Comment: Governments do not come into

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I think you're right that any (see in situ)

Governments do not come into

spontaneous existence. Name one government that has continued to exist once its services were no longer demanded by anyone?

The definition of a free market is a market absent violence. Not only does such a market not exist in nature it is impossible to exist in nature because violence is a natural part of nature.

The obstacle to achieving maximal belief for any one form of social organization is that no form of social organization is perfect and no one is advocating law of the jungle. Everyone advocates a system which intervenes against nature's laws of the jungle in one way or another. Whether it is eliminating violence or allocating resources by technology is pretty irrelevant in the context of intervening against nature. What is being argued is essentially a pissing contest over which imperfect system is the so called best system.

How is any kind of maximal belief achieved for arguments of imperfection? It is not as simple as removing the gun in the room. Who gets to remove the gun in the room?

Nor is aggression a clear and simple definition. People have all different opinions about what they consider aggression especially if we start talking about threats that do not involve physical harm or property damage. If we throw fraud in the mix .. oh my it only gets more complicated. Do I have an obligation to educate you for free by providing a full and honest disclosure about everything I know because I have taken the time to alleviate my own ignorance at my own expense?

Let's presume for a moment when the Constitution was ratified people were as free as possible and had a maximum uniformity of belief. What did they create? A government which has racked up the most debt of any nation on earth ever not mentioning any other present tyrannies.