Arguing with a libertarian

I've been arguing with a libertarian who does not believe in state coertion but thinks, anyway, that dangerous criminals should be punished through a system of voluntary associations freely entered into...:

Ricky, your plan for voluntary association vs. aggression etc. sounds very much like "choose your own Protection". That phase of human history was dealt with c. 4,000 years BC, and the outcome was (guess what) the appearance of the State and the state monopoly of coertion. Because otherwise there's the trouble of deciding a) who is a dangerous criminal and b) who should lock him up. That sounds like the band of Protectors with the bigger guns and most coercive power will set the rules. And that's what we have got — so everyone's happy and we agree deep down. Deep, deep down.

This is from a LinkedIn conversation, btw.

El origen mafioso del Estado

 

—oOo—