It could but I think that's a step in the right direction because it means the premise that the government monopoly is the same as the feared violent gangs of an anarchistic society has been accepted. The government monopoly is just a far more sophisticated form of the violent gang.
At that point I think the libertarian argument should become that the "worst-case scenario" happening in a stateless society is unreasonable. The state is a concept and institution formed in the origins of civilizations, where poverty was immense, technology was nothing, and people were sorely unproductive. Contrasted to today, where productivity and technology are mountains higher, and we'll find that the incentive we would face in a stateless society is antipodal to the incentive our ancestors faced. Capitalism has wholly changed the paradigm and what was once our greatest weakness (the capability to defend our interests) has become our greatest strength. Individuals, communities, and corporations would have more than enough incentive and capacity to subvert the growth of violent gangs.
Reply With Quote