非自然的暴力的结果。这也是一个哲学问题。人类的发展是一种自发应对的方式，还是由于外在非自然强制的结果。
中国也有类似的哲学，其实就是道家以及孔孟之道。道家是前者，孔孟之道是后者。当然我不是很了解这个，就是一个模糊的概念而已。
下面这段文章是The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism开始的一段，讲的就是这个争论的源头。
你怎样看待人类发展的历史。简单的例子，比如语言的产生，因为人们感觉需要一个口头沟通的方式，经过
一段时期就产生了语言。这个过程是自发自然的过程。没有一个外加的强制力告诉人: 你们现在必须发展出语言。
这是人类跟动物的最重要区别之一。或者说，人在面对一定自然条件下，他有自己的自由意识以及能思考

能做出自己的选择。这是人最宝贵的一面，跟人的生命一样。

如果你们看待人以及其历史的观点是正确的化，那干脆一个集中的强制力就足够支配人类了。可惜
已经证明了那不管用，不工作，最后都失败了。

To understand our civilisation,

one must appreciate that the extended order resulted not from human

design or intention but spontaneously: it arose from unintentionally

conforming to certain traditional and largely moral practices, many of

which men tend to dislike, whose significance they usually fail to

understand, whose validity they cannot prove, and which have nonetheless

fairly rapidly spread by means of an evolutionary selection - the

comparative increase of population and wealth - of those groups that

happened to follow them. The unwitting, reluctant, even painful adoption

of these practices kept these groups together, increased their access to

valuable information of all sorts, and enabled them to be `fruitful, and

multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it' ( Genesis 1:28). This

process is perhaps the least appreciated facet of human evolution.

Socialists take a different view of these matters. They not only differ

in their conclusions, they see the facts differently. That socialists are

wrong about the facts is crucial to my argument, as it will unfold in the

pages that follow. I am prepared to admit that if socialist analyses of the

operation of the existing economic order, and of possible alternatives,

were factually correct,-. we might be obliged to ensure that the

distribution of incomes conform to certain moral principles, and that

this distribution might be possible only by giving a central authority the

power to direct the use of available resources, and might presuppose the

abolition of individual ownership of means of production. If it were for

instance true that central direction of the means of production could