Re: Justice and Punishment

Alejandro Dubrovsky (
Mon, 6 Apr 1998 15:51:47 +1000 (GMT+1000)

On Fri, 3 Apr 1998, John K Clark wrote:

> On Sat, 4 Apr 1998 Alejandro Dubrovsky <> Wrote:
> >I was just pointing out the, what i think are, extensive
> >simmilarities between the current system and PPA based
> >anarcho-capitalism as you described it
> PPA's are profit motivated, Nations are power motivated.
i would say nations are profit motivated, but the boundary between profit
and power is not very clear cut.

> Nations have a
> geographical location , PPA's do not.
Not by definition, but they would very probably become localised since
weaponry is localised.

> It's easy to change PPA's, it's not
> easy to change nations.
It's easy to change nations if they let you, it would not be easy to
change PPAs if they didn't let you.

> PPA's membership is voluntary, Nation citizenship is
> not.
again, as above.

> PPA's settle differences with arbitration, Nations prefer force.
most nations settle through negotiation, wars are rare. yes, negotiation
involves force, but so too would arbitration (the more powerful PPA could
select an arbiter closer to its likings). Wars only come when the sides
don't agree on their relative strength, this happens with nations as well
as with PPAs (as well as with humans and animals).

> Nations claim powers individuals lack, PPA's don't.

why not? are you trusting the PPAs to be "good" entities?
> >The holocaust or the inquisition could just as well happen as with
> >the current nation-states,
> Please explain to me how a PPA consisting of 40 million Germans, even
> assuming they all decided for some reason to join the same one, would be
> powerful enough to kill 6 million Jews. Explain why even though it means
> their life the Jews would not be willing to pay a premium seven times as high
> as their German neighbors pay their PPA.
I'm sure the germans were spending more than 14% of their GDP on their
army, which, if you translate to PPA, it would make it impossible for the
jews to put as much money (>100%) (they would have to stop at much less,
other necessities such as food and shelter would consume some of the
money). But there would be no need for all germans to join the same PPA,
just the part that would count (ie the bit that has 80% or so of the
wealth) which would probably account for 10 or 20% of germany. You could
probably do it with the top 1% of germany, but i don't have hard numbers
to back this up, the other claims are probably quite a bit on the

> >>Me:
> >>By the way, last time I checked there were close to a billion
> >>Indians not 10 million
> >huh? what's that got to do with the price of fish?
> If you're an Indian fisherman and you think that big bad Bill Gates is out to
> get you and that your 10 million member PPA is too small and weak to protect
> you, then join a bigger stronger one.
but you can't afford it. A PPA would not take you if it thought you would
be more costly to keep than what you pay, and since with your pitiful
income you can't pay jack, then your PPA, if you can afford any at all,
would be extremely weak.

> >War is expensive for both sides.
> Yes.
> >Your PPA doesn't have to fight anyone if no other PPA tries to
> >"rescue you".
> Yes.
> >And no other PPA will try
> No.
> >because they know that your PPA gets a higher profit from you than
> >they would
> So what? I don't know or care how much the psychotic PPA is extorting from
> you, it's completely irrelevant to me, all I need to know is that your money
> is good and you want to buy my services at my going rate. I also know that if
> I let the psychotic PPA get away with this outrageous behavior I will lose
> other customers. My fellow PPA owners agree with me completely and have
> offered to help.

on the contrary, it's very relevant how much the other PPA is extorting
from you, since how much you they will spend on keeping you depends on
this figure, and how much you will have to spend to fish the guy out
depends on that figure.
why would you loose other customers?
Alejandro Dubrovsky