4 ms·
Right, because the State is the entity with a Monopoly on Violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on
by hellbanner 9y ago
Right, because the State is the entity with a Monopoly on Violence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
- dredmorbius 9y agoThe correct, proper, and original formulation by Max Weber is the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. The alternatives are either granting all parties equal right to any chosen violence they choose to enact, granting the right to some particular entity, or attempting ... and by what means specifically without a state and sanction of legitimate violence ... to bar all use of violence. Note too: legitimacy does not mean unlimited or capricious. It does, however, mean that the sanction of violence originates from, and is enacted either directly by, or through licence (e.g., self-defence) from, the state. Misuse of this term is rampant, particularly among so-called Libertarians.
- hellbanner 9y ago"The monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force, also known as the monopoly on violence" I think the "legitimate" is implied - a State is a thing that creates Legitimacy and enforces it through Violence. To supplement this it monopolizes Violence by inflicting Violence on those who commit it without Legitimacy.
- dredmorbius 9y agoThe overwhelming majority of usage online, including in this thread, strongly suggests otherwise. The fact was an insight to me when I happened to stumble across it (researching other aspects of Weber, as it happens).
- hellbanner 9y agoSorry but I'm not seeing what I'm missing.
- tertius 9y agoThat's the system yes. I'm not particularly fond of it, neither am I defending it. It is what it is.