Again, it's a chicken and egg thing. I think you don't sustain a free society(nation?) unless the members of that society are committed to preserving the values/morals that created it.
process of coalescence, but there may come a time when the cost of attacking a truly free economic community is too great for the state. Perhaps BCH will play a role in the above. /2
The USA did pretty well by having a very limited mandate for the feds(border defense and basic NAP enforcement) and state legislatures. Had a target on it's back from the word go.
true, this is the problem minarchists have, how do you keep the state at this level when everyone sees it as an easy way to 'solve their problems?'
Exactly. The big problem with ancap is that, while theoretically decentralized, there's no meta-security mechanism. Once you get something good going you will def get attacked.
What you need is a nucleus of individuals around which such a society and culture can grow and which cannot be easily disrupted. Historically, the state always acts to disrupt this /1
History is not a good indicator of the future when exponentials are involved.
kowloon walled city had a good run. heard people were cramming in there despite the conditions.
I see a lot of ancaps using "the state" as an ill-defined slur, much like you'll get a Marxist screaming about "capitalists" but then it always ends up being the same gangster assholes
The state is pretty well defined, no? OTOH, socialists always cherry pick what they mean by "capitalist" which always means some billionaire govt. crony, not a wealthy dentist, etc.
yeah, state is monopoly of violence in a geographic region right?
