When discussing a free society most people believe that government is necessary for the big three public goods: Defense, Courts, and Police. Most people do not trust competing, self-interested, profit-making companies to protect them. But what they do not realize is that people rely on companies that have exactly those traits daily.
For example, when two cars pass each other going opposite directions with no barrier, what is it that stops them from running head-on into the other?
Is it because it is illegal? Nope. No person wakes up in the morning and wishes that they could run head-on into another car but decides not to on the margin because it is illegal.
The reason why the two cars can safely pass each other without problem is because both of them are pursuing their self-interest. It is not in the best interest of either driver to run head-on into the other.
Now this may seem simplistic, but when you begin to think of the world in a self-interest versus charitable altruistic manner the mirage of the government protecting you from everything withers away.
What the government lacks is strong competition and a profit motive. What they do not lack is self-interest. Having self-interest without competition and profit motive is one of the most dangerous states of man. This is the exact reason why people fear monopolies, dictators, and people who are insane.
Without competition and a profit motive, all that is left is a megalomaniac who can do what he pleases. A totalitarian dictator is the most classic example of this. The very point behind the Constitution and the three branches of government is to try and create a competitive atmosphere. Even still, the competition is weak. Pork passes through Congress everyday because the self-interest of Congress pleasing the people is in-line with the President wanting to please the people.
When you go out into the consumer world, you are faced with many different choices. Each product is competing for the scarce amount of money that you are willing to spend. This leaves you with possible large buying power, and ever greater choices.
When you step into the political world, you are faced with very few choices. Each candidate is competing for your one vote. This leaves you with no buying power, and very little choices.
Now, back to the car example, the pro-big three people will always find the one crazy example. I often hear “well what if one guy declares war on everyone, or doesn’t recognize your private court.” There are many economic reasons for how this can be dealt with and that will come in later posts. But just on the comparative approach, ask yourself, what happens when the crazy guy drives over the line and runs into you head on killing both himself and you? What does the government do to protect you from that?
So the point of this story is not to say that a free society would magically keep suicidal guy from killing you head-on but that when comparing a free society, or Anarcho-Capitalism, to a society with government, we must always compare them on the same terms.
In other words, we must compare imperfect government with an imperfect free society. You cannot possibly compare how George Washington and Jesus Christ would act under government versus how Charles Mansion and the Unabomber would act under anarchy.
If you are a pro-government person and you are thinking of the worst-case possibility for anarchy, you must also compare that to a world under Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot. Only then can you make a fair judgement of which is better.
