Who is going to enforce your property claims (real estate, for example), if not a state?
reply
How does a single sentence question merit a book response?
You can't answer my question in one sentence?
reply
What exist first? The state or the property?
reply
How is that relevant? I would say the property, as an abstraction, exists independently of a state
reply
Then why do you need a state to enforce a property? Who is this "state"? Is the state part of the contract? Who is giving the authority to a "state"?
reply
Because there exists people who will try rob me of that property.
If your answer is protect it yourself, I would say you're not anti-state, you're actually just pro-mafia.
reply
hahaha so you really think the state will protect you. LOLOLOL The state will the first one to rob you, not others.
reply
Exactly. You pay one mafia or another, but in a large enough society this is inevitable.
reply
Only inevitable for those who refuse to choose Liberty and small, localized voluntary associations, rather than cave to any mafia (no matter how large or small).
reply
I'm with you on small, localized voluntary associations.
I would say that more than likely, that association will develop rules for arbitrating disputes that essentially constitute "a state". In the event that such voluntary association breaks down, you essentially have mob rule, not unlike the democracy you have such disdain for (and rightly so).
The reality is social organization is challenge, and musing about it philosophically as opposed to practically can easily lead to mental masturbation.