Time to hit the last school of thought in classical liberalism libertarianism. – Anarcho-Capitalism. Here is the synopsis of the video.
The two big names associated with this school are Murray Rothbard and David Friedman. There are actually two different schools of thought on anarchy. One is collectivist anarchy and then there is his school based n capitalism.
Rothbard believes in Natural Rights like Ayn Rand but he developed the Non-Coercive Axiom: It is always wrong to use force except in self-defense.
David Friedman follows his father of the Chicago School with its comparison of market versus government. Focused on Consequences.
The role of Government is that there should not be any government at all. No State should exist.
A State is an institution which claims a monopoly over the legitimate use of force over a given territory. Rothbard says that this violates natural rights. To him taxation is theft.
Friedman takes a little different tack by saying the state is inevitably inefficient. The Market is always more efficient than government.
Government is illegitimate and inefficient. They use the examples of private security and private arbitration being more prevalent because they are more efficient that the police and courts. If you create a minimal state it will never stay minimal.
I am not sure this is a classical liberal school so much as some of the folks that use classical liberal ideas and push them to some interesting conclusions. I have been asked by anarchists why I don’t like anarchy and I have two basic problems with it. 1) While it is true that say arbitration is used in the place of the courts there is in inequity from one arbitration company to the next. You could always have the issue of corruption that sways an arbiter and then you have no recourse against it. 2)Private security is great until it turns against you and with no clearly stated Bill of Rights, you could not stop them.
Practically the issues are legion but the most troubling one is defense because anyone who knows anything about game theory knows that anarchy loses every time. Private defense firms have no way of organizing on a grand scale against a truly organized aggressor. I will not argue that private security is probably better for smaller jobs but the big stuff but there is not a chance and would you want to give a private army that kind of power with no governmental recourse if they go rogue? I see anarchy going two ways of pressed, it will ether develop into a totalitarian corporation that dominates everyone or it goes to small government. Both are inevitable.
This country originally was run in anarchy and people gave it up after only a few years to go with the limited government of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Anarchy failed after the Revolution because it became too dangerous a society in which to live. Sorry as much as it may be true that small governments don’t stay that way, it is also true that no government does not stay that way. Some organized threat will end it or the basic fact some people are evil and will require an organized response.
Next: Closing Thoughts