Comment: Government warfare also

(See in situ)

Government warfare also

Government warfare also happens/happened/happening. We have had a century of almost constant war between governments, and it may end in nuclear holocaust. How is this preferable to smaller gangs fighting, but without access to printing press money, mandatory funding from people who pay taxes and weapons of mass destruction?

Is it not true that all of the scary drawbacks people fear about a stateless society are already experienced in this age of governments? Indeed, how are governments "not" just gangs that got big and stopped raiding villages, but rather just moved into them?

A stateless society is only possible when the vast majority of people decide they do not wish to violate other people's natural rights, and also have the means and technology to defend themselves and their communities. That day may never come, however lets not pretend that we are not living in an age of gang warfare today. We are.

In the end, there are only two possible outcomes to this contest between freedom and coersion, and it all boils down to two things, information and weapons techology:

1) One gang, because of superior technological means rises above all others without any possibility of competition so that they can rule unopposed over their dominion. Tyrannical society rules into the foreseeable future.

2) The human race develops the technological means to overpower criminal gangs and governments and reject that anyone has the right to deprive others of their rights. Voluntary society emerges until criminals find a way to overpower peaceful people again.

Its hard to say what will happen, but what is clear is that we are on the path of option 1, and there has been and will be catastrophic loss of human life until one of the super-gangs currently battling manages to become the one-world-government. Then things will get really bad.

The minarchist view is naive because it denies what governments actually are, and feels that the force of government can be contained. A laughable notion when one considers that small government requires a vigilant population who understand rights and are educated on political and economical issues.

The anarchist view isn't naive because we hold no illusions that it is a dream that can be realized currently. We understand that massive societal and technological advancements must first occur.

In my opinion, the only way that voluntary society can exist is when everyone is more-or-less equally armed and deadly. As Jefferson said: When governments fear their people, there is liberty. When people fear their governments, there is tyranny. I would expand and say that when some people have superior force over others, there will be governments. When people fear committing crimes against other people, there will be freedom.