by Brett Morgan (from elsewhere) Gonna borrow a lot from Curt Doolittle here and

by Brett Morgan

(from elsewhere)

Gonna borrow a lot from Curt Doolittle here and say that as long as a market demands a state, there will be one. While it’s true that as we go up in class, the members of said classes can better organize and operate without the apparatus of the state, forming a society that is absent of all the lower classes that would be unable to function in this way would be detrimental.

Observing the iq distribution of Asians and Europeans, we see that there is a spike and high concentration of the Asians on the upper end of average, whereas Europeans have a broader distribution. Our diverse range of intelligence allows for a hierarchy and societal structure that allowed us the most beneficial distribution of labour and this granted us the ability to advance faster and in special ways as opposed to Asian societies. As I see it, the only way to make anarchy work is to concentrate the best of the upper classes in one area, thus negating one of our best characteristics as a people.

I think that forming society based on natural hierarchy and aristocracy would be the optimal system in which the minimum amount of state is needed to organize society. As Doolittle has said before, those of us that *can* operate with less restriction, may. In the past there were different laws governing different classes.