My argument to the ancaps
Im not even a right libertarian. I used to call myself ancap. I think you guys make a lot of good observations about the structure of our society and i do think most are generally well meaning but here is the thing that made me move leftward. The concept of a state is very vague and nuanced but the general idea is it is a group or entity which claims a territory and uses violence to enforce both that claim and your participation in the propagation of itself and its goals. The argument against the existence of this entity is that it is immoral to use violence to compel other people to do things they dont want to do and that if we dont do this people will naturally and more efficiently organize themselves better than a state ever could. I think this observation is useful, especially in considering what laws we want to pass when considering that they will be enforced by the barrel of a gun and the bars of a cage. That said, not only to i reject the notion that violent compulsion is always evil, i also dont think anyone actually accepts that. Most territory is initially claimed through either finders keepers or by killing the current occupants. There is no way around this. Its also been shown in history that not only states, but tribes and clans can and will use violence to benefit themselves and are very often better off for doing so. In an environment where there is no monopoly on force, different groups (tribes, fraternities, gangs, corporations, etc.) Will use violence to benefit themselves. So the question is, how does an individual prevent this and the most common answer is that free people will band together to defend their claim through violence. Congratulations! You have created a state.
“But these people will be free to disassociate from this group once their ends have been achieved” could be the solution, but the problem is defending a border isnt a one time deal. It is a constant work in progress, especially in a world as decentralized as this. The free people in this scenario have 2 choices. A)remain banded together and create a code of conduct for all of the families and businesses that are apart of this union (a constitution) or B)return to being a loosely knit scattering of people, some of whom will sell their claim or side with the expansionists and become subject to whatever their codes are, some of whom will just leave again selling their patch of land, some of whom will attempt to become expansionist themselves, etc. Until you find yourself isolated on an island and your claim is meaningless because you are completely reliant only on what you can produce and trade with the expansionists such that you are already defacto under their control. There is no way that humans can organize on a large scale without becoming a state and humans who dont organize on a large scale will inevitably be overrun or out maneuvered by people who do. The faction that allows its members to come and go as they please will inevitably be conquered by the faction that compels membership.
Article from r/Libertarian: For a Free Society