Phred wrote:Tell that to post-1945 European countries whose inhabitants no longer have to worry about being forced to speak German. Or to the inhabitants of South Korea who thank the memory of the Allies every day they don't have to endure the conditions their neighbors to the north do.
I don't talk to countries - I talk to people. Unfortunately, there are about 70,000,000 fewer of them following the attempts of their own governments to protect them during WWII.
Plus, you are obviously unable to argue the counter-factual. That governments sometimes and at some cost manage to make their citizens feel safer is without dispute. That they are doing a good job in any absolute or relative sense is a completely different proposition.
Phred wrote:You missed my key qualifier - "credible".
Credibility is subjective. I found them credible. In any event, very few people seriously suggest a sudden transition to ancap society. We have a long road ahead, with national defence likely to be one of the last functions making the transition.
While as a matter of principle, and even as a matter of practice (from my subjective judgement), there is no doubt that a free society will always do better than one run by a government, the speed and modality of transition will clearly depend on specific circumstances, including the perceived nature of external threat. Other things being equal, Belgium will probably make the move before Israel.
I merely point out that the proposal of Anarchists to deal with foreign aggression without any kind of modern weaponry to speak of will come nowhere within hailing distance of "total security".
Who said anything about not having "any kind of modern weaponry"? The vast majority of the countries in the world have little or no access to weapons that couldn't easily be purchased and/or developed by large corporations.
I have started a separate
thread where we can continue the conversation.
Happyhippo wrote:Except that businesses where the workers own the business themselves work out pretty well.
They are quite rare as soon as you go beyond the family size. They could work, but there is probably a reason why the vast majority of medium to large scale businesses are not organized that way.
tCan wrote:People would just vote without considering alternative ramifications of the outcome. Like wanting public health care without paying taxes for it. It wouldn't work.
How is that different in a representative democracy? Aren't we seeing the result of exactly that kind of behaviour all over the world?
Free men are not equal and equal men are not free.
Government is not the solution. Government is the problem.