Suppose (and this is hypothetical, I realize) there are societies out there whose conflict-resolution rules involve exiling people who violate the society's rules. Before long, yet another society develops composed of people who have little or no regard for social rules. Call them bandits. Maybe they don't want to till fields, don't want to plant, don't want to weed, don't want to harvest, etc.. Thus, they steal their food instead. With force when necessary.
And why would it be necessary to steal when a group might give to them willingly? I suppose then there's the problem of giving too much, too often, so much that our-own-selves are sacrificed in the process.
But there is a logical fallacy with these people: if they steal by force then they work for their food.
I really don't think that's an unreasonable hypothetical situation.
No, and it happens in the US too-- we learn that laws are not preventive more so than retributive.
Maybe. But sitting on them is a form of force application; it's merely nonlethal.
It's merely non
violent. Let's say, though, that we've had enough of the BS from "bandits" -- my personal ethics/morality aside -- is there a reasonable chance we could defend ourselves successfully anyway? I highly doubt it. With a government in place, we have external laws that says stealing and killing is wrong and that there are punishments for violating such laws, which the police enforce.
Again, my personal moral stance aside, why couldn't we police and defend ourselves, our dignity, our wellbeing, our internal order, with necessary force?
And let's say it's necessary to do so or else we face death without dignity. I'd go with death-with-dignity and small-chance of survival and likely go on lamenting we live on The Planet of the Apes (if I survived).
Most people I know do not own the necessary weapons to defend their own property -- but hypothetically speaking, if a group of people came to my grandmother's house in the sticks, during the middle of the night, wearing masks, seeking to steal all her stuff, what can a government do for her in this situation? She'll never catch the people, never get her stuff back. It's a similar hypothetical situation. Same stuff happens in cities: you can get mugged on the street and never catch the criminal, never get your stuff back, and still face the same dangers.
I contend that preparation for such circumstances (ie, stockpiling weapons, combat training) leads to their usage and not always in the ways one wishes to use them-- that is, against one another.
Is this what they call false dilemma. (Or in this case, trilemma!)
If so, may you also provide more options. I gathered those initial options from our posts.
AMC
