Talk:Anarcho-capitalism

message: It is important to mention recent victory of Javier Milei in presidential elections in Argentina as long as he may be acknowledged as the first president that explicitly advocates for this corpus of ideas.191.97.184.179 (talk) 02:15, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A section should be created on anarcho-capitalism in the real world politics in general, from factions and individuals in the boogaloo bois (e.g., Michael Robert Solomon), to all relevant politicians in the world. 93.45.229.98 (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First anarcho-capitalist president in the world 

message: The most practical solution (or if we want a compromise consistent with the guidelines) is to include both positions since there is no academic consensus.
I propose:
According to its proponents in favor of stateless societies [...] for others in favor of privately-controlled statelets.
The latter position is clearly supported by Warren J. Samuels, Paul Birch and Quinn Slobodian. RVD3 (talk) 23:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: N.b. The prevarication of some positions over others makes no sense; both should be included. RVD3 (talk) 00:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: P.s. also Brian Morris, Bob Black, etc. claim that anarcho-capitalism precludes the state de facto. RVD3 (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 2 

message: I know wikipedias political bias and that people should not use it for balanced views on political topics but writing missinformation like "in some cases, control of other people as private property." into the first paragraph is offensive. 
A person can not be the private property of another person because the person can not transfer the ownership without dying ... The will of the person is still in their head while alive. 
It is therefore plain obvious strategic dissinformation, since the non-transferability of self-ownership is basic knowledge explained in basically every bock and fundament to the core ethics of AnCap in almost every flavor. If you reference literature that claims otherwise that literature is not a valid source or so fringe that putting it into the first paragraph is probably an attempt for opinion manipulation. and certainly not something for the intro. Maybe you can write a section "pseudo-libertarianism gone wrong" or something.
But of course you will not change so this is just FYI for those seeking for unbiased political views who are not yet able to see wikpeadia clear. Even GPT >= 3.5 is more accurate, neutral and rational in explaining this. 2A00:20:3049:DDC7:4F13:1757:D393:A1CA (talk) 20:08, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has two sources for that, and one of them says . Are you saying Christopher Vandenberg is not an anarcho-capitalist? --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "in some cases, control of other people as private property." Bluntely wrong! 

message: This article should specify the difference between anarchism and anarcho-capitalism more. As it is, a reader with no knowledge of anarchism or anarcho-capitalism could believe that most anarchists believe that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. Regardless of whether or not you believe this to be true, all modern anarchist (and practically all leftist) thought that i’ve seen does not classify anarcho-capitalism as a form of anarchism. Saturniapavonia (talk) 04:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  anarchism vs. anarcho-capitalism