Version 1 of #902
> The anarchists do not object to retaliatory force, only to it being wielded by a government. Why? Because, they say, it excludes "competitors." It sure does: it excludes vigilantes, lynch mobs, terrorists, and anyone else wanting to use force *subjectively*.↵ ↵ Competing arbitration agencies would develop *objective* (ie, non-arbitrary) laws and rules for coordination. And, just like governments, they would defend their customers against anyone who wants to use force subjectively. That’s their value proposition; their income relies on it.
The anarchists do not object to retaliatory force, only to it being wielded by a government. Why? Because, they say, it excludes "competitors." It sure does: it excludes vigilantes, lynch mobs, terrorists, and anyone else wanting to use force subjectively.
Competing arbitration agencies would develop objective (ie, non-arbitrary) laws and rules for coordination. And, just like governments, they would defend their customers against anyone who wants to use force subjectively. That’s their value proposition; their income relies on it.