You said: This is not a ringing endorsement of anarchies. Apparently, anarchies cannot compete with other forms of social organization. Who wants to be conquered by a foreign people?
True it is not. Ultimately all states have ever been good for is to protect you from other states. Which is not a ringing endorsement of states.
Historically states have won over non-states (and it’s important to note that there have been examples of non-state non-primitive societies) because of two factors: bigger firepower and the element of surprise. The real danger has always been the hordes which suddenly appear at the horizon in ship or on horseback armed with new and more dangerous weapons.
These factors are a lot less important today than they were even fifty years ago.
Pearl Harbor could never happen in today’s world. They would have spotted the fleet the second it left Tokyo Harbor.
More to the point, it is possible to make yourself an extremely unattractive target for relatively little money. The doctrine of MAD works. Combine it a Swiss-style defensive military and no one is going to attack.
On 11 September 2001, the terrorists managed to attack without a fleet.
More to the point, it is possible to make yourself an extremely unattractive target for relatively little money. The doctrine of MAD works. Combine it a Swiss-style defensive military and no one is going to attack.
I agree, and I think the Founders would agree too. However, note that MAD depends on nuclear weapons, which were the product of a modern state. It is doubtful that a private firm would have been able to carry out the Manhatten project.