tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post3409303635977550286..comments2024-03-27T20:51:11.303-04:00Comments on Accepting Ignorance: What Isn't a State?Alrenoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11119846531341190283noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post-47906140765927893642011-04-10T05:13:26.976-04:002011-04-10T05:13:26.976-04:00My reply exceeded Blogger's comment limits.<a href="http://alrenous.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-avoid-state.html" rel="nofollow">My reply</a> exceeded Blogger's comment limits.Alrenoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11119846531341190283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post-45012088087046417982011-04-09T14:25:35.868-04:002011-04-09T14:25:35.868-04:00Anarchists confuse these things because they'r...<i>Anarchists confuse these things because they're the same.</i><br /><br />They are not quite the same. All security agencies with a monopoly of force by definition have no higher power who is accountable. But it is possible to have multiple security forces in a territory who neither hold a monopoly nor have a higher power holding them accountable.<br /><br /><i>In this case, 'multiple, competing' does indeed lead to horrific violence - in one sense. In another sense, it may not. The difference is legitimacy. 'Multiple, competing' normally means civil war. At least two self-righteous armies each attempting to force the others to admit its self-righteousness by use of arms. A non-corrupt private security firm knows that its rights stem from the fact it receives voluntary subscriptions from its customers. Let's try the latter sense out somewhere, shall we, then judge it?</i><br /><br />If you assume that the security firm is non-corrupt, has a lawful ideology, and keeps its promises, then any sort of system becomes workable. That said, the multiple security firms would need some sort of organization for dispute resolution and to handle issues of common concern (if I want to build a nuclear power plant on my parcel of land who can allow or forbid me from doing so?). That organization will be - by definition - the state.<br /><br />It's hard for me to comment much further because I don't really understand what you are proposing. I would be interested in hearing what phase 1 trial would look like in one, real life city that has a problem with bad government (let's say Philadelphia or Baltimore).Devin Finbarrhttp://intellectual-detox.comnoreply@blogger.com