Esbuck, That sounds logical until you factor in some fundamental realities. 1) By far most of the crime and gangs are a direct result of government laws against consensual "crimes". 2) Through their unjust laws, unjust wars, and their many other abuses, the government currently causes that which you fear would ensue without it. 3) Historically, governments have been the worst murderers - far worse than mobs - even without counting all the collateral damage from their unjust laws.
It seems that when you describe that which government is supposed to protect you from, you are describing "government". -------------------------- Anarchy, like communism, appeals to a lot of people on a philosophical basis, but anarchy, like communism, doesn't seem to work in the real world. In each case, the "problem" is that individuals are different, and some of them are evil. We have an example of anarchism in action in Somalia, which apparently has no recognizable government. In places, tribal traditions and membership suffice to enforce contracts, etc. If you fail to pay your debts, your extended family takes care to preserve their honor and then exerts coercion to make you behave according to the rules. That's not what most libertarians would like, as it requires conformity to the "code" of the group. Elsewhere, war lords hold sway, the worst of repressive government (organized crime) without any legitimacy. Then there is mob rule by religious fanatics. Generally, the economy does not work, and people are not free. Here in mid-America, one would hope that we could manage our affairs without mobs or despots, but when I observe "anarchic" drivers on the roads and hear of drive-by shootings and gang activity, not to mention rape, burglary, arson, etc., it seems to me that, were there no "professional" law enforcement, my neighbors would invent government to provide it. Since the poor, and the gangs, will not pay for law enforcement, some "socialistic" (tax supported) scheme would emerge. Mob rule, vigilante justice, is not acceptable, as we know that mobs have poor judgement and little rational investigative ability. We need "professionals" to protect us from the mob. Multiple, privately funded police organizations, insurance companies against fraud and violence, would interfere with each other, becoming much like the rival gangs which defend their turf in the inner city. (Bank guards and mall security firms do not protect me, just their employers) I agree that that government is best which governs least, but it would seem that some sort of collective action is necessary. Given anarchy, some collectives (gangs, tribes) will spontaneously form and will likely impose on others. Humans are social animals; they do that. How, then, will anarchy function with human nature?
