Maurice,
You mentioned the factional nature of the libertarian philosophy and I see you have landed astride one of the fault lines.
Some libertarians, as you seem to be doing, will acknowledge the need for the state to regulate personal behavior, and then they fall apart over the details, some want only the minimal amount of state intrusion into interpersonal relations, others are willing to accept a larger role for the state. This can become an endless argument, as I am sure you well know. <grin>
But there is a powerful anarchist tendency within the libertarian movement and in general, I am attracted to this faction. The most extreme anarchists desire no state control anywhere of any sort whatsoever, even transnationally. These folks used to try to claim that they were the only "true libertarians".
Another faction of the anarchist wing will acknowledge the need for the nation state, but mainly for the purpose of national defense and for diplomatic dealings with other nation states, but are opposed to the state regulating interpersonal affairs.
Others, you might call them Jeffersonians, are basically anarchists, but accept the need for a national government for foreign affairs, and then desire that any other government structure be as local as possible, and desire that government to stay out of interpersonal matters, as much as possible.
This wing is accepting of an enlightened "vigilante" response to local problems. Guess I am a sort of Jeffersonian.
Slagle |
