I have no comments to make on Tucker's article.

The point I was making was that you view force by government as illegitimate, but you seem to have no such compunction about privatized force.

Tell us in how many other instances besides "covenant communities" you would view use of force as legitimate? How much force? How much force and private security companies would be needed to protect your privatized world?

Would you have privatized jails to keep law and order or would you just shoot people on sight?

>>>>The point I was making was that you view force by government as illegitimate, but you seem to have no such compunction about privatized force.<<<<<

???Huh? Only in self defense or defense of private property.

>>>>>Tell us in how many other instances besides "covenant communities" you would view use of force as legitimate?<<<<<<

Self defense or defense of private property. The same rights that used to be lawful in this country....unless you lived in a community that contracted to relinquish these rights for some reason.

>>>>> How much force? How much force and private security companies would be needed to protect your privatized world?<<<<<

As much as necessary. Probably far less than is used against people for no reason now by the state.

>>>>Would you have privatized jails to keep law and order or would you just shoot people on sight?<<<<

Not my community. I'd throw them out with a warning to not ever return unless they were able to provide restitution for whatever they did to the wronged party. And I certainly would never shoot anyone I couldn't see.

The point is, you are invoking the third way, violence and coercion, but privatized violence.

The same violence you claim is wrong, murderous, thieving, etc., when used by the state.

This makes no sense to me, none whatsoever. Further, I'd rather have a court system and a Constitution in place and rely on PRINCIPLES of justice than on privatized violence set up by privatized forces to oversee a privatized world.

>>>>The point is, you are invoking the third way, violence and coercion, but privatized violence.
The same violence you claim is wrong, murderous, thieving, etc., when used by the state.<<<<

Self defense is not a "Third way". It is a legitimate right. What good is a property right without a right to defend your property or person??

>>>>This makes no sense to me, none whatsoever.<<<<

As your position makes no sense to me.

>>>> Further, I'd rather have a court system and a Constitution in place and rely on PRINCIPLES of justice than on privatized violence set up by privatized forces to oversee a privatized world.<<<

And YOU are welcome to them.

>>>>>Quote:
As much as necessary. Probably far less than is used against people for no reason now by the state.XXXX
You have no reliable way of predicting that.<<<<

Look just on youtube at the many many instances of recorded state violence against the innocent, not to mention the wars being waged all over the place. Subtract state sized wars, that leaves the "violence" of self defense and property defense. Their would be the occ aggressor but he/she would be limited by resistance to his/her illegitimate force. Look at the difficulty superstates like the US and USSR have had occupying foreign countries with far smaller armies and supplies.

JS,
I'm just curious but are you aware that the Roman Catholic people invented modern capitalism and that scholars from the Roman Church developed the first, and todate the best, theoretical underpinnings for capitalism. Adam Smith and Ayn Rand are johny come latelies.
Ron