| > People take care of the things they own. Agreed. As for most of the rest, I don't want to fish for meaning in a pond of analogies. I found something that's actually addressable though: > It seems perfectly obvious that states of some kind are a naturally occuring phenomenon. Yes, in the sense that psychopaths have existed for ages, have always wanted power over other people, and have always been exceptionally good at manipulating people to get it. > It also seems obvious that they are easier to get wrong than right. Oh they're functioning perfectly well. In other words, they've been "gotten right". It's just that their purpose is not what we imagine. It's not to "maintain order" or to "protect our rights" or other brainwashospeak people spout. Nation-states are a vehicle for a small elite to exploit everyone else. > If only the criminals are allowed to set up states, all the states will be run by criminals. If most people are evil, then they clearly can't be allowed to rule over others. If only a small percentage of people are evil, then states are a bad idea because they'll be run by the power-hungry evil minority. Strangely enough, our governments are run by psychopaths. > And as for the car: you and I may be happy, but Joe down the street has to breathe the same air. Was our exchange beneficial for him? I haven't claimed anything about Joe. Do you want to make a claim about voluntary exchanges, based on what happens to Joe? On a related note, if you've ever bought a pair of sneakers, you've motivated China (etc) to cause externalities. Was it immoral for you to buy sneakers? |