What exactly would an anarcho-capitalist "revolution" entail?

[AK]

I imagine private police forces would be formed and/or the current police forces are privatised and the institutions of government that we have today would be gone (something to do with the sovereignty of the individual and all that shit). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any of the above.

But what else does it entail? I've heard from a small number of anarcho-cappies that capitalism these days is corrupt, etc. and the monopolies need to be broken - in favour of a truly "free market" (a concept I consider a contradictio in terminis). Is that the view anarcho-capitalists hold?

[Widerstand]

I don't see how Anarcho-capitalism is revolutionary at all. In fact I consider it a form of capitalism rather than anything connected to Anarchism (which is related to socialism and communism after all), where the Anarcho- prefix is used in the literal sense: Capitalism without rulers, or one might say without laws. It's really just an extreme form of laissez-faire.
In that sense, a revolution leading to Anarcho-capitalism seems highly unlikely, especially in the sense of "monopolies being destroyed" - honestly what the fuck? Wherever capital accumulates, monopolies are inevitable. Not to mention the immense power held by corporations who fully own and control privatized juristic, legislative or executive bodies. To say that privatized government would lead to a more "free" market requires a thought construct well beyond my understanding. In any case, a classical revolution won't lead to this. A paramilitary coup d'état controlled by some corporation might - though I find that hard to imagine - or maybe we will actually get there by reformism and continuing privatization of public bodies.

[AK]

I don't see how Anarcho-capitalism is revolutionary at all. In fact I consider it a form of capitalism rather than anything connected to Anarchism (which is related to socialism and communism after all), where the Anarcho- prefix is used in the literal sense: Capitalism without rulers, or one might say without laws. It's really just an extreme form of laissez-faire.
In that sense, a revolution leading to Anarcho-capitalism seems highly unlikely, especially in the sense of "monopolies being destroyed" - honestly what the fuck? Wherever capital accumulates, monopolies are inevitable. Not to mention the immense power held by corporations who fully own and control privatized juristic, legislative or executive bodies. To say that privatized government would lead to a more "free" market requires a thought construct well beyond my understanding. In any case, a classical revolution won't lead to this. A paramilitary coup d'état controlled by some corporation might - though I find that hard to imagine - or maybe we will actually get their by reformism and continuing privatization of public bodies.

I know most of anarcho-capitalism is bs and not revolutionary in the true sense of the term. But atm I'm trying to clear up some things with the help of anarcho-cappies, hence why I asked this in OI Learning.

[Dean]

I imagine private police forces would be formed and/or the current police forces are privatised and the institutions of government that we have today would be gone (something to do with the sovereignty of the individual and all that shit). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any of the above.

But what else does it entail? I've heard from a small number of anarcho-cappies that capitalism these days is corrupt, etc. and the monopolies need to be broken - in favour of a truly "free market" (a concept I consider a contradictio in terminis). Is that the view anarcho-capitalists hold?

Are you kidding me? In the US, private military companies represent $100Bn yearly in US Gov't contracts - that portion of the industry alone accounts for roughly 1% of US GDP. The privatization of Government process is alive and well, and the childish characterizations of our resident anarcho-capitalists will have no bearing on the material reality once corporate martial law is fully enacted.

15% of US military presence is private: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../mercenary.htm
In 2002 the industry was valued at at 100Bn/yr, and some estimates predict that it will be at 200Bn/yr by 2010 http://www.sipri.org/research/armame...rchissues/pmsc

I couldn't find contemporary statistics, but that gives you a good idea of what's going on.

[Skooma Addict]

Why would you ask this question here?

[Nolan]

Go to Mises and ask them.

[Dean]

Why would you ask this question here?

Because your critics will be more honest about the expected outcome of a liberal economic system. What honesty can one seriously expect from an ideology that emphasizes assertions as opposed to historical data?

[Dimentio]

It would most likely emerge after a social collapse, and then last until the most successful local mobster clans are wiping out their opposition and establishing territorial entities which will develop into a new generation of states. Eventually, they will develop laws and some sort of opportunistic conscience.

Much like the current group of European states originally came about in the 14th-18th century.

[AK]

Why would you ask this question here?

I thought OI Learning was the place - as anarcho-capitalism is an ideology which opposes all socialist ideologies. I was hoping for anyone from OI who was knowledgeable on the stuff to inform me. Then I read the forum description and it was for restricted learners - not people who wanted to learn about opposing ideologies.

[ComradeOm]

Why would you ask this question here?

Yes, God forbid that one of you OI denizens would actually answer a question instead of ranting or throwing insults

AK had a question about anarcho-capitalism. Now, its safe to say that there are more anarcho-capitalists in OI than elsewhere on RevLeft. This is the OI Learning forum. Do you see where I'm going with this?

[Thirsty Crow]

Yes, God forbid that one of you OI denizens would actually answer a question instead of ranting or throwing insults

AK had a question about anarcho-capitalism. Now, its safe to say that there are more anarcho-capitalists in OI than elsewhere on RevLeft. This is the OI Learning forum. Do you see where I'm going with this?

I don't think he wants to see where are you going with this.
After all, this whole "theory" isn't based on real social or economic analysis, and as such, cannot engage in a construction of potential "revolutionary" steps in the future.
I wouldn't expect an honest answer if I were you.

[Apoi_Viitor]

I don't see why so much focus is put upon the monopoly argument. Even if a free-market capitalist system didn't dissolve into monopolies (I stand with the libertarian-right on this, I don't believe monopolies are inherent in capitalism), it would still be necessary to oppose it. I mean, there would be no chance for a monopoly on any industry. Huge sectors such as the high-tech industry, computers, etc. wouldn't exist - as any intelligent being, realizes that almost all ingenious, creative innovations came about when the profit motive was diminished. Instead of diverging into arguments Chomsky has brought forth thousands of times, I'll sum it up by saying: there would be no ultimate hierarchy, because everybody would be too busy fighting one another in an every man vs himself shit hole.

Of course, ideologically, that's what many Randians/anarcho-capitalists believe - Survival of the Fittest!!! (I actually saw some Randian "intellectual" use the term survival of the fittest to support his ridiculous claims. It might be obvious, to point out that Peter Kropotkin thoroughly debunked that argument a century ago, but..)

I actually view anarcho-capitalism as being anarchistic, because it would lack a state (a monopoly on violence). Instead it would be a marvelous, fairy-tale world, where the intelligent and romantic businessman flourished, and the evil, lazy, collectivists were forced to do their fair share in order to live.

EDIT: Also, I'd like to emphasize the fact that anarcho-capitalists actually believe in a "privatized" justice system!!!!?!!!!?!!!?!!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard - Like many here I assume, I used to be a libertarian and even a member of mises.org. Murray Rothbard was one of my favorite writers (and he still is), not because I agree with him (in fact even when I was a staunch libertarian I disagreed with him on numerous points) but because his ideas seemed so unthinkable/unreasonable. That said, I still feel some vague idealogical connection to the anarcho-capitalist right, because often times people like Rothbard or Lew Rockwell bring up very pertinent and relevant criticisms - however they offer all the wrong solutions.

[Qayin]

I actually view anarcho-capitalism as being anarchistic, because it would lack a state (a monopoly on violence). Instead it would be a marvelous, fairy-tale world, where the intelligent and romantic businessman flourished, and the evil, lazy, collectivists were forced to do their fair share in order to live

There is a monopoly on violence, its just privatized

[revolution inaction]

a few years ago they where claiming Somalia was a successful anarcho-capitalist society.

[AK]

Also, I'd like to emphasize the fact that anarcho-capitalists actually believe in a "privatized" justice system!!!!?!!!!?!!!?!!?

Well, I wouldn't call what that system would deliver "justice".

[AK]

There is a monopoly on violence, its just privatized

Well, from an anarcho-capitalist viewpoint, since there is no clear monopoly (you have to pay for services when you want them) there is no state

[Revolution starts with U]

Oh no, they are still hoping for Somalia over on Mises.org.. they just avoid calling it succesful and base it all of hope.

[Comrade Marxist Bro]

Oh no, they are still hoping for Somalia over on Mises.org.. they just avoid calling it succesful and base it all of hope.

Yeah, lmao. Somehow, I just now realized Somalia leads the way to libertarianism.

Somalia is in the news again. Rival gangs are shooting each other, and why? The reason is always the same: the prospect that the weak-to-invisible transitional government in Mogadishu will become a real government with actual power.

The media invariably describe this prospect as a "hope." But it's a strange hope that is accompanied by violence and dread throughout the country. Somalia has done very well for itself in the 15 years since its government was eliminated. The future of peace and prosperity there depends in part on keeping one from forming...

http://mises.org/daily/2066

[Amado]

I wonder how the mises.org folks are going to get people into this.

"Hey poor people, help us with this revolution! We'll privatize your schools, get rid of your welfare and remove your work benefits, so if everything goes wrong, you can just starve! Doesn't it sound awesome?"

[Revolution starts with U]

Anyone who thinks healthcare is a privelage is already a greedy self-righteous prick. It's hard to even argue with them. I have heard many say they would prefer medieval feudalism to the systems we have now?!?! What a joke.