Sasan, I have never claimed to have the only solution. On occasion, I claim to have the best solution. While we both would prefer otherwise, there is no perfect solution. The question we must answer is, What imperfections do we prefer to tolerate?
I do not believe an environment devoid of coercive systems can exist. If there is a vacuum, new coercive systems will arise to fill it. The system which minimizes this coercion is best. You say "Market forces will dictate which VOLUNTARY systems succeed or falter." Yet, why do you assume that (a) market forces will do the dictating, and not coercive forces; and (b) that it is the voluntary systems which will succeed, rather than the coercive systems? This is far from self-evident to me. I also do not see as self-evident, that the "only" guarantees government provides are "corruption, theft, kidnapping, and murder." In fact, such a statement seems very difficult to justify. For example, a few years ago some acquaintances of mine became intoxicated and belligerent. I told them to leave my property but they would not. So I called the police. These people were willing to fight me, but realized the police possessed overwhelming force. They left immediately. When the police arrived, I lied and said I did not know their names. I did not wish them harm, I only wished to be respected on my own property. You make many bold and confident statements, but they create more questions than they answer. I also have an impressive signature but alas, no fancy dashes :) Chris Edes Vice-Chair, LP of New York Chair, Greater Rochester LP > As I have stated before, EVERY Government that has ever existed fits > the textbook definition of a criminal protection racket. If anyone > would care to challenge this premise then I would love to hear your > arguments. > > I've often heard the excuse that anarchy will not "work" because it > does not "guarantee" that defense or justice will be provided. There > are just a couple of problems with that assessment: > > 1) Anarchy is not a system, which means that it can neither "work" or > fail. It is an ENVIRONMENT which is devoid of coercive systems. Market > forces will dictate which VOLUNTARY systems succeed or falter. > > 2) The only "guarantees" that criminal protection rackets > (Governments) provide are those of corruption, theft, kidnapping, and > murder. Why anyone would automatically default to this solution is > beyond my comprehension. > > It is a blatant fallacy to assert that simply because you cannot > figure out how a certain service will be provided on the Free Market > then the only possible solution is a criminal protection racket. > > --- Sasan > --- Owner / Moderator > --- Libertarian Yahoo! Group > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
