Friday, October 14, 2005

So what kind of beast am i?

From Wikipedia:
"Minarchism is the view that the size, role and influence of government in a free society should be minimal ... Many minarchists consider themselves part of the libertarian tradition, and claim that what they call minarchy continues the traditions of classical liberal philosophy. The term is perhaps most often used to differentiate libertarians that believe it is possible to have a state that protects individual liberty without violating it itself, from the anarchists who believe that any state is inherently a violation of individual liberty. Minarchists believe some minimal government is necessary to preserve liberty (from invading non-minarchy based armies, if nothing else)... Many minarchists agree that government should be restricted to its 'minimal' or 'night watchman' state functions of government (e.g., courts, police, prisons, defense forces). Some minarchists include in the ideal role of government the management of essential common infrastructure (e.g., roads, money)...
minarchists favor expansion of power in a government of a small jurisdiction (like a city or county) over a larger jurisdiction (like a state or nation). This leaves individuals who wish to avoid living or working under the expansion more options (it's easier to move to another city or county than to move to another state or country)."

2 comments:

ADevoe said...

I forsee an either/or situation arising here--either totalitarian police state (and unchecked, unbalanced, political structures tend toward the restrictive), or a free-for-all that endangers personal rights. Even if the police states exist only in the great cities, and the uncontrolled territories outside of them, natural instinct engenders war. So we get a land of contentions...not a land, just pieces of property in proximity.

J. Willard Curtis said...

Go read Neal Stephenson's novel "Snow Crash", then we'll talk.

Also, the minimalism of government doesn't change the dynamic of power distribution -- even in our current system there's not an either/or dynamic. We have police/fbi etc to enforce individual rights, but we also have courts, municpal governments, state governments, national guard, federal armed forces, as balancing powers. None of this would change under a more minimal government.

The difference would be less regulation, less government spending, and less taxation. period.