From e37b19dfe76136335347476527d2ffc355a33946 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martti Malmi Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:47:26 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] . --- _posts/2017-03-30-law-is-better-without-monopoly.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_posts/2017-03-30-law-is-better-without-monopoly.md b/_posts/2017-03-30-law-is-better-without-monopoly.md index 5d677b4..b9b32e7 100644 --- a/_posts/2017-03-30-law-is-better-without-monopoly.md +++ b/_posts/2017-03-30-law-is-better-without-monopoly.md @@ -16,7 +16,9 @@ Unlike top-down *dictated* statutory law, laws should be *discovered* in free hu Characteristic of customary legal systems such as the [early Irish law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Irish_law), the [ancient Germanic law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Germanic_law#Principles) or the still practiced Somali [Xeer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeer) is the prevalence of compensation over punishment. That tends to happen when lawmaking is not detached from the real world, i.e. is subject to real costs and benefits instead of popularity in parliamentary elections. Laws that do more harm than good would go out of business. -Few would pay 50,000€ a year out of their own pocket to keep an offender in prison, when he could be made to follow a compensation plan instead. Your tribe would likely foot the bill and collect it from you, as going to war over it would be too expensive. If you refuse to pay, your tribe might disown you. You would become an outlaw and might need to go into hiding, essentially isolating yourself at your own cost. +Few would pay 50,000€ a year out of their own pocket to keep an offender in prison, when he could be made to follow a compensation plan instead. If you commit a crime, your tribe would likely compensate the victim and collect the debt from you, as going to war with another tribe over it wouldn't be worth the cost. If you refuse to pay, your tribe might disown you. You would become an outlaw and might need to go into hiding, essentially isolating yourself at your own cost. + +What if the tribes disagree? Well, governments these days disagree all the time and international justice is a mess. Still, they don't go to war over small things — even if they could do so with taxpayers' money. In case of voluntaristic tribes that people are free to leave without moving to another country, there is even less incentive to go to war or leave disputes unresolved. Members will go elsewhere if the price gets too high or the service too bad. Victimless crimes would generally not exist. War on drugs would not happen without a law monopoly — physically attacking others because of their personal choices would be a fatal mistake without taxpayers’ money and the overwhelming force of a law monopoly to back it up.