The former discusses liberty in the context of clannish behaviour, arguing that it is the existence of the institutions of modern democracies that allows people individual liberty, as it precludes the need for clan structures (extended family groups, crime syndicates, patronage networks and such).
Historically it was the other way around. Societies that were already not-so-clannish were the ones that tended to make governments that defended individual liberty. Southeast England and the Dutch Lowlands were already far ahead on the path of eliminating clans before the states became strong and centralized.
I'd say that the above summary of the article is incorrect. The article poses that a strong, central state is essential for the elimination of clan structures as the fundamental organizing principle of a society. It also states that the concept of individual liberty we have today could only develop under such strong, central states, and that strong, central states are essential to the preservation of that liberty. The 'natural' inclination of any society is to gravitate back towards clannish behavior, and the role of the state is to prevent that kind of ba...
A pair of links I found recently (via Marginal Revolution) and haven't found on LW:
http://www.cato-unbound.org/2014/03/10/mark-s-weiner/paradox-modern-individualism
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475054.0;all
The former discusses liberty in the context of clannish behaviour, arguing that it is the existence of the institutions of modern democracies that allows people individual liberty, as it precludes the need for clan structures (extended family groups, crime syndicates, patronage networks and such).
The latter is a author's summary of a white paper on the subject of decentralised Bitcoin prediction markets with a link to the paper.