In an organized society a psychopath can kill a few in a murder spree. In an unorganized society the psychopath can gather and organize a lot of thugs to loot and burn millions of homes. Has happened many times in history. I know which one I prefer.
The gun argument actually works here, if you ban good guys from organizing then all organizations will be bad ones. And an organized group of people always wins against unorganized groups.
> In an organized society a psychopath can kill a few in a murder spree. In an unorganized society the psychopath can gather and organize a lot of thugs to loot and burn millions of homes. Has happened many times in history. I know which one I prefer.
I think this should be re-examined through the view of the ~1 million Iraqis recently murdered by one such “organized society”.
I don’t think the (violence-based) organization has the set of benefits you think it does.
When the good guys practices anarchy then the bad guys are free to create huge violent organizations. Our modern societies aren't perfect but violence is lower today than ever before.
"Thousands of raiders" don't magically appear, you prevent them by preventing the conditions necessary for thousands of people to unite with the goal of hurting others.
How does a power structure prevent it? Raiders are a result of people unable to live off their of own labor, generally as a result of the exploitation of others.
The gun argument actually works here, if you ban good guys from organizing then all organizations will be bad ones. And an organized group of people always wins against unorganized groups.