3 ms·

> In a society without governments, there would be no-one able to prevent the use of violence. Eventually, organisations which provide violence as a service (wh

by danans 5y ago

> In a society without governments, there would be no-one able to prevent the use of violence. Eventually, organisations which provide violence as a service (whether offensive or defensive) would come up. So basically warring mini-states, mercenary groups, mafias. We've been there before, most of history in fact. In a lot of places with little to no government control, we're still there now. > The expensive nature of violence (nobody in their right mind would spend the money we spend on wars if the cost of war wasn't socialised through mandatory taxes) would push these organisations to negotiate contracts to settle matters peacefully Regaining stability after dismantling the current monopolies on violence than ensure it will take a very long time, and in the interim the situation will be extremely violent. The world didn't start settling matters relatively peacefully until two massive world wars occurred, and even then it only settled matters between some major western governments, not the world as a whole.

jokethrowaway 5y ago
> So basically warring mini-states, mercenary groups, mafias. We've been there before, most of history in fact. In a lot of places with little to no government control, we're still there now. Yes, I agree with you that a society without government where you would want to live is hard to achieve (hence why I'm not living in Somalia). I think it's in the realm of possible things, though. Maybe at some point in the future. There is a nice example in Medieval Iceland: https://mises.org/library/medieval-iceland-and-absence-government https://mises.org/library/medieval-iceland-and-absence-gover... > Regaining stability after dismantling the current monopolies on violence than ensure it will take a very long time, and in the interim the situation will be extremely violent. The world didn't start settling matters relatively peacefully until two massive world wars occurred, and even then it only settled matters between some major western governments, not the world as a whole. I think the best approach would be to gradually privatise public entities, reducing taxes progressively and replacing with private alternatives: healthcare, education, police, courts and eventually national defense. I agree maintaining stability could prove to be a challenge. I think in particular, switching the police for protection agencies would need some negotiations in place during a period of peace maintained by a central (national or foreign) entity. I think that even just going in this direction, without adopting anarchic plans, and reducing the size of the government could prove to be beneficial. Georgia would be a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88vXJzkvr8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88vXJzkvr8Y

by danans 5y ago

jokethrowaway 5y ago

> So basically warring mini-states, mercenary groups, mafias. We've been there before, most of history in fact. In a lot of places with little to no government control, we're still there now. Yes, I agree with you that a society without government where you would want to live is hard to achieve (hence why I'm not living in Somalia). I think it's in the realm of possible things, though. Maybe at some point in the future. There is a nice example in Medieval Iceland: https://mises.org/library/medieval-iceland-and-absence-government https://mises.org/library/medieval-iceland-and-absence-gover... > Regaining stability after dismantling the current monopolies on violence than ensure it will take a very long time, and in the interim the situation will be extremely violent. The world didn't start settling matters relatively peacefully until two massive world wars occurred, and even then it only settled matters between some major western governments, not the world as a whole. I think the best approach would be to gradually privatise public entities, reducing taxes progressively and replacing with private alternatives: healthcare, education, police, courts and eventually national defense. I agree maintaining stability could prove to be a challenge. I think in particular, switching the police for protection agencies would need some negotiations in place during a period of peace maintained by a central (national or foreign) entity. I think that even just going in this direction, without adopting anarchic plans, and reducing the size of the government could prove to be beneficial. Georgia would be a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88vXJzkvr8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88vXJzkvr8Y