Jacob:
please tell me you aren’t saying that anarcho/libertarian democracy can justify detention of an individual for trespassing. Deportation from the property, yes, but imprisonment, no.
I agree.
Jacob:
Also, this is where Noam Chomsky starts to make sense. A private agreement, whether democratic or not, is in essence a private tyranny. If you form a corporation and buy all of the land around my property on a lake and begin to pollute it and when i sue you for destroying my property (my part of the lake), but the ‘private justice system’ agrees with you and polluting (maybe because the corporation benefits more people than my private property), then what recourse do i have? how can justice be served? Or will democracy have spoken?
First off, have you watched this?
VIDEO
And Clayton sums up law and recourse really nicely here and here .
Ancaps have no problem with coercion, as long as it isn’t aggression. Coercion is a perfectly just response to aggression.
Jacob:
Especially if it can detain people. State sanctioned police act after crime is committed and because of the law cannot act before, private police would only really have the ability to prevent because the law is in no way, and cannot ever be, agreed upon by everyone. That, I thought, was why Rothbard said that it would be more likely for police services to arise from preventative insurance. Like the neighborhood watch. And what do they do when crimes are happening and they do see? Call the state sanctioned police.
Read Rothbards For A New Liberty chapter on police starting on p. 219. Private police can act when they see a crime.
There is no such thing as the rule of law.
AnCaps have no problem with governments, only with the State. Wikipedia: Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.
