>>15220
>state property
The state holds no legitimate property, having acquired all of it either through coercion (military conquest, eminent domain being the worst offenders in this category) or fraud (by telling people the land already belongs to them by default, for example).
Did you really think this argument was new? The only thing new here is you, if you haven't read the dozens of critiques of this argument we have already made.
>And who's to stop states forming again that simply just need you to give them rent in order for you to stay on their land? And how is government any different then this?
Read up on diseconomics of scale, for starters. Then check the history of monopolies that came about without help from the state. This should take you two minutes, because these monopolies don't exist.
>How can you be sure to avoid this situation in an Anarcho-capitalist society? When capitalists own all of the land as well?
They won't. Read above.