WITHOUT GOVERNMENTS THE WORLD WOULD BE AMAZING advocates for “zero government.” Author Lance Van Romunde’s libertarian thesis is that all government is fundamentally inefficient and tramples on freedoms. He states there should be no regulations regarding minimum wage, healthcare, or the environment; everyone should be able to do as they please, with the market (which apparently “always takes in the full picture”) as an organizing force.
The level of political and economic analysis is laughably rudimentary. It is obvious to anyone today that governments and the markets are intimately connected; but, since van Romunde’s purpose is to lambast the former while elevating the latter, government is rigidly separated from the market forces that so often guide its direction. In this way, van Romunde can blame the Deepwater Horizon disaster on the government for encouraging deep-water oil drilling, and offer the Trabant car as evidence of governments’ fundamental inefficiency.
The author frequently advances the most questionable ideas on no evidence whatsoever. Space does not permit examination of each claim, but two examples will suffice. During a discussion of gun violence, van Romunde repeats the claim (frequently heard in alt-right circles) that “More recent shooters have been transgender,” ignoring the fact that cisgender men are disproportionately responsible for mass shootings. And in a chapter titled “What Is Government?”, he notes that the government has the monopoly on violence and states that it will kill you if it likes. Perhaps in some places, but in one of van Romunde’s examples (the UK), the death penalty has been illegal for all intents and purposes since the 1960s. The British justice system does not kill people because the law does not permit it. Van Romunde’s point—that governments have theoretically unchecked power—is taken, but the hyperbolic terms in which he puts the point merely make him look shrill.
The book’s worst fault is that it fails to advance a credible alternative to government. Van Romunde criticizes the criminal justice system, sometimes justifiably; he rightly points out that waiting lists for certain criminal cases to come to trial are unacceptably long. But instead of advocating reform, he proposes a privately run alternative where private security forces apprehend criminal suspects—who are then subjected to trials organized by the companies themselves: “It would be in each company’s interests to be as just as possible, with the best track record of convicting the guilty and freeing the innocent.” But what exactly would incentivize such “justice companies” to be “the fairest, most honest company”? Wouldn’t they be propelled by market forces instead? Wouldn’t that simply lead to a race to send as many people through their private courts as possible, in the interest of increasing revenue?
The section on punishment is likewise undercooked. Van Romunde muses on unpaid heavy labor and “drop[ping the convicted] on an island to fend for themselves” as possibilities: “Who knows what the market will come up with.” Any reasonably informed reader knows exactly what the market would come up with: The option that maximizes the advantage to its most powerful stakeholders, and justice be damned. Who would want a world like that?
Lance van Romunde’s annoyance at governments is genuine, but WITHOUT GOVERNMENTS THE WORLD WOULD BE AMAZING’s lack of a convincing substitute makes nonsense of its conclusions.
~ Craig Jones for IndieReader