Somewhat, through reading/listening to Jeff Deist and especially Hans Hoppe.
The distinction then comes down to natural vs unnatural elites.
Natural elites in Hoppe’s framework aren’t the problem—it's when one elite centralizes power that a shift toward state-like institutions occurs. A voluntary, market-like adjudication system is key to maintaining a stateless, yet orderly society.
The Wrong Elites | Mises Institute https://share.google/cgdbNT8pbzsNviJQU
Natural Elites, Intellectuals, and the State | Mises Institute https://share.google/xXqGXazOnmpb9Thoa
Login to reply
Replies (3)
Hoppe on this is like James Lindsay; good at diagnosis, but he’s gonna give you an outdated remedy like blood letting and suggest it’s the best we’ve got and you must do it because he never read further 🤣
And I like Hoppe: View quoted note →
Jeff Deist outside of his self-interested goldbugism is the closest from the Mises Institute alum to get it; Tho and McMaken aren’t far away but none of them have taken this leap.
You should start here: View quoted note →
It’s like Per’s book - a proper primer on what you’re getting in to. Everything else will make more sense with such a foundation.
Elite Theory says we have elites regardless. Either you have a State which announces itself; or you get a Mafia like Sicily or Cartels like Mexico, but there is never a vacuum of power; someone will take that power and do what they want with it if not challenged.
This isn’t a Mike Brock bullshit “I reject ancap theory and am now a liberal again” - it’s much deeper than that.
Encourage you to have a look.
Thanks for sharing 🤙
So, in your view, is the State inevitable because even natural elites will ultimately exert coercive control over any market-based system of adjudication?