ทวีตที่ปักหมุด
-> Anarchy is the natural state of things.
-> Under anarchy, people have natural rights they are free to exercise.
-> Anarchy is vulnerable to "overthrow" by collective (government) use of force (power). The government that utilizes power most effectively will displace the anarchy, regardless of how righteous the ideology of the other governments are. (Righteousness is not a necessary condition of power). This is binary (but situation dependent) - a government either does or does not have enough power to enforce the rules.
-> The displacement of the anarchy is inevitable because there exists collectives / governments with ideologies that support the use of force to displace anarchy.
-> Therefore, for the government with the most righteous ideology to displace the anarchy, it also needs to be the most powerful government.
-> Corollary: if you believe libertarianism (the preservation of natural rights) is the most righteous ideology, then it is also OK to believe that a libertarian government can possess the most power and use that power to displace external anarchy and protect against external threats, with the goal of preserving internal anarchy (natural rights) for the citizens of that government.
The disputes within libertarianism are usually not about the purpose of government, it is about how government can effectively achieve the above. Libertarians can truly range between pure anarchist and neocon. I believe that the libertarian party can attract more people if it focused official messaging on the importance of preserving natural rights and the benefits of that, while leaving the "how" for internal debate.
@beinlibertarian @LPNational
English
