How exactly do you plan on individually empowering people with armed NGOs, as you mentioned earlier? Wouldn't you say a bunch of elitist boot licking UN toolbots could be considered "armed thugs" by the people?
You seem to require remedial reading lessons... Then you should read the libertarian literary canon, but we all know that's not going to happen...
For one thing, you should know that an NGO is a Non-Governmental Organization, that is a private charity, with no "divine right" to tax, conscript, or limit its liabilities. UN (which is a particularly scary government that needs to be abolished) has about as much to do with this conversation as a ravioli pizza.
At least read up on Ron Paul talking about Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Since military specialists tend to know more than fishermen or oilmen about fighting off the commie thieves,
Private Defense Agencies (PDA's) are the natural outcome.
For-profit PDA's will be the Microsofts of the industry, but the Linuxes (non-profit peacekeepers) will be there too, and I consider them the ideal. In a sufficiently advanced marketplace, non-profits would eventually dominate the industries in which for-profits are handicapped by conflicts of interest and lack of consumer trust.
How does this fit into your "let the locals set their own path toward peace, freedom, and free markets - for their own good" plan?
All people, regardless of geography or culture, need to accept the
Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) to be able to function in the (post)modern civilization. This includes the negative Rights to Life and Liberty, Property Rights,
Contract Rights, Victims' Rights, and the much-neglected concept of Parents' Rights. Those that don't will gradually find themselves at a competitive disadvantage (ex. running out of competent people to tax), and would eventually be brought to justice for their aggression, or at least ostracized for their barbarity. Not everyone will understand NAP, but everyone will find it in their own self-interest to accept it, rationalizing it in whatever ways they will.
There's more than one way to do things, especially complicated things like planning a gradualist transition from the current political and cultural systems to the more rational and functional ones that the advancement of modern civilization demands. Read up on
Deng Xiaoping sometime - I'd call him the most positively-significant person of the 20th century! His ideas were remarkable in bringing China from utter madness and a lot closer to modern capitalist civilization - even though abandoning the commie religious symbolism isn't a possibility at the time. Similar reformers can do similar things for the Muslim World, the Catholic World, etc - and all the subdivisions and nuances therein.
BTW: Your -repping me for my opinions is getting old. How about you keep this open for once?
I've down-karma'd maybe 3-4 posts on this forum this year, always for
extreme stupidity. I don't pay attention to the identity of the poster, just the content of the post.
