prolic on Nostr: The necessity of nation-states is, in my view, a false premise. The threats you ...
The necessity of nation-states is, in my view, a false premise. The threats you describe—whether from predatory practices like slave labor or aggressive foreign powers—are often consequences of state policies. Nation-states escalate conflicts, enforce harmful economic interventions, and create conditions where exploitation thrives. A world of decentralized, voluntary communities would be far less susceptible to such threats, as individuals would engage in peaceful trade and mutual cooperation rather than being conscripted into the state’s conflicts.
quoting nevent1q…7997I believe in the Atlas Shrugged dichotomy between producers (who trade fair value with no threat of force) versus looters (who extract value from others through force, sometimes cloaking it as "for the greater good").
I find it almost paradoxical that the only way for the producers to be able to have the utopia of freedom is by having the threat of force available. (In Atlas Shrugged, demonstrated by the fact that Danconia and others multiple times take up arms and kill multiple violent people.)
Incarceration is another example of this: the threat of force to deprive someone of life, liberty, or property is evil. And we punish it by using force to deprive someone of liberty, property, and sometimes their life.
IMO there's a larger message here about the necessity of nation-states in the current day and age. Even if you live in a nation that believes in freedom and liberty, without the willingness to defend that freedom through force, you'll be at the mercy of other, more nefarious entities. To a lesser extent, predatory national practices (like slave labor) require a defense of some kind, such as sanctions or tariffs.
This is another not-fully-fleshed-out thought, still piecing it together.