To form a collective and seize an illegitimate authority of "arbitrary compulsion under threat of violence" that no member individually posses?
I don't have the authority to violate the natural rights of another person.
An arbitrary group of people exerting supposed authority (that none of them have individually), and calling it "Government", is a brazen, illegitimate, out and open criminal enterprise.
because people often disagree on facts. because people violate others' rights, even when they try not to. because some issues have to be decided together, and then some people refuse to accept the outcomes.
and most of us think that the solution to these failures of your theory translating well to reality, shouldn't be the bigger or wealthier or more dangerous clan getting what they want.
@eriner@wjmaggos If people disagree on facts, including what rights people have, or whether rights even exist, how will they “decide issues together”?
Also, bigger, wealthier, and more dangerous clans getting what they want is the direct, demonstrable, and consistent result of the state throughout human history. In fact, it’s essentially the definition of what the state is.
you're right about clans becoming governments. monarchies, not liberal democracies. liberal democratic governments are imperfect, but better than what you seem to be conceding your idealistic society would devolve into (since you avoided my argument).
in liberal democracies, we give power to governments and institutions to resolve the conflicts. we teach civics. we participate. but ultimately we do accept their force upon us, even when we disagree with its decisions.
Add comment