[foilist13]

I have read several books about the possibility of anarchist societies, but I have never heard an answer to this question.

How can a society with no government defend itself as a whole from a trained army?

[Dr House]

I'm guessing a people's militia or a federated volunteer army.

[FallenRaptor]

I'm guessing a people's militia or a federated volunteer army.

I think this may or may not be a contradiction to Anarchism: could a federation of anarchist communities with a central military force be considered a state?

[Dr House]

I have no idea. If it isn't, I don't see how an anarchist society can survive long.

Personally I think the only way an anarchist society can endure is by having a libertarian-style central state government for protection.

[foilist13]

That was pretty much what i thought, but neither of those things seem that practical.

Most of the people in todays volunteer army are there for one of two reasons. A feeling of duty to one's country, and the other is to escape bad conditions in one's family or financial situations. The other part of that is that the people in volunteer armies get paid.

in an anarchist society the people would have to find it in their interests to have a standing army even when there isn't likely to be an invasion. Since national defense is non-excludable, people could choose simply not to pay and hope that everyone else will pay for the army.

The peoples militia is unrealistic match for a trained army. Even if they had some training they still would not devote their lives to the level of military excellence that produces an effective fighting force.

In vietnam 175 marines held a small airfield against 1500 trained North Vietnamese. They had fewer rounds of ammunition than there were enemies, yet with the help of minimal air support and artillery they killed every single one of them.

That is a perfect example of a trained fighting force with massively superior numbers being defeated by a professional army.

[Gletkin]

Well the CNT-FAI had its own "army" in the Spanish Civil War and the Ukrainian anarchist Nestor Mahkno had his "Revolutionary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine" in the Russian Civil War (although in actual practice the RIAU fundamentally was no different then any other army. Mahkno appointed commanders and imposed discipline).

[yourstruly]

yes, i agree. I think that the problem of national defense and the problem of pandemic diseases are the two issues for which there is no market solution. Perhaps there are other public good scenarios that i haven't considered, but these are the two that come to mind that i haven't been able to answer.

[Dr House]

Well he's asking about anarchism, not anarcho-capitalism.

[yourstruly]

the only difference between the two is that anarcho-capitalism is mature anarchism, after people have eliminated the chaos that is not in their interest. Anarcho-capitalism refers to the likely set of agreements and institutions that would arise from the absence of government. Anarchism, for one reason or another, is associated with chaos and violence, and therefore refers to the time immediately after the disbandment of government. Fundamentally, there is no difference.

[foilist13]

The mistake was on my part. I meant Anarcho-Capitalism, but any anarchist society might have an answer for it. I suppose that part of being in a communist society, there might be a requirement for people of a certain age to serve a term in the army. They would be expected to do this the same as they are expected to work every day.

Lets not get into all the subtleties of wether or not Communism actually works though, shall we?

You might have a standing contract/union among the private defense agencies that would call for them to combine their soldiers for joint defense of their customers. However you would have to find a way to make it excludable so that those who do not pay are not defended.

[Coolmustang]

National Defense? It is really a complicated matter for a citizen.Coz it is related to too much fields.For me, it is really hard to understand

[mod: no advertising, please]

[canadiancapitalist]

A few nukes in the hands of some sort of dispute resolution organization should do to deal with most serious threats. Certainly there is no guarantee against invasion - nor is there with a state, my friend - but at least your government won't be actively seeking war with people (because you won't have a government). Since anarcho-capitalism is exponentially more productive than any other economic system the resources at your disposal will be far greater. There is no gun control so people could stockpile arsenals and companies could no doubt retool to fight defensive wars. The companies that provide security would already be doing this basically, just on a much lesser scale.

[Figlio di Moros]

"Uncertain as we must ever be of the particular point in our circumference where an enemy may choose to invade us, the only force which can be ready at every point and competent to oppose them, is the body of neighboring citizens as formed into a militia. On these, collected from the parts most convenient, in numbers proportioned to the invading foe, it is best to rely, not only to meet the first attack, but if it threatens to be permanent, to maintain the defense until regulars may be engaged to relieve them." - Thomas Jefferson.

It seems to me that a small military funded by a lottery, a PDA, or whatever other such organization such may be devised for defense would be suffecient with the provision of a dedicated militia. No people under attack have ever suffered for willingness to fight.

[canadiancapitalist]

Hannes Herman Hoppe, a modern day anarchist philosopher / economist, has written a book on this subject called "The Myth Of National Defense". But you're probably more interesting in the crazy pipe dream that is left anarchism.

[Wolfman]

In vietnam 175 marines held a small airfield against 1500 trained North Vietnamese. They had fewer rounds of ammunition than there were enemies, yet with the help of minimal air support and artillery they killed every single one of them.

That is a perfect example of a trained fighting force with massively superior numbers being defeated by a professional army.

No, thats a perfect example of the fact that Marines can do the impossible.

On a side note, if a 'country' were to become Anarchist, and the rest of the wrold was not, it would alsmot definitly be invaded, and some form of standing defense force would be needed. However, that military would have to be paid in some way. If nothing else, they would need a supply of ammunition. In order for them to get that ammunition there would have to be some way for the military to get money. So, it would have to either steal money, or collect taxes. Which becomes a small problem.
Now, even if the whole world were to become Anarchist, There is still the unavoidable fact that eventually someone is going to start a gang to go around killing/stealing from people (very Road Warrior like). Or, one town will just organise to take over it's neighbor. Again, a standing defense force would be needed.