Would simply want to know different opinions on how defence from other nations, and defence from domestic threats would be resolved in an anarchial society. ty
The myth of national defense
a collection of essays edited by Hans Hermann Hoppe
ty stranger
I am currently about half way though it, and have taken about 2 pages of notes. I plan on writing a rebuttal in perhaps a week.
But I have a question:
- Do Austrians/libertarians subscribe to natural selection and/or evolution? If so, do they think natural selection can work in non-living fields? Like medicine, monatary policy, government services etc. ( There was an AP article this week about how the medical field is using natural selection to develop new cures. [try out tons of random and crazy methods, then apply natural selection based on results])
Thank you in advance.
Ixtellor
Some do. Austrianism and libertarianism are not defined by common religious, scientific or cultural beliefs. It’s defined by a moral principle and an understanding of why man acts. Other than that, all sorts of non-aggressive beliefs are compatible.
And of course, then you have the non-Austrian libertarians.
The market process is essentially evolutionary.
Government, by contrast, is devolutionary because in the absence of reckoning from profit and loss, economic calculation is impossible. The result is a dystopic, unsustainable society.
I like to think of the state as being static. It pushes against evolution, and tries to impose the same formula regardless of the variables.
If only the state were static! Many of our problems would not exist now if this were the case. Just imagine if our government was the same size as in the days of Jefferson, instead of what really happened; namely, the ever growing size, scope and ruthlessness of it. The state should really be thought of as an ever growing virus … one that has little consideration for its prey, even to the point in which it risks its own safety.
The work of Thomas Malthus predates Darwin’s Natural Selection by a few years if I remember right. And that it was Malthusian Social Selection that Darwin would come to use as his basis for Natural Selection. So, in terms of non-living fields, it’s already been in use and many sociologists and a few economists that I’ve read do subscribe to Malthus’ concerns.
Pardon me, but what exactly is a “domestic threat”? Maybe those ugly yellow Japs who are trying to sell us out to the enemy? Or the homos who are after your children? Or those draft-dodging, traitorous peacniks that need to be made an example of?
Bottom line: I get really agitated when I hear the words “defense” and “domestic” in the same sentence.
You shouldn’t get really agitated about that, because the root of all foreign threats is the domestic, tyrannical government’s policies favoring conquest.
Also, to answer the topic, I may not be the first one to say this, but in an anarchy, in the rare chance a really crazy unprovoked person or foreign army invaded the land and inalienable, natural rights of a prosperous, at-liberty anarchy society, all the members of the anarchy state would just naturally come together to defend their inalienable right to keep their land an anarchy.
In an anarchy, people could form many private groups in case of a crazy unprovoked threat, to pay for weapons, and even individuals could pay for the weapons. An anarchy society is superior to the the Authoritarians in the govt that have collected from and deprived citizens of their individual liberties.
To summarize, an anarchy defends itself by the nature of it being an anarchy, just like a free market regulates itself by nature.
Austrianism proposes that market selection is the most efficient means of distributing resources.
So, the cures you’re talking about may or may not have as strong an effect, and may or may not have strong side effects. Given a general knowledge of the product they are purchasing, consumers will decide which cure they are willing to buy through what risk they are willing to take in terms of effectiveness/side effects and what they are willing to forgoe to get the cure (the price they pay). Whether or not a cure is desired cannot be known until it is put on the market.
Also, keep in mind, Austrianism and Libertarianism are different things. They make sense together, but neither one needs the other.
As far as I am aware, evolution is a theory of speciation. It does not imply success, or otherwise. It implies speciation, or the differentiation of life.
There is a concept in artificial intelligence called genetic algorithms, which attempt a form of simulated annealing to find local minima (or optima …). Without reading that article, I have to assume this is what they really meant. I’m not sure that the medical industry is looking for the speciation of cures. They are looking for a good cure. These are different concepts. They are using statistically sound applications of simulated annealing to discover solutions.
I’m not sure asking if an Austrian “subscribes” to natural selection or evolution makes sense. It would be like asking if I subscribe to gravity.
Either way, this has little to do with evolution as a theory of speciation.
I am interested in your rebuttal to Myth. I only found one particularly troubling dilemma as a result of reading it; I just posted this in a separate thread.
Didnt Jefferson say that we should “audit” and rework the government for every generation?
No, that was Maddison. He wanted a policy where a Constitutional Congress was held every 30 years to reassess and rework the constitution.
Thanks for posting this. As a newcomer to Austrian and Libertarian thought, I’m skeptical that national defense can be provided for without a strong state. I look forward to the read!
What I’m trying to say is how will we not have someone want power. But thats not the point. Would private security create or sustain a market for WMD’s and such?
Weapons are made to defeat other weapons. What exactly would WMDs be used to defeat? Perhaps large troop concentrations could be destroyed using low-yield nuclear weapons, but chemical and biological weapons have no real purpose.
Russian WMD’s not to single out one country.