tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post5834607735655740700..comments2024-03-27T20:51:11.303-04:00Comments on Accepting Ignorance: Summary of Libertarian Versus Anarcho-Capitalist Theory and PredictionsAlrenoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11119846531341190283noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post-77477805524130650132014-02-27T11:07:31.627-05:002014-02-27T11:07:31.627-05:00Most generally speaking, no. National security is ...Most generally speaking, no. National security is one of ancap's undeveloped sides.<br /><br />There's some intriguing possibilities though. <br /><br />The Cossacks got special privileges because they were just that unruly. It was too expensive to bring them fully to heel. A traditionally ancap society would be even more unruly - they would have no cooptable authorities at all. <br /><br />Secondly, deterrence. To defend your territory, you don't have to win. You just have to make it very expensive to fight. So expensive only a madman would attack. Madmen have issues with holding onto empires anyway... <br />It's one way entropy is on the side of civilization. It's easier to destroy than create, which means any locale with wealth X can easily destroy 2X or even 10X stuff. Switzerland is hardly unconquerable, but it's such a huge pain that nobody even tried. Alrenoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11119846531341190283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post-42663849123067711132014-02-27T02:12:26.385-05:002014-02-27T02:12:26.385-05:00do ancaps have any answer to coordination problems...do ancaps have any answer to coordination problems, most importantly foreign Empires?hathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10815339259151766424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5204863782883637837.post-85142856742349799332013-06-01T21:49:09.629-04:002013-06-01T21:49:09.629-04:00" Essentially, law needs to be opt-in, with t..." Essentially, law needs to be opt-in, with the option of attempting to provide your own security. This allows individual variation on laws, which allows noise, which means experimentation and natural selection."<br /><br />Interesting; have you read chapter 23/24 of The Open Society and Its Enemies? It has a similar approach, but within a Social Democratic conext, where law is not opt-in, but laws are easier to get rid of, if they do not fulfill the outcomes the policy predicted it would. <br /><br />"if you understand standard economics, you are a libertarian"<br /><br />What do you mean by "standard" economics. Furthermore Ancaps are not libertarians (and incidentally i am neither and ancap nor a libertarian) does this mean they do not understand "standard" economics?Drewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11010170449210014578noreply@blogger.com