Anarcho-capitalism

The Libertatis Æquilibritas is one symbol used by anarcho-capitalists [2].

Anarcho-capitalism is an individualist philosophy based on the idea of individual sovereignty, and a prohibition against initiatory coercion and fraud. It sees the only just basis for law as arising from private property norms and an unlimited right of contract between sovereign individuals. Anarcho-capitalists reject the state as an unjustified monopolist and systematic aggressor against sovereign individuals, and would replace it with cooperatives, neighborhood associations, private businesses and similar non-monopolistic organizations. They embrace a form of anti-statist laissez-faire capitalism, and believe that all goods and services should be supplied through voluntary mechanisms like the free market. For anarcho-capitalists, property may only be transferred by trade, gift, or abandonment; confiscation is seen as an illegitimate method of acquiring property from others, whether performed by private individuals, groups, collectives, or the state.

The first well-known version of anarcho-capitalism to identify itself thus was developed by Austrian School economist and libertarian Murray Rothbard in the mid-20th century, synthesizing elements from Austrian School economics, classical liberalism and 19th-century American individualist anarchism. While Rothbard bases his philosophy on natural law, others, such as David Friedman, take a pragmatic consequentialist approach by arguing that anarcho-capitalism should be implemented because such a system would have consequences superior to alternatives.

Because of this embrace of capitalism, there is considerable tension between anarcho-capitalists and those anarchists who see the rejection of capitalism as being just as essential to anarchist philosophy as rejection of the state. Despite this tension, many anarcho-capitalists have cited the laissez-faire market philosophy of the American individualist anarchists such as Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner as being predecessors to anarcho-capitalism.

Philosophy

The nonaggression axiom

The term anarcho-capitalism was most likely coined in the mid-1950s by the economist Murray Rothbard. Other terms sometimes used for this philosophy, though not necessarily outside of anarcho-capitalist circles, include: capitalist anarchism anti-state capitalism anarcho-liberalism stateless capitalism the private-law society radical capitalism right-anarchism free market anarchism private-property anarchy stateless liberalism individualist anarchism

A postage stamp celebrating the thousandth anniversary of the Icelandic parliament. According to a theory associated with the economist David Friedman, medieval Icelandic society had some features of anarcho-capitalism. Chieftancies could be bought and sold, and were not geographical monopolies; individuals could voluntarily choose membership in any chieftan's clan.

Main article: non-aggression axiom

Anarcho-capitalism, as formulated by Rothbard and others, holds strongly to the central libertarian nonaggression axiom:

[...] The basic axiom of libertarian political theory holds that every man is a selfowner, having absolute jurisdiction over his own body. In effect, this means that no one else may justly invade, or aggress against, another's person. It follows then that each person justly owns whatever previously unowned resources he appropriates or "mixes his labor with." From these twin axioms — self-ownership and "homesteading" — stem the justification for the entire system of property rights titles in a free-market society. This system establishes the right of every man to his own person, the right of donation, of bequest (and, concomitantly, the right to receive the bequest or inheritance), and the right of contractual exchange of property titles.

In general, the nonaggression axiom can be said to be a prohibition against the initiation of force, or the threat of force, against persons (i.e., direct violence, assault, murder) or property (i.e., fraud, burglary, theft, taxation). The initiation of force is usually referred to as aggression or coercion. The difference between anarcho-capitalists and other libertarians is largely one of the degree to which they take this axiom. Minarchist libertarians, such as most people involved in Libertarian political parties, would retain the state in some smaller and less invasive form, retaining at the very least public police, courts and military; others, however, might give further allowance for other government programs. In contrast, anarcho-capitalists reject any level of state intervention, defining the state as a coercive monopoly and, as the only entity in human society that derives its income from legal aggression, an entity that inherently violates the central axiom of libertarianism. Some, such as Rothbard, accept the nonaggression axiom on an intrinsic moral or natural law basis. Others, such as Friedman, take a consequentialist or egoist approach; rather than maintaining that aggression is intrinsically immoral, they maintain that a law against aggression can only come about by contract between self-interested parties who agree to refrain from initiating coercion against each other. It is in terms of the non-aggression principle that Rothbard defined anarchism; he defined "anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression ['against person and property']" and said that "what anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the State, i.e. to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion." In an interview with New Banner, Rothbard said that "capitalism is the fullest expression of anarchism, and anarchism is the fullest expression of capitalism."

Original appropriation

Central to anarcho-capitalism are the concepts of self-ownership and original appropriation:

Everyone is the proper owner of his own physical body as well as of all places and nature-given goods that he occupies and puts to use by means of his body, provided only that no one else has already occupied or used the same places and goods before him. This ownership of "originally appropriated" places and goods by a person implies his right to use and transform these places and goods in any way he sees fit, provided only that he does not change thereby uninvitedly the physical integrity of places and goods originally appropriated by another person. In particular, once a place or good has been first appropriated by, in John Locke's phrase, 'mixing one's labor' with it, ownership in such places and goods can be acquired only by means of a voluntary — contractual — transfer of its property title from a previous to a later owner.

Anarcho-capitalism uses the following terms in ways that may differ from common usage or various anarchist movements: Anarchism: any philosophy that opposes all forms of initiatory coercion (includes opposition to the State) Contract: a voluntary binding agreement between persons Coercion: physical force or threat of such against persons or property Capitalism: economic system where the means of production are privately owned, and where investments, production, distribution, income, and prices are determined through the operation of a free market rather than by government Free market: a market where all decisions regarding transfer of money, goods (including capital goods), and services are voluntary Fraud: inducing one to part with something of value through the use of dishonesty State: an organization that taxes and engages in regularized and institutionalized aggressive coercion Voluntary: any action not influenced by coercion or fraud perpetrated by any human agency See also: Anarcho-capitalist terminology and symbolism

This is the root of anarcho-capitalist property rights, and where they differ from collectivist forms of anarchism. Original appropriation allows an individual to claim any "unused" property, including land, and by improving or otherwise using it, own it with the same absolute right as his own body. According to Rothbard, original appropriation of land is not legitimate by merely claiming it or building a fence around it; it is only by using land — by mixing one's labor with it — that original appropriation is legitimized: "Any attempt to claim a new resource that someone does not use would have to be considered invasive of the property right of whoever the first user will turn out to be." As a practical matter, in terms of the ownership of land, anarcho-capitalists recognize that there are few (if any) parcels of land left on Earth whose ownership was not at some point in time transferred as the result of coercion, usually through seizure by some form of state. However, unless records and titles exist to confirm the theft and the rightful individual owner most do not believe that this history de-legitimizes current ownerships which are based on consensual transactions. They believe it is wrong to attempt to remedy past coercion by the use of present coercion (i.e., seizure or eviction).

By accepting an axiomatic definition of private property and property rights, anarcho-capitalists deny the legitimacy of a state on principle:

"For, apart from ruling out as unjustified all activities such as murder, homicide, rape, trespass, robbery, burglary, theft, and fraud, the ethics of private property is also incompatible with the existence of a state defined as an agency that possesses a compulsory territorial monopoly of ultimate decision-making (jurisdiction) and/or the right to tax."

The contractual society

The society envisioned by anarcho-capitalists has been called the Contractual Society; "[...] a society based purely on voluntary action, entirely un­hampered by violence or threats of violence." The particulars of what such a society would look like are disputed both among anarcho-capitalists and between them and their critics.

One particular ramification is that transfer of property and services must be voluntary on the part of both parties. No external entities can force an individual to accept or deny a particular transaction. An employer might offer insurance and death benefits to same-sex couples; another might refuse to recognize any union outside his or her own faith. Individuals would be free to enter into contractual agreements as they saw fit.

One social structure that is not permissible under anarcho-capitalism is one that attempts to claim greater sovereignty than the individuals that form it. The state is a prime example, but another is the modern corporation — defined as a legal entity that exists under a different legal code than individuals as a means to shelter the individuals who own and run the corporation from possible legal consequences of acts by the corporation. It is worth noting that Rothbard allows a narrower definition of a corporation: "Corporations are not at all monopolistic privileges; they are free associations of individuals pooling their capital. On the purely free market, such men would simply announce to their creditors that their liability is limited to the capital specifically invested in the corporation [...]." However, this is a very narrow definition that only shelters owners from debt by creditors that specifically agree to the arrangement; it also does not shelter other liability, such as from malfeasance or other wrongdoing.

There are limits to the right to contract under some interpretations of anarcho-capitalism. Rothbard himself asserts that the right to contract is based in inalienable human rights, and therefore any contract that implicitly violates those rights can be voided at will, which would, for instance, prevent a person from permanently selling himself into slavery. Other interpretations conclude that banning such contracts would in itself be an unacceptably invasive interference in the right to contract.

Private law and order

Morris and Linda Tannehill, in The Market for Liberty, support natural law as the basis of an anarcho-capitalist society but "object to any statutory law whatsoever. They assert that all one has to do is ask if one is aggresing against another in order to decide if an act is right or wrong." Murray Rothbard, on the other hand, while also supporting a natural prohibition on force and fraud, supports a commonly-agreed upon legal code. Unlike both the Tannehills and Rothbard, David Friedman proposes that "the systems of law would be produced for profit on the open market, just as books and bras are produced today. There could be competition among different brands of law, just as there is competition among different brands of cars."

Anarcho-capitalists only believe in collective defense of individual liberty (i.e., courts, military or police forces) insofar as such groups are formed and paid for on an explicitly voluntary basis. According to Molinari, "Under a regime of liberty, the natural organization of the security industry would not be different from that of other industries." Proponents point out that private systems of justice and defense already exist, naturally forming where the market is allowed to compensate for the failure of the state: private arbitration, security guards, neighborhood watch groups, and so on. These private courts and police are sometimes referred to generically as Private Defense Agencies (PDAs.)

Retributive justice, meaning retaliatory force, is often a component of the contracts imagined for an anarcho-capitalist society. Some believe prisons or indentured servitude would be justifiable institutions to deal with those who violate anarcho-capitalist property relations, while others believe exile or forced restitution are sufficient.

The use of force

File:Bunkertrumbull.jpg

Many anarcho-capitalists admire the American Revolution and believe it is the only U.S. war that can be justified.

Like classical liberalism, and unlike pacifism, anarcho-capitalism permits the use of force, as long as it is in the defense of persons or property. The permissible extent of this defensive use of force is an arguable point among anarcho-capitalists.

Another controversial application of defensive aggression is the act of revolutionary violence against tyrannical regimes. Many anarcho-capitalists admire the American Revolution as the legitimate act of individuals working together to fight against tyrannical restrictions of their liberties. In fact, according to Murray Rothbard, the American Revolutionary War was the only war involving the United States that could be justified.

Conflicts within anarcho-capitalist theory

There is dispute on whether anarcho-capitalism is properly justifiable on deontological or consequentialist grounds. Natural-law anarcho-capitalism (such as that advocated by Rothbard) holds that rights can be determined through natural law and that consequences are not relevant to their determination. Consequentialists such as Friedman disagree, maintaining that rights are merely human constructs that rational humans create through contract as a result of concluding what sort of system leads to the best consequences.

Friedman describes an economic approach to anarcho-capitalism. His description differs with Rothbard's because it does not use moral arguments — i.e., it does not appeal to a theory of natural rights to justify itself. In Friedman's work, the economic argument is sufficient to derive the principles of anarcho-capitalism. Private defense or protection agencies and courts not only defend legal rights but supply the actual content of these rights and all claims on the free market. People will have the law system they pay for, and because of economic efficiency considerations resulting from individuals' utility functions, such law will tend to be libertarian in nature but will differ from place to place and from agency to agency depending on the tastes of the people who buy the law. Also unlike other anarcho-capitalists, most notably Rothbard, Friedman has never tried to deny the theoretical cogency of the neoclassical literature on "market failure," nor has he been inclined to attack economic efficiency as a normative benchmark.

Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism

Main article: Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism

Dispute over the name "anarchism"

Many anarchists strongly argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism, since they believe capitalism to be inherently authoritarian. Anarchists favor purely voluntary interaction and oppose coercive interactions, but anarcho-capitalists and their anarchist opponents disagree on whether certain actions are voluntary.

According to The Anarchist International, capitalism is an economic plutocracy that includes its own hierarchy. They place anarcho-capitalism outside of the anarchist movement, and into the classical liberal tradition "Plutarchy without statism = liberalism."

Jamal Hannah says that most anarchists and capitalists agree in believing that capitalist economics require a state to defend private wealth. Joe Peacott has said that individualist anarchism is anti-capitalist, and contrasts it to anarcho-capitalism. Nevertheless, he does not deny that anarcho-capitalists are anarchists and refers to them as "capitalist anarchists" and "individualists". Individualist anarchist Daniel Burton says that anarcho-capitalism is a "type of individualist anarchism", but that most individualists are class-war anti-capitalists.

Often, anarchist individualism is regarded as a form of socialism (for example, by individualist anarchists such as E. Armand). However, American individualist anarchism is sometimes regarded as a form of "liberal-anarchism." Some, while accepting that anarcho-capitalism is a radical form of liberalism, question the coherence of such a statement, holding that if socialism and communism can have anarchist forms, then liberalism can as well. Likewise, many academics put anarcho-capitalism closer to libertarianism rather than to other forms of anarchism. However, some, such as social sciences scholar Richard Sylvan, notes anarcho-capitalism as one of "several recognized varieties of anarchism."

According to Wendy McElroy, when traditional individualist anarchists referred to "capitalism" they "meant state capitalism, the alliance of government and business." Despite disagreeing on whether or not non-state capitalism is a coherent concept, anarchists like Gambone oppose a state and support private defence of wealth. Murray Rothbard argues that an "anarchist society [is] one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual." Adherents of other schools of anarchism reject the term "anarcho-capitalism."

"Left" and "Right" anarchism

Murray Bookchin in Social Anarchism Or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm, calls the divide between anarcho-capitalism and traditional anarchists as social anarchism versus lifestyle anarchism. Similarly Ulrike Heider calls the divided as left anarchism versus right anarchism by , who placed anarcho-capitalism on the far right. Most contemporary anarcho-capitalists reject the standard linear model of ideologies in favor of a multidimensional model with a liberty-authority dimension, though some, both advocates and opponents of anarcho-capitalism, maintain that anarchism itself is a left-wing ideology.

History and influences

Gustave de Molinari (1819–1912).

Liberalism

Main article: Liberalism

Classical liberalism is the primary influence with the longest history on anarcho-capitalist theory. Classical liberals have had two main themes since John Locke first expounded the philosophy: the liberty of man, and limitations of state power. The liberty of man was expressed in terms of natural rights, while limiting the state was based (for Locke) on a consent theory.

In the 19th century, classical liberals led the attack against statism. One notable was Frederic Bastiat (The Law), who wrote, "The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else." Henry David Thoreau wrote, "I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, 'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

One of the first liberals to discuss the possibility of privatizing protection of individual liberty and property was France's Jakob Mauvillon in the 18th century. Later, in the 1840s, Julius Faucher and Gustave de Molinari advocated the same. Molinari, in his essay The Production of Security, argued, "No government should have the right to prevent another government from going into competition with it, or to require consumers of security to come exclusively to it for this commodity." Molinari and this new type of anti-state liberal grounded their reasoning on liberal ideals and classical economics. Historian Ralph Raico asserts what that these liberal philosophers "had come up with was a form of individualist anarchism, or, as it would be called today, anarcho-capitalism or market anarchism." Unlike the liberalism of Locke, which saw the state as evolving from society, the anti-state liberals saw a fundamental conflict between the voluntary interactions of people — society — and the institutions of force — the State. This society versus state idea was expressed in various ways: natural society vs. artificial society, liberty vs. authority, society of contract vs. society of authority, and industrial society vs. militant society, just to name a few. The anti-state liberal tradition in Europe and the United States continued after Molinari in the early writings of Herbert Spencer, as well as in thinkers such as Paul Émile de Puydt and Auberon Herbert.

Ulrike Heider, in discussing the "anarcho-capitalists family tree," notes Max Stirner as the "founder of individualist anarchism" and "ancestor of laissez-faire liberalism." According to Heider, Stirner wants to "abolish not only the state but also society as an institution responsible for its members" and "derives his identity solely from property" with the question of property to be resolved by a 'war of all against all'." Stirner argued against the existence of the state in a fundamentally anti-collectivist way, to be replaced by a "Union of Egoists" but was not more explicit than that in his book The Ego and Its Own published in 1844.

Later, in the early 20th century, the mantle of anti-state liberalism was taken by the "Old Right". These were minarchist, antiwar, anti-imperialist, and (later) anti-New Dealers. Some of the most notable members of the Old Right were Albert Jay Nock, Rose Wilder Lane, Isabel Paterson, Frank Chodorov, Garet Garrett, and H. L. Mencken. In the 1950s, the new "fusion conservatism", also called "cold war conservatism", took hold of the right wing in the U.S., stressing anti-communism. This induced the libertarian Old Right to split off from the right, and seek alliances with the (now left-wing) antiwar movement, and to start specifically libertarian organizations such as the (U.S.) Libertarian Party.

Individualist anarchism in the United States

Lysander Spooner (1808–87).

Main article: Individualist anarchism in the United States

Anarcho-capitalism is influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists, and is regarded as a form of individualist anarchism by several scholars. Rothbard sought to meld the 19th-century individualist theory with the principles of Austrian economics: "There is, in the body of thought known as 'Austrian economics', a scientific explanation of the workings of the free market (and of the consequences of government intervention in that market) which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their political and social Weltanschauung" (Egalitarianism). The 19th-century individualist anarchists espoused a labor theory of value, while the anarcho-capitalists adhere to a subjective theory, leading to differences over the legitimacy of profit. Anarchist historian Peter Marshall believes that anarcho-capitalists selectively interpret individualist anarchists texts, overlooking egalitarian implications. However, Marshall may have overlooked that the most noted individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker explicitly supports the right to inequality in wealth and upholds it as the natural result of liberty. Tucker did, although, oppose vast concentrations of wealth which he believed were made possible by government intervention which protected monopoly. He believed the most dangerous intervention was the protection of a "banking monopoly" which concentrated capital in the hands of the privileged elite. Though, he also argued that harmful monopolies that were created by government intervention could be maintained in the absence of government protection because of the accumulation of great wealth (see predatory pricing). Anarcho-capitalists also oppose governmental restrictions on banking. They, like all Austrian economists, believe that monopoly can only come about through government intervention. Most modern individualists, following in the footsteps of historical counterparts, reject capitalism in the sense of government-backed privilege for capital. Individualists anarchists have long argued that monopoly on credit and land interferes with the functioning of a free market economy. Although anarcho-capitalists disagree on the critical topic of profit, both schools of thought agree on other issues. Of particular importance to anarcho-capitalists and the individualists are the ideas of private property, "sovereignty of the individual", a market economy, and the opposition to collectivism. In addition, like the individualists, anarcho-capitalists believe that land may be originally appropriated by, and only by, occupation or use; however, most traditional individualists believe it must continually be in use to retain title. Notable 19th-century American individualist anarchists include Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker.

Lysander Spooner's articles, such as No Treason and the Letter to Thomas Bayard, were widely reprinted in early anarcho-capitalist journals, and his ideas — especially his individualist critique of the state and his defense of the right to ignore or withdraw from it — were often cited by anarcho-capitalists. Spooner was staunchly opposed to government interference in economic matters, and supported a "right to acquire property [...] as one of the natural, inherent, inalienable rights of men [...] one which government has no power to infringe [...]". Like all anarchists, he opposed government regulation: "All legislative restraints upon the rate of interest are arbitrary and tyrannical restraints upon a man's natural capacity amid natural right to hire capital, upon which to bestow his labor." He was particularly vocal, however, in opposing any collusion between banks and government, and argued that the monopolistic privileges that the government granted to a few bankers were the source of many social and economic ills.

Benjamin Tucker supported private ownership of the product of labor, which he believed entailed a rejection of both collective and capitalist ownership. He was a staunch advocate of the mutualist form of recompensing labor, which holds to "Cost the limit of price". He also advocated a free market economy, which he believed was prohibited by capitalist monopoly of credit and land backed by the state. He believed that anyone who wishes should be allowed to engage in the banking business and issue their private currency without needing special permission from government, and that unused land should not be restricted to those who wished to use it. He believed that if these and other coercive actions were eliminated that profit in economic transactions would be rendered nearly impossible because of increased availability of capital to all individuals and resulting increased competition in business. Accepting the labor theory of value and the resulting "cost principle" as a premise marks one of mutualism's main conflicts with anarcho-capitalism. Although his self-identification as a socialist and sympathy for the labor movement led to hostility from some early anarcho-capitalists such as Robert LeFevre, others, such as Murray Rothbard, embraced his critique of the state and claimed that he defined his "socialism" not in terms of opposition to a free market or private property, but in opposition to government privileges for business. However, individualists argue that capitalism cannot be maintained in the absence of the state. For example, Kevin Carson argues, "As a mutualist anarchist, I believe that expropriation of surplus value — i.e., capitalism — cannot occur without state coercion to maintain the privilege of usurer, landlord, and capitalist. It was for this reason that the free market mutualist Benjamin Tucker — from whom right-libertarians selectively borrow — regarded himself as a libertarian socialist." Tucker characterized the economic demands of Proudhon and Warren by saying, "though opposed to socializing the ownership of capital, they aimed nevertheless to socialize its effects by making its use beneficial to all instead of a means of impoverishing the many to enrich the few [...] Absolute Free Trade; free trade at home, as well as with foreign countries; the logical carrying out of the Manchester doctrine; laissez-faire the universal rule."

Anarcho-capitalism is sometimes viewed by those sympathetic to it as a form of individualist anarchism, despite the fact that the original individualist anarchists universally rejected capitalism (i.e., they opposed profit, which is seen as a fundamental characteristic of capitalism). Organizations such as mutualist.org remain dedicated to "free market anticapitalism," while individualists like Larry Gambone explicitly state that all capitalism is state capitalism. Nonetheless, anarcho-capitalist Wendy McElroy considers herself to be an individualist, while admitting that the original individualists were universally anticapitalist. In addition, historian Guglielmo Piombini refers anarcho-capitalism as a form of individualist anarchism, though he offers no support for this statement. Collectivist anarchist author Iain McKay and historian Peter Sabatini both argue that anarcho-capitalism is fundamentally opposed to individualist anarchism.

The similarity to anarcho-capitalism in regard to private defense of liberty and property is probably best seen in a quote by 19th-century individualist anarchist Victor Yarros:

Anarchism means no government, but it does not mean no laws and no coercion. This may seem paradoxical, but the paradox vanishes when the Anarchist definition of government is kept in view. Anarchists oppose government, not because they disbelieve in punishment of crime and resistance to aggression, but because they disbelieve in compulsory protection. Protection and taxation without consent is itself invasion; hence Anarchism favors a system of voluntary taxation and protection.

The Austrian School

Main article: Austrian School

File:Murray Rothbard Smile.JPG

Murray Rothbard (1926–95).

The Austrian School of economics was founded with the publication of Carl Menger's 1871 book Principles of Economics. Members of this school approach economics as an a priori system like logic or mathematics, rather than as an empirical science like geology. It attempts to discover axioms of human action (called "praxeology" in the Austrian tradition) and make deductions therefrom. Some of these praxeological axioms are:

• Humans act purposefully.
• Humans prefer more of a good to less.
• Humans prefer to receive a good sooner rather than later.
• Each party to a trade benefits ex ante.

These are macro-level generalizations, or heuristics, which are true for the many, but not necessarily true for any particular person.

Even in the early days, Austrian economics was used as a theoretical weapon against socialism and statist socialist policy. Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, a colleague of Menger, wrote one of the first critiques of socialism ever written in his treatise The Exploitation Theory of Socialism-Communism. Later, Friedrich Hayek wrote The Road to Serfdom, asserting that a command economy destroys the information function of prices, and that authority over the economy leads to totalitarianism. Another very influential Austrian economist was Ludwig von Mises, author of the praxeological work Human Action.

Murray Rothbard, a student of Mises, is the man who attempted to meld Austrian economics with classical liberalism and individualist anarchism, and is credited with coining the term "anarcho-capitalism". He was probably the first to use "libertarian" in its current (U.S.) pro-capitalist sense. He was a trained economist, but also knowledgeable in history and political philosophy. When young, he considered himself part of the Old Right, an anti-statist and anti-interventionist branch of the U.S. Republican party. When interventionist cold warriors of the National Review, such as William Buckley, gained influence in the Republican party in the 1950s, Rothbard quit that group and formed an alliance with left-wing antiwar groups. Later, Rothbard was a founder of the U.S. Libertarian Party. In the late 1950s, Rothbard was briefly involved with Ayn Rand's Objectivism, but later had a falling out. Rothbard's books, such as Man, Economy, and State, Power and Market, The Ethics of Liberty, and For a New Liberty, are considered by some to be classics of natural law libertarian thought.

See also: Roberta Modugno Crocetta: The anarcho-capitalist political theory of Murray N. Rothbard in its historical and intellectual context

Anarcho-capitalism in the real world

19th-century interpretation of the Althing in the Icelandic Commonwealth, which authors such as David Friedman and Roderick Long believe to have some features of anarcho-capitalist society.

Anarcho-capitalism is largely theoretical, and even sympathetic critics say that it is unlikely ever to be more than a utopian ideal. Despite this, some anarcho-capitalist philosophers point to actual societies to support their claim that stateless capitalism can function in practice.

Medieval Iceland

According to David Friedman, "Medieval Icelandic institutions have several peculiar and interesting characteristics; they might almost have been invented by a mad economist to test the lengths to which market systems could supplant government in its most fundamental functions." While not asserting that it was an anarcho-capitalist system, he argues that the Icelandic Commonwealth between 930 and 1262 had "some features" of an anarcho-capitalist society--while there was a single legal system, enforcement of law was entirely private — and so provides some evidence of how such a society would function. "Even where the Icelandic legal system recognized an essentially "public" offense, it dealt with it by giving some individual (in some cases chosen by lot from those affected) the right to pursue the case and collect the resulting fine, thus fitting it into an essentially private system."

However, some disagree with this assessment, arguing that Medieval Iceland was a communal rather than individualist society - [p]eople of a communitarian nature... have reason to be attracted [to Medieval Iceland]... The economy barely knew the existence of markets. Social relations preceded economic relations. and that when a free market finally did arise, that it was the cause of the end of the republic - "During the 12th century, wealth and power began to accumulate in the hands of a few chiefs, and by 1220, six prominent families ruled the entire country. It was the internecine power struggle among these families, shrewdly exploited by King Haakon IV of Norway, that finally brought the old republic to an end."

Modern Somalia

Main article: Anarchy in Somalia

A marketplace in Somalia, in 1992, during the Somali Civil War

More recently, Somalia is cited by some as a real-world example of a stateless capitalist economy and a legal system. Since 1991, Somalia as a whole has had no internationally recognized government. Large areas of the country are ruled by unrecognized mini-states such as Somaliland, Puntland, and Southwestern Somalia. The remaining area, including the capital Mogadishu, is divided up into smaller territories ruled by competing warlords. In many areas there are thus no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses, and individuals and businesses pay money to private security guards and local warlords rather than 'taxes' to a constituted state.

The legal system, and most of the educational institutions and social services, fell under the control of religious institutions, which often received significant funding and support from international Islamic charities. In 2005 these clerical organizations united to form the Islamic Court Union, after the secular warlords began to challenge the sharia based judicial institutions. In June 2006, after the Second Battle of Mogadishu, the ICU gained control of Mogadishu and its surrounding districts.

Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism

Main article: Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism

Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism fall into several categories: practical criticisms which claim that anarcho-capitalism is unworkable in practice, critiques which claim that capitalism requires a coercive state to exist and that a society can be anarchist or capitalist, but not both, general critiques of the morality of capitalism and liberalism which also apply to anarcho-capitalism, and a utilitarian critique which claims that anarcho-capitalism would not maximize utility.

Various minarchist liberatarians, including Objectivists, argue that in the absence of a state, an anarcho-capitalist society would degenerate into a "war of all against all"; others argue that the free rider problem makes provision of protection service in an anarcho-capitalist society impractical.

Some anarchists and many socialists argue that (some) capitalist transactions aren't truly voluntary, and maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion incompatible with an anarchist society. Socialists and other anti-capitalists also argue that a capitalist society, anarchist or not, has severe moral and/or practical failings which render it undesirable.

Anarcho-capitalist literature

Main article: Anarcho-capitalist literature

Nonfiction

The following is a partial list of notable nonfiction works discussing anarcho-capitalism.

• Murray Rothbard Father of modern anarcho-capitalism:
  • Man, Economy, and State The ultimate Austrian economics book,
  • Power and Market Classification of State economic interventions,
  • The Ethics of Liberty Moral justification of a free society
• Frederic Bastiat, The Law Radical classical liberalism
• Davidson & Rees-Mogg, The Sovereign Individual Historians look at technology & implications
• David D. Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom Classic consequentialist defense of anarchism
• Auberon Herbert, The Right and Wrong of Compulsion by the State
• Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy the State Oppenheimer's thesis applied to early US history
• Juan Lutero Madrigal, anarcho-capitalism: principles of civilization
• Franz Oppenheimer, The State Analysis of State; political means vs. economic means
• Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia Academic philosopher on libertarianism
• Herbert Spencer, Social Statics Includes the essay "The Right to Ignore the State"
• Morris & Linda Tannahill, The Market for Liberty Classic on PDAs (private defense agencies)

Fiction

Anarcho-capitalism has been examined in certain works of literature, particularly science fiction. an example being Robert A. Heinlein's 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, where he explores what he terms "rational anarchism."

References

• Benson, Bruce: The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without The State
• Hart, David M.: Gustave de Molinari and the Anti-Statist Liberal Tradition Retrieved 14 September 2005
• Hoppe, Hans-Hermann: A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism
• Hoppe, Hans-Hermann: Democracy: The God That Failed
• Rothbard, Murray: For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto
• Rothbard, Murray: The Ethics of Liberty
• Spooner, Lysander: (1867) No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority Retrieved 19 May 2005
• Tannehill, Linda and Morris: The Market For Liberty
• Tucker, Benjamin: (1888) State Socialism and Anarchism:How Far They Agree, and Wherein They Differ Liberty 5.16, no. 120 (10 March 1888), pp. 2-3.Retrieved 20 May 2005
• Tucker, Benjamin: (1926) Labor and its Pay Retrieved 20 May 2005
• Van Notten, Michael: The Law of the Somalis, 2005

See also

Books

• Murray Rothbard Father of modern anarcho-capitalism:
  • Man, Economy, and State The ultimate Austrian economics book,
  • Power and Market Classification of State economic interventions,
  • The Ethics of Liberty Moral justification of a free society
• Frederic Bastiat, The Law Radical classical liberalism
• Davidson & Rees-Mogg, The Sovereign Individual Historians look at technology & implications
• David D. Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom Classic utilitarian defense of anarchism
• Auberon Herbert, The Right and Wrong of Compulsion by the State
• Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy the State Oppenheimer's thesis applied to early US history
• Juan Lutero Madrigal, anarcho-capitalism: principles of civilization
• Franz Oppenheimer, The State Analysis of State; political means vs. economic means
• Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia Academic philosopher on libertarianism
• Herbert Spencer, Social Statics Includes the essay "The Right to Ignore the State"
• Morris & Linda Tannahill, The Market for Liberty Classic on PDAs (private defense agencies)
• Robert Paul Wolff, In Defense of Anarchism
• Anarcho-Capitalism: An Annotated Bibliography by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Related subjects

• Anarcho-capitalist literature
• Anarcho-capitalist terminology and symbolism
• Classical liberalism
• Digital gold bug
• Crypto-anarchism
• Free market
• Kritarchy
• Liberalism
• Libertarianism
• Market liberalism
• Polycentric law
• Private currency
• Tax resistance

General

• Anarchism
• Libertatia
• Statism

External links

Anarcho-capitalist websites and articles

• Anarcho-capitalist FAQ
• Strike The Root is an anarcho-capitalist essays, news, and forum.
• anti-state.com, has one of the more active forums and infrequent theoretical and practical articles, and hosts Private Property Anarchists and Anarcho-Socialists: Can We Get Along? by Gene Callahan
• Simply Anarchy is an anarcho-capitalist website with articles, links and a forum
• The Molinari Institute offers online resources for those interested in exploring the ideas of Market Anarchism
• Ancapistan Network comes with an ancap start-up, articles and links
• Libertari.org Italian anarcho-capitalism website
• Bertrand Lemennicier, a renowned French anarcho-capitalist economist
• Cuthhyra is a resource promoting anarcho-capitalism through essays, humour, quotes, links and more.
• Bryan Caplan's "Anarchism Theory FAQ" is written from the perspective of an anarcho-capitalist.
• LewRockwell.com is a widely read anarcho-capitalist news site with the slogal "anti-state, anti-war, pro-market;" it also hosts What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist by Stephan Kinsella and "The Non-Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism" by Walter Block, How can anarcho-capitalism function , by Stefan Molyneux and Disproving the state, by Stefan Molyneux
• A Legacy of Liberty and For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Murray N. Rothbard
• "Jesus Is an Anarchist: A Free-Market, Libertarian Anarchist, That Is—Otherwise What Is Called an Anarcho-Capitalist," (PDF) James Redford, June 1, 2006; or in HTML: [3]
• The American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not so Wild, Wild, West Anarcho-capitalism in the old "Wild West" in the U.S.
• The anarcho-capitalist political theory of Murray N. Rothbard in its historical and intellectual context by Roberta Modugno Crocetta
• Panarchy, another way of considering things that is considered by some ultimately equivalent to anarcho-capitalism.
• Liberalia, an anarcho-capitalist site
• The Anarcho-Capitalist Front a network for anarcho-capitalists primarily in Northern Europe
• A Brief Introduction to Philosophical Anarchism from the viewpoint of an anarcho-capitalist
• Sovereign Life and Sovereign Individual at Sovereignlife.com
• Bureaucrash
• Individualist Anarchist Society at UC Berkeley
• Anarcho-Capitalism Lifestyle guide for Anarcho-capitalists
• The liberal theory of power a solution to complete anarcho-capitalism with effective solutions to the public good problem and to practical implementation ; it is planned to be implemented by software on the web.
• Sumit Dahiya "The home of the Anti-Government Pro-Enterprise Movement of India"
• Freedomain Radio anarcho-capitalism podcast and message board
• On Peter Sabatini's "Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy" by Richard A. Gardner
• The Philosophy of Liberty (animated)
• Economic Means to Freedom - Part IV: 25 Anarcho-Capitalist Things You Can Do Now!, by Frederick Mann

Criticisms

• Anarchism, Capitalism, and Anarcho-Capitalism from anarchism.net
• Section F - Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism? - "An Anarchist FAQ" Version 11.4 Accessed March 2006
• An Anarchist critique of Anarcho-Statism by anarcho - from Infoshop.org
• The Anarchist International Website Retrieved 20 May 2005
• Anarcho-Capitalism vs. Individualist Anarchism
• Jeff Draughn's Between Anarchism and Libertarianism: Defining a New Movement is a contemporary left anarchist critique of anarcho-capitalism
• The "Critiques Of Libertarianism" website contains critiques of both libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism.
• Collection of critical articles
• Ecology or "anarcho" capitalism by Ian MacSaorsa
• Interview with Noam Chomsky in which he discusses anarcho-capitalism
• Anarcho-Hucksters
• The New Right and Anarcho-capitalism from Chapter 36 of "Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism" by Peter Marshall
• Peter Sabatini's Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy

Criticisms by other radical capitalists

• Robert J. Binidotto's The Contradiction in Anarchism
• Paul Birch's A Fatal Instability in Anarcho-Capitalism? and Anarcho-Capitalism Dissolves into City States
• Tony Hollick's Impossibility of anarcho-capitalism
• Capitalism.org's rejection of the anarchist title
• A short selection by Leonard Peikoff, Ayn Rand's self-proclaimed intellectual heir, concerning anarchism
• The Anarcho-Libertarian Utopia — A Critique by Drieu Godefridi (Hayek Institute)

Other

• American Anarchism 19th Century Individualist Anarchist influence on Libertarianism by Wendy McElroy
• American Liberal-Anarchism from The Conquest of Power, by Albert Weisbord
• Anarcho-Capitalism debate guide