The state’s monopoly on violence

[rooster]

I was listening to the 1st couple episodes of the “ Martyr made” podcast and the host brings up a very interesting point in regard to what makes a state, a nation if you will.
He says one of the most fundemental things that a state must have is a monopoly on violence. Now in the tribal honor systems of the past if someone stole from you or even worse broke into your home and killed your children you were expected to answer with violence. I’m not talking about catching them in the act. I’m talking about someone tells you later that this person here did the crime.

Now in a nation state like we made the transition to in the 1900’s we no longer go seek out retribution on our own, instead we call the police and let them handle it. If that person gets off because they tampered with a witness, they have friends in high places or the police “mishandle” the case well then that’s too bad. Should you seek justice yourself then you will be pursued by the state.

This transition from tribal honor to state institutions and the monopoly on violence is why places like Afghanistan cannot make the leap to democracy.
Now in modern America, post bundy ranch and BLM riots, has America as a country abdicated the monopoly on violence? In the bundy standoff people stood up and threaten violence against the government and the government backed down. During the riots of last summer a group committed violence, a lot of it, and the government didn’t pursue them, they caved. Look at the verdict just passed. The jury is open in their saying that violence and threats of violence caused them to make the verdict guilty.

Can America take back the monopoly on violence needed to maintain the peaceful functioning of institutions or are we in a downward spiral with no hope. Time to choose your clan?

 

[SwikLS]

no, not time to choose your clan (as if there would be a choice). if the states can't maintain a monopoly on violence they better at least sure as he** contain it to urban America. let the degenerates tear themselves apart I say. because if they can't contain it then you won't need to ask the question if its time to choose your clan because you'll already know the answer.

 

[BigRed]

I was listening to the 1st couple episodes of the “ Martyr made” podcast and the host brings up a very interesting point in regard to what makes a state, a nation if you will.
He says one of the most fundemental things that a state must have is a monopoly on violence. Now in the tribal honor systems of the past if someone stole from you or even worse broke into your home and killed your children you were expected to answer with violence. I’m not talking about catching them in the act. I’m talking about someone tells you later that this person here did the crime.

Now in a nation state like we made the transition to in the 1900’s we no longer go seek out retribution on our own, instead we call the police and let them handle it. If that person gets off because they tampered with a witness, they have friends in high places or the police “mishandle” the case well then that’s too bad. Should you seek justice yourself then you will be pursued by the state.

This transition from tribal honor to state institutions and the monopoly on violence is why places like Afghanistan cannot make the leap to democracy.
Now in modern America, post bundy ranch and BLM riots, has America as a country abdicated the monopoly on violence? In the bundy standoff people stood up and threaten violence against the government and the government backed down. During the riots of last summer a group committed violence, a lot of it, and the government didn’t pursue them, they caved. Look at the verdict just passed. The jury is open in their saying that violence and threats of violence caused them to make the verdict guilty.

Can America take back the monopoly on violence needed to maintain the peaceful functioning of institutions or are we in a downward spiral with no hope. Time to choose your clan?

I am not convinced that a state monopoly on violence makes peace.

 

[SwikLS]

I am not convinced that a state monopoly on violence makes peace.

it doesn't. not the job of the state to establish order. nor is it the job of the state to provide security within the state. it is the job the federal govt to provide security from foreign threats but that's it. it is the job of the state to enforce the law established by the state from elected officials which is why the election compromising of the last election in some states is so terrible.

 

[jbombelli]

The state doesn't have a monopoly on violence. They'll use it against you if you don't do what they tell you, but that's not the same thing.

 

[Tombs]

Here's what the state is busy tying up your federal tax dollars to do:

 

[Kutnupe14]

it doesn't. not the job of the state to establish order. nor is it the job of the state to provide security within the state. it is the job the federal govt to provide security from foreign threats but that's it. it is the job of the state to enforce the law established by the state from elected officials which is why the election compromising of the last election in some states is so terrible.

“It’s not the job of the state to establish order?” Wait, what?

 

[Leadeye]

I think it's more what local government and the people on the ground making the decisions value in those instances. Once the bullets start flying, blood flowing and people dying everything changes forever.

West coast city administrators have been playing a long game with Antifa and BLM hoping I'm sure to keep kicking the problem down the road until something changes and the gas runs out of these movements. Nobody wants to see their city in that shape but the situation hasn't gotten to the point where they will change their direction.

 

[Denny347]

The public finds the thought of violence abhorrent. Sure, they love to watch it in TV or in movies. However, doing violence to save themselves is way outside their level of comfort. People are pushing towards a more "civilized" society which, for them, means less violence. What has happened is that while "civilized" people have become less violent, they are less able to respond to violence when thrust upon them. Criminals haven't gone away. So the brunt of safe society has been pushed onto the shoulders of LE and away from individuals. Government might have the monopoly but that is only because it was given to them.

 

[BigRed]

The public finds the thought of violence abhorrent. Sure, they love to watch it in TV or in movies. However, doing violence to save themselves is way outside their level of comfort. People are pushing towards a more "civilized" society which, for them, means less violence. What has happened is that while "civilized" people have become less violent, they are less able to respond to violence when thrust upon them. Criminals haven't gone away. So the brunt of safe society has been pushed onto the shoulders of LE and away from individuals. Government might have the monopoly but that is only because it was given to them.

I have retained my full natural right to exert violence in defense of my loved ones, my property, or myself.

 

[Denny347]

I have retained my full natural right to exert violence in defense of my loved ones, my property, or myself.

Of course, as you should. Sadly, we here are the minority.

 

[jamil]

it doesn't. not the job of the state to establish order. nor is it the job of the state to provide security within the state. it is the job the federal govt to provide security from foreign threats but that's it. it is the job of the state to enforce the law established by the state from elected officials which is why the election compromising of the last election in some states is so terrible.

The primary purpose of the state is to 1) protect it's citizens from outside harm and 2) protect the rights of citizens. That implies some system of order is necessary.

 

[BigRed]

Of course, as you should. Sadly, we here are the minority.

Indeed.

 

[Tombs]

The public finds the thought of violence abhorrent. Sure, they love to watch it in TV or in movies. However, doing violence to save themselves is way outside their level of comfort. People are pushing towards a more "civilized" society which, for them, means less violence. What has happened is that while "civilized" people have become less violent, they are less able to respond to violence when thrust upon them. Criminals haven't gone away. So the brunt of safe society has been pushed onto the shoulders of LE and away from individuals. Government might have the monopoly but that is only because it was given to them.

I think there's some complexity to the issue beyond people simply wanting it to be that way.
Everyone is raised today to think violence is the worst possible thing. They're told by every authority figure that they need to leave it to professionals, and call someone else to solve their problems.

And because they're normal people, they go along with it, just like they went along with the masks and every other crazy thing recently.

As always, the heart and soul of everything in society starts with upbringing and education. We have an exceedingly slave-like culture in the US at this point.

 

[rooster]

Just to clarify “state” in my original post means

-a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.

Not
-one of the 50 states of America.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

The public finds the thought of violence abhorrent.

They do? There seemed to be a sizeable portion of "the public" that found it completely acceptable throughout most of last year. If you're strictly speaking of defensive violence, then okay, but there are a significant number that are more than willing to commit offensive violence.

 

[BigRed]

I think there's some complexity to the issue beyond people simply wanting it to be that way.
Everyone is raised today to think violence is the worst possible thing. They're told by every authority figure that they need to leave it to professionals, and call someone else to solve their problems.

And because they're normal people, they go along with it, just like they went along with the masks and every other crazy thing recently.

As always, the heart and soul of everything in society starts with upbringing and education. We have an exceedingly slave-like culture in the US at this point.

For those that were raised well, there is nothing complex about the matter whatsoever.

 

[Thor]

In today's technology based society there is little chance of a successful insurrection. The coms are all monitored...there is no chance of surprise. Mob flash a takeover? Good luck with that. The military is not all pervasive but when concentrated to specific areas is insurmountable. No encryption you think you have is safe from people who have been doing encryption since the civil war.

 

[jamil]

No encryption you think you have is safe from people who have been doing encryption since the civil war.

Other than side channel attacks, encryption/decryption is just math. But really hard math. AES-256 is pretty damned good. It takes 2^256 operations to crack. A messaging app that uses end-to-end encryption, like Signal, is probably good to go for nefarious people to plot nefarious things.

But, if your password is fuzzyhippos123 it’s probably not all that secure from prying eyes.

 

[eldirector]

But, if your password is fuzzyhippos123 it’s probably not all that secure from prying eyes.

<flips over keyboard. Checks post-it note> Whew, ok. I'm good.