right there are definitely strong arguments to be made for why government is responsible for those deaths and why if we didnt have a government we wouldnt have had those deaths, and i personally believe this is accurate. My point was not to say that freedomequalsriches had drawn a false conclusion. I believe his conclusion was accurate. My point was to say that that particular conclusion does not follow from those particular premises alone.
However, the act of blaming governments for various atrocities also casts doubt on the theoretical viability of Anarchic alternatives. If soldiers, policemen, judges and other state workers are not individually responsible for their actions, then why should a change of system make any difference? If the population isn't already bound by the NAP, then clearly it's not all-encompassing or 'natural' like some people suggest. Besides, people need governments in order to blame them when things go horribly wrong.
right government is an idea. It is the idea that different people are entitled to different sets of rights. When i say "government was responsible" i really just mean that without the prevalence of this idea said people wouldn't have died.
