underattack86 asked: Thanks for the swift response! I very much enjoyed reading your "minarchism over anarchism" post, and it went some way to satisfying my curiosity, but I have a few more questions which I'll be posting in the comments section on that post. Here I'll only ask this: do you consider the state and it's coercion morally good, or do you consider it a necessary moral evil? Is it morally good to force others to pay for your protection, or is this merely preferable to free market alternatives?
My response wasn’t so swift this time, but oh well XD.
In answer to your question…well, first, let’s look at the question. It creates a bit of a false dichotomy, only allowing my to choose if I like state coercion and want to keep it or don’t like it but want to keep it anyway. That’s a bit like asking a man if he’s stopped beating his wife.
The answer is I consider a noncoercive night watchman state created through a voluntary social contract to be morally good. This question is so closely related to the ones you asked in the comments section of my blog, though, that I suspect you’ll find the elaboration you seek in my newly posted (and super lengthy — sorry) answer there.
And if you disagree with me still, well, that’s where anarchists and libertarians may get along very well but eventually come to an impasse.
