4 ms·
Actually, while lots of ideas and phrases from the "libertarian book" are objectionable (as with every movement), this is one of those I find is the most clarif
by edanm 5y ago
Actually, while lots of ideas and phrases from the "libertarian book" are objectionable (as with every movement), this is one of those I find is the most clarifying of how the world actually works.
At the end, deep down, whenever you pass a law or regulation or whatever, you're essentially forcing people to do something at the threat of violence. That is how laws are enforced - either with fines, which turn into violence if you refuse to pay them, or with actual violence.
It's not an empty idea to remember that that is what is actually being proposed, even if it's sometimes painted in nicer language. (And less relevant to our immediate discussion, but this same concept is relevant in the fact that some minor offense can sometimes literally turn into police ending up killing people, e.g. the various horrible cases in the US that sparked BLM protests.)
- krapp 5y ago>but this same concept is relevant in the fact that some minor offense can sometimes literally turn into police ending up killing people, e.g. the various horrible cases in the US that sparked BLM protests. In free societies, the monopoly on violence is granted by the people in order to create a more just society than would exist in the alternative (power granted through popular or mob violence.) It only considers violence as encoded in law to be justified to that end, not all forms of violence committed by any person representing the state. So police arresting and detaining people is an example of the state exercising its monopoly on violence, but police brutality isn't.
- edanm 5y agoFair enough, and thanks for the correction.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]