Comment: The real 3 positions:

(See in situ)

The real 3 positions:

1. Actual anarchist thinkers like you that understand that polycentric law will not exist any more than it does today(Rothbard included).

2. Minarchist like me that understand the same and therefore don't really see the need to go towards anarchy.

3. Anarchists on this site like limelemon that are the most misinformed, unread anarchist I've ever seen that literally think everyone in a town gets to hire different courts and police lol.

I don't agree that a monopoly equals a state, I just think that it is substantially similar to a state.

Here is Rothbard on "covenant communities":

"With every locale and neighborhood owned by private firms, corporations, or contractual communities, true diversity would reign, in accordance with the preferences of each community. Some neighborhoods would be ethnically or economically diverse, while others would be ethnically or economically homogeneous. Some localities would permit pornography or prostitution or drugs or abortion, others would prohibit any or all of them. The prohibitions would not be state imposed, but would simply be requirements for residence or use of some person’s or community’s land area."

and then

"n a country, or a world, of totally private property, including streets, and private contractual neighborhoods consisting of property-owners, these owners can make any sort of neighborhood-contracts they wish. In practice, then, the country would be a truly “gorgeous mosaic,” … ranging from rowdy Greenwich Village-type contractual neighborhoods, to socially conservative homogeneous WASP neighborhoods. Remember that all deeds and covenants would once again be totally legal and enforceable, with no meddling government restrictions upon them. So that considering the drug question, if a proprietary neighborhood contracted that no one would use drugs, and Jones violated the contract and used them, he fellow community-contractors could simply enforce the contract and kick him out. Or, since no advance contract can allow for all conceivable circumstances, suppose that Smith became so personally obnoxious that his fellow neighborhood-owners wanted him ejected. They would then have to buy him out—-probably on terms set contractually in advance in accordance with some “obnoxious” clause."

This is pretty much my view of the best-case-scenario Ancap society. Basically a corporate locality where majority rules(majority of dollars or votes) and if you don't like it you can't live there.

Ventura 2012