Minarchism vs. Anarcho-Capitalism

The Minarchism vs. Anarcho-Capitalism debate is fundamentally a semantic debate, and a colossal waste of time.

[NeonGen]

Essentially Anarcho-Capitalists are libertarians that take the NAP serious whereas Libertarians (the party types) say: "We shouldn't initiate force/coercion but on the other hand ... <insert irrational excuse here>"

Liberarians and AnCaps get along just fine in my experience. AnCaps can be considered more principled whereas Libertarians/minarchists are more pragmatic. AnCaps tend to focus more on innovation towards replacing government services with free market alternatives. Whereas Libertarians tend to focus more on how to shrink the government from within.

[terradraca]

In strictly practical terms, you kind of are advocating ending the FED and all that because we all know those lard asses wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell in a free market, but of course, that's their fault, not yours.

[litigioussociety]

The difference may be semantics, but only one term is confusing: minarchist. Some people identifying as libertarian or minarchist advocate for a state, but no anarcho-capitalists do that. If you don't like the name anarcho-capitalist, then use voluntaryist.

A similar concept would be someone who is classically liberal identifying as a liberal, it's confusing. Instead they should use a term that better identifies them to the audience, such as libertarian.

[jesse]

Every minarchist that I've talked to wants a state and believes that the state should be exempt from the NAP because "we need it or there would be chaos".

Just like every other type of statist.

[greyed]

Personally I'd call myself a minarchist and and not an anarchist.  The way that I try to agree with those who are further along the liberty spectrum than I am is to ask them to work with me to get to a minarchist position first, then worry about the last few steps that may separate us at that point.  IE, we agree on 99% of the things, let's work on those and worry about the 1% later.

Kinda like how Penn puts it.  Why are we arguing about roads now?  How about we not argue about the roads until we get rid of the surveillance state, the war on drugs, the war(s) overseas, etc.  How about we agree that right now we'll let them have the roads for now provided we can get them to help us on that other stuff?  We'll revisit roads later.  How about that?

[killerbee]

I'm not sure I like the way you're trying to redefine the words 'government' and 'state' here. To me, they both have the same definition, a coercive monopoly with the right to initiate force and/or fraud against people.

[tylerantony]

I sometimes wonder if you are getting the "minarchist" position wrong.  What percentage of minarchists really advocate totally decentralized polycentric law with competing private governments?  I've known a few people who brand themselves minarchists who are in fact *statists* in the sense of the word that you use, prescribing a government which has coercive monopoly over a region of land, and then prescribing "minimal policy control", usually involving defence in order to attempt to resolve the free rider problem for defence in the usual way (statism).

[petterwiggen]

We aren't talking about the same. I despise the idea of getting rid of the state and having multiple governments (of equal power) ruling over an individual. I see the state or government as a necessary evil and the best way to protect people from a state of your definition is downsizing the state and getting out of everyday life. Such as I think the state should get out of marriages but nobody should not be unable to get married. However, on the other hand, I don't like the idea of Church's not paying taxes, but if a church does pay taxes they should be allowed to say whatever they want since they're not getting any extra privileges.

I am a Minarchism I am not pro-destroying the state/government and replacing it with multiple

[igorgerlovin]

Thanks to this video, I finally reconciled the gap between minarchists and anarchists. I am both. Amen!

[Minarchiste]

This video completely misrepresents the minarchist position. Shane Killian ... minarchists are not idiots. We understand the arguments of the anarcho-capitalists. We know you guys want competing "security agencies". We just don't believe it could work in practice. Competing armies are not the same thing as competing bakeries.

[Zero-peiq]

Government: the organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified according to the distribution of power within it- merriam-webster.com
Political- 1. of or relating to government, a government, or the conduct of government. 2. involving or charged or concerned with acts against a government or a political system. 3. : of, relating to, involving, or involved in politics and especially party politics
By the definition I use for government which is a valid one I'm anti-government. I'm an Anarcho Capitalist. And since it is commonly used to mean the oppressive group of people who initiate force against peaceful people even if that isn't the real definition I'm not saving that word I want to be seen as the word that represents that bad thing that it really always was. If you support taxation(which is theft) for any "government", your not a libertarian your a minarchist. Either you are against all violations of the NAP or you are not. Minarchists if they do support theft to any degree are statists and not libertarians. If they don't support taxation ever then they are already Anarcho Capitalists and just don't know it.

[sigurdvandewiel]

This reminds me a lot of the 'theory of evolution' debate. Many people say evolution is "just a theory". People like Matt Dillahunty then try to convince them that a scientific theory is an all but proven, thoroughly tested hypothesis. I think it would be far more productive to come up with a new term for "scientific theory", because let's face it, the general public thinks a 'theory' is just an idea. "But they're wrong!!" Yea well... language evolves.

Your definition of 'government' has the same problem. It causes needless confusion. Trying to change everyone's mind on what 'government' means seems like a waste of time to me. I think we should just accept the fact that most people view 'the state' and 'the government' as synonymous.
Do you really want to hunker down and defend your definition of government, or would you rather call it 'privatized police' for example, and get on with the actual debate?

[spamface]

Couldn't one just allow private institutions do run courts, but they can always be appealed for violations of rights to the state run courts?

[Ermiar]

Shane Killian Did you see the recent Atheist Experience (#888) where a caller asks Matt and Tracie about their thoughts on a society based on libertarian principles? Both of them were very outspoken about the idea stating that we'd basically be recreating a government. Here is the relevant video: Atheist Experience #888: Scientific Journals and Reporting 

[Marvindaloo]

Yeah, that's not minarchism. Minarchism most definitely advocates for a state, not just a government. It is statism. It advocates a state that monopolizes the use of force SOLELY in order to prevent the use of force by competitors. The problem I see with the anarchist government is that the monopolization of the use of force is an unavoidable potentiality. At any point, a strong power could outdo its competitor governments through initiating the strongest force... NOT through offering the most desirable services. Here's the problem: government cannot be an open market. Open markets can only exist because customers are certain that the services being offered will not be forced upon them. Because of this, such a monopoly on the use of force must be established in order to ensure the openness of all other markets (that is, freedom of choice) besides that of force.

[TheEnneagram]

SUGGESTION: Be careful with your use of the word “regulations” (6:52) and the implication that it is synonymous with “rules”. The origin, the root, of “regulation” is “regis”, which means “king”. The regular fuel you put in your car has the king's approval, for example, as opposed to being “normal”, or, to use another loaded word, “standard”. Cheers.

[jfhrdy]

Yeah but what distinguishes a board of governors from the government is that THE government is in the political sphere which is entirely based on coercion. THE state IS THE government

[BadMouse]

I'd also argue, how are you going to achieve a government that shuns the use of violence? How would they not have the power to be able to do that?

[unlimitedpower]

I am a Minarchist because I believe in national security and public schools. Or else everything else should be privatized. I also believe in the NAP. I also agree with DownsizeDC.

[unlimitedpower]

Shane, would you rather have the Gold Standard again rather than the Federal Reserve? The Gold Standard was better in my opinion.