So if this has instead moved on to "explain anarchism 101 to me lel" I'm out, you can go do your own reading.
I don't doubt the sincerity of your statement, but could you rephrase it without moral emotions? Do you think that there is a stable social equilibrium without a state monopoly on violence, and it works better? If so, is there any empirical evidence or game theoretic proof?
-
-
Thank you for this request. I did get my start in this area from ethical incentives and Gillis is explicit about ethics being central. I have, however, shifted to far greater concern with systematics, incentive structures, economics, etc.
-
The predominance of the state is a fact, but a contingent one. You seem aware that its potency is closely tied with firearms. This tie suggests a couple things.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.