Minarchism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Part of the Politics series on Libertarianism |
|
Schools of thought Origins Ideas Key issues |
| Politics Portal · |
In civics, minarchism, sometimes called minimal statism or small government, is the view that the size, role and influence of government in a free society should be minimal — only large enough to protect the liberty and property of each individual. 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 who 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).
The term was coined in 1970 or 1971 by Samuel Edward Konkin III, an anarchist. [1] [2]
Minarchists agree that the guiding principle in determining what should or should not fall into the domain of the government is the maximization of individual liberty. Minarchists often disagree on exactly how to accomplish this. Many minarchists usually 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 and money). In general, minarchists favor the administration and funding of government services in 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 an expansion of government more options (it's easier to move to another city or county than to move to another state or country) - thus inducing more downsizing political pressure on the government. Minarchists are generally opposed to government programs that either transfer wealth or subsidize certain sectors of the economy. However, most minarchists support some level of government funding, including perhaps taxation in some limited cases, as long as individual liberty and the non-aggression principle are not compromised. [3]
Some minarchists explain their vision of the state by referring to basic principles rather than arguing in terms of pragmatic results. For example, in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia Robert Nozick defines the role of a minimal state as follows:
- "Our main conclusions about the state are that a minimal state, limited to the narrow functions of protection against force, theft, fraud, enforcement of contracts, and so on, is justified; that any more extensive state will violate persons' rights not to be forced to do certain things, and is unjustified; and that the minimal state is inspiring as well as right. Two noteworthy implications are that the state may not use its coercive apparatus for the purpose of getting some citizens to aid others, or in order to prohibit activities to people for their own good or protection."
Other minarchists instead use utilitarian arguments. They might use theoretical economic arguments, like Ludwig von Mises's contribution to Austrian economics, or statistical economic research, like the Index of Economic Freedom.
Other arguments for minarchism are natural rights, contractarianism and egalitarianism.
Prominent minarchists include Benjamin Constant, Herbert Spencer, Leonard Read, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, James M. Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Bill Maher, John Hospers, Robert Nozick, George Reisman.
Organizations with minarchist members and supporters include Reason Foundation, International Society for Individual Liberty, and Bureaucrash.
Contents |
[edit] Criticism
Some believe that minarchism is a contradictory philosophy. Libertarianism, by definition, opposes the initiation of force or fraud against person or property. In order for a state to fund itself, it would have to tax people, which requires coercion and thus an initiation of force. Some libertarians argue that anarcho-capitalism is the only logically consistent form of libertarian belief. It is also contradictory to state that violence is immoral, yet still maintain violence in the form of a government.
But supporters of minarchism counter that a government could survive on private donations and the creation of trust funds without any form of taxation whatsoever. Even if a government could be voluntarily funded, then it still amounts to an authority with a monopoly of force over a given area, and as such would dictate and control. The mere existence of government, irrespective of how it is funded, undermines one's self-ownership, since to govern is to control.
Also, some libertarians believe that the concept of "constitutionally limited government" is a fallacy. All known governments in history have grown in size and scope[dubious — see talk page]. The American Founding Fathers' approach of limiting the inherent force linked with government (in respect to the United States Constitution) has not worked[dubious — see talk page]. The size and scope of the contemporary US federal government probably is far greater than what the Founding Fathers intended or envisaged.
Some minarchists believe their approach to be more pragmatic. However, professor Hans Hermann Hoppe has argued that the only form of state that can pragmatically be restrained from expanding is a monarchical (privately owned) state.
[edit] See also
- Classical liberalism
- Capitalism
- Objectivist philosophy
- Libertarianism
- Minarchists
- Anarcho-capitalism
- Starve the beast
- Anarchism
- Anarcho-individualism
[edit] External links
- The Freedom Library: A collection of Masterpieces of Economics and Philosophy - Free Pdf and multimedia downloads of the great liberal thinkers.
