Is anarcho-capitalism actually anarchism?

If Murray Rothbard himself was sitting in front of me saying that anarcho-capitalists are not real anarchists, I would have to explain what capitalism is. I would help him to understand exactly why he’s wrong.

Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. ~ Oxford Dictionary

The state, even if structured bottom up, is a collectively owned system where market failure reigns supreme due to everything it does being a public good.

Hear this: The only reason the state continues to function at all is due to coercive correction of its inevitable market failures. It literally uses violence to steal resources from its “citizens” (that would be you, part of the collective) in order to control them so they can keep stealing the money. Anyone who supports this sort of system is culpable to this theft. You directly contribute to the theft by voting in people that think up more dreamy ways to pick pocket you.

Then you have to have the tax collectors, and “law enforcement” which should be redefined as “thugs” since their primary objective is to enforce the edicts of their masters (this is you, statists). These enforcers have the lovely job of dreaming up new ways to physically assault you if you resist your pick pocketer.

Then the state gets to dream up terrible ways to corner markets while paying for more law enforcement and helping to “smuggle” products in… officials are elected to oversee everything and further the progression of larger and larger government.  This is how you end up with the drug war, because it creates an intentional black market industry so the enforcers have someone to attack.

If one considers that which was stated above, and how toxic the state is. Then, one should understand that capitalism is completely at odds with the state. Capitalism is at odds with the state.

The corporation only exists because of governments. Governments ask you to register your corporation, so they can steal some money. In return, some corporations are given protection services for maintaining their monopoly. These special corporations are not capitalistic, because they involve using the state to modify the market in their favor. This is corporatism by force.

Anarcho-capitalists do not support this setup at all. They support anything you can do voluntarily with another person.

Anarcho-capitalism is the rejection of initiated violence. It is the notion that through voluntary actions beneficial to both sides of a trade, and the non use of justified violence, everyone is truly free.

To suppose that anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism is foolish.

The definition of anarchy. What do you mean without rule?

Without Rule is a blog dedicated to spreading the philosophy that no one is fit to rule any given person except that very person.

In order to speak to this philosophy, one must first consider the word: anarchy.

Popular culture (and some dictionaries) would suggest that anarchy is a state of disorder or chaos. Both Google and Bing give the following definition as a search result:

Anarchy – a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority:
“he must ensure public order in a country threatened with anarchy”

  • absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.

It is the bullet point that strikes me as closer to the unbiased definition. The initial definition implies the outcome of anarchy, as opposed to simply defining the term.

In order to explain the actual meaning of the word, one must only look to the root words that when combined form the English word itself.

  1. an – without, no, none of, etc. Used to make words that have a sense opposite to the word (or stem) to which the prefix is attached.
    1. E.g. anterior, anharmonic, anechoic
  2. archy – a combining form meaning “rule” or “government,” forming nouns
    1. E.g. monarchy, oligarchy

One can clearly garner the definition of anarchy from the root words.

It simply means: without rule. Anarchy is not lawlessness, nor is it implicitly chaotic.

The absurdity of the definition provided by dictionaries is more than apparent given the basic definition. The assertion herein, is that governmental rule is not required for orderly society.