[iggymcfly]

(Note: Sorry if this rambles a little bit, I was reading the different things you linked in the middle of responding.)

[ QUOTE ]

We had this. We had a libertarian government that was so small it barely escaped being no government at all. The inevitable happened. Powers were quickly usurped, the government grew like a cancer, and basically every libertarian principle it had been founded on was repudiated within less than a century. This occured because even though the populace was very much individualist, they still believed that government was somehow necessary. No culture where the majority of people believe that it is right and even necessary for a class of people to do things that for everyone else are universally recognized as criminal cannot last.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the key paragraph. You believe that the change from a Libertarian government to the semi-socialist government currently in place in the United States was "inevitable under any government system". I disagree with this vehemently. It's only "inevitable" because the populace is stupid enough to encourage it.

In the United States for example, if the voters had a revelation and decided that they didn't want the state controlling their lives, they could easily just vote Libertarian for every office in the next election, and the whole face of the government would be changed. Laws would be rescinded, taxes would be slashed, and the government could become unobtrusive again in no time.

In the current democratic system, all it would take is about 1/4 of the population to be committed to this idea (with voter turnout and competition between the current parties), and it would become so. It's not like people are being tricked by the government in most of these areas. They're actively supporting flawed concepts such as social security and actively want taxes to become even more Socialist for rich Americans.

As for your linked post re: Monarchy vs. Democracy, it's a very interesting idea and I think you got the general idea that the people in power don't have much to gain in promoting the overall long-term health of the country. However, that's merely because the only check on their power is an ignorant, uninformed electorate. The average person simply is not intelligent enough to decide what political course the country should take. That's why simple "take from the rich and give to the poor" rhetoric will succeed on so many voters. If anything, the ability to vote should be restricted some way to those who can pass a test for basic intelligence and knowledge about the government.

Finally, your main contention is that a Libertarian government works in theory, but not in practice since the people will go back to what they know as long as they assign some power to the government. However, I say this is even more true about AC. If you can't even get 25% of the population to check a box to say they want smaller government, then how can you ever overthrow the government i in the first place.

It seems like me that the options are:

1) Live in a socialist state where 50% of all earnings can be given to the government to be apportioned out inefficiently.
2) Educate the electorate.
3) Only allow the educated within the electorate to vote.
4) Destroy all forms of government all over the world and hope that private security firms prevent new ones from forming, even though all evidence throughout human history says such an effort will fail.

I just don't see how (2) or (3) can't be the natural conclusion. If people support property rights in a democratic system, they'll succeed. Basically, I still don't see where a democratic Libertarian system fails. Most of your criticisms are of the current system controlled by Republicans and Democrats. Would the police force really be that inefficient if they weren't constantly preoccupied with chasing down harmless drug users? Would 'pet projects' be diverting government funds if the electorate was committed to only putting people in office that wanted to keep spending to a minimum? It seems like simply voting Libertarian is enough to accomplish all reasonable goals and is infinitely more practical and stable than anarchic capitalism.