Comment: What frustrates me...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Ive made this point hundreds (see in situ)

What frustrates me...

...about my fellow ancaps is their tendency to think about private law as just another sector in the free market - but it isn't, because the free market already presupposes law enforcement, and law enforcement is inherently violent, not voluntary (so how can it be part of a *free* market?).

The conventional ancapism is based on a crude analogy: free market works in X, Y, and Z...so why not law? In my experience, that's really about the extent of the depth of their thinking, I hate to say it. Even Rothbard and his epigones don't get into any deeper analysis.

The basic idea of a stateless society is sound, but ancapism as presently constituted, i.e. based on the impossible idea of polycentric law, is not.

P.S. I might add, if this problem would be recognized by ancaps, there is a hugely fruitful area to be explored. We could finally develop the praxeology of involuntary interaction that Mises was talking about.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."