Difference between anarcho individualism and anarcho egoism?

sinonym is a fancy word for "name of China"

Dude, that's retarded

All anarchism is the same anyway. Difference between anarcho syndicalism and anarcho capitalism? There is no, cuz anarcaps are ok with people volunteer to live in a communist anarchy

but ancoms are not ok with people volunteering to live in a free market

Focuses on individual responsibility. Makes no ethical statement on acting in the interests of others.
Focuses on self interest. Altruism is a vice. Unless you have something personally to gain from acting in the interests of others you should not do so.

Ancoms think anarcho capitalism is oxymoronic. If there is no state, there is no protection of private property and no value to currency. Occupation and ownership are two different things. Just because you can defend something while you're in contact with it doesn't mean no one will take it from you when you're not. If you make occupation and ownership synonymous, then your stance is indistinguishable from the ancom stance as the means of production belong to those using them.

this is retarded tbh
in ancapistan whoever can defend whatever property owns it. e.g., if you have a gun and are willing to defend your house you own it, and if you hire a private police force to defend your factory you own it. that's literally the only logical conclusion in a stateless society. if someone takes it from you while you're not looking, they now own it, but you can act in self-defense because they aggressed upon you. this would likely result in everyone voluntarily paying for protection services from one of any number of competing private polices. if someone claims something that isn't his, the other person can act in self defense, or take it to private court or whatever.
this is also dumb. the state doesn't decide that currency has value, the people using it do. see: bitcoin. if no one thought that bitcoin had value, then it wouldn't, but between every voluntary transaction the two parties both agreed that bitcoin had value. in ancap world there'd be an innumerable amount of currencies, some centralized (secured by some kind of "currency company") and some decentralized, and people would use them as they agreed they have value.

Than anarcho individualism is like anarcho capitalism or NAP

anarcho-fascist reporting in

I understand the argument. But could anyone feasibly defend said property against a mob? And what's to stop the police force from turning against you? They would earn more by owning the factory than by being payed by the factory owner. They might lose business from people who wanted a police force but now they own a factory which is more profitable than their policing job anyway.

In the market would arise a niche for something to stop that, perhaps a "police insurance" that polices the police, or a private court that certifies only companies who've signed contracts protected by force to be ruled under the court's law? same would apply for things like the EPA, a company that only certifies other companies that pass it's safety tests.
And even then, it wouldn't be profitable to take the factory because then no one would buy from them. the market has repercussions.

i mean no one would buy their policing jobs*

None of this protects against back-stabbery.

This is a common sense issue:
If the total of what you're paying all the police you hire to protect your factory is greater than the profits from said factory, you wouldn't hire them in the first place because you would be losing money just by owning this factory. They never need to go back to policing because now they're earning more by owning the factory they were payed to protect.

yes it would. that's the point- in the market, the need for companies that protect against "back-stabbery" would arise. i'm just highlighting some of the possibilities for how that would work.

i'd imagine they'd have multiple clients besides the factory owner, right? if they took over that one factory, everybody else would stop enlisting them because they could take over their factory, too. it's up to you in this hypothetical situation whether the ownership of that one factory is more profitable from their entire previous business spanning multiple clients, but if it wasn't there'd be no incentive to take over the factory.