Peace K 🪙 on Nostr: The original poster started by saying that he supported anarchism. He thought that an ...

The original poster started by saying that he supported anarchism. He thought that an anarchist state can exist and can fund itself by taxing land.

I pointed out that

1. He is saying that an anarchist state (rothbardian society) can't exist.
2. That by refusing to acknowledge land rights he is undermining all rights.
3. That the same logic can be applied to internal threats (bad actors within society).

What you are asking now is: so does that mean that a rights respecting society cannot exist?

The answer is: of course it can exist. It would have a government, Police, and an army to protect these rights.

How to fund them? By requiring a fee for services that the government is uniquely positioned to give. Things that having a monopoly of power and general objectivity are an advantage.

For instance: For a judge to handle a contract disagreement, this contract must be registered in the judicial DB. For a fee.

A gold based token can be created where the government assures the gold existence. A fraction of each transaction will go to the government as payment for this assurance.

This is not a tax since no one is forcing people to use this gold backed token. It's a fee for a service. Many will opt to use it, since it gives extra assurance.

I am sure that there are more services where the states monopoly over poser or / and objectivity give it an advantage. The state can utilize them to create an income