The Secret Army: while 1 DRO can afford it in 10 years, 10 DROs can do it in 1 year.
Independantly Wealthy+Defense DROs: how would defense DROs grow? by having more men and more weapons to defend more peoples. this doesn't have to be secret at all. it would be raising an army in plain daylight. why didn't the rest of the world gang up on the united states during it's arms race? how were empires ever allowed to amass their armies?
The Question of profit: saying it's unprofitable doesn't make it unprofitable. it was profitable for GB to take over india and hongkong, for USA to take over indian territories, etc etc.
also, the comments on that page are pretty good also.
world government have emerged (i guess you could think of it that way) when the roman empire conquered some gross portion of the world. likewise with the mongols. when you let states(the players in an anarchy) act rationally, there will not always be the means to prevent armies to use to conquer other states (the other players).
is Machevilian bad? if it was trading 1 american for 1 million japanese would it be worth it? 1 for 1? would you steal medicine from a pharmacy to save your sick daughter?
you always have the option of leaving your country. no one forces you to stay. there are many anarchic societies in the world, you could always move to an uncharted, unclaimed island. you would have all your assets with you so that you lose nothing and you would be completely unoppressed. and once you're on that island you can let supply and demand provide all the goods and services that you want. i think 5% of republicans supports ron paul, so there are maybe 7million guys just like you. somewhere out there, there's an island about the size of delaware. would you be willing to go there with 7million friends that share the same beliefs?
people voluntarily giving up power is never going to happen and it's against your morals to take it by force. so it's a bit tough for you to abolish government. but you could always move.
you're not giving up the property, the shop owner selling all of his stuff (he now has things worth everything he's ever produced and can be traded back for). he is giving up nothing except his citizenship. note that geographical location is part of his assets, the price of his shop reflects where it is.
well, in our case power is held by the people. there's a system of checks and balances so that the leaders and laws have to serve the interests of the poeple. furthermore, each person's vote counts the same if your rich or poor and minority rights are protected also. if people disapprove of their actions, they wouldn't be reelected. likewise, the only way to enforce the laws is through force. i think you agree with me on that? the government is a natural monopoly on force and law. and going by what you said earlier that monopolies are efficient, then that's good right?
you said that courts should always make wise decisions, but wouldn't free market courts (assuming that they exist) always make popular decisions because it's the community that gives them its authority and force. and also if they would need to make popular decisions in order for people to keep coming. note that popular decisions and wise decisions are not necessarily the same decision.
there's also the perspective of game theory. a coastal community will benefit from a giant wall that prevents big waves from crashing down on it when hurricanes come. how do we get people to pay for it? I want it, but i could always just let other people pay for it and then it would come for free and i benefit from it whether i use it or not. this will end in no one paying for it!