Subject:
|
Re: We'll take in your poor, your homeless, your oppressed...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:42:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1134 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > These are LMF answers, mind you... not mine, which are rather muddier
>
> That's fine with me--I'm interested in examining the philosophy itself,
>
> > > I'm curious--under the Flash(tm) philosophy, what happens if one sovereign
> > > nation invades and subjugates a second nation, thereby imposing the sovereignty
> > > of the invader over the invaded?
> >
> > Armed conflict happens, presumably.
> >
> > > What kind of action can be taken in response,
> > > since the invader could simply assert that the invaded nation is now part of it.
> > > In other words, who gets to decide which country's sovereignty is valid,
> >
> > The citizens of the invaded country. As always, just as if they were considering
> > secession peacefully.
>
> Okay, I think that makes some sense. But couldn't the dominant nation simply
> impose upon the seceeding nation a fee of, say, a billion dollars per person to
> effect the secession?
In advance? Would you sign up for that? Or do you mean after the fact against
people who were in already? I would tend to think (and I'm guessing here) that
every new law (except basic common law, you can't dodge the prohibition against
stealing) is a new secession opportunity, just before it goes into effect.
> > > and
> > > what's to prevent one nation from annexing another,
> >
> > The Second Amendment should help slow down invasions considerably, properly
> > applied.
>
> Sure. Actually, this is one of those cool points on which my opinion has
> evolved, thanks largely to discussions in OT.debate (take that, you naysayers
> who claim that this forum doesn't change anyone's views!). I've recently begun
> to believe that a defending force (even a small one) can put up sufficient armed
> resistance to make it not worth the invader's effort.
You mean kinda like in Iraq right now? Guerilla warfare always is more expensive
for the invader than the guerillas... it's just hard to convert to victory
unless the invader tires of the game.
> But can we posit a case in which a small nation like Kuwait is invaded by a
> vastly more powerful neighbor? The conflict might be bloody and costly, but if
> zillions of dollars in oil revenue are at stake, might an invader think it worth
> the price?
Depends. Some venture capitalists might well fund the resistance (either in
advance or after the fact) on behalf of the companies and people that owned the
oil in place that had been usurped, though.
Also, why is the neighbor "vastly more powerful"? In the end state there are a
lot of small nations, none of whom has much power to mount vast invasions.
> > > if that second nation can't
> > > repel the annexation? In what forum can the invaded nation plead its case?
> >
> > The case can be pled in the court of world public opinion when the Valiant
> > Resistance(tm) seeks volunteers and cash (from private citizens, not
> > governments, mind you) to help overthrow the oppressor.
>
> Reading through all of this just now, it sounds like the LMF model describes a
> world without nations, rather than a world with a whole bunch of individually
> sovereign states. Contracts between parties, rather than alliances between
> countries. Is that an inaccurate way to phrase it?
Partly, but not totally. Think "minarchist"... nations are small and feeble,
depending on the consent of the governed for their very existence, and tending
to fracture at the slightest whiff of rights usurpation (or accrete when they
become more efficient and freer as citizens seek economies of scale in the
supply of law enforcement and defense). They hold the initiation of force
monopoly, though, giving them an advantage over companies and people.(1)
Companies (not corporations with unlimited liability) also tend not to be very
big although there may be exceptions.
For some fiction set in this sort of world, see "The Ungoverned" by Vernor
Vinge, or going farther back and a bit farther afield, "Covenant" by RAH
1 - the loose end there is "who gave it to them and how do they keep it", other
than because everyone goes along with the game?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
120 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
