APARACTONOMY AND ANARCHO CAPITALISM

Kai H. Kayser, MBA, MPhil
Portugal. Jan 4, 2026.

Aparactonomy is a concept formulated and named by K. H. Kayser, derived from the Greek “aparaktos” (unbothered, undisturbed) and “autonomy,” representing a more practically oriented extension of anarcho-capitalism. It envisions a stateless nation guided by a voluntary constitution, with a strong emphasis on cultural cohesion, meritocratic diversity, and robust self-defense capabilities. Aparactonomy seeks to overcome some of the obstacles surrounding anarcho-capitalism, particularly its perceived vulnerability to external threats, to facilitate lasting societal and individual peace and prosperity (Kayser, 2025; Hoppe, 2001).

Both systems—aparactonomy and anarcho-capitalism—are theoretical in nature and have never been tried in pure form, only in historical approximations such as certain customary law societies in medieval Iceland or Gaelic Ireland (Friedman, 1979; Rothbard, 1973). Both stem from the conviction that maximum individual freedom ensures economic prosperity and social progress, as historical and empirical evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that self-organization is far more efficient than central planning (Mises, 1949; Hayek, 1944). Opponents argue that economic prosperity shouldn’t be a priority and instead make equality or social justice their focal points, thus calling for a strong authority to enforce them. This makes clear that aparactonomy and anarcho-capitalism are the polar opposite of authoritarian, totalitarian and collectivist systems, as both reject any formal enforcement. The very lack of enforcement is therefore the major criticism of anarcho-capitalism, the reason for calling it utopian, unrealistic, unfeasible, or impossible.

AI systems like ChatGPT, Google, Meta, and Brave AIs, which are extremely leaning to collectivist ideologies and clearly push Marxist and socialist agendas, argue in a circle against anarcho-capitalism by 1. stating that there is no historical evidence for it to work, so it can’t work and 2. that most academic studies have stated that it cannot function, so it cannot function.

H. H. Hoppe has addressed both how governmental enforcement is not necessary as communities will take care of defending their values and way of life against criminals and destructive forces, and how academic studies are particularly biased and self-serving due to their depending on governmental funding (Hoppe, 2001; Hoppe, 1993). Academic studies are the least likely to argue against government as that would equal “biting the hand that feeds them.” The best argument against the necessity of government is history, as it shows how very well humans prospered before the establishments of parliaments, senates, courts, bureaucracies, public universities, official accreditation and licensing, journals, etc. Leonardo DaVinci was not receiving any grants, or public stipends, Mozart had no public education or qualification, and Lady Murasaki not only wrote the most important historic novel of Japan but invented through it a completely new literary genre in Japan—without any quota to ensure female equality (Rothbard, 1982). What good has government, bureaucracy and taxation actually done? Well, they have built hospitals, roads and schools, proponents say but that is not true: They have reallocated the profits of net producing citizens by force, threatening with prison, expropriation and labor/concentration camps, to hire private companies to build hospitals, roads and schools without prioritizing innovation, efficiency or long term cost-benefit ratios.

In reality, across modern Western economies, only a modest fraction of public expenditure is devoted to such infrastructure and essential services. For instance, in Spain—a typical European welfare state—social protection (pensions, welfare transfers) accounts for the largest share of government spending, often exceeding 40% of total expenditure, while health and education combined represent around 25%, and transport/infrastructure (including roads) typically less than 5-10% (Eurostat, 2024; OECD, 2023). Interest payments on public debt add another 5-6% of total spending, leaving limited room for productive investments (Banco de España, 2025). In the USA, interest payments on public debt now exceed military spending, with fiscal year 2024 seeing $881 billion in interest costs compared to lower defense outlays, and projections for 2025 estimating interest at $952 billion or more, underscoring the unsustainable spiral of government borrowing that diverts resources from genuine productivity (Congressional Budget Office, 2025; Bipartisan Policy Center, 2025). Private organization would and does build them better, faster and cheaper. Would people take care of their own pensions and use insurances without governmental interference, prosperity would virtually explode and poverty become a rather rare phenomenon (Rothbard, 1973; Friedman & Friedman, 1980).

Also the argument that under statist coordination, universities and academia prosper and have a much higher output is ridiculous considering how useless that output is – 3 to 5 million papers yearly and yet we see not much progress (solar and wind energy far less efficient than nuclear, mobile phones available since over 25 years, internet from 1968, electric cars from 1890, transrapid/high speed trains early 1990). While the suppression of nuclear energy is more regulatory and political than a pure scientific failure, the utter lack of academic papers arguing against it is telling: students are incentivized to praise and propose “renewable energies” while critical voices questioning their scalability or praising nuclear are marginalized or disincentivized. Dr. Eric Weinstein argues that in physics there haven’t been any notable breakthroughs since the 1970s, and even in medicine the actual progress has slowed down, with the sole exception of surgical progress (Weinstein, 2020). Instead science got distorted to advertise harmful pseudo vaccines against covid, proven not to prevent infection, by now even calling all vaccinations in question due to possible correlation to auto immune and mental issues. Studies by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, and Dr. Peter McCullough have provided irrefutable evidence, including autopsies showing a high likelihood of causal links between mRNA vaccines and death in 325 cases, estimates of over 17 million global vaccine-related deaths, and direct evidence of mRNA integration into the human genome leading to rapid cancers, demonstrating that these injections are unsafe, ineffective, and contaminated, warranting immediate withdrawal (Hulscher et al., 2025; McCullough et al., 2025). Real progress is mostly, if not only visible in private organization, as seen with Starlink, SpaceX, Grok AI, or the enormous relief an increasing number of people find in improving their health through the carnivore diet, re-discovered and re-introduced by Dr. Shawn Baker and many other physicians, going against governmental nutrition advice and shoddy sciences pushing counterproductive narratives (Musk, 2022; Baker, 2018). All EU countries impose extremely high taxes—often exceeding 40-50% of GDP—yet their health systems are in decline, with over 1 million avoidable deaths annually in 2022 due to underfunded services, long waiting lists causing people to die awaiting surgeries, and systemic failures from austerity and bureaucratic paralysis (Eurostat, 2025; ETUC, 2025). European universities are falling in global rankings, with 52 out of 90 UK institutions dropping in 2026 QS rankings and broader continental declines in THE World University Rankings, reflecting reduced innovation and funding inefficiencies (QS, 2026; THE, 2026). Europe is completely left out from AI and key future technologies like quantum computing (only 6% of global patents vs. China’s 46% and US’s 23%), thorium reactors, and small modular reactors (SMRs), where it lags behind Russia, China, and India due to governmentally induced regulatory paralysis, fragmentation, and overregulation that stifles scaling and investment (European Commission, 2025; Draghi Report, 2025).

Of course, the above arguments are in no way new, and go back to the Austrian school of economics, and economists like Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell, Rothbard, Hoppe, etc. (Mises, 1949; Hayek, 1944; Friedman, 1962; Sowell, 1980). Their arguments have never been proven empirically wrong but instead been attacked emotionally and morally, declaring in some way or other equality or social justice a higher cause than prosperity and social well being. Such is the corrosive destruction government causes in everything it touches.

Therefore, both aparactonomy and anarcho-capitalism embrace competition of currency—an Austrian concept allowing multiple private monies to vie in the market, which prevents monetary monopolies, curbs inflation, and enhances economic stability—echoing Hayek’s vision of denationalized money as a bulwark against government-induced economic distortions (Hayek, 1976; Hoppe, 2001).

Understanding that background is important to understand in which way aparactonomy differs from anarcho-capitalism, why it focuses so much more on a heavily armed population. Aparactonomy is fully based on Hoppe’s private law society, on his argument that private enterprise and insurance companies organize every aspect of civilization better than government and means not only health and education but especially safety of all sorts (Hoppe, 2001; Hoppe, 1993). Without limiting, contradicting or discrediting Hoppe’s flawless argument and suggestion on insurance, private organization and community, aparactonomy offers a crucial addition to how those can be practically and sustainably organized. Aparactonomy is thus a more practice-oriented and less philosophical version of anarcho-capitalism, and shifts focus to cultural adhesion and diversity. To make the distinction clearer, while anarcho-capitalism provides the theoretical framework for a society without state coercion, emphasizing voluntary exchanges and private property rights, aparactonomy builds on this by incorporating mechanisms for real-world resilience, namely the stateless nation with a voluntary constitution embedded in anthem, flag, festivals, and everyday symbols that foster cultural unity and preparedness against threats.

Another commonality of aparactonomism and anarcho-capitalism is respecting the relevance of The Iron Law of Oligarchy by Robert Michels (Michels, 1911). While Rothbard discussed it directly as a universal sociological law arising from natural inequality and the division of labor (Rothbard, 1971), Hoppe preferred a more cautious approach, describing the natural tendency to form elites within organizations (Hoppe, 2001). Oligarchy and elitism are not necessarily the same. Aparactonomy embraces that natural tendency towards building elites, concentration of wealth, knowledge or strength as an important element of a stateless nation. Like Rothbard and Hoppe, Kayser agrees that the inherent danger of monopoly building can only be countered by removing regulatory interference that limits the natural remedy: self organization. In a free society without limitations on speech, opinion and research, any perilous accumulation will be countered by competitive forces trying to participate in a market or sector or even replace the existing leader of it through a better offer. A stateless society would be the ideal framework for not only prevent monopolies but to even benefit from the attempts of forming them, as they are bound to invite competition.

Whether one finds classifications like warrior, merchant and agricultural societies overgeneralized, there is undoubtedly something there, especially in comparing China (merchant culture) and Japan (warrior culture) (Reischauer, 1970). Another such comparison would be Prussia (warrior culture) and Bavaria (agriculture). Regardless of their over generalizations, the cultural orientation is crucial for a society’s advancements and sustainability. Warrior cultures tend to burn out and falter economically, while merchants and farmers sustain their societies significantly more efficiently but are always threatened by conquering states trying to take their wealth over by force (Spengler, 1918). A prospering stateless society would face such threats soon, too. But what makes a society hard if not impossible to conquer, especially in the long run? Their “unitedness” which comes from cultural identity, language, customs, specific differences…their inequality. Assimilation is a slow process and without it, conquering is futile, invasions can happen but conquering requires much more than that. Now, let’s imagine Cuba sets out to conquer the American state of Florida, the outcome is very easily predicted. Even if Cuba had the naval power and military might to invade near Florida, even if Cuba does so with the element of total surprise, the Cuban troops would face heavily armed citizens that have a cultural and practical resilience hardened and solidified by natural disasters like hurricanes and tornadoes, with food rations and water in their basements and ammunition to keep intruders away for weeks.

In a sociopolitical context such hypotheticals may seem weird but that is only because academia has retreated to ivory towers, where it indulges in ignoring reality while getting pimped out by funds and grants. Historically, the freer a society, the more successful thanks to innovation creating prosperity, and that freedom always required self defense. One of the best examples hereby is Switzerland, a rather small country that declared neutrality, as they were tired of pointless wars and the waste of resources caused by them, establishing a very decentralized power structure that hinges on referenda and citizens armed readiness (Hoppe, 2001).

In an aparactonomous society it is crucial to establish a smart blend of merchant, agriculture and warrior culture, where citizens are heavily armed, well trained and ready to give invaders a very hard time. This blend of merchant, warrior, and farmer ideally grows in each person in an aparactonomous society, so that specialization goes hand in hand with generally capable people who can defend themselves, farm their own food if needed, and engage in trade intelligently—creating a resilient populace that isn’t overly dependent on narrow roles. That requires diversity as much as unity, and the two are in no way contradictory. True diversity is a tremendous strength, the pinnacle of meritocratic discipline, actually, and goes far beyond the color of skin. True diversity embraces inequality, celebrates the differences between individuals, knowing that division of labor works best utilizing the specific strong points of different talents, ideas and experiences (Smith, 1776; Sowell, 1980). When widely distinct individuals unite, their strength multiplies. An aparactonomous society needs to be built upon that mindset, which is a natural state of mind found in mammals anyways—humans suppressed it through governmental indoctrination on purpose, creating decadent and hapless masses for easy direction and manipulation. Hence, aparactonomy is far more aggressive, self defense oriented and diversity based than anarcho-capitalism and seeks to establish that mind set through a voluntary and unenforced constitution, as a constant reminder for society and individual to continue being alert and prepared, so that their freedom and prosperity won’t be lost to the antisocial and dark tetrad forces that drive the enslaving and impoverishing governments around and about.

References

• Baker, S. (2018). The Carnivore Diet. Victory Belt Publishing.
• Banco de España. (2025). Economic Bulletin 2025/Q3.
• Bipartisan Policy Center. (2025). Deficit Tracker. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/report/deficit-tracker/
• Congressional Budget Office. (2025). The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2025 to 2035. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61172
• Draghi Report. (2025). The Future of European Competitiveness. European Commission.
• ETUC. (2025). One Million Avoidable Deaths Shows Austerity Kills. https://www.etuc.org/en/pressrelease/one-million-avoidable-deaths-shows-austerity-kills
• Eurostat. (2024). Government expenditure by function (COFOG).
• Eurostat. (2025). Avoidable Mortality in the EU. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20250630-1
• European Commission. (2025). Quantum Europe Strategy. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/quantum-europe-strategy
• Friedman, D. (1979). Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case. Journal of Legal Studies, 8(2).
• Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago Press.
• Friedman, M., & Friedman, R. (1980). Free to Choose. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
• Hayek, F. A. (1944). The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press.
• Hayek, F. A. (1976). Denationalisation of Money: The Argument Refined. Institute of Economic Affairs.
• Hoppe, H. H. (1993). The Economics and Ethics of Private Property. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Hoppe, H. H. (2001). Democracy: The God That Failed. Transaction Publishers.
• Hulscher, N., et al. (2025). COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Integration into Human Genome: Evidence from Bladder Cancer Case. Public Health Policy Journal.
• Kayser, K. H. (2025). Aparactonomy. https://doi.org/10.62891/39006333
• McCullough, P. A., et al. (2025). Autopsy Evidence Linking COVID-19 Vaccines to Mortality. Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.
• Michels, R. (1911). Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. (Translated 1962). Free Press.
• Mises, L. von. (1949). Human Action. Yale University Press.
• Musk, E. (2022). [Various public statements on SpaceX and Starlink innovations].
• OECD. (2023). Education at a Glance 2023.
• QS. (2026). World University Rankings 2026. Quacquarelli Symonds.
• Reischauer, E. O. (1970). Japan: The Story of a Nation. Knopf.
• Rothbard, M. N. (1971). Freedom, Inequality, Primitivism, and the Division of Labor. In The Irrepressible Rothbard (1991 reprint). Mises Institute.
• Rothbard, M. N. (1973). For a New Liberty. Macmillan.
• Rothbard, M. N. (1982). The Ethics of Liberty. Humanities Press.
• Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. W. Strahan and T. Cadell.
• Sowell, T. (1980). Knowledge and Decisions. Basic Books.
• Spengler, O. (1918). The Decline of the West. Alfred A. Knopf.
• THE. (2026). World University Rankings 2026. Times Higher Education.
• Weinstein, E. (2020). [Public discussions on scientific stagnation].