[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's a demand for it, and if they're willing to pay an organization for black/jew/queer-free streets, then serious problems could arise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they own the street, they should be able to control who uses it, shouldn't they?

[/ QUOTE ]

The operative word is "if," but that may not matter.

Let's say a black person purchases property in a certain area. A bunch of KKK members move in. They want this black person out, even though he rightfully owns the land. They pay someone a substantial sum to burn the black man's house down. What protects the black man's rights?

I'd also like to know how you propose to divide up currently existing public land. In anarcho-capitalism, all streets/parks/other public lands and easements would be purchased by private owners who paid top dollar to them. If I want to purchase a street and I have a lot of money for it, to whom do I pay the money? There is no state to sell it to. I envision this as leading to feudalism, but perhaps I'm missing something?