Nostr Web Client

I agree with you. My post was more a thought experiment, toying with the idea of purchasing defense on the market, as anarcho-capitalists argue should be possible.

I agree that any people that want independence from another are entitled to it, even down to the individual level.

But shouldn't a smaller country be able to purchase the aid of a defense firm for their protection? It's the nationality/government that gets in the way.

tŞhคຊคr 11mo ago

Sure they should be able to but they shouldn’t need to. Ideal hypothetical scenario aside.

If Taiwan wants to indenture itself to a new master It should be able to FA&FO.

The USA Government and European Union are already a gun for hire, there is no hypothetical theory about that.

Unfortunately it is at the expense of their own citizens rather than benefit. Creating the indentured servitude required to keep costs low and profits high for a few by the pseudo enslavement of countries we protect.

We would all be better off if it were an above board contract between nations for protection rather than using the guise of independence as an enslavement/indenturing tool.

Globalization, as it exists, is about exploitation not humanitarianism.

**Like Herbie and Rudolph, “let’s be independent, together”.**

Independence is irrelevant and an illusion and as such should be recognized and fostered whenever asserted. Doing so strengthens relationships making interdependence not only more palatable but stronger in the long term. Like rebelling children, the more you stifle their independence, the more they will find their dependence elsewhere. Unfortunately not always a dependency to their ultimate advantage.

Unfortunately the USA was usurped without a shot fired in 1789.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Marakesh 𓅦 11mo ago

> Unfortunately the USA was usurped without a shot fired in 1789.

I wonder how many understand this. Good points.

tŞhคຊคr 11mo ago

Only a fraction of those that paid attention understand that what was lost.

Then and now, more so now.

They called it weak but that was what could have made it stronger in the long term.

Would be an interesting alternative history novel if nothing else.

Starting with the possibility of Native tribal “states”, no civil war, different outcomes for southern and northern borders. Not to mention western territories and involvement in “world wars“.

I could honestly see a larger present day union in more than just North America.

In some respects the European Union is closer to our original intention after independence than we are today.

Marakesh 𓅦 11mo ago

Yeah, I've read how that when Jefferson received a copy of the draft US Constitution while he was away in Paris he was shocked by it. He thought only a few changes needed to be made to the Articles of Confederation, which was the current constitution at the time, and actually ensured more freedom.

Some interesting counterfactual history you propose there, and possibly a lot more peaceful.

It's true that European nations still retain more of their sovereignty while in the EU than do American states, and their people still think of themselves in terms of their individual nations; but of course history and different languages and cultures help in that regard. I was pleased to see that the UK was allowed to peacefully secede from Europe, despite the fact they did not allow the American colonies to peacefully secede a couple of centuries ago. Perhaps sometimes lessons are learned from history.

tŞhคຊคr 11mo ago

Good chat.

Always an interesting thought experiment to muse over past mistakes/failures and apply ideas to future choices.

Too bad those that make the big mistakes are more likely to double down than put in the work required to correct course.