Anarcho-capitalism and defence

In anarcho-capitalism, wouldn't poor and middle class people have the incentive to associate together and then attack wealthy humans then steal their wealth?

No they wouldn't.

 No. Considering your other posts, that should be sufficent, since you seem to have no interest in doing any research.

Stranger:

No they wouldn't.

I'm not sure I see how we can know that with such certainty.  Sure, it's not it anyone's long-term best interest to do so, but why does that mean there won't be a short-term incentive powerful enough to convince people?  At present, we have a state and poor folks don't mind seeing that state attack the rich for their benefit.  Yes, yes, I know that our rich got that way because of state interference, etc. etc. but do the folks supporting the welfare state think that way, or do they think "I want what they have?"  I don't see why this tendency wouldn't be present in an-cap.

Now, would there be countervailing tendencies?  Sure there would, and I think there would be market structures, competing legal systems, insurance arrangements, and so on that would prevent the poor from actually doing this.  But I don't see that it can be easily rejected out of hand.

libertarian:

In anarcho-capitalism, wouldn't poor and middle class people have the incentive to associate together and then attack wealthy humans then steal their wealth?

 

Anarcho-capitalism would destroy wealth disparity as we know it today. But there would still be the rich.

Of course envy could destroy society. But would it? No more so than it does today.

Every individual possesing the ability to make violence, instead of just a limited number, is the surest way to banish violence from society. Isn't that why libertarians are anti-gun control?

libertarian:

In anarcho-capitalism, wouldn't poor and middle class people have the incentive to associate together and then attack wealthy humans then steal their wealth?

 

Excellent question, IMO.

First, do you think that does not happen in a statist society?

And second, if you haven't listened to this podcast, it might be of interest to you...

http://www.freedomainradio.com/Traffic_Jams/stateless_society_take_2_320.mp3 

Best wishes!

Stefan Molyneux

Host, Freedomain Radio

www.freedomainradio.com 

I think private defence agencies would become corrupt so they can kill people to get money under the disguise of "defence". Private defence agencies can have the capability to enforce a monopoly on land.

Whereas the State, itself a legal monopoly immune from competition, is exempt from this...

Why?