When someone is about to start doing some mental contortionism in order to try to justify statism, they'll often make the statement, "it's a very complex issue". No, it really isn't. They're lying to try to appear deep and smart and to justify the unjustifiable.
"Gun control" isn't a complex issue. You have no right to forbid weapons of defense to anyone, and you can't delegate a right you don't have.
"Drug legalization" isn't a complex issue. You have no right to forbid the manufacture, possession, or sale, nor the ingestion, inhalation, or injection of substances. You can't magically acquire that right just because you think it's necessary. You have no right to have people do things you have no right to do without asking them to become bad guys. Prohibition is enforced by bad guys, only.
"Immigration" [sic] isn't a complex issue. You have the right to allow (or bar) anyone on (or from) your property. For any reason or no reason at all. You have the right to hire or trade with anyone. Your rights end at your property lines-- the only legitimate borders.
"Taxation" isn't a complex issue. It is theft-- specifically extortion. Nothing can make it something else.
Complex issues" look complex only when someone adds all sorts of twists and turns, bells and whistles, bows and ribbons, and flags and laws. At the base, there's probably a simple ethically right thing to do and hundreds of wrong things to do. They have to tell lies to justify the wrong things-- the statist things.
When someone lies and calls a simple issue a complex issue you can be certain they are looking for ways to justify doing wrong. I've run out of patience with the lies told to harm others.
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com.
Donations and subscriptions are always appreciated!
Reality is simple too. The strong subjugate the weak. So is genetics. Slaves have been hybridized to select suitable traits.
You are free to begin your anarchy utopia immediately. Nothing to stop you. Of course you will be immediately subjugated by a long list of embedding groups that employ more sophisticated methods to out-compete anarchy. Perhaps if you stop trying to think of governance and social structures as a cartoon, you can move beyond simple ideas.
You seem to be confusing social structures with anti-social structures (government). Government is the opposite of society, in every instance. Good trick they played getting people to confuse the two, though.
Anarchy won't lead to Utopia. Nothing will. In fact, your whole argument is the long-discredited "But wouldn't warlords take over?" objection.
Cling to theft and aggression if that's what you prefer. I won't stop you. All I insist is that you stay out of my way.
No.
Since you linked to Mises, I'll explain a property of markets that you won't find from him. It comes from network and game theory. 'Free markets' are not the stable state of markets. They are a transitory state of immature, developing market. Given enough time all markets converge to direct or collusive monopolies.
Since talking to you is mostly just an exercise where you randomly list bumper-sticker ideas with little understanding and then you misconstrue positions into some low-effort cliche so you can emit canned responses, there is no further value communicating with you.
A monopoly is impossible to maintain without the State. I would explain the reasons, but since you'd prefer to run away...