IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jeehcn/v12y2002i4n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anarchism and Minarchism: A Rapprochement

Author

Listed:
  • Machan Tibor R.

    (Chapmam University & Stanford University)

Abstract

Among classical liberals and libertarians a serious debate has been afoot about whether any sort of government (some call it "state") is justified. Murray N. Rothbard, Jan Narveson, Bruce Benson and Randy Barnett are usually listed as the main skeptics, while Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, John Hospers, among others, are listed as defenders of the morality of limited government. In this paper I argue that once properly understood, the two sides aren't in fundamental disagreement. Anarcho-libertarians do embrace the idea that men and women in a free society are justified in establishing a legal order in defense of their basic and derivative rights, and this is also what limited government proponents advance as the basis for the system they deem to be just. I argue that no fundamental difference exists between these two legal orders. The monopoly anarcho-libertarians claim limited government proponents wrongfully sanction is, in fact, not a coercive monopoly and the legal order proposed by anarchists would also have this monopolistic characteristic. This should put an end to this fruitless dispute and free the energies on both sides to mount a really important and henceforth united defense of the free society with its just legal order.Parmi les libéraux classiques et les libertariens un important débat concerne la question de savoir si une quelconque forme de gouvernement (certains l'appellent "Etat") est justifiée. Murray N. Rothbard, Jan Narveson, Bruce Benson et Randy Barnett sont habituellement classés parmi les principaux sceptiques, alors qu'Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, John Hospers, entre autres, sont plutôt classés en tant que défenseurs de la moralité d'un gouvernement limité. Dans cet article, je soutiens qu'une fois correctement compris, les deux clans ne sont pas fondamentalement en désaccord. Les anarcho-libertariens soutiennent l'idée que les hommes et les femmes dans une société libre sont en droit d'établir un ordre législatif pour défendre leurs droits fondamentaux et leurs droits dérivés, et c'est aussi ce que les partisans du gouvernement limité proposent comme fondement du système qu'ils considèrent être juste. Je soutiens qu'il n'existe pas de différence fondamentale entre ces deux ordres législatifs. Le monopole du gouvernement limité que les partisans anarcholibertariens sanctionnent à tort est, en fait, non pas un monopole coercitif, et l'ordre législatif proposé par les anarchistes aurait lui aussi cette caractéristique monopolistique.Cela devrait mettre un terme à cette dispute stérile et libérer les énergies des deux côtés pour ériger à l'avenir une défense unie réellement importante pour une société libre avec un ordre juridique juste.

Suggested Citation

  • Machan Tibor R., 2002. "Anarchism and Minarchism: A Rapprochement," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jeehcn:v:12:y:2002:i:4:n:6
    DOI: 10.2202/1145-6396.1077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1145-6396.1077
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1145-6396.1077?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. von Mises, Ludwig, 1985. "Liberalism in the Classical Tradition," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number mises1985.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2004. "The Freiburg School: Walter Eucken and Ordoliberalism," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 04/11, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    2. Viktor Vanberg, 2014. "James M. Buchanan’s contractarianism and modern liberalism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 18-38, March.
    3. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2006. "On the Complementarity of Liberalism and Democracy," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 06/9, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    4. Giandomenica Becchio, 2018. "Gender, Feminist and Heterodox Economics: Interconnections and Differences in a Historical Perspective," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 1, pages 5-24, March.
    5. Viktor Vanberg, 2011. "Liberal constitutionalism, constitutional liberalism and democracy," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Brandon M. Tate & Walter E. Block, 2022. "Buyer Beware: A Critique of the #BuyBlack Movement," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 37(Winter 20), pages 77-89.
    7. Viktor J. Vanberg, 2020. "J. M. Buchanan’s contractarian constitutionalism: political economy for democratic society," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 339-370, June.
    8. Werner Bonefeld, 2018. "Stateless Money and State Power: Europe as ordoliberal Ordnungsgef?ge," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(1), pages 5-26.
    9. Suri Ratnapala, 2012. "Economics of collective choice—the missing dimension of constitutional theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 461-466, September.
    10. Viktor Vanberg, 1999. "Markets and Regulation: On the Contrast Between Free-Market Liberalism and Constitutional Liberalism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 219-243, October.
    11. David S. Lucas, 2017. "Federal homelessness policy: A robust political economy approach," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 277-303, September.
    12. R. A. Gonce, 2003. "Ludwig von Mises: The Man and His Economics," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 633-636, July.
    13. Mingardi Alberto, 2017. "Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World: By Deirdre Nansen McCloskey," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-15, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jeehcn:v:12:y:2002:i:4:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.