What Kind of a World Do You Want?
Charting out our options:
Yes, I think this is an excellent overview of the situation.
For myself, I would immediately eliminate the two groups
“government” and “market anarchy”, except in some cases
where they might overlap with the two middle groups.
I think that “Distributed Phylarchy” would work only as
a subset of “Enarchy”. So, in that sense I would eliminate
all of the “Market Anarchy” group.
Within the “Enarchy” group there might exist some groups
that have the characteristics of the “Government” and “Market
Anarchy” groups, but these two categories should not be
imposed on the state as a whole.
My preference is definitely “Enarchy”, under the “internally
self-governing” and “city states” categories.
However, knowing the state of the rest of the world,
I do believe that some over-arching body would be
necessary to do two things: represent our Enarchy
to the rest of the world, and guarantee the rights of
the internally self-governing bodies – that is to say,
that the “state” would guarantee that no one of these
internally self-governing bodies would be allowed to
transgress on the others, or aggress upon them.
In the case of New Hampshire as a whole, the
non-aggression principle would always apply. The
protection from aggression would apply to all of those
who are unwilling victims of violence. Child abuse,
spousal abuse, elderly abuse, any type of aggressive
assault would be included. Serious neglect would be
included, if that neglect results in a continuing deterioration
of the condition of the victim that could lead to permanent
disability or death. The state should have nothing to say
about criminal matters. It could, however, step in if one
of the polities should ask for an investigation of abuse that
is taking place in another polity.
No assumption of abuse, nor assumption of “intent”,
should be grounds for intervention. This would come
into play mostly in the field of sexual relationships.
The whole concept of statutory rape is one I will never
understand. Rape, or sexual assault as it is more
often cited in the criminal codes, is definitely a violent
act. But I think our whole society has been propagandized
to believe that any small thing that someone doesn’t
like should be taken as aggression.
This should not be taken to mean that an individual polity
would be restricted in any way, only that the state would
have no power to intervene unless there was severe abuse.
“What happens when countries get smaller and break off? The empirical evidence shows that as states get smaller, as they break off from other states, those small states compete, and as they face the threat of further secession, they’re actually more open to trade, to the migration of workers, and to economic development.” —
Compare the list of the top 10 or so in the Human Freedom Index (2024) with the top
10 or so on the Freedom on the Net (2023) list.
Human Freedom Index Freedom on the Net
“There are two basic methods a state can use to resist federal tyranny: interposition or nullification and secession.”
latest pile of links