>>1868
Because agorism is less a philosophy and more a mode of strategy and behavior. Not all agorists are ancap, and not all ancaps are agorists. Agorism's emphasis on separating oneself from the political process and doing nothing to effect political change, for instance, runs against the sensibilities of ancaps who acknowledge some forms of governance are worse than others, and would like to influence politics.

>>1868
Agorism was mainly supposed to be a bridge between the Voluntaryist viewpoint and the Syndicalist viewpoint and a means to an end/a theoretically agreed upon strategy that is more "independent" of any particular anarchist ideology. See >>1870 It gained popularity around the 2000s at which point it widely spread via various "libertarian left" organizations back in 2013-2017 era. This is also why various groups with high AnCap participation had the rug pulled out from under them in big tent organizations by leftists leading to large group separations (See: Texas Students for Liberty getting sick and tired of the DC-based group's bullshit especially ISFL and forming their own NGO). By 2018 it was largely considered an AnCap ideology despite Konkin being left-libertarian.

For all intents and purposes just consider it "AnCap in practice." There's a few points of disagreement between AnCaps and Agorists, but they're smaller than the differences between AnCaps and Syndicalists. The entire ideology can be summed up as "Let the Black Market Choke The State!" It's just sometimes Agorists see certain social structures as "The State" that AnCaps don't.

>>1870
>
>>
I think agorism has it's place but it wouldn't hurt to have someone running for office as well to alleviate government bullshit. Maybe something like a two pronged approach.

Americans think that the elites want to collapse the economy so that the globalists can buy property cheaply, but what if the ruling class wants to kill off the 99% so that they can steal property?