非自然的暴力的結果。這也是一個哲學問題。人類的發展是一種自發應對的方式，還是由於外在非自然強制的結果。
中國也有類似的哲學，其實就是道家以及孔孟之道。道家是前者，孔孟之道是後者。當然我不是很了解這個，就是一個模糊的概念而已。
下面這段文章是The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism開始的一段，講的就是這個爭論的源頭。
你怎樣看待人類發展的歷史。簡單的例子，比如語言的產生，因為人們感覺需要一個口頭溝通的方式，經過
一段時期就產生了語言。這個過程是自發自然的過程。沒有一個外加的強制力告訴人: 你們現在必須發展出語言。
這是人類跟動物的最重要區別之一。或者說，人在面對一定自然條件下，他有自己的自由意識以及能思考

能做出自己的選擇。這是人最寶貴的一面，跟人的生命一樣。

如果你們看待人以及其歷史的觀點是正確的化，那乾脆一個集中的強制力就足夠支配人類了。可惜
已經證明了那不管用，不工作，最後都失敗了。

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