• Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    All societies use some form of violence to control people.

    Even the Amish ‘shun’ the malefactors.

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      But not all societies monopolize violence in an institutional superstructure.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        What does that even mean?

        The Vikings let people go out and raid other villages but drew the line at murdering your neighbor. It that what you’re going on about? You think any one who wants should be able to have their own army?

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          What exactly do you mean? Monopolization? Superstructure? Violence? Where do I need to start? At the definition of a state?

          My critique is as follows: Violence is currently monopolized by a hierarchical system of command & control - the state. I (and I’m presuming: OP as well) question the legitimacy of the state and its’ monopoly of violence.

          I would prefer it if the necessary amount of violence would be controlled by horizontal power structures.