[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Without this cultural norm for non-violence in the private sector, society would be pure AC.

Am I wrong?

[/ QUOTE ] Yes you are. Capitalism implies a cultural norm for non-violence, as property rights apply to all humans. Without a norm for non-violence (which arises naturally), you wouldn't have AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Without a cultural norm for non-violence, you'd have a lot of dead people and a lot of destroyed wealth. You'd have utter poverty. You'd have chaos. You'd have anarchy, technically, but not in any useful sense of the word, and you certainly would not have capitalism, since (among other reasons) anything that resembled capital would be destroyed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the replies.

But given this new information, I don't understand how textbook AC claims to be viable outside a utopia. Won't there always be a significant minority of people who are happy to do as much violent coercion as they can get away with?

In general, I'm interested in reading more discussion on the viability of any moral code that doesn't reduce to "might makes right."

But it seems 90% of 2+2 has me on ignore, so I'll just have to wait for someone else to bring it up. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]