Free rider problem is made up. Stateless classless societies have obviously existed throughout history. Every small tribal society is basically that. Meanwhile, the "voluntary" market-driven society is what liberal capitalism is. It doesn't work.

[–] minnix@lemux.minnix.dev -4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The free rider problem is most definitely not made up.

Stateless classless societies have obviously existed throughout history. Every small tribal society is basically that.

Every tribal society on earth exists within a State. As I wrote before, there have always been States after the birth of nations.

Meanwhile, the “voluntary” market-driven society is what liberal capitalism is. It doesn’t work.

There isn't currently a voluntary market society, since all societies also exist within States, States that are run by governments.

The two original arguments exist within a theoretical vacuum which is my point. Unless you have some kind of a priori argument that solves either one, you haven't provided actual "proof" of anything.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The free rider problem is most definitely not made up.

It is because real world societies have simple and well known mechanisms to deal with it.

Every tribal society on earth exists within a State. As I wrote before, there have always been States after the birth of nations.

It very much does not.

There isn’t currently a voluntary market society, since all societies also exist within States, States that are run by governments.

Wait till you find out how and why states form.

The two original arguments exist within a theoretical vacuum which is my point. Unless you have some kind of a priori argument that solves either one, you haven’t provided actual “proof” of anything.

Actually, it's your arguments that exist in a theoretical vacuum utterly divorced from the real world.

[–] minnix@lemux.minnix.dev -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ok, you're now writing things that have no connection whatsoever to the points presented. There is a good discussion to be had around the two original arguments as they've been covered by philosophers and economists for years, but it appears you are not the one to have that discussion with.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What I wrote directly relates to the points presented, but if you don't understand how that's fine. It appears you are not the one to have that discussion with.

[–] minnix@lemux.minnix.dev -4 points 3 months ago

Sure. Also as an aside, votes are transparent on Lemmy