Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?  (Read 23317 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2009, 05:26:19 PM »

If you have a question about how the "free market" (as in unregluated, unlimited) can handle something, the first thing to do is to do a search on http://mises.org/

But Wouldn't Warlords Take Over? - Robert P. Murphy
http://mises.org/daily/1855

"When dealing with the warlord objection, we need to keep our comparisons fair. It won’t do to compare society A, which is filled with evil, ignorant savages who live under anarchy, with society B, which is populated by enlightened, law-abiding citizens who live under limited government.  The anarchist doesn't deny that life might be better in society B.  What the anarchist does claim is that, for any given population, the imposition of a coercive government will make things worse.  The absence of a State is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to achieve the free society."
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2009, 05:42:28 PM »

If you have a question about how the "free market" (as in unregluated, unlimited) can handle something, the first thing to do is to do a search on http://mises.org/

But Wouldn't Warlords Take Over? - Robert P. Murphy
http://mises.org/daily/1855

"When dealing with the warlord objection, we need to keep our comparisons fair. It won’t do to compare society A, which is filled with evil, ignorant savages who live under anarchy, with society B, which is populated by enlightened, law-abiding citizens who live under limited government.  The anarchist doesn't deny that life might be better in society B.  What the anarchist does claim is that, for any given population, the imposition of a coercive government will make things worse.  The absence of a State is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to achieve the free society."

Sounds about as utopian as Marxism.

By that I mean: it's romantic bullshit that completely ignores real life.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

blackie

  • Guest
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2009, 05:50:06 PM »

First you have to kill all of the evil, ignorant savages. Then you eat cake.
Logged

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #18 on: December 15, 2009, 05:54:42 PM »

First you have to kill all of the evil, ignorant savages. Then you eat cake.

The cake is a lie.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #19 on: December 15, 2009, 05:56:39 PM »

Sounds about as utopian as Marxism.

By that I mean: it's romantic bullshit that completely ignores real life.

Then either you didn't read it, or logic makes no impression.

Marxism depended upon people _changing_. Simple liberty takes into account how people _are_.
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2009, 05:59:58 PM »

Sounds about as utopian as Marxism.

By that I mean: it's romantic bullshit that completely ignores real life.

Then either you didn't read it, or logic makes no impression.

Marxism depended upon people _changing_. Simple liberty takes into account how people _are_.

No, it really doesn't.

It seems to imply that there are people who won't band up and turn against other people. Which - as Humungus has already pointed out - is sort of what happened in a place like Somalia when the government collapsed there and, as I have pointed out, isn't what happened when the Western Roman Empire or the Chinese Empire collapsed.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2009, 06:07:47 PM »

It seems to imply that there are people who won't band up and turn against other people. Which - as Humungus has already pointed out - is sort of what happened in a place like Somalia when the government collapsed there and, as I have pointed out, isn't what happened when the Western Roman Empire or the Chinese Empire collapsed.

I meant the entire article, not just paragraph two.

Somalia would be far more peaceful, systemically speaking, if the UN and US would stop trying to force a central government upon them from the outside. That seems to be what most of the "fighting" has been about since the collapse.
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2009, 06:11:09 PM »

It seems to imply that there are people who won't band up and turn against other people. Which - as Humungus has already pointed out - is sort of what happened in a place like Somalia when the government collapsed there and, as I have pointed out, isn't what happened when the Western Roman Empire or the Chinese Empire collapsed.

I meant the entire article, not just paragraph two.

Yes, I read the entire article.

Humans are spiteful, vainglorious, and greedy. To presume that a "stateless" society would work in a free-market paradise is to presume that the "stateless" society would work under the worker's paradise.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

BonerJoe

  • Guest
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2009, 06:35:33 PM »

Nobody wants to touch my personal nukes idea with a 10 ft. pole?
Logged

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2009, 06:37:53 PM »

Nobody wants to touch my personal nukes idea with a 10 ft. pole?


Good luck finding them and storing them.

And defending yourself against people who try to take them from you because they consider you a threat to the community.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)

  • A Cut Above The Rest
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8299
  • If government is the answer, the question is stupi
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2009, 07:15:42 PM »

You could be like Robin Williams in The Secret Agent and carry it around on you at all times wired to a dead man switch through your coat sleeve.

Still seems like a bad idea.
Logged
"Do not throw rocks at people with guns." —Hastings' Third Law
"Income tax returns are the most imaginative fiction being written today." —Herman Wouk 

"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2009, 07:22:35 PM »

You could be like Robin Williams in The Secret Agent and carry it around on you at all times wired to a dead man switch through your coat sleeve.

Still seems like a bad idea.

Or like Raven in Snow Crash and having a literal dead man's switch to it.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2009, 08:25:47 PM »

Humans are spiteful, vainglorious, and greedy. To presume that a "stateless" society would work in a free-market paradise is to presume that the "stateless" society would work under the worker's paradise.

Which is why I quoted paragraph 2, where he specifically defines that it is in a per society basis, not a utopian one.

Specifically, "The anarchist doesn't deny that life might be better in society B.  What the anarchist does claim is that, for any given population, the imposition of a coercive government will make things worse.  The absence of a State is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to achieve the free society."
 
What you're doing is completely ignoring that conditions "here" with a powerful state might very well be better by any objective measure than "there" without a state. That's the only reason you can use the term "free-market paradise".

No one who isn't trying to pull a fast one confuses "free-market" and "paradise".
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2009, 08:46:35 PM »

I'm talking about actual warlords, like say those from the Middle Ages or (literally) from the Warlord Era of China in the early 20th century.

We don't have warlords, in that sense, now. And those in control of the governments of the First World couldn't be called warlords anyway.

What is the difference, or to put it another way, why couldn't First World governments be called warlords according to your definition?

Already said above. First World governments generally have a civil authority that can be appealed to.


For claims against the warlord?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity
Quote
Generally speaking it is the doctrine that the sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution; hence the saying, the king (or queen) can do no wrong.

There's no god damn King in America.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2009, 08:53:01 PM »

I'm talking about actual warlords, like say those from the Middle Ages or (literally) from the Warlord Era of China in the early 20th century.

We don't have warlords, in that sense, now. And those in control of the governments of the First World couldn't be called warlords anyway.

What is the difference, or to put it another way, why couldn't First World governments be called warlords according to your definition?

Already said above. First World governments generally have a civil authority that can be appealed to.


For claims against the warlord?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity
Quote
Generally speaking it is the doctrine that the sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution; hence the saying, the king (or queen) can do no wrong.

There's no god damn King in America.

But there is the doctrine of sovereign immunity.  

In the USA sovereign immunity only applies to the individual states, and not to the federal government, and not to individual people.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?

// ]]>

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 31 queries.