Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleAnarcho-capitalism is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 9, 2005.
Article milestones
June 24, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
July 15, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 28, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
August 13, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
August 17, 2006Featured article reviewKept
December 16, 2014Featured article reviewDemoted
January 8, 2016Articles for deletionKept
Current status: Former featured article

Regarding Konkin[edit]

Within Anarcho-Capitalist Communities Agorism is widely considered a Sect of the ideology such as Hoppeanism or Voluntaryism with the differences between the ideologies being miniscule, Further more i'd like to say that if were allowed to reference Hans-Hermann Hoppe or Larken Rose we should be allowed to reference Konkin, i'd also like to make the case that Agorism should be grouped by that of the 12 Agorist Wikipedians about 8 of them also have Anarcho-Capitalist Userboxes rather than leaving the Userbox alone or with a Anarcho-Communist Userbox SirColdcrown (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Konkin never considered himself to be an anarchocapitalist; in fact, he said that while similar on paper, there are some key differences between the ideologies. Meanwhile, if I'm not mistaken, Hoppe self-identifies as an ancap, and often talked about what his ideal ancap society would look like. People are free to identify as whatever they want: if someone identifies both as an ancap and agorist, so be it. However userboxes shouldn't dictate what is written in articles, only reliable sources. BeŻet (talk) 12:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to point out that for the most part Anarcho-Capitalism is a very Community Developed ideology, almost every Structure beyond the NAP and the Name has been widely peer developed, with online or in-person fourms coming up with most "Solutions" and "Structures" while people like Rothbard merely gave reasons as to why the state needed to be abolished and what to do from there, this is why despite people like Hoppe self identifying as AnCap him and Konkin not identifying as AnCap but writing several nutorious AnCap concepts, Hoppe and his followers are shunned from most AnCap communities while Konkin's Followers are welcomed with open arms. a Rookie editor of This Emporium of Knowledge, SirColdcrown (talk) 14:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Almost every political ideology is "community developed" in the same way. We however need reliable sources in order to include information in the article. If we want to include anything regarding Konkin, we require a reliable source saying that ancaps agree with some points that Konkin has expressed - we can't just include Konkin's opinions without context, since he wasn't an ancap. Internet forums and blogs are also not quality sources, so we would need, say, a peer-reviewed analysis of the viewpoints expressed on such forums. BeŻet (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Justification for the statement: "The term "anarcho-capitalism" is generally seen as fraudulent and an oxymoron by anarchists."[edit]

I think this statement is under-justified. A list of anarchists who might support this claim does not justify the (weasel word) statement that anarcho-capitalism is "generally seen" a certain way "by anarchists." I believe this sentence should be deleted.

"Fraudulent" is probably not the right word. This is a minor problem, though, in comparison with the rest of the article, which is shockingly bad.  Tewdar  22:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There absolutely needs to be a review of this page by a non-biased source, this article is bad on a few levels and being heavily biased is just the tip of the iceberg. The article seems to be trying its best to say "but this isn't real anarchy" as often as possible, when the bulk of the people who say this are direct political opponents of the subject of the article.
It's like asking a bunch of Republicans if Democrats are a party that cares for the people, and then treating that as a neutral point of view. It astonishes me that anyone would even need to point out how bad of a way this is to frame an article, there's clear political bias all over this. (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Who cares about Julian Assange?[edit]

Hi! In the context of this “ancap” article, I simply don't see why WikiLeaker journalist Julian Assange is cited for his opinion about the political ideology. It doesn't make sense. He might have authority. However, what he is cited for lacks substance and actual arguments. Merely opinions. I suggest deletion but that's just me. ToniTurunen (talk) 05:46, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed, Assange's opinions are totally UNDUE, so I erased it. 😁👍  Tewdar  08:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Child selling section[edit]

I feel like the child selling section is WP:UNDUE, feels like an attempt at bashing Anarchocapitalism by highlighting one of those opinions. In the spirit of WP:BOLD I am removing it. Please let me know if anyone feels it should be there. BeŻet (talk) 10:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What do independent reliable sources (WP:BESTSOURCES) say about it? Llll5032 (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There weren't any independent reliable sources, only quotes from Rothbard and Walter Block. This is a larger problem with the article: due to the fringe nature of anarchocapitalism, there aren't many independent sources discussing the ideology, and most of the sources are from people identifying as ancaps themselves. BeŻet (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]