Comment: I'm a minarchist and not an

(See in situ)

I'm a minarchist and not an

I'm a minarchist and not an anarchist because I believe at some point it becomes permissible to violate a strong view of the non-aggression principle to achieve particular outcomes in society. For example, I have no problem with a socialized police force that uses money raised through taxation, in order for it not to be the case that only the wealthy are able to afford a minimum standard of protection against theft or bodily injury. I am also not opposed to a minimal welfare state, where there is some minimal threshold of income guaranteed to all citizens, to be collected through compulsory taxation. I would prefer that it is done in a way that is least likely to disrupt the economy, which is probably something like a VAT or a land tax, and which does the least damage to the marginal decision to work, which is most likely a guaranteed minimum income. But these are mere quibbles. When the time comes that government is so small that there is actually policy relevance for minarchists vs. anarchist, this conversation would be more fruitful.