i think regardless of the system, big or small, we have to look at what human nature is really capable of in terms of self governance. Some ideas are great, but we may not be the right species for them. Some people are very opportunistic and some are very humanist and altruistic, some have a lot of resources and some don't. If we could all achieve a level of care for others while benefiting ourselves in all situations, then it wouldn't matter what government we have - big or small.... but as it stands today, most people need some form of governance because we are prone to conflict... which would be fine if we didn't live in the age of weapons of mass destruction and the ability to annihilate each other in a blink of an eye...
I'm not saying that the current government is good, far from it, in fact i'd be interested to have an experiment in our society to see if small remote communities can do a better job and get along.... But my understanding of how complexity works, especially if you also factor in technological advancement and uneven distribution of resources, simply doesn't logically allow to for anything other than a complex governing system... anything less, will be too chaotic for our well-being. But i will stand corrected if the opposite can be demonstrated.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Well, here's some reading, if you haven't already:
An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not So Wild, Wild West, by Terry L. Anderson and P. J. Hill
The Not So Wild, Wild West: Property Rights on the Frontier by Terry L. Anderson and Peter J. Hill Reviewed by Edward Stringham
The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality, by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Although it is not with modern advancements.
thank you, i will give it a read. which do you recommend most?
An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not So Wild, Wild West, by Terry L. Anderson and P. J. Hill