Thread: What is Your Political Philosophy?

Originally Posted by Atmoscheer

If you create more than one "law enforcement hierarchy for a given geographical region" then you're expanding the government's role in direct violation of the "anarcho-" part of anarcho-capitalist.

The justice system is, by definition, reactive. If your fuckin' yee-haw, shoot-from-the-hip "justice" system were in effect, with no independent audit function, it would create a horribly powerful incentive to run around lawlessly. We'd be plunged into the wild west, with even better weapons.

The strength of the modern justice system is exactly the reason our economy was able to diversify and expand--a society cannot be productive if it cannot delegate a specialized group to maintain the function of justice. A society cannot be productive if it cannot rely on the sanctity of its contracts, or if market participants cannot trust in the delivery of goods or payments. In fact, the one and only statistically significant indicator of advanced economic growth throughout the entire history of man has been the relative strength of a society's justice system. Essentially, the less time and resources you need to spend physically protecting yourself and your assets, the more time and resources you have available to dedicate to commerce. When a society has more time and resources available for commerce than its peers, it is obviously more capable of growth.

But yeah, keep dreaming of your fortified castle filled with guns where any asshole off the street can end it all for you with little threat of repercussion. That seems healthy.

I neither said nor implied that any or all given law enforcement groups operating in a given area would be "official" or state operated, or authorized by any powers apart from their subscribers. There's nothing statist about having a free market for defensive and even retributive force.

I imagine in a society that had several different law enforcement groups operating at the same time, in the same area, there would also be watchdogs of all sorts. Furthermore, at the end of the day, if a sufficient number of individuals are dissatisfied with anything about the law enforcement agency that they subscribe to, they could end it in a minute by ending their subscriptions and switching to other, better law enforcement groups. From where does the incentive to run around lawlessly come?

You're quite correct insofar that only a relatively small fraction of the population can devote serious time and effort to the maintenance of a justice system. I believe that in an anarcho-capitalist system--a system without a state monopoly on justice--most people would subscribe to law enforcement agencies, militias, armies, and bodyguards as necessary. Most people would not take defend themselves without a larger group to rely on, much less seek justice without a larger group to rely on.

I don't own any guns, and I don't believe that I'll ever amass anything similar to an arsenal, much less a "fortified castle" filled with arms. I don't particularly want to, either. In an anarcho-capitalist society, I would simply look around for the best law enforcement agency for me in the same manner that one looks for home owner's insurance, or life insurance, or what have you. Rather than paying taxes in order to fund a monopolistic law enforcement group, I'd prefer to have a choice in who I rely on for defense without moving to some other geographical location.

In the world as it stands, if one does not like the state law enforcement system one lives under, one can move to another state (or hire bodyguards for extra fees under special circumstances). The anarcho-capitalist view is simply that one should not have to move to another part of the globe--one should simply cease to purchase a law enforcement group's services and switch to another group. We believe, like mainstream libertarians, that no one has a right to another person's wealth in order to purchase a given good--except we, unlike mainstream libertarians, do not make an exception for justice or defense.

Here is a pretty good explanation of my viewpoints: http://jim.com/anarchy/