Listen my other reply was rather flip. But I didn’t expect to be plunged into a debate about the necessity of violence and the existence of states. I thought we were talking about budget allocations. You will get no argument from me about the violent nature of states. The violence that (may) find a tax cheat being the most blunt edge of an otherwise sharp sword.
No, the question is simply why isn’t spending less on one of the great engines of state violence ever a part of these discussions?
futurebird