[extropy-chat] A Stateless Civilization?

[Joseph Bloch]

Technotranscendence wrote:

>On Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:04 PM Joseph Bloch
>transhumanist at goldenfuture.net wrote:
>  
>
>>>When one points to Medieval Iceland, one problem
>>>is, of course, that even though the stateless period
>>>lasted about three centuries, Icelandic society
>>>during that time never formed cities -- it was an
>>>essential non-urban or pre-urban society.
>>>      
>>>
>>Another problem would be that medieval Iceland
>>was not really "stateless", despite what David
>>Friedman might maintain. It maintained a complex
>>(and written) system of laws (see, for example, Grágas)
>>and courts (þing and alþing) in which to pursue those
>>laws,
>>    
>>
>
>None of which defines a state, especially since all these relied on
>consensus and there were no centers of power as such.  I.e., nothing
>like a state.  
>


I suppose we could dosey-do around this for a week without getting 
anywhere unless we agree upon what constitutes a "state", because 
otherwise every example I give of what I think constitutes an Icelandic 
state during the Commonwealth will simply be met by "well, that doesn't 
make a state". One could say that any modern nation-state "relies on 
consensus". And as far as the Icelandic Commonwealth having "no centers 
of power as such" I would submit that the goðar and the alþing (perhaps 
the former moreso than the latter) constitute an oligarchic collection 
of centers of power.

I'll go with Mirriam-Webster definition 1a for purposes of this discussion:

"A politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite 
territory; /esp/ One that is sovereign"

 From what I know about Commonwealth-era Iceland (which is quite 
considerable), it satisfies that definition of statehood.

What's your definition of "state", in this context?

Joseph