Hear me out and think past the Deep State’s indoctrination. Q has mentioned several times that changes would be made to prevent all this from ever happening again. He mentioned independent auditors. How well did the independent “auditors”/watchers work in preventing/exposing the election counting? In order to prevent evildoers from having monopoly power over us, we need to remove their primary weapon, which is government, and replace it with a true Free Market. Liberty and Freedom.
Government is monopoly power, with unlimited funding via theft/enslavement, that forces socialized monopoly services on us. It’s a lot easier for the evildoers to gain control of a singular monopoly power wield it against us than to gain control of dozens or hundreds of privatized companies providing those same services in a Free Market.
Who here supports socialism, even for courts, security, roads, etc? How’s the horrible quality and lack of accountability in those devices working out for us? What about the Constitution, which either enabled the evildoers to gain monopoly power over us, or was too weak to prevent it?
All services can alternatively be provided by multiple competing private companies in a free market. Competition generates better quality, better prices, more innovation, and accountability.
We’ve proven we can’t keep the Republic. The falsely perceived authority of Government is derived from “the consent of the governed”, but at any given time it is obvious that the majority of us don’t fully consent to it. We need a true free society with a real free market, where everyone votes with their dollars and is their own ruler, and is forced to be responsible individuals if they don’t want to have to live on charity for life.
Most people reactively would reject this idea because they haven’t spent the time to critically think about how it would work. It would work though, if you think about it. People wrongly believe that certain essential services wouldn’t exist without a forced government socialized monopoly, or that it’s at least more efficient or better as a government socialized service. You’re wrong, and there’s simple explanations as to why.
No amount of communism/socialism is good, especially for our most critical services such as policing/security/justice that “conservatives” support, and certainly not for education, housing, healthcare, and food, as the worse leftists support.
We'd reject it because you haven't thought it out.
You act like the free market would just build defenses for our country. Who pays them? What interest is there to doing that? What stops countries from giving them more money via their governments?
It falls apart instantly from there.
I touched on this in other replies already, and this has already been thought out extensively by people like me and many a lot smarter than me who wrote books on it.
Anywhere there’s a demand for a service (such as security) the market will provide it, the people who demand it will voluntarily pay for it. It would likely be structured like this:
There would be large competing businesses called Dispute Resolution Organizations (DRO’s), which would sell insurance policies and security to their subscribers against various disputes such as civil lawsuit defense, car wrecks, theft, assault, and attack from foreign nations, etc. In their interest to prevent you or your property from being harmed, and them having to pay out on your claim, they’d provide security forces to prevent it as much as possible.
It would basically be like multiple competing mini-governments overlapping each other, and when a dispute arises between subscribers from 2 different DRO’s, they would hire a reputable 3rd party arbitration firm to settle it.
If a foreign country attacks, then obviously all the DRO’s would organize together to defend us, just like our current multiple branches of military and foreign allies would band together.
Also, good luck finding a foreign country willing to buy off the entire military of our nation, and having enough real money to do it in the first place. Wouldn’t seem like a good investment on their part. But it’s a lot harder for them to buy off dozens of firms than to buy control of one monopoly.