FHI, I wasn't calling you dumb with that reply. You're pretty smart about a lot of things. Politics just isn't one of them. Your knowledge of anarchy is about as correct as old gold bugs' attitude on Bitcoin. You know, people who have never used Bitcoin but say "It's a Ponzi scheme." lol.
You completely ignored my statement that I do not care about what happens in the interim, only in the endgame, and in the endgame, both anarchism and statism converge on the same outcome. That outcome is where one entity or a cartel monopolizes available resources and becomes a slum lord with rent seeking behavior to exploit the rest. The slum lord will either be the government or some large business entity, but it doesn't really matter.
In the end, you are either the exploiter or exploitee. Somebody is always getting screwed working for less pay than they should, and someone is always making tons of pay by doing nothing. Extreme rent seeking behavior is the outcome in both systems. It's all the same difference.
The first sign you have a real free market is that cartels and monopolies form, and then you don't have a free market. Just because the state doesn't subsidize them doesn't mean they can't hang onto their power. Especially when the state is smaller and parties can just murder anyone who stands in their way - Billy the Kid, Lincoln County cattle wars style.
People who are just hell bent on pretending you can create a system of anarchy with some type of Nash equilibrium to prevent one party from turning it into a dictatorship just don't come across as very smart people to me. Hell, we are watching that unfold in Bitcoin right now.
