Hmm. This is a bit similar to communism, quasi a "stateless state". The communism has an ideological expression: "...according to everyone's needs"
Discussion
Communism puts power in the hands of the state. There is no state in anarcho capitalism. It’s not similar at all.
Not exactly. You probably mention the socialism. According Marx and Engels the communism and socialsm were synonymous terms. But Lenin divided them. The socialism was "... according to everyone's work", while communism "... everyone's needs"
The communism idea was the "classless society" and "everyone is equal". (unfortunately we had to learn about this in the school).
But in this case, when everyone is equal, then there are no "leaders". The conequence: without leaders there is no state. The communism is an "ouroborous". It's aim to eliminate itself (which is a crazy concept). So if no state exists remains the anarchy (see George Kennan's book titled "Around the cragged hill").
I think a stateless society will lead us to peace, prosperity, respect to the property rights and complete free-market. On the other hand communist society lead us to a totalitarian society with a planned economy controlled by a small elite of bureaucrats (just take a look to the historical examples and you will be able to confirm it)
It doesn’t really matter what they say about it. All versions of communism have been implemented through the state.
National Socialism is needed to protect the people and nation
Socislists: Socialize the means of production on the state.
Ancaps: Privatize the state and all public property.
nostr:npub1j2rqesvvtyktcyxakxhuxw54x3zm44frdr0h6prpgdmg7a9md39qmwcmzd: They are similar.
I couldn't get your point. How a system based purely in free-market and property rights can be communist?