3 ms·
Yes, I addressed that didn't I? Before states there is tit-for-tat killing, blood feuds, taking justice into your own hands, raids on ones property ... after st
by igravious 13y ago
Yes, I addressed that didn't I? Before states there is tit-for-tat killing, blood feuds, taking justice into your own hands, raids on ones property ... after states, plus property rights plus trade there is a reduction. It seems that property rights plus trade would lead to a decrease in violence also but there would be a power vacuum and you would still need some entity to enforce the rules (consistently, fairly and not punitively) and it is difficult to imagine a non-state structure filling that role. A volunteer police force and judiciary? Free market militia?
I mean, we all see what can happen when a police state goes bad so that prompts some to imagine a utopian world without the 'evil' cops but unfortunately we had that world in the past and it was, in fact, worse. This is not comparing like with like though. It would be difficult to definitively know without, I think, accurate computational modeling of societies and that's a toughie, I don't know if anyone has tried that. Stephen Pinker does provide data on societies that haven't integrated into the modern world (hint: more per capita violence than our own, including the US which is far more violent than any other developed country) and also there is archaeological and historical evidence from societies of the past (seems to indicate they were more violent as well: homicide, torture, theft, rape, ...)