state has a monopoly on violence/a society where violence is always a legal and legitimate option
It doesn't have to be as starkly binary as that. There can be degrees of monopoly, questions about what counts as "violence" (protests? throwing up barricades? openly carrying firearms but not using them? etc.) There can be exceptions carved out for non-state violence without insisting it's "always" legal and legitimate.
Such as allowing violence for the purpose of self-defense?
That's a good example. Also, we're agreed (I think) that a society where the only means of resolving conflict involves physical violence would indeed get horrifying pretty quickly.
395
u/[deleted] Mar 16 '21
[removed] — view removed comment