The farmer and the cowman should be friends

Oh, the farmer and the cowman should be friends

One man likes to push a plough

The other likes to chase a cow

But that's no reason why they cain't be friends

Territory folks should stick together

Territory folks should all be pals

Cowboys dance with farmer's daughters

Farmers dance with the ranchers' gals

(from "The Farmer And The Cowman" in Rogers & Hammerstein's Oklahoma )

The fundamental claim of the Geoist is a moral claim. It is that the land rent for all real properties in the world are due to all of the current human population of the world, pro rata. This claim is not universally accepted, but neither are many other moral claims. It is the polycentric legal order envisioned by all anarchists that allows for people with conflicting visions of justice to live in relative peace.

Other moral claims that are also disputed among various political philosophies include: whether abortion is murder, whether charging interest is a form of theft, and whether the indigent are due subsistence by the well-off. All of the arguments advanced here regarding the Geoist-Ancap controversy apply to these other moral claims, as well.

The core anarchist claim is that people are and should be of equal authority. Randy Barnett, David Friedman, Bruce Benson, and the Tannehills, among others, have outlined historical and theoretical descriptions of legal orders without monopolies of decision-making in a specific territory. We take an unspecified amalgam of their descriptions as our starting point.

Given that there are two adjacent geographical areas, both in anarchy, and both served by private defense associations (PDA's), each with a citizenry of, on the one hand, Geoists (we'll call it Geoland), and on the other hand, Ancaps (we'll call it Ancapland); then, what can we deduce about their likely amicability?

Well, it is certainly the case that each citizenry will consider a class of inhabitants of the other area as oppressed. The Geoist will consider the non-landowning class in Ancapland as not getting their due, the Ancap will consider the landowning class in Geoland as being unjustly taxed. Indeed, such ideas will be concentrated in each geographic area, since any strong believer in the opposite ideology need only move to the other geographic area.

Those Poor Landowners

The Ancapland citizen, sympathetic to the landowners in Geoland, actually has very little to complain about. Firstly, if these are long-lived regimes, then the present value of the discounted sum of future Geoist land rents due will be capitalized within the market price of land. So, if the present land owner in Geoland bought in to the property with the Geoist land rent already legitimated, then he will not have paid for such rents: they will have been built in to the lower market price of the property. Indeed, if Geoland is to exist on earth, then it will certainly have come from a historical state, in which land values were already taxed. More than likely, the annual assessment in Geoland would be reduced over its statist history, not increased, which will have resulted in a windfall to the landowner at the time of the tax reduction. Secondly, a Geoland landowner that considers himself oppressed need not emigrate, he can simply engage a non-Geoist PDA for protection. This solution is most effective on the geographical edge of Geoland, due to network effects discussed below. Such secession would then expose a new geographical edge. If the secessions continued, house by house, then Geoland would slowly be engulfed by Ancapland.

Some might argue that such competing moral claims would necessarily result in civil war or invasion between Ancapland and Geoland. This is highly unlikely. Historically, the American War Between the States shows that both hardcore abolitionists and hardcore slaveowners advocated secession and disunion. It was the statists, intent on ramming the tariff down the throat of the South, which forced the South to re-enter the Union on the North's terms. Since both Geoland and Ancapland will be served with multiple overlapping PDA's, there will rein market-chosen law. We may profitably employ Stephan Kinsella's Estoppel Approach in reverse, and demand why an Ancapland citizen would insist on saving a landowning Geoland citizen from himself? What the Ancapland citizen sees as a tax, the Geoland citizen sees as justice, and willingly pays it. There are costs to his not paying it, but the fact that secession is a real and individual or household-centered market phenomenon, means that Geoland taxes are quite different in nature from the statist tax, and they are much easier to avoid, especially on the geographic periphery of Geoland.

Those Poor Non-Earners

The Geoland citizen, sympathetic to the non-landowners in Ancapland, also have very little to complain about. Firstly, employment of a Geoist PDA is at least theoretically possible, and it is most practical (given network effects) at the periphery of Ancapland adjacent to Geoland. And, as non-landowners (hence, they are renters, and most likely young and/or poor), the expected gain in non-earned land rent is likely to outweigh the disutility of moving. Secondly, there is nothing that prevents Geoland citizens from distributing their land rents to non-landowners in Ancapland. Indeed, justice demands it.

The biggest objection to Geoist-Ancap peace is the possibility of large-scale payments. Imagine that tomorrow all of Africa were Geoland and all of North America were Ancapland (to borrow a line from Marx, it is in their class interests to choose these ideologies). It is clear that the Geoland citizens would demand a net payment from North America , and North America would refuse. Picking this hypothetical case answers the objection.

Firstly, it would be suicidal for Africa to attack North America . In general, if Ancapland is much richer than Geoland, then Geoland will not attack Ancapland for prudential considerations. Secondly, if Ancapland is only slightly richer than Geoland, then the incentive to go to war (over such a small amount) will be much reduced. There is a middle case where the alleged land rent owed is great enough to go to war over the matter, but not so great that defeat is certain. Here, again, though, peace should prevail. Why? Per the specification, it is not all of Geoland that is at war with all of Ancapland. Instead, there are specific PDA's that either enforce the Geoist land rents or not. Some will likely be more or less persuadable via threats of non-coercive action, such as boycotts.

The Great Struggle

The Geoist and Ancap worldviews are fundamentally opposed. But the struggle between these competing visions will produce societies with a different mix of goods. Each side may even claim that their ideology will produce a more prosperous society.

If Geoism is more productive than Ancap, then in the long run, the Geoist land rents in Geoland will overtake those of Ancapland. The Ancaps will no longer be pressured to render what they consider to be unjust taxes, and some marginal Ancap PDA's may be persuaded to institute Geoism, since it would initially mean a net payment from Geoist PDA's, and eventually higher-than-Ancap prosperity for the PDA's clients. In this way, the Geoist may rest assured that if Geoism is more productive than Ancap, that it will be eventually adopted by virtually all.

If Ancap is more productive than Geoism, then in the long run, the Geoist land rents in Geoland will fall relative to those of Ancapland. The Geoists will demand more and more net rent payments while being relatively impoverished by their own system. Boycotts of Ancaps will only make such relative impoverishment worse. The desire for more and better goods will persuade marginal Geoists to abandon Geoism and embrace Ancap, if for no other reason than the network effects of trade. In this way, the Ancap may rest assured that if Ancap is more productive than Geoism, then Geoists will be, in the long run, a tiny minority.

Diffusion of Norms

The account above is a specific exploration of how anarchy implies more peaceful interaction among people with differing moral beliefs. Namely, that of Geoists and Ancaps. But, this analysis extends to other areas.

For instance, we expect that some PDA's would have a hardline anti-abortion position. If you are strongly opinionated on the matter, this may be a decisive factor in your choice of PDA. Also, how that PDA interacts with PDA's that hold a pro-choice position could affect market share of anti-abortion clients. Economic incentives generally dictate that some degree of liberalism reign.

We would no more expect PDA's to go to war over abortion than PDA's to go to war over the Geoist-Ancap controversy. Indeed, it is even expected that PDA's could and probably would peaceably interact with organizations that systematically enslave, steal, and murder, provided those organizations are legitimate in the minds of many (here, we have in mind modern states, especially the worst ones).

But, more than an expectation of a new era of peace, anarchy promises to bring market forces to bear on moral tenets. For, all rational ethicists agree that that which is good, is good precisely because it conduces to the weal of the individual, the family, and society at large.

The clients of PDA's will have a long-term economic incentive to increase the wealth of the market they serve (which is, to the far-sighted entrepreneur, all of mankind); and, they will have a short-term economic incentive to minimize barriers to wealth creation by their clients. And since no PDA will enjoy a monopoly, it follows that the struggle for market share will drive PDA's to accept ideologies and moral tenets most conducive to the wealth of mankind.

The farmer should be sociable with the cowboy

If he rides by and asks for food and water

Don't treat him like a louse

Make him welcome in yer house

But be sure that you lock up yer wife and daughter!

[…]

I'd like to teach you all a little sayin'

And learn the words by heart the way you should

I don't say I'm no better than anybody else

But I'll be damned if I ain't jist as good!

(from "The Farmer And The Cowman")