[Architect]

Hoppe wants us to believe that consensus building among peers (i.e., democracy) leads to war more inexorably than other forms of government

Where exactly did you get this idea? In fact, Hoppe's point is that not democracy lead to war per se but rather that democracy leads to total war. It's an important insight, one which is clearly true. Democracies engage in total war because the enemy must be proven evil to rally the citizenry to the battle.

America has not fought a war in the 20th century for limited purposes such as territorial gain. American wars are always fought for abstract reasons, to eradicate evil. This is impossible but that doesn't stop us from trying. Zviadist was right when he says that communism, a form of democracy, fights wars for the same reason.

Democracy also fights wars on the home front. To eradicate poverty. Or patriarchy. Or drugs. Or racism... Once again the objectives are impossible at attain and ultimately the purpose becomes the perpetration of the war and the self-satisfaction of the warriors, rather than progress towards the supposed goals.

[beckett]

I think it was de Tocqueville (or was it Samuel Johnson?) who said that a "democracy can only exist until the voters realize they can vote themselves the contents of the treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy collapses over loose fiscal policy...followed by a dictatorship." There is something to be said for this view. I am not blind to the pitfalls for democracy, but as many have said before me, I consider constitutional democracy the best option among several flawed choices.

Certainly I don't believe that Hoppe's idea of thousands of feudal despotisms bound by loose ties is an improvement. On the contrary, bloodshed and strife would increase.