Comment by r3trohack3r
2 hours ago
> they have a monopoly on violence in the country
I have not seen a definition of this that is simultaneously true and useful
The sole provider of violence in the U.S. is not the government.
2 hours ago
> they have a monopoly on violence in the country
I have not seen a definition of this that is simultaneously true and useful
The sole provider of violence in the U.S. is not the government.
"Monopoly on violence" isn't some new concept I just invented here, it's a established concept about "legal use of force", which the government typically is the sole arbiter of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
Of course many engage in "violence", or "provide it", that is not in doubt.
I know it’s not new, thus why I said I’ve never seen a definition that is both true and useful.
In the U.S. I can lawfully use violence in many ways under many circumstances. I.E. if you’re in my house and I didn’t invite you there, I can slay you lawfully.
In the U.S. the federal government is not the only institution responsible for law making or law enforcement. It is not only entity that can lawfully use violence. Etc.