Re:Capitalist Science
by mcv on Saturday December 14, 2013 @08:12PM
(#6907851)
Hey, I'm all for street-level government, but that's still a government. And one that is not powerful enough to stand up to the more powerful gangs or corporations. You will still need a larger structure of organization to defend against the larger threats.
> The government-run police primarily serve the interests of the rich and powerful and their own interests - they don't do much to protect the poor.
That's certainly the case in corrupt countries, but much less so in the less corrupt ones.
> I'm talking about actual rule of law, which does protect the rich and poor alike.
What law? Whose law? Who enforces that law if you don't have a government? Without enforcement, the law is meaningless. With enforcement, you've got a government. There's really nothing in between there.
What you're talking about are different forms of government. Better ones, perhaps. There are definitely a lot of improvements possible (and needed) in our current forms of government, and especially so in the US. But one way or the other, you'll still end up with some form of government.
> Consider that by social convention when you aggress against me I have a claim against you for damages. Suppose I can sell that claim. If I can afford to prosecute you directly I do so; if not, I sell my claim against you to someone who is more powerful. But selling a claim is an ordinary business transaction - it doesn't give the buyer any special power over the seller.
Sounds interesting, but to prosecute, you still need courts, you still need enforcement, and that means you still need government. (By the way, this already exists. Some legal claims have gone to the stock market even.)
> The government-run police primarily serve the interests of the rich and powerful and their own interests - they don't do much to protect the poor.
That's certainly the case in corrupt countries, but much less so in the less corrupt ones.
> I'm talking about actual rule of law, which does protect the rich and poor alike.
What law? Whose law? Who enforces that law if you don't have a government? Without enforcement, the law is meaningless. With enforcement, you've got a government. There's really nothing in between there.
What you're talking about are different forms of government. Better ones, perhaps. There are definitely a lot of improvements possible (and needed) in our current forms of government, and especially so in the US. But one way or the other, you'll still end up with some form of government.
> Consider that by social convention when you aggress against me I have a claim against you for damages. Suppose I can sell that claim. If I can afford to prosecute you directly I do so; if not, I sell my claim against you to someone who is more powerful. But selling a claim is an ordinary business transaction - it doesn't give the buyer any special power over the seller.
Sounds interesting, but to prosecute, you still need courts, you still need enforcement, and that means you still need government. (By the way, this already exists. Some legal claims have gone to the stock market even.)