[Rothbardian]

I am as anti-government as anybody I know. Still, one has to acknowledge that the quality of government (the extent to which it engages in objectively-criminal activity) is not even.

Modern western governments are much better than older western and current non-western governments.

We also see both some success in limiting (or, at least, slowing down) the expansion of government powers and, in all-to-rare an occasion, actual scale-down of government powers, at least in particular fields.

This is to say that political culture is a critical component in determining the actual extent of government activity.

A minimal government will stay "minimal" for as long, and to the extent, the that underlying political culture within society demands a minimal government, and sees non-minimal forms of government intervention as illegitimate.

That's like pointing out that a little cancer is better than terminal cancer. That's true....but you've still got cancer.

[Phred]

That's like pointing out that a little cancer is better than terminal cancer. That's true....but you've still got cancer.

It is often the case that humans are faced with a choice, not between good and bad, but between bad and less bad. To say, "I reject the 'less bad' option in favor of the 'good' option," makes sense only if there is in fact a 'good' option.

Phred

[Rothbardian]

It is often the case that humans are faced with a choice, not between good and bad, but between bad and less bad. To say, "I reject the 'less bad' option in favor of the 'good' option," makes sense only if there is in fact a 'good' option.

Phred

That's nice. I'd pick no cancer over a little cancer, personally. I don't care if you call that 'good' or 'less bad'.

[Eran]

That's nice. I'd pick no cancer over a little cancer, personally. I don't care if you call that 'good' or 'less bad'.

And I wish you all the luck.

My point wasn't about choice (though Phred is right - you can only choose amongst available options, and, unfortunately, an anarchy isn't currently on the menu) but rather about the importance of political culture in determining the scope and degree of criminality of governments.

It is easy to make sweeping statements about government and its tendency to grow, thereby becoming overly pessimistic about the likely success of a gradualist approach to diminishing the state.

If you did have a small cancer, surely you wouldn't object to a treatment that shrunk, but didn't eliminate it, given that the latter wasn't possible given available medical knowledge, right?

[Rothbardian]

And I wish you all the luck.

My point wasn't about choice (though Phred is right - you can only choose amongst available options, and, unfortunately, an anarchy isn't currently on the menu) but rather about the importance of political culture in determining the scope and degree of criminality of governments.

It is easy to make sweeping statements about government and its tendency to grow, thereby becoming overly pessimistic about the likely success of a gradualist approach to diminishing the state.

If you did have a small cancer, surely you wouldn't object to a treatment that shrunk, but didn't eliminate it, given that the latter wasn't possible given available medical knowledge, right?

Life is dynamic, everything is up for grabs. Authority will not obviously go for anarchy but do you think the state is going to reduce itself any quicker? Libertarians have been harping about their principles for over a century now and have they managed to even slow the state down? No, and it's not for lack of insight. Hayek published papers in the early 20's predicting the great depression; if simply being right was effective then we wouldn't be where we are today.

Libertarians need to stop playing the game by the statists' rules. What authority offers as options is 100% irrelevant. All that has to happen for the state to die is for people to stop pretending it has any legitimacy at all. The day that happens, it's over. And then, just like now, any option you can come up with will be on the table for consideration.

Create a new state, try again, make it small and convince yourself it will stay that way? Or develop a rational society that doesn't create violent hierarchies and thrive on oppression? I know what I'd pick.