what if the thieves pay the government more? nestle is basically genociding niggers and noone does anything
I agree that big corporations are evil. No need to convince me of that, you are just preaching to the choir!
the government has no incentive to keep their word and protect you, the private security firm won't be hired by anyone if they fuck over people
Sure, the current government has little incentive to protect its people. That is why we need to chnage it.
As for your security firm, if they steal something really valuable then they will not need to steal anything more in their life. That is why in medieval Europe they shied away from mercenaries. After all they amongst other things lead to the fall of Rome.
ever since the creation of the fed there were these boom and bust cycles, the money is devaluing, big corps get bailed out when they start failing and the wealth gap has been increasing
Yes, those are very important issues. Though I do not see how the federal reserve has much to do with financial crashes, if anything unrestricted private economic speculation lead to the last few american crashes. The fed per definition can not go broke, private banks can and they did in 2008. All hail the invisible hand!
"i can't imagine it being done by anyone else other than the government, so it HAS to be done by the government!"
It needs to be done by someone who is not influenced by interest groups, otherwise you will have Nestle judges who will always do whatever is in the interests of Nestle. Of course modern day justice is not perfect, in fact it is worse than in recent history, but it would be a lot worse if a private enterpise were to do it for profit.
The medieval Icelandic Commonwealth was not lawless, despite its unique political structure. It had a well-defined legal system, with laws recorded in the Grágás and administered through assemblies like the Althing, which functioned as a national legislative and judicial body. The society had a complex system of justice, including outlawry and financial compensation for crimes, and it was not characterized by an absence of law.
I'm not some sort of academic, but please be more rigorous when you are supposed to give a positive example of something. This is just not serving your purpose.
The territory was approximately 1 square mile in size, with a population of around 250 people
So we are counting communes as instances of capitalism without government working? Cool. Then socialism worked for tens of thousands of years. Be serious my guy! You are insulting me with this "example" and most importantly you are proving that your are not here in good faith.
Hmmm
I could swear that western territories, yet to be colonized, belonged to a certain country.... I can not put my finger on it though.
Oh well! Guess they would have been lawless were there not ranger and sheriffs there. Good thing that THE STATE provided stellers not only with land RIGHTS, but also enforced the rule of law over there. If anything everyone was using USD, even the outlaws.
Again, you are just insulting anyone who would read this. Are you underage or something? Because I can not imagine that any adult that has a even tangetial interest in history can claim that the wild west was lawless. All the indian wars, the land grants etc.
For most of its history, Gaelic Ireland was a "patchwork"[1] hierarchy of territories ruled by a hierarchy of kings or chiefs, who were chosen or elected through tanistry. Warfare between these territories was common. Traditionally, a powerful ruler was acknowledged as High King of Ireland.[a] Society was made up of clans and, like the rest of Europe, was structured hierarchically according to class. Throughout this period, the economy was mainly pastoral and money was generally not used.
Again, they did have governments, feudal ones, but governments nonetheless. You porbably heard these examples in a podcast or read them on /pol/ without actually looking into it.
It would be unfair to have a discussion with you in this context. Please read some more, structure your examples at the very least and then we will commence this discussion.