So, in a society completely without government, what stops warlords?

[TimeLady Victorious]

Let's say the government collapses tomorrow.

What stops warlords from springing up? Neofeudal societies?

I don't think I've ever seen a good answer to this.

A warning: if I suddenly get mindless rants in this topic that do nothing to help the conversation they will be removed.

[theodorelogan]

We have warlords now.  And these warlords control armies of millions of people and nuclear weapons, and kill people all over the world.

[TimeLady Victorious]

We have warlords now.  And these warlords control armies of millions of people and nuclear weapons, and kill people all over the world.

That's not what I'm talking about.

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.

[Moebius Tripp]

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.

I don't see why they couldn't.  They extract tribute from their conquered peoples, are surrounded by bodyguards, and wage wars based on lies.  Seems fairly warlordish to me.

[TimeLady Victorious]

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.

I don't see why they couldn't.  They extract tribute from their conquered peoples, are surrounded by bodyguards, and wage wars based on lies.  Seems fairly warlordish to me.

Except there is still a civil authority to be appealed to. In a warlord state, there is none.

[AL the Inconspicuous]

(1)  The only difference between a petty thug with a gun, a small-time gang of crooks, a slave-owning plantation, a Mafia crime family, a warlord, a principality, and state / national / world governments is their size.  The former, if not met with proper resistance, eventually find it in their interest to grow into the latter, "democracy theater" and all.

(2)  This has been debated endlessly on a number of forums (ex) with no conclusive theories on why an upstart warlord would be able to brainwash people more effectively than Mommy Government brainwashes them today, thus every warlord will be overwhelmed by billions of people who don't want to be its slaves.  Absence of government can only come about through wide-spread acceptance of the Non-Aggression Principle, which also means wide-spread resistance to new threats to one's life, liberty, and property.  If we can resist a trillion dollar nuclear monopoly on force whose claims of "divine right" to power trace back to antiquity, then resisting some crackpot Dr. Evil wannabe would be a piece of cake!

(3)  The government should not collapse 100% in one day (or one decade), nor should we want it to.  The crisis after the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe perfectly demonstrates that people (and thus markets) need time to adjust to greater amounts of liberty.  What we need is gradual progression toward ever-stricter Minarchism, with ever-more intergovernmental competition, until enclaves of Anarcho-Capitalism can finally be allowed to emerge and grow organically on the basis of competitive advantage.

[Rillion]

The only difference between a petty thug with a gun, a small-time gang of crooks, a slave-owning plantation, a Mafia crime family, a warlord, a principality, and state / national / world governments is their size. 

No. The fact that they all have in common something bad, something you object to, does not make them the same. 
A Mafia crime family may be the same size as a small-time gang of crooks, but you would be ill-advised in dealing with them in the same way.  Likewise a slave owner and a warlord.  Any entity which governs (regulates others by force) which is greater than one person has its own internal government, and those function in different ways.  You have codes of honor, alliances, truces, etc.  With a larger, more powerful entity, you get more stability (for better or worse) but also more bureaucracy. 

Sure, there are commonalities-- the same themes of allegiance, loyalty, reward, etc.-- but those happen according to different rules, and it's generally better to deal with a group whose rules you know and understand.  The devil you know, and all of that. 



Give it a read.  It's educational. 

[sandm000]

What stops warlords? .50 cal?
Seriously, if he has thugs who pick on you and your neighbors, you have the means to protect yourself.
Eventually (and I'm not saying you wouldn't die in the process) he won't have any bodyguards and he'll have to do the thugging himself. And then he'll bite one lead piece.
Why will this work? He can't afford to have a shoot first ask questions later policy if he wants to extract money from you next week and the week after. He'll have a vested interest in your continued survival. Whereas you can shoot any number of thugs from him, because you aren't trying to gain anything from him, you're just trying to keep what you've got.

[Bill Brasky]

What stops warlords? .50 cal?
Seriously, if he has thugs who pick on you and your neighbors, you have the means to protect yourself.
Eventually (and I'm not saying you wouldn't die in the process) he won't have any bodyguards and he'll have to do the thugging himself. And then he'll bite one lead piece.
Why will this work? He can't afford to have a shoot first ask questions later policy if he wants to extract money from you next week and the week after. He'll have a vested interest in your continued survival. Whereas you can shoot any number of thugs from him, because you aren't trying to gain anything from him, you're just trying to keep what you've got.

Thats not really true.  You're obviously gonna do what you can to survive, but warlords govern by fear of reprisal.  If you have no fear of reprisal, you're immediately worthless in the taxable sense and become valuable in the example sense.  He will use your show of power to display his own, which will demonstrate to others he is to be feared. 

Don't get me wrong, its noble to fight him off and all...  but it costs him nothing but a few soldiers and some bullets to crush what could lead to a much larger problem, which is a complete lack of respect of his power.  And it doesn't take a lot of convincing to send the enforcers in, this is what they signed up for.  They're thugs and scums, and they enjoy bringing fire to situations.  Every enforcer has a goal of one day being el supremo.   

[davann]

Let's say the government collapses tomorrow.

What stops warlords from springing up? Neofeudal societies?

I don't think I've ever seen a good answer to this.

A warning: if I suddenly get mindless rants in this topic that do nothing to help the conversation they will be removed.

You. If this is something you do not wish to happen take action at the appropriate time. Better yet, become a warlord yourself and run things the way you want instead of being at the mercy of another. One could be a benevolent feudal lord.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

You need an army to defeat an army.

[BonerJoe]

Personal nukes.

[TimeLady Victorious]

Good responses.

What stops warlords? .50 cal?
Seriously, if he has thugs who pick on you and your neighbors, you have the means to protect yourself.
Eventually (and I'm not saying you wouldn't die in the process) he won't have any bodyguards and he'll have to do the thugging himself. And then he'll bite one lead piece.
Why will this work? He can't afford to have a shoot first ask questions later policy if he wants to extract money from you next week and the week after. He'll have a vested interest in your continued survival. Whereas you can shoot any number of thugs from him, because you aren't trying to gain anything from him, you're just trying to keep what you've got.

What if he simply wants power, and, because he wants power, can afford to shoot as many people as he wants?

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.

Let's say the government collapses tomorrow.

What stops warlords from springing up? Neofeudal societies?

I don't think I've ever seen a good answer to this.

A warning: if I suddenly get mindless rants in this topic that do nothing to help the conversation they will be removed.

You. If this is something you do not wish to happen take action at the appropriate time. Better yet, become a warlord yourself and run things the way you want instead of being at the mercy of another. One could be a benevolent feudal lord.

Absoulte power corrupts absolutely. And there's always going to be someone who wants to kill you and take your power.

[davann]

I'd like to expand upon my reply.

The appropiate time is now. If you do not wnt warlords in the future take the nessasary steps now. What are those steps? Well, that would again be up to you. For me it means educating those around me. Showing them through example that the desire to control others is harmful in the long run.

The problem I see with the liberty movement is it really is not offering something the sheeple want. The sheeple want warlords. Because of this, they will get warlords and those of us that want freedom will be out of luck until we start offering the sheeple something they want.

[Riddler]

plenty of warlords in somalia after the collapse of their govt.
as i stated before, the power vacuum over their,after the govt. became ineffective, created a fucking worse mess than they were in before....so much for your anarcho society model...it don't work.
so much for your non-agression principle.
all it takes is a bigger gang that takes a shit on your NAP & wipes its ass w/ you.