Any Libertarian arguments against Anarchy?

[MrT-Tar]

Viper1 said:

Jumpin said:

Libertarianism is the opposite of Liberalism. Libertarianism is a system which caters to the healthiest and most selfish people in society; those who are unhealthy or unselfish are at a disadvantage. The aim of Liberalism is to provide the greatest life experience possible for every man, woman, and child; it is precisely the opposite of libertarianism.

The core of Libertarianism is Anarchy - but not in the true communist sense where all property is public; but in the sense that everyone with possessions has absolute authority over that property - it even permits racism, a Libertarian politician in the US said that people should be able to turn away customers based on race.

The core of Liberalism is Democracy; we're familiar with the concept.

Libertarianism works on the principle that the people will help the people.   Where liberalism expects the government to do this for them.   Libertarianism is hardly selfish whereas you could say Liberalism is just lazy.   Worse, it breads a society that becomes dependant on that government

As for the property rights of a store allowing the proprietor to turn customers away based on race, that's true.  However, you're missing how that business model would eventually lead to a business failure given that most people would not shop there.  That's the point.  It balances power.    The proprietor can choose his rules (it is their property, after all) while the people can choose to support such a business practice or not thereby enacting their own citizenry regulation....power to the people.

liberalism doesn't really expect the government to help people that much, only to a very limited extent.  Think of when Jefferson said 'the best government is that which governs least', that is the general classical liberal view of the state.  They believe in a nightwatchman state which just provides protection for individuals rights to life, liberty and property and maybe some public goods, which cannot effectively be provided by the private sector.  Or think of John Stuart Mill's harm principle, where the state can only intervene in one's life or actions to prevent harm to another.  Liberalism doesn't expect government to do much for people; hence why libertarianism is really just a radical strand of neo-liberalism.