Strange Bedfellows

The election has gotten me thinking about political coalitions, because to some degree thats what every political party is. Both the left and the right like to project this image of solidarity, but within their ranks it's quite clear that political positions and ideologies run the gamut. From the extreme right wing conservative christians to the log cabin republicans; from the old guard conservative southern Democrats to the extreme left (communists, socialists, feminists etc.), there is quite a bit of diversity among the different factions of both of the major parties.

Which brings me to my next point: What would an anarchist/minarchist coalition look like?

Theoretically that is what the Libertarian party is. Surely getting a no-government faction and a limited government faction to agree can't be easy. Of course that depends on how we define government. Minarchists believe that a minimal, constitutionally limited government is an absolute necessity, whereas anarchist reject the idea that any formal top-down form of government is necessary.

This doesn't mean "no rules," but rather no monopolistic authority over the use of non-initiatory force. Which leads us to the question: would it be feasible to have a constitutionally limited government with no power to initiate force that also has no jurisdictional monopoly on the powers that it is given?

It seems to me that that is what most of the politically active libertarians I have encountered are aiming for. I've heard it dozens of times: "a constitutionally limited government, paid for with users fees." The variation is always in whether or not that government has a monopoly on the services it provides. Some say "yes," and some say "no."

My theory is that the so-called "purist" position among libertarians is really the middle ground, the place where anarchism and minarchism roughly meet. And if anarchists and minarchists can find a platform that both groups agree upon and can confidently put both their efforts and their money behind, then I think they are doing pretty well regardless of how many votes they get.

They are doing a lot better than the Democrats whose postion from this last election on gay marriage seems to be: "all people should be treated equally regardless of their sexual orientation, and marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman and should be preserved as such..."

The fact that anyone could stand behind either a party or a person with that position absolutely blows my mind.

Share this

Of course, there are a

Of course, there are a number of anarchists (such as Y.T.) who recognize that electoral politics aren't the solution to anything in particular.

I was among the balloteers four years ago. It blows *my* mind, now, that anyone even bothers to meander down to the voting booths.

What would an

What would an anarchist/minarchist coalition look like?

Like two groups of people arguing incessantly about one fundamental issue for the short duration of the coalition. :D

The only platform I can see such a group consenting to is "Peacefully shrink the size, scope, and power of the government."

Unfortunately, we are very

Unfortunately, we are very far away from actually having to worry about such disagreements as a practical matter, since what we have now is a good distance away from what either faction of the libertarian coalition wants. So let's just concentrate for now on rolling back the government and cross that bridge when we come to it! Hang together, hang seperately, etc.