Comments on: Defence monopoly and slavery http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/09/22/defence-monopoly-and-slavery/ Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:24:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Perry de Havilland http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/09/22/defence-monopoly-and-slavery/#comment-2027 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/09/22/defence-monopoly-and-slavery/#comment-2027 I have always taken the view that I can tolerate the state having a military and a police function because that is one of the few legitimate roles I see for the state. But seeing a role for the state in these things is not the same as wanting the state to have a monopoly in them. Private military organisation and private security already exist so clearly there *is* a market for such services... all me need to do is get the state to recognise that these areas are as amenable to markets as anything else. I have always taken the view that I can tolerate the state having a military and a police function because that is one of the few legitimate roles I see for the state.

But seeing a role for the state in these things is not the same as wanting the state to have a monopoly in them. Private military organisation and private security already exist so clearly there *is* a market for such services… all me need to do is get the state to recognise that these areas are as amenable to markets as anything else.

]]> by: Bhavin http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/09/22/defence-monopoly-and-slavery/#comment-2028 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/09/22/defence-monopoly-and-slavery/#comment-2028 I think whats most important is that the use of force in the society be governed by predictible rules. It should be clear to the citizens what activity on their part invites the use of force against them. You advocate abolishing the government monopoly of the use of force. How do you propose the private militias will be bound by a set of rules? Or do you disagree with the need of objective rules governing the use of force? I think whats most important is that the use of force in the society be governed by predictible rules. It should be clear to the citizens what activity on their part invites the use of force against them.

You advocate abolishing the government monopoly of the use of force. How do you propose the private militias will be bound by a set of rules? Or do you disagree with the need of objective rules governing the use of force?

]]>