Do the Amish and Ancaps need Woodrow Wilson and B. Kristol to protect them?

The mindcrime liberty show discusses freeriding, pacifism and defense. Recently popular youtuber Peter Santenello interviewed a beachy Amish family and they stated that during times of war they were viewed as freeriders or scabs who didn’t do their fair share but enjoyed the freedoms and luxuries provided by the broader society including the security state.  Is this criticism true?  Also recently Bill Kristol and Scott Horton debated the topic of regime change wars and whether they benefit the US.  The primary benefit for certain groups including libertarians and the Amish is a foreign power isn’t destroying their property or lives.  Is this criticism true?  Would the Amish and a hypothetical Ancapistan be overrun by commies and nazis (or others)  if it wasn’t for the “security” provided by the state led and created by acolytates of Bill Kristol and Woodrow Wilson? Is Libertarian foreign policy a naïve fairy tale compared to the realist position?  Are the Amish free-riders off the state?  Would the Amish and many other western groups be as wealthy if it wasn’t for the US navy and formerly the British navy opening up markets and protecting shipping lanes?  How would industrialization look and would it happen at all if it wasn’t for the state? Would more groups go the Amish way and choose to forgo certain consumer goods and industrial products if the state didn’t subsidize their creation?  What industrial products would be produced and not produced? Would there be more river and air travel with shorter supply chains?  Is Wilson and Kristol a bigger threat to the Amish and a hypothetical ancapistan society?

Categories: Anarchism/Anti-State

Leave a Reply