Comment: Interesting how very nomadic

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Up top again on - Choice in law. (see in situ)

Interesting how very nomadic

Interesting how very nomadic it all sounds. You know, it was the political stability of the emergence of the Nation-State that allowed Europe to exit the dark ages and was a pre-requisite for capitalism, right? That political instability like under Feudalism does not allow for capitalism? See: Africa. There's less government intervention in Africa than in the US but there is no stability. Stability is provided by a strong, credible state and it allows for forecasting the future and investment.

You see, we DO have a record of historical anarchism. It will not fit the black-and-white thinking of the typical anarchist's paradigm but it will provide a useful tool for how much government is necessary for wealth maximization.

A utilitarian looks at history and sees that too much government = communism = poverty. On the other hand, too LITTLE government = feudalism, balkanization, radical ethnocentrism/tribalism = poverty. So the historian concludes that wealth maximization(utility) lies somewhere in the middle(benevolent constitutional monarchies and republics).

Some early anarchists made the mistake of citing ancient anarchist civilizations as proof that anarchism "can work". The seeds of its own undoing are the failures of the model to stick even within those very civilizations. An interesting aside, the longest lasting anarchist community lasted until the early 1900's and lived in almost total communism in Africa. So much for anarcho-"capitalism", but an argument for anarcho-pauperism, anarcho-tribalism, and anarcho-third-worldism.

Ventura 2012