LIBERTARIANISM IN A FALLEN WORLD

"A 1982 article, The Impossibility of anarcho-capitalism, was recently called to my attention. In it, the author, one Tony Hollick, argues that the "components" of anarcho-capitalism are:

1.A belief that a fully-fledged free-market private property based social order can be realised and maintained without the existence of a single, finally arbitrary system of lawmaking and enforcement which asserts jurisdiction over non-consenting parties.

2.A preference for the imagined advantages of that social order however conceived.

3.A willingness to advocate attempts to instantiate it as an actual experiment in the more or less foreseeable future.

This type of argument is typical of those who want to argue for states and the aggression states commit, while still adopting the libertarian label. It is a way of changing to subject away from the aggression they favor, by insinuating the presumption that the anarchist is for something, and thus needs to prove it before we abandon the current (statist) order and "adopt" the system known as anarchy. This approach tries to color anarchy as just one of many prima facie equally valid competing possible systems. Anarchists have the burden of proving we should "adopt" it just like a socialist bears the burden of proving we should adopt socialism. Thus, it is not surprising Hollick concludes, "One can only be struck by the similarities between 'socialism' and 'anarchism'. Partisans of every kind rush to show that their vision is uniquely realisable; and the visions cover the entire range of mutually contradictory systems and practices."

But, of course, anarchists don't advocate a "substitute system". We are not for something, other than respect for rights. Rather, we are an-archist, "without (belief in) (political) rulers." We simply are not persuaded that political action is justified. This is because we see that states by their nature commit aggression--and as we are libertarians and against aggression (see my What Libertarianism Is), we are thus against states."
Mises

It’s interesting that this discussion of secular religious belief systems can avoid any mention of Christianity. I’m Catholic. Before I have to hear about all of the abuses of the Church (state) let me just say, you’re right. But, I think these abuses just prove the authors point.

The Church serves two primary purposes, one sacramental and one judicial. It is the judicial with which I am concerned.

"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” Mathew 18:15

The above passage seems to me to describe the real function of the state, that of final arbiter. Due to our fallen nature we need a final arbiter. The problem is that the State (Church), because it is run by those same fallen individuals, cannot seem to limit itself to its God given role. It always overreaches.

I have always believed that the American Constitution came closer to describing the true role of government than any document since the Bible. The idea of government as final arbiter of disputes regarding violation of our Natural Law Rights seemed to me always to be what the framers of the Constitution were striving for.

I think that the rule of subsidiarity as promulgated by the Church, the idea that all solutions to problems should emanate from the lowest level and only move up when no solution can be found pretty nearly fits the mold of libertarianism, or anarcho-libertarianism, if I understand your use of these terms correctly. This does presuppose the existence of a final arbiter, however.

Due to our fallen nature I don’t believe it is possible for us to function without some very limited government. The problem is, how do we keep that government contained? The Catholic Church and its abuses caused the Reformation and the abuses of the American government are about to cause something of an equally historic nature.