Of course we can -- it happens all the time. However, this time I haven't usurped the meaning of anything. Force -- the threat or actual use of violence -- is the essence of government. You just said so yourself: "enforces laws".
This is how we got into this in the first place. You CAN enforce laws in cyberspace without the use of physical realm force. You can form a fairly potent government using economic coercion. [monetary deposits, denial of communication, and out right banishment]. This rather unfortunate thread started because people objected to my use of the term government when refering to a cyberspatial entity that makes and enforces laws... without force.
Here's the closest applicable dictionary definition of "government", taken from the Random House Dictionary of the English Language: "1. the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the members, citizens, or inhabitants of communities, societies, and states; direction of the affairs of a state, community, etc.; political administration." This is amplified by looking at "govern" in the same dictionary: "1. to rule by right of authority, as a sovereign does."
Yup.
"Rule", or "political ... control" are only ever exercised through force.
Nope. Because of the nonlinear nature of an information economy [the total value of information is greater when shared in a communty], the power of a cybergovernment to banish citizens gives it the abilility to enforce its regulations. This power is enhanced substantially by the availability of cryptographic protocols to escrow e-cash and withdraw fines from it. And despite my anarchic tendencies, I think it is important that relatively powerful cybergovernments come into existence. If they don't, if the average Joe is not able to enter cyberspace and feel secure, then physical realm governments will absolutely insist (more than they do now) on extending their authority into cyberspace and it will take a fair part of my lifetime before they realize its futility. JWS