Any Libertarian arguments against Anarchy?

[Kasz216]

mrstickball said:

Rath said:
Anarchy is the extreme of libertarianism.

To be a libertarian doesn't mean you have to take it to the very extreme though, it's a sliding scale. Just like how socialists don't have to believe that all property has to be communually owned.

The libertarians on this board don't take libertarianism to the point where they reject all established authority.

Pretty much, this.

The ability to live free usually requires a mediator. Someone that can codify, ratify and enforce contract, weights and measurements, and extract compensation from the violation of said contracts.

Most libertarians fit somewhere in the middle area of the philosophy - that government can and should exist, but its impact on society and freedom must be at a minimum (likely around the 5-15% of GDP level as a very broad-reaching metric).

And like you said, every political ideology has its extremists, and anarchy is where the logical conclusion of libertarianism meets its extremity.

It's a shame that it's near impossible to get an indepth book on Freiberg School of Ecnoomics in English.