Can any of you address the following concern this minarchist has?
I am of the opinion that a minarchy (that is, a state that only has control of law, and not necessarily monopolistic law) provides a valuable service to a free and voluntary people: it prevents the emergence of a much more intrusive and repressive state. If you keep a minarchy on a leash, it’ll be a lot harder to get people on board with any would-be kingdom or dictatorship, as there will be no “power vacuum” to fill, as many historical examples of anarchy have had (think Afghanistan between the Soviets leaving and the Taliban taking over, or England between the death of Charles I and the restoration of the monarchy).
I’m starting to understand how free-market law might work, but the above concern yet remains. Anyone feel like addressing it?
EDIT: I’m aware that my examples aren’t proper anarchies, but failures of state. But the lack of effective law, I believe, led to the establishment of the tyranny that followed.