Well, if a government takes it's role seriously...
No, it is inherent in the very nature of politics. Politics is about power, first and foremost, of necessity. All other ends and goals must be subordinate to the acquisition of power first.
...everyone carries a gun , or even a baseball bat, and metes out justice for themselves...
Well, whereas self-defense is more respected and not infringed in a free society, it is not necessarilly true that everyone would necessarilly decide to DIY on their defense and security needs. We don't have a division of labor in the market for nothing. Not everyone is good at every job; that's why we trade. A market in security and protection from crime would develop in the absence of a State monopoly. It would likely evolve out of the insurance industry, but it wouldn't have to do so in that fashion. It's impossible to predict what human inventiveness would produce, but we do know that where there is competition there is improvement, increased efficiency, and innovation. Even with things the way they are now, there are plenty of private security options. In a freer society, with no War On Drugs (on people) and other victimless crimes, the policing becomes more about protecting people from violations they actually want to be protected from, not from themselves.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: Essentials matter
Date: 17/6/11 20:19 (UTC)No, it is inherent in the very nature of politics. Politics is about power, first and foremost, of necessity. All other ends and goals must be subordinate to the acquisition of power first.
Well, whereas self-defense is more respected and not infringed in a free society, it is not necessarilly true that everyone would necessarilly decide to DIY on their defense and security needs. We don't have a division of labor in the market for nothing. Not everyone is good at every job; that's why we trade. A market in security and protection from crime would develop in the absence of a State monopoly. It would likely evolve out of the insurance industry, but it wouldn't have to do so in that fashion. It's impossible to predict what human inventiveness would produce, but we do know that where there is competition there is improvement, increased efficiency, and innovation. Even with things the way they are now, there are plenty of private security options. In a freer society, with no War On Drugs (on people) and other victimless crimes, the policing becomes more about protecting people from violations they actually want to be protected from, not from themselves.