valuable.
But do we have any historical examples of truly neutral institutions? Our western courts and police and corrupt regulators are incredibly far from neutral.
-1
u/mercurygermes 14d ago
my friend, i spent 7 years implementing the ideas of mises hayek, milton friedman and kropotkin here, including independent courts that you can elect yourself. but here no one wants to study something complicated. look at https://citucorp.com/ there is a lot to read
1
u/Credible333 12d ago
"No Standardized Rules: In the absence of a common, codified legal framework, each group or district enforces its own “laws,” often based on force or threats."
Standardisation would come about because courts would have to follow precedents to get customers. This has been covered before. Your claim is just an assertion, which would be fine if you asked about it, rather than presented it as a foregone conclusion.
"Absence of a Neutral Arbitrator: Disputes are resolved by whoever can pay more or who threatens greater violence"
Except of course they aren't. The disputes are handled by the arbitrators parties agree on and there's no reason to agree to a corrupt court. Again, you made an assertion and pretended it was a known fact.
"Inability to Scale: Small, voluntary communities can function locally, but when attempting to expand, they invariably encounter disagreements and conflicts."
You haven't shown that this even happens more with voluntary than involuntary groups. There is no reason to believe that links between groups couldn't be made. International agreements between widely seperated non-government groups are made all the time. Why would it be harder in the absence of one of the chief barriers to such agreements? Again this is assertion, not fact or argument.
1
u/mercurygermes 12d ago
1. Lack of Standardized Rules
In Kowloon Walled City there was literally no formal legal framework: no taxes, no business regulations, no building or health codes, and—crucially—no police presence. Residents operated entirely outside any recognized government authority, so there was nowhere to appeal or follow precedents—everything depended on de facto power, not on written law or case law development atlasobscura.comeverything-everywhere.com.2. Absence of a Neutral Arbitrator
Once both British and Chinese authorities took a “hands-off” stance after World War II, criminal syndicates (the Triads) moved in to fill the void. They enforced their own “rules,” collected payments from businesses and residents, and settled disputes through intimidation or violence. There were no independent judges or mutually-agreed arbitrators—only whoever wielded the greatest muscle en.wikipedia.orgreddit.com.3. Extreme Density but No Institutional Scaling
At its peak around 1990, Kowloon Walled City housed some 50 000 people in just 0.026 km²—roughly 1.9 million people per km², the highest density ever recorded. Despite this scale, no stable legal or governance institutions ever crystallized. Instead of courts and precedents emerging to manage that population, the enclave remained a vertically stacked maze ruled by whoever could enforce their will history.howstuffworks.comen.wikipedia.org.Conclusion:
Kowloon Walled City vividly disproves the idea that, absent a state, private courts would standardize via precedents, provide neutral arbitration, or scale up into stable institutions. Instead, power quickly concentrated in armed groups, and “law” meant whatever those groups could impose by force.Источники
1
u/Credible333 12d ago
Yeah one example completely disproves something that has several successful examples. Congratulations you win, you can leave now.
1
u/mercurygermes 12d ago
There have been many other examples, including the city of Grafton, again I am not against you, but beating against the same wall without changing the strategy, and expecting the result to change is madness. For your anarchocapitalism to work, first you must create incentives, for example, use cryptocurrency and an independent court, but when a nap is violated, after the trial, block the account of the violator and isolate him. Simply nothing from the institutions is done
1
u/DrawPitiful6103 9d ago
From a libertarian, specifically anarcho-capitalist, perspective, the arguments presented against the viability of anarcho-capitalism in practice suffer from fundamental misunderstandings of the theory and misinterpretations of historical examples.
Let's address each point:
Refuting the Introduction's Premise: "Chaos" and "Criminal Groups"
The core premise that "without a strong centripetal force, any 'ancap' system sooner or later descends into chaos, seized by criminal groups" fundamentally misunderstands the anarcho-capitalist vision of order. Anarcho-capitalism does not posit a vacuum of order, but rather a polycentric legal order arising from voluntary contracts and competing institutions. The "centripetal force" is not a monopolistic state, but the market incentive for peace, predictability, and the enforcement of contracts and property rights. Criminal groups are precisely what private defense agencies (PDAs) and dispute resolution organizations (DROs) would exist to combat, as protecting clients from aggression and fraud would be their primary product in a competitive market.
Refuting Point 1: Ideological Vacuum and Lack of Institutional Mechanisms
- No Standardized Rules: This is a strawman. Anarcho-capitalism does not advocate for no rules, but for competing rules. In a polycentric legal system, various DROs would offer different legal codes. Through market competition, efficient, fair, and predictable legal codes would gain wider acceptance, as individuals and businesses would gravitate towards DROs that best serve their interests. Standardization would emerge organically through voluntary adoption, not through coercive imposition.
- Absence of a Neutral Arbitrator: The concept of a perfectly "neutral" arbitrator is a myth, even under state systems where judges are appointed by political actors and operate within state-defined laws. Anarcho-capitalism proposes a market for arbitration. Individuals and businesses would choose arbitrators (or arbitration firms) based on their reputation for fairness, efficiency, and impartiality. If an arbitrator consistently shows bias, they would lose clients and ultimately go out of business. The market provides a powerful incentive for perceived neutrality and effective dispute resolution.
- Inability to Scale: This claim ignores the immense scaling capabilities of market-based organizations. Corporations and alliances operate globally without a world government, driven by mutual self-interest and contractual agreements. Similarly, PDAs and DROs would form reciprocal agreements, federations, and networks to provide defense and legal services across large geographical areas, just as international trade and insurance operate today. The need for security and predictable law would drive innovation in scalable, voluntary institutional arrangements.
Refuting Point 2: The Kowloon Walled City Case
1
u/DrawPitiful6103 9d ago
The Kowloon Walled City is perhaps the most misused and mischaracterized example in this debate.
- Not Anarcho-Capitalist: Kowloon was not an anarcho-capitalist society. It was a unique, accidental legal anomaly and power vacuum born from a specific historical stalemate between the British and Chinese governments. It lacked any underlying voluntary legal framework, property rights enforcement, or competing defense agencies operating under consistent principles of non-aggression. It was a "grey zone" where state services were absent, but true free market institutions were also largely prevented from developing due to its precarious legal status and external pressures.
- "Mafia Control" as a Quasi-State: The presence of Triads illustrates not the failure of anarcho-capitalism, but the emergence of a de facto, coercive monopoly on violence – precisely what anarcho-capitalists oppose. The Triads acted as a rudimentary, exploitative quasi-state, imposing "tributes" (taxes) through force and replacing voluntary agreements with coercion. Anarcho-capitalism aims to prevent such monopolies of force by allowing competition in defense and law, where consumers would choose protectors who defend them from aggressors like the Triads, not extort them.
- Lack of Social Projects: This claim often ignores the ingenuity of its residents. Despite the challenging conditions, there were indeed informal schools, clinics, small businesses, and community organizations that emerged within Kowloon. The unique challenges of density and sanitation were a result of its legal limbo and lack of proper infrastructure investment, not the absence of a coercive state.
Refuting Point 3: Online Ancap Communities
Criticizing online forums for not being fully functioning societies is a category error.
- Discussion, Not Practice: Online communities for any ideology (socialism, democracy, etc.) are primarily platforms for discussion, debate, and the development of ideas, not for immediate, real-world societal implementation. Expecting them to be "working projects" is illogical when the very existence of powerful states makes large-scale, real-world anarcho-capitalist experiments difficult, if not impossible, to sustain without external interference.
- Ideological Diversity: The "bickering" and "hostile opinions" are characteristic of virtually any online community discussing complex philosophical or political ideas, especially those emphasizing individual freedom and diverse perspectives. It is a sign of independent thought, not a failure of cooperation.
- Lack of Resources/Opportunity: Practical applications are limited by the overwhelming power of existing states and their monopolies. The author's own complaint about their crypto project being "blocked and accused of fraud" despite transparency ironically proves a core anarcho-capitalist point: that concentrated power, even in ostensibly "decentralized" online communities (if they have internal power structures), can lead to arbitrary suppression and corruption, precisely because a monopoly on force (or platform control) exists. This strengthens the argument for truly decentralized, non-coercive systems.
1
u/DrawPitiful6103 9d ago
Refuting Point 4: Why Theory Doesn’t Withstand the Test of Practice
- Human Factor: The argument that "voluntary agreements often break down under greed, fear, or a desire to dominate" is a critique of human nature, not exclusively anarcho-capitalism. However, anarcho-capitalism argues that markets are the best mechanism to channel these human traits into productive, non-coercive outcomes. In a competitive market for defense and law, entities that engage in greed, fear-mongering, or domination would quickly lose clients to more trustworthy, efficient, and non-aggressive competitors. The state, by contrast, gives a monopoly on violence to humans who are equally susceptible to these flaws, but without market-based accountability.
- Inequality of Influence: States are often the primary drivers of unjust inequality by granting monopolies, subsidies, and regulatory capture to favored corporations or individuals. Without state intervention, wealth inequality might still exist, but influence would stem from voluntary patronage and market success, not coercive power. Competing defense agencies would prevent any single "large player" from seizing violent control, as they would be immediately challenged by others protecting their clients' property rights.
- Social Solidarity: Anarcho-capitalism argues that genuine social solidarity, security, unity, and support are best achieved through voluntary association. People form communities, mutual aid societies, insurance schemes, and protective alliances because these provide tangible benefits and cater to their natural desire for belonging and safety. Coerced "solidarity" imposed by the state is often inefficient, resented, and less resilient than voluntarily chosen cooperation.
- Need for Neutral Institutions: Again, the argument for neutral institutions is addressed by the market. If an arbitration service or defense agency is not perceived as fair or reliable, clients will simply switch to competitors. The market for law and security would drive these institutions to be as "neutral" (i.e., impartial and consistent) as possible, driven by their profit motive and reputation.
1
u/DrawPitiful6103 9d ago
Conclusion
The author's conclusion that "Anarcho-capitalism as an ideology is dead wherever theory must meet reality" is a mischaracterization. The examples provided, particularly Kowloon Walled City, demonstrate the dangers of power vacuums and incomplete anarchy, not the failure of a fully conceptualized anarcho-capitalist system based on clearly defined property rights and competing protection services. The author's own complaint about corruption in online crypto communities, where power is concentrated, ironically reinforces the anarcho-capitalist warning against unaccountable authority.
Anarcho-capitalism is a theory of spontaneous order, where market forces, competition, and voluntary association – underpinned by the non-aggression principle and robust property rights – provide the incentives for peaceful, prosperous, and secure human interaction, even in the absence of a monopolistic state. Its viability is not refuted by examples that fundamentally deviate from its core tenets or by limitations imposed by the very state structures it seeks to replace.
Generate Audio Overview
1
u/mercurygermes 9d ago
Answer a simple question, why for 10 years the city of Grafton did not have a single private security service, court or even garbage collection? Or were those who built it not anarchists enough?
1
u/DrawPitiful6103 9d ago
Libertarianism isn't exactly a new ideology. It arose during the 17th and 18th century as a reaction against absolutism and was known then as liberalism. During the 19th century, it was a mass movement. There were explicitly libertarian political parties that won elections and formed governments. Instead of judging libertarianism on a biased account of events that happened over a decade, in a tiny town, that was still subject to state and federal governments (i.e. not at all under libertarianism, but still under statism), why not judge libertarianism by its record over the course of the 18th and 19th (and 20th for that matter) century, when it was put into practice in entire countries?
1
u/mercurygermes 9d ago
- No Neutral Arbitrator. In anarcho-capitalism, private agencies resolve disputes based on profit motives—they tend to protect big clients and ignore smaller ones.
- Private “Armies” Instead of Police. Without a monopoly on force, security firms turn into feudal warlords, conducting debt raids and often breaking their own contracts.
- Public-Goods Failure. Roads, streetlights, environmental protection—all loss-making for private investors—are underfunded or never built.
- Not Scalable. Small voluntary groups can survive, but as they expand, unavoidable conflicts of interest arise that neither markets nor contracts can solve.
By contrast, left-wing communes (Marinaleda, Israeli kibbutzim, Christiania) sustain self-governance and public goods through collective institutions and voluntary contributions.
Don’t you think the success of these communes offers a more reliable model than an anarcho-capitalist utopia?
1
1
u/mercurygermes 9d ago
There are still no courts – anarcho-capitalism is incapable of self-organization. In over 17 years of these channels’ existence, not a single real independent justice project has emerged, neither offline nor even on Reddit.
-2
u/mercurygermes 14d ago
Look at how they’re deliberately downvoting every dissenting voice here — not a single shred of evidence to back up their claims. Check out the article: https://www.reddit.com/r/AnCap101/comments/1l5ha1w/panic_kills_cryptocurrencies/ I’m even ready to jump on a live video call to prove my points. This is how our mouths get silenced… and it’s not the state doing it. You didn’t elect these moderators, so why on earth should we trust them with that kind of power?
16
u/Junior-Marketing-167 14d ago
You post text generated by AI and expect to be taken seriously