Feudalism: The Argument

"'Feudalism is when people own land' -DestroyTheRoads"Feudalism: The Argument is an attempt by the statists to refute anarcho capitalism by deeming it "feudalism." The two classes of statists who attempt this are the socialists retards and the grill enjoying statist. The socialist retard does this because they do not understand property rights and inheritance. This article will be dedicated to the grill enjoying statist.

The Argument
The typical logic goes like this. "Under Anarcho Capitalism land holders are solely in charge of their own estate. They hire private security to defend this land. This system is feudalism. Feudalism functions as land holders being in control." This argument seeks to prove that AnCapism isn't anarchy since a state exists.

The State
Somebody using weapons and hiring services to protect their property does not somehow become a feudal lord. This would mean that basically everyone on the planet is some sort of feudal lord. A 5 year old is the feudal lord of his toy blocks, the 15 year old is the feudal lord of their iPhone, and a typical person with a house is now a feudal lord. The reasoning takes a massive leap in logic. This argument ignores the state, the divine right of kings, the church, and many other characteristics of feudalism. Truly to make a conflation like this you must be retarted, specially indoctrinated, or a socialist.

Serfdom
A feudal society often had peasants bound to the land by virtue of inheritance. This type of shitty contract requires a monopoly on violence and the use of slavery. Slavery is not legal under libertarian ethics, nor would 99% of people in present society allow it.

Anarchy to Feudalism
The criticism would then be "wouldn't it just devolve into feudalism." This is the same thing as "wouldn't warlords take over" and "the state would return." A private land owner does not have the same "legitimacy" as the state.