Talk:Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism

message: Should there be a counter-counter criticisms section?  Or a response system akin to []?  Or are there even people willing for a response page?  Fephisto 01:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, That's silly. This is Wikipedia, not a discussion forum.Spylab (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Counter-Criticisms 

message: I've removed the word objectivists from the first criticism and replace it with classical liberal. The reason for this is that the word added nothing, the argument held nothing unique to objectivism and seamed to be an argument from the classical liberial tradition.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.6.251 (talk) 22:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Objectivist

message: Note: Also made a minor edit for clarity (changed 'equal right to liberty' to 'equal right to outcomes')
But more importantly noticed significant repetition in the opening sections of 'Morality' and 'Pragmatic' sections regarding competing defense firms. Sections of paragraphs are repeated word for word. Might be worth someone with better writing chops than I fixing this up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.34.61 (talk) 23:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Repitition

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Criticisms of socialism which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 08:45, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: The recent edit () to the lede doesn't seem as explanatory.  IMO, the old lede was preferable.  BigK HeX (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  lede change 

message: A lot of these sections do not have references. If it's just throwing out any criticism, we could easily add the ideas of debt slavery. For example, a widow is robbed and has no means of production, and nothing to trade (by means of goods or currency). She has to rely on the virtue of a for-profit justice system to correct this, or they will provide justice on credit and she will then have to find a way to work to pay it back. And if she cannot work to pay it back, is there an anarchist bankruptcy court? The justice company then uses coercion against her to force labor to fulfill her contract.
And how does this system deal with child abuse? Does anyone have the right to take an abused child away from a parent? Does this person have to find out what court system that parent subscribes to and seek justice through that system, and pay for it from their own earnings?
Speaking of children, does a child have a right to the labor of their parent? A parent not feeding their child is not a positive encroachment of rights, but a withholding of that child's right to be fed. There is an obligation there, and this can happen without the outside public being aware of it.AndrewK760 (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: this is supposedly an article about the criticisms of anarcho-capitalism, because there is almost none in the main article, so it should focus on the criticism side
lets see:
Some critics argue that private defense and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.[1] Some anarchists agree with this argument, but argue that it is futile to eliminate the potential concentration of power by concentrating power in the hands of the state.[2] Many also argue that monopolies tend to be corrupt and inefficient.
Murray Rothbard argued that all government services, including defense, are inefficient because they lack a market-based pricing mechanism regulated by the voluntary decisions of consumers purchasing services that fulfill their highest-priority needs and by investors seeking the most profitable enterprises to invest in. Therefore, the state's monopoly on the use of force is a violation of natural rights. He wrote, "The defense function is the one reserved most jealously by the State. It is vital to the State's existence, for on its monopoly of force depends its ability to exact taxes from the citizens. If citizens were permitted privately owned courts and armies, then they would possess the means to defend themselves against invasive acts by the government as well as by private individuals."[3] In his book Power and Market, he argued that geographically large minarchist states are indifferent from a unified minarchist world monopoly government.[4] Rothbard wrote governments were not inevitable, noting that it often took hundreds of years for aristocrats to set up a state out of anarchy.[5] He also argued that if a minimal state allows individuals to freely secede from the current jurisdiction to join a competing jurisdiction, then it does not by definition constitute a state.[6]
Many anarcho-capitalists argue that private defense and court agencies would have to have a good reputation in order to stay in business. Furthermore, Linda & Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government's citizenry can’t desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.[7] In response, Randall G. Holcombe argues that defense agencies could form cartels and oppress people without fear of competition.[8] Rothbard conceded this point and responded that one cannot justify a concentration of power out of a fear of a concentration of power, and that a market system is the best checks and balances system.[9]
2 sentences of the whole first criticism section portrait the criticism the section is about (see bold), the rest of the text only deals with the defense of anarcho capitalism against this criticism by repeating the anarcho capitalist positions over and over (see italics)
this section fails horribly at the aim of the article and gives undue weight to the anarcho capitalist positions which are already described in the main article...178.24.228.150 (talk) 03:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means then, edit boldly. KLP (talk) 05:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style, setup, and weight 

message: It seems to me that this article should be rolled into the main article on this topic. I have seen a few libertarians sharing the main article in social media the same way they share political cartoons, which seemed odd to me until I realized that the main article avoids critical views, instead shunting it to a separate article. I hope that doesn't sound too glib, and I suppose that my observation also applies to articles about other political systems as well, some of which have separate "criticism" articles, but it seems that political systems which are largely theoretical (meaning ones which exist mostly in hypothetical academic discussions and debates) do not need to be compartmentalized like this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.217.190 (talk) 07:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't this be merged with the main article? 

message: Since Anarcho-capitalists want to privatize everything and abolish the state, shouldn't there be criticism of that position concerning the improbable manner by which private entities will inspect food and regulate industries that sell contaminated food? In an anarcho-capitalist society, private inspection of contaminated food to prevent illness or even death would be considered an infringed violation of the right of the business to sell such food and would clearly violate the non-aggression principle. If a food industry doesn't oblige to allow a private health inspection service to inform the public of its poor quality and standards, the business has every right to refuse agreement with that because of the non-aggression principle. How can Anarcho capitalists prevent innumerable deaths caused by things like food poisoning when there's no government regulation and safety inspection? Shouldn't we add some information about Anarcho-capitalists' desire to abolish government operated health inspection services and public entities like the FDA? Nashhinton (talk) 07:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms about Anarcho-capitalists' views on health inspection to prevent illness 

message: I think this article has too much from Noam Chomsy, and not enough from other critics. 
50.49.121.243 (talk) 05:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noam Chomsky overload 

message: Since the page was posted to https://np.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/2q8l48/what_do_you_think_of_wikipedias_criticisms_of/ it has been bombarded with changes designed to discredit the page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.235.118 (talk) 15:22, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for page protection

message: Does anyone want to create a section on the lack of real world examples as a criticism. Humans have existed for about 100-200k years and I can find no anarcho-capitalsit societies that have every existed. Some libertarian blogs point to obscure night watchmen state societies like the Icelandic Comonwealth which technically isn't anarchist but thats it. NeoStalinist (talk) 19:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this would be a good addition if sourced. To me it is connected to the criticism that a truly free market has never existed.Jonpatterns (talk) 12:12, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real World 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://capitalism.org/faq/anarchism.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717040101/http://www.spaz.org/~dan/individualist-anarchist/ac-vs-ia.html to http://www.spaz.org/~dan/individualist-anarchist/ac-vs-ia.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121017201953/http://www.spunk.org/library/otherpol/critique/sp000713.txt to http://www.spunk.org/library/otherpol/critique/sp000713.txt
*Added  tag to http://capitalism.org/faq/anarchism.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031128120031/http://www.vix.com:80/objectivism/writing/RobertBidinotto/ContradictionInAnarchism.html to http://www.vix.com/objectivism/Writing/RobertBidinotto/ContradictionInAnarchism.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060813151056/http://www.paulbirch.net:80/AnarchoCapitalism1.html to http://www.paulbirch.net/AnarchoCapitalism1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060806070819/http://www.paulbirch.net:80/AnarchoCapitalism2.html to http://www.paulbirch.net/AnarchoCapitalism2.html
*Added  tag to http://www.fahayek.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=693&Itemid=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Anarcho-capitalism#Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism already covers this topic in sufficient detail (more a less a concise when not verbatim version of what was written here). There isn't a showing of reliable, secondary sources to warrant a summary style split from that section. Moreover, the sourcing is heavily reliant on primary source quoting (X scholar said Y) rather than secondary sourcing. If it remained separate, it would need TNT to rid itself of the non-encylopedic tone, and at that point, we're looking at expanding summary style from the existing section anyway. czar 18:43, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge to main article