I am quite familiar with the last 2000 years of history.
It is why I suggested you prove your assertion. You can't state it was unstable because it lacked government, it most certainly did not lack government. You argue that it's form of government was a factor in the instability, which may hold some merit, however, that form of government has nothing to do with what we are discussing.
You make an assumption that "no government" results in "X government" and then you subsequently argue against X government. That is a strawman as you cannot prove a link between no government and X government. Further, your assertions about X government, are in and of themselves not accurate.
X being tribalism, warlordism, fuedalism, etc that you reference. In some cases these forms of government resulted in a great deal of prosperity.
You also tried to claim business required the formation of strong government. This also was most certainly not the case.
The Philosophy Of Liberty -
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: