Comments on: How Government Destroys Community

By: no third solution » Blog Archive » Contre le Mythe de Hobbes

no third solution » Blog Archive » Contre le Mythe de Hobbes — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:01:15 +0000

[...] cet argument: Les gens sont assez violents, sont incapables à établir la paix, la securité, la communité sans gouvernement, et pour cet raison-ci, ils coopérent parfaitement à établir l’état. Sans l’état, [...]

By: David Z

David Z — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 20:59:23 +0000

@ Brad – I finished Ron Paul’s book earlier this week, it was a good read.

By: Roland

Roland — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:11:25 +0000

This is one thing the conservatives (and Thoreau) got right: that government is best which governs least. Problem is, conservatives preach it but don’t practice it.

By: Brad

Brad — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 16:12:57 +0000

Dave

I read something similar about your post in the Ron Paul book. I am half way done with your “Economics of Liberty” book. The book is getting me angrier at the way things in D.C are ran. Some (All) of the info in there are things the average American just does not think about. It was amazing to see that the book was published in 1990 and everything those guys have written is coming or is true.
I am trying to get a hold of Chuck Norris to see if he can deliver one big “round house kick” to everybody in D.C.

By: David Z

David Z — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:44:18 +0000

@ John – great point!

By: John

John — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 05:55:57 +0000

“Unless one lives in a very close-knit, face-to-face community where everyone knows each other and is invested in the group as a whole (which almost none of us does), it seems unrealistic to think that life without a political state would be anything but a horribly chatotic and perilous environment….”

Ha! “We live in a thoroughly Statist world, which permeates every aspect of our lives, and we aren’t that close-knit or invested in each other’s well-being, so therefore without a State we would run the risk of not being close-knit or concerned about each other’s well-being!” Surely he realized how ridiculous that sounds…

By: Francois Tremblay

Francois Tremblay — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 20:14:25 +0000

So he’s just willfully ignorant, instead of willfully evil. Well, good for him.

By: Michael Wiebe

Michael Wiebe — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:07:00 +0000

Wellman’s theory of samaritanism is pretty interesting. Basically, he has two premises, one normative and one descriptive:

1- We have samaritan duties to rescue others from peril (when it is not unreasonably costly).
2- Governments provide vital benefits which could not be secured otherwise.

I think he has a good case for (1), but (2) can be easily demolished. All he offers as support is nothing more than the old “private agencies would battle” nonsense.

Surprisingly, he admits that “if someone could generate conclusive evidence that a just and secure peace could be established in the state of nature, I would embrace anarchism rather than statism.” (A Theory of Secession, p.32)

He’s also knowledgeable of libertarian anarchists, mentioning Benson, David Friedman, and Barnett (p.30 n35).