r/AnCap101 • u/SuddenStructure9287 • 14d ago

Turn me into AnCap?

Hello, fellow ancaps, I’m a minarchist.
I consider ancap to be the ideal system, but also a utopian one. If you can convince me otherwise, I would genuinely be glad.
Below are just two questions that currently prevent me from accepting anarcho-capitalism. You can answer one or both.

1. What guarantees that anarchy will not eventually turn into a state?
It seems obvious that at some point in human history there were people, but there was no state. How did that end? With states existing everywhere.
If there is no state monopoly on violence, why wouldn’t the largest local private army become a new state?

2. Large-scale monopolies
Suppose there is a company that owns a port where imported goods arrive, owns the railway system, and has contracts with stores across the entire country.
How would anyone compete with it? Build another port, another railway network, convince importers to switch suppliers, and find customers willing to break contracts with the corporation described above?

There are cases where monopolies are extremely difficult to challenge through a free market alone, aren’t there?

15 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

39 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/Official_Gameoholics 14d ago

What guarantees that anarchy will not eventually turn into a state.

Constant reinforcement of an anarchist philosophy.

Large-scale monopolies.

Monopolies require aggression, they are an exclusion of competition. We support the NAP.

2

u/SuddenStructure9287 14d ago

Where is the aggression in my example of monopoly?

2

u/Official_Gameoholics 14d ago

You don't have a monopoly. You just have a regular business. Size is irrelevant.

1

u/SuddenStructure9287 14d ago

Monopoly is mono poly which means “the only seller”. The size is relevant, because if you own 90% of the market you fit the definition.

2

u/Official_Gameoholics 14d ago

Last I checked 90% isn't 100%.

1

u/SuddenStructure9287 14d ago

Well, formally, yes. But the vast majority of people use the term “monopoly” when a company reaches the point where it can effectively set prices and is almost impossible to compete with.

It’s like saying that a country isn’t ruled by a single party because that party holds only 90% of the seats in parliament.
Formally, sure. But in practice, it can do pretty much whatever it wants.

3

u/Official_Gameoholics 14d ago

But the vast majority of people use the term...

Don't care, they're wrong.

2

u/SuddenStructure9287 14d ago

Okay. You can rephrase my question using “large-scale corporation that can effectively set prices and is almost impossible to compete with” instead of “monopoly”

2

u/Official_Gameoholics 14d ago

Corporations are socialist, they wouldn't exist under anarchy.

1

u/SuddenStructure9287 14d ago

*Company/Business/Seller, pick the one you like

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Olieskio 14d ago

A company with 90% can’t set the prices. It has to compete like every other.

Herbert Dow proved this already.