If civilization broke down and money became useless, would capitalism or anarcho-socialism spontaneously arise?

To the extent where pockets of civilization struggled to exist, a barter system would probably arise.

Beyond that... That's why we have our guns... to defend what we have from those that would try to take it.

normal people build their own houses, plant gardens, raise animals, hunt, fish, and barter. We are limited in our current culture and economy so that only people with money can do that. And they legislate and tax the heck out of everything to make it prohibitive to the working class and the poor. My guess is that in a community where you were allowed to live and let live most people would spend their time living off the land and bartering...that would be their economy. That's normal. But as soon as lazy, greedy bullies got involved, or someone poisoned the well, or stole your food or people and forced slavery or whatever, things would change. No longer live and let live the weak and confused may petition the strong and savvy and the barter system would be heavily influenced by the person in a position of authority. It would be local economies...and could be any type. The economies are as strong as the people and their participation in them. As to the names you gave, glean your category from my answer cuz I never heard of that stuff.

Could be either one, if you define "capitalism" as a market economy. Capitalism as it is now would be dead, but the market mechanism might conceivably go on. "Money" isn't limited to fiat money - it's any good that people will accept in exchange for goods or services. The things people tend to choose for money tend to have inherent value (historically - not in the case of government-sponsored currency), like salt, tea, cocoa beans, gold, etc., and they tend to be durable for long periods of time so that they can change a lot of hands, and won't go bad on you. So, by contrast, fresh fish would make poor currency.

In that sense, people might very well return to barter economies, and then to currency-based market economies.

Socialism is another option. If history is any kind of indicator, it will probably continue to be a mixture of both, since we can't ever seem to agree on which is preferable, and we tend to shy away from orthodoxy in political organization.

In reality, if the situation was really precarious, we'd probably find ourselves in authoritarian, tribal chiefdoms again.

Capitalism the natural state of humanity... socialism in all its forms is delusional fantasy.

If socialism destroyed civilization (as it is now threatening to do) capitalism would rise from its ashes and start anew.

pretty much when folks landed in north America some 400 years ago--money wasn't all that valuable--however--some folks were good at various things--and rather quickly a capitalist economy developed.

Capitalism is ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEED merely by the absence of FORCE forbidding it.

capitalism