Trhe whole premise of it is for it to not be as organized as the gov so it cannot have a monopoly on force like the gov has.

Yeah

I get what your saying

But consider say Coca-Cola

They have a lot of facilities

That need guarding

So they would have to employ a lot of security

yes?

Now say you have a competitor like pepsi

Would it not result in an arms race between the companies

Perhaps leading to the bombing of eachother’s factories and offices, etc...

warfare is expensive. It produces rather unpredictabe results as you can imagine. So from the standpoint of both firms it makes much more sense to agree on a private court, that will settle disputes between them

It can be

But at the same time it can also be quite effective

yes but the cost of it would outweigh the benefit

Not always though

and even their private rights enforcment agencies would agree on that

As I was saying this seems that everything would just collapse down into smaller governments

Perhaps city/county sized

Perhaps state sized

smaller governments? Not really since competition woudl stop that from happening since government create monopolies, monopolies are impossible in free markets.

So your saying

That

A private militia couldn’t cover say... a city?

But guys you are missing the bigger question

The real question you should ask is ..

Wanna sprite cranberry?

Yes plz

There would be different kind of militias

and yes

different firms would try to top over each other with better protection

You agree that one may cover an entire city

gov has no incentives

At some point though

A militia would be able to cover a city, correct?

if it monopolizes, but as ive stated monopolies are impossible in free markets. Govs create monopolies so that would not happen

a militia from a single firm?

https://mises.org/wire/many-ways-governments-create-monopolies

Like yeah

They wouldn’t be able to take military control of a city?

what do you mean by that