Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

re: Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

ragnar_rahl — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:12:55 GMT

By their very nature, two providers of retaliatory force in the same territory must, unless they agree on all laws, all procedures such as trials to ensure that innocents aren't accidentally subject to the retlation mechanism, etc, come into conflict with one another-- they cannot coexist. And there is no way to guarantee, even if both are believers in the "nonaggression" principle, that they will not differ in their procedural standards, except a contract between the two-- such contract becoming a government, and ceasing to function if anyone else shows up to the job unhindered

Much like two radio providers can't both broadcast over the same spectrum. The one that comes later in radio broadcasting is violating the spectrum property rights of the one that comes first.

So too is the defense agency that comes later. That is why it is not an initiation of force-- it cannot be an initiation of force to defend one's property from someone initiating force against it, even if it's property over a different spectrum than land.

That said, any and all immediate defense agencies (timmediate defense as opposed to general retaliatory force) that abide by the procedural limits set by the state for minimizing harm to innocents must of course be permitted to operate. It's not so much that the police have to have a monopoly, as that the courts have to, and the police without the courts are indistinguishable from a gang.

Blagnet.net » Blog Archive » Minarchism: Ethically self-contradictory

Blagnet.net » Blog Archive » Minarchism: Ethically self-contradictory — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:06:12 GMT

Pingback from Blagnet.net » Blog Archive » Minarchism: Ethically self-contradictory

re: Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

zsignal — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:33:15 GMT

The last three paragraphs bring to my mind Robert Nozick's book Anarchy, State, and Utopia. However, Rothbard's critique of Nozick's "invisible hand" explanation for the creation of the minimal state is still damning.

re: Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

Brainpolice — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:49:27 GMT

I've posted a response to it in the comments. I believe Irish outlaw will be working on a blog response to you soon as well.

re: Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

Attackdonkey — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 07:53:29 GMT

Hey. I wanted to write a comment, but I thought it would be too long. so I posted over on my own blog. It is a direct response to this article.

re: Minarchism: Ethically Self-contradictary

IrishOutlaw — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:40:34 GMT

Great post man.