Has there ever been a successful libertarian country?

[artikk]

It is so funny to me how much the freedom of others scares the crap out of you.

Again, libertarianism is a STRONG government protecting the freedoms and rights of individuals. There is nothing "do nothing" about that. Everyone is free to do as they please so long as they harm no one else nor infringe on their rights.

But you need more than that, don't you? You need control. Some people act and think in ways you don't like, and you want to control that, don't you?

How funny that "liberal" in today's society has come to mean "authoritarian."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

Libertarianism is a political theory that advocates the maximization of individual liberty in thought and action[1][2] and the minimization or even abolition of the state.[3][4] Libertarians embrace viewpoints ranging from a minimal state (or minarchist) to anarchist.

How is exactly does minimal amount of state/gov't, according to Wikipedia, equal to strong government? Your assertion can only possibly match the definition of libertarianism if the limited gov't somehow is strong enough with limited resources, ie a superman government? Impossible.
To answer the question in the thread, as someone already mentioned, one possible example of a libertarian gov't(at least in regarding to central gov't), would be when US was operating under the Articles of Confederation. Even then only the central gov't was weak with state governments holding majority of the power.

 

[HumblePie]

artikk,

Amused and others have this bad view of anarchy because they think it has a stigma of "violence" attached to it. This is where they are wrong.

Anarchy is the complete lack of government in a social setting. No more and no less. Can a lack of societal government control lead to violence and nihilism? It sure can, but it doesn't have to. Meaning, in a perfect world where everyone could agree on the same moral values and everyone always followed those values then there would be no need for any government. In reality, this would never happen, but that doesn't change the definition of the word anarchy.

Again, people see the word anarchy and see it as a "bad word" because of previous anarchy proponents that did violent things. It's the equivalent of many people today in American viewing all Muslims as evil and terrorists. Something I am seeing become far to prevalent I am sad to say.

Again, anarchy is libertarianism in its purest form. No matter how many people here try to deny it does not make it so.

 

[QuantumPion]

artikk,

Amused and others have this bad view of anarchy because they think it has a stigma of "violence" attached to it. This is where they are wrong.

Anarchy is the complete lack of government in a social setting. No more and no less. Can a lack of societal government control lead to violence and nihilism? It sure can, but it doesn't have to. Meaning, in a perfect world where everyone could agree on the same moral values and everyone always followed those values then there would be no need for any government. In reality, this would never happen, but that doesn't change the definition of the word anarchy.

Again, people see the word anarchy and see it as a "bad word" because of previous anarchy proponents that did violent things. It's the equivalent of many people today in American viewing all Muslims as evil and terrorists. Something I am seeing become far to prevalent I am sad to say.

Again, anarchy is libertarianism in its purest form. No matter how many people here try to deny it does not make it so.

Anarchy IS a bad word (well, one that has negative connotations) because we live in the real world, and a loss of the rule of law at this stage in the modern world would result in utter chaos and societal destruction (maybe not everywhere, but in major urban areas at least).

Libertarianism =! "anarchy lite". Libertarianism means laizze-faire government which enforces the rule of law and provides defense of the nation, but does little else to meddle. They are two different concepts.

There is a big gap between going from rule of law to chaos. Just like there is a big difference between European socialism and full communism - where the government actually confiscates all property and forces every individual where they work and how much they make.

 

[Elias824]

Its really a pretty broad term and everyone seems to be taking the most extreme view of it. It all comes down to how far you take it, quantumpion posted about the definition ive seen here in terms of the U.S political system.

Libertarianism =! "anarchy lite". Libertarianism means laizze-faire government which enforces the rule of law and provides defense of the nation, but does little else to meddle. They are two different concepts.

 

[Deinonych]

lol shut?