Individual defensive resistance without shared institutions collapses into near-permanent civil war.

Evidence

But the scenario where there is no constitutional provision for universal protection, and where each asserts himself or herself in individual resistance, still approximates to permanent civil war. While people might enjoy non-domination under such a scenario—assuming that no one person or group becomes dominant—the range and ease of undominated choice would be savagely reduced. No one would be able to trade or travel, for example, without having to equip themselves with costly resources of resistance and defence. The choices available to people might be undominated, but they would be very expensive and very restricted. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 460

Categorization

• XREF: Directly informs the reader’s core question: solidarity built purely through each agent’s defensive capacities fails; Pettit argues shared constitutional provision is strictly more promising than reciprocal-power strategies. — connects to: Civil society may be structured by perpetual war between forces — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 37; Force without authority is a state of war justifying armed resistance — John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, 192; The overall balance of forces imposes the form of war (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Civil society may be structured by perpetual war between forces #corroborates (0.80) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 37
• Political struggle resembles permanent conquest rather than finite military war. #corroborates (0.80)
• Force without authority is a state of war justifying armed resistance #expands (0.75) — John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, 192
• The overall balance of forces imposes the form of war #expands (0.75)