The only thing it shows is that a strong central government can outsource some of it's operations. It does not show that those mercenaries could be controlled without it.

I wouldn't be using Afghanistan as your shining example unless you are trying to convince us that the Taliban are a desired feature of this brave new world of yours.

Private law is no law at all, it is anarchy. You just won't see that you cannot subdivide people into tiny little independent groups and then expect them to react as one to an external threat. They will argue and bicker and fight amongst themselves and would soon be gobbled up piecemeal.

Even without an external threat you still cannot expect that these tiny independent communities to remain friendly to each other. Whether through mismanagement or pure back luck there will always be haves and have nots with the inevitable friction, greed and hatred as a result. That's why a society built upon Hoppes vision could not long survive and what replaces it will make the survivors yearn for the old Democracies and Republics where they had at least the appearance of human rights.

Human nature cannot be ignored no matter how much you may wish to do so!

It shows that fiscal pressure creates - "creative solutions" that are not legitimised in democratic state's self-understanding. In theirs - not necessarily in mine.

the one doe snot lead to the other. The Taliban have been there when you walked in, and they will be there when you leave. You got out-waited and strategically defeated, the military operation to keep them away and to democratize Afghanistan, is a complete failure. And that qualifies as an example for that a not nationally organised underdog can very well fight off an assumed superior organised nationalistic army.

Local resistance and militia did that in all parts of Europe over centuries of armed conflict, too.

No. Get some information hat the terminology of "natural law" really means, on which it bases. Law codes must not, not at all, be given by centralised govenrments only. That is historically wrong in that the basis of modern laws ofetn have roots that lead back in time and anchor in tradfitions that are naything but centrlaised, and "natiuonal". Oftgen it bases on the porivate law of trading guilts, like for example the Hanse. I have that at the very end of my reply to Oberon.

Nobody external, and so also not me, subdivides anyone. It is people in place deciding to do this or that. London does not force the Scots to possibly seoarate. The Kanton of Zurich did not tell people in some part of it to separate years ago, nor did anyone tell other Swiss people to unite with some Kanton in another plart of Switzerland. People in Moincco or Hongkong are not told to stay separate from France, or China.

People decide, in their realm. That's all. Now leave them the right and freedom to decide all by themselves how they want get social insurance, or not.

Some mn ths ago there was an uproar int he forum. US firebrigades just sat still and watched as s couple's private house burnt down. when I googled ther story I found that in soke districts, they had to make the dfecision that outside a central city perimeter fire brigades can only economically be maintained by having people to pay a yearly fee, like an insurrance. this couple in question decided to not do that, quoting the woman they asumed they would not get struck by fate. They made a decision. They were free to do so. With freedom comes responsibility. And the new firebrigade system? I read it works great in these districts, having avoided communal budget breakdown and maintaining the firebrigade intact and functional inside and outside the centre perimeter. Great job ! - In germany: unimaginable. How could people be löeft being responsible for their deicisons? How antisocial, how brutal! Lets have the nanny milked again.

Historically you have some examples on your side. And some examples against you. The Hanse. Italian and Russian city states. Germany a puzzle of several thousand free cities and dukedom before the united "nation" - never before and after that phase has Germany's culture and cultural output blossomed like that. The whole "nest" that europe was, probably became big and globally influential only because geography and historic time lines favoured competition even between smallest neighbouring regions. No renaissance and what came in its aftermath without the Italian city states. And the Hanse in its time and region (Baltic, Northern continental Europe) was an economical and fiscal superpower like the US was in the past 70 years. No national states headed any of these.

In the past, Hope also points out, the usual wars between rivalliung dukedoms that sometime sbroke out, most of the time were short, differentiated clearly between miliary target and porivate property of the people, and were ended soon. That was because the feudal lords of the worrying sides both had their very own property ta stake, and they wanted it undamaged a smuch as possible, aqlso, ioften ignored, kings and dukes were usually e,mbedded in a very tight corsett of legal respinsibilities and did not have just the freedom to explpoit their subordjnates at will. They were accoutnable to the next higher, and finally to a king. High ranking adminiostrators and officials serving in hgihb ranks also were expected to not live at the cost of the public, but to finances themselves. the also often had to pay for the costs that their hjigh ranks caused in obligations.

On a side note, during the crusades the huge majority of crusading knights did not go there to become rich and exploit the foreign land. It was a moral or religious obligation, a decision based on their conscience indeed. One did not allowed to say it today without getting burnt by the stake: but the biggest group of crusading noble men had to sell all their land property at home and had to give away their family wealth to finance their expedition. Many left (or fled) from Europe in a state bancrupcty. - I just finiihed reading a new book on the crusades, by an American author. It was just translated into German. Very good book, byRodney Stark: http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/3942...seller=&sr=8-1

Anyhow, I have just posted in reply to Oberon, so I am leaving here. I am certain that you will not like it one bit.

Sorry, but those examples make his case not yours.
They can only "support" your case of a utopian dreamworld with a very liberal sugar counting of their positive aspects while completely ignoring all their negative aspects and their actual history.

Best advice i've seen yet how to combat this scourge:

Everyone talk like a terrorist all the time!

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ba0...e-announcement

RedOctober and McBee won't like this idea :D

May Allah have mercy on them

May their IED's be powerful and their Ricin be fresh! :salute:

Lets see if I can make them invade Finnland :hmmm:


Hey Dowly, how's your refurbishing of an abandoned russian nuclear submarine going. I hear the Al Qaida is interested in buying it so they can sneak into Norfolk and detonate a chemical biological nuclear weapon.

If you want to use the name Al Qaida... at least spell it right.
Al Ciada.:O:

Anybody have their phone number in Yemen? I plan to call them frequently and ask if their refrigerator is running.

We probably have our own NSA satellite by now... :D

:haha:
lovely like an Abomb in washington!

ssshhh, you're giving away the secret.:stare:
Get your ticket to Hong Kong yet?:03:


NSA= Electronic voyeurism at its finest.
National
Snoopers
Association