The fundamental acid test of any political economic system is how it can organize for and conduct. Combat for a very long time now has required close organization and synchronization of elements and units and this continues to require structures of authority in hierarchies that are even strikingly alien and ill at ease with today's democracies. The author cites examples of guerrilla war and tribal conflict but societies that relied on these as means to maintain their sovereignty have perished or have been diminished so that they are utterly at the mercy of nations that do not.

Moreover, decentralized political economies cannot either deliver the goods when it comes to economies of scale that modern capital makes possible. Democracies strain to deliver large capital intensive projects like the Hoover Dam or the construction of aircraft carriers but these are simply currently beyond the pale of even more decentralized political economies.

Of course, technology can change how warfare is conducted and reduce the relative advantages of economies of scale. If one prefers anarchist political economy, one should be interested in anything that levels the playing field between decentralized and centralized coordination strategies. When push comes to shove though, will you be so enthralled by anarchist ideals that you would scorn or deny technology that tends to centralization if it makes humanity wealthier or wiser than alternatives?