Comment: Origins of the state

(See in situ)

Origins of the state

I thought this was a very informative debate and both speakers did a great job, with the possible exception of their own unique personality quirks.

As this article points out, from an anthropological perspective, I believe it does make sense to assume that the market came before the state.

After all, people had access to resources and traded them long before the creation of a state. So it was in this primitive free market, based on voluntary trade, that gave birth to laws and subsequently government enforcement.

So when Stefan doesn't concede that the state is actually a product of the market, I find him not being open-minded enough. Ultimately, if the market creates the state, and as Stefan mentioned, the state incentivizes market participants to use its mechanisms for unfair advantage, if we had a true free market, who is to say that this development of unfair mechanisms would not just develop again?

Even if the mechanisms didn't manifest in the form of a "state" as we know it today, the fact that when push comes to shove, people can be incentivized to cheat and play dirty shows that there would need to be fail-safes built into the market to prevent acquiring unfair levels of power.

The only method I see to manage that would be laws or regulations (which I am against), but here's the problem. Laws would require a state or some sort of centralized power for enforcement, and then we've created a system that's ripe for abuse and it's a catch 22! WE START ALL OVER AGAIN.

Can someone help me out here?

I really do think this was a great debate and I personally think it's great discussing conflicting philosophies, because that's how new philosophies can arise! :)