4 ms·
>Or are you saying that, without government regulation, the East India company wouldn't have formed their own private army? >Correct. This is why libertinism
by mozumder 11y ago
>Or are you saying that, without government regulation, the East India company wouldn't have formed their own private army?
>Correct.
This is why libertinism is often relegated to that of a sweet, innocent 12 year old idealists, because they do not know about the real world.
In the real world, what happens without government is that warlords form. This happens throughout history, such as colonial expansion into indian territory, or after the collapse of the Soviet Union, etc. And it's happening RIGHT NOW in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Sudan.
You don't need a state to sanction violence for violence to happen. Violence will happen when there isn't a state to sanction it.
This is why the correct solution that adults agree on is a strong, centralized government with power. The whole point of a strong, centralized powerful government is to limit the rights and freedoms of individuals, so people AREN'T allowed to do what they want.
Because, when people are allowed to do what they want, they form violent armies. Government limits peoples rights and freedoms to do that.
To stop this, you need a) a strong, powerful government, and b) that government to say "no violence."
Government is the social contract you offer to other people. And only though a social contract can you prevent violence.
- Turing_Machine 11y agoWhy are "warlords" worse than, say, the Stalinist USSR, Nazi Germany? That's what you get with your "strong, powerful, centralized government". If there's ever been a government that actually said "no violence" and followed through on it, I haven't heard of it. Can you name a few?
- mozumder 11y agoAre you implying that "warlords" are better than the US government? Which system is better? A libertarian warlord system? Or the US government? What exactly makes a warlord system more favorable than the US government? If you want an example of a government, you don't need to bring up Stalin's Russia or Nazi Germany.. you have an example of government right here in the US! Clearly you thought through your cunning "less government" libertarian plan, and have concluded that such a system, which results in warlords, would be better than the US government, right? Let's hear that rationale then.
- mindcrime 11y agoIt has not been demonstrated that a libertarian system necessarily results in warlords, so the entire premise of your argument is unsupported. How about you prove that assertion? And please drop the silly "cunning plan" business, this is Hacker News, not reddit.
- Turing_Machine 11y agoNo, I'm stating (not implying) that the hazards of a too-strong central government (such as the Soviet Union under Stalin, or Germany under Hitler) are far worse than "warlords". You're pretending that the only options are no central government at all, on the one hand, and an all-powerful central government on the other. That's not actually the case.