Comment: Hypothetical.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: So, why anarchy fails (see in situ)

wolfe's picture

Hypothetical.

Let's assume that the general population is fairly opposed to taking lives except in the most dire of circumstances, so that the right to bear arms has little impact on 99.9% of the situations we are discussing. (For instance, not many people would be willing to shoot a cop over a "weed" arrest, despite it being effectively kidnapping).

Let's further assume that this population is too busy working to adequately participate in civil disobedience. And since "democratic" history has been forever consumed by fraud and deception, let's remove that as an option.

Are there any ways that you can see, that we could use to keep government in check assuming:

1) Prefer NOT to bear arms, despite the right.
2) Working population requires a way to act, without too much time/money investment.
3) Voting by nature carries fraud?

Or possibly some variation on the 3 that you gave that would somehow meet the 1-3 bullet list?

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/