4

Are there any countries that that can be said to be truly liberal, in the sense of only having a very minimal state (a so-called night-watchmen state)? If not, which ones come closest?

Edit: More specifically, I'm looking for examples of places where the state is very limited due to an underlying minarchism sentiment, not because its an undeveloped and/or conflict ridden area. Basically, think Bioshock.

Speldosa
  • 291
  • 1
  • 7
  • Not really, such a thing is not even desirable. Without a state anyone with big muscles can come, steal everything you own and set your house on fire, and only your eyes remains to cry and your aggressors will never get any kind of punishment. – Bregalad Jun 27 '15 at 10:30
  • 1
    @Bregalad Not if there is a night-watchmen state, since the role of this type of state is hinder and punish crime. – Speldosa Jun 27 '15 at 13:56
  • 2
    @Speldose And how do you hinder and punish crimes without hiring police and army officiers, and thius, without collecting taxes? – Bregalad Jun 27 '15 at 17:40
  • perhaps you should amend your question to ask is there a liberal state, e.g. a state where individual liberty strongly exists and is protected within the framework of minimal government. – user1450877 Jun 27 '15 at 20:25
  • @Bregalad Who said anything about not collecting taxes? :) I'm talking about a minimal state, not a non-existent one. – Speldosa Jun 28 '15 at 20:59
  • @user1450877 That's what I thought that I asked? :S – Speldosa Jun 28 '15 at 21:00
  • 2
    @Speldosa I realized that but there are those that favor large government that like to misrepresent the question by suggesting places like Somalia and other violent anarchy ridden states are representative of small government libertarianism. – user1450877 Jun 28 '15 at 21:18
  • @Bregalad - whereas in the current state, anyone with a big mouth can agitate for other guys with big muscle to come and steal most of what you own, and throw you in jail or kill you if you resist. And call it "fairness". When you say "not desirable", you mean "not desirable to me personally". Oh, and I wasn't even (or only) talking about taxes. See Baltimore'15 – user4012 Jun 29 '15 at 22:42
  • There's generally at least 2 independent axes on liberty: economic and social. Some states may be closer on one and not another – user4012 Jun 29 '15 at 22:45
  • 1
    @Speldosa Usually, arguments for "minimal government" things comes from the refusal to pay taxes. If this is not your case then please ignore everything I said. – Bregalad Jun 30 '15 at 07:55

1 Answers1

5

There are tons of countries where the state has a very minimal role: Large swaths of Africa, Asia, and even parts of the Americas are governed at the local/tribal level with minimal central-government oversight. However, that's not so much due to a philosophical commitment to minarchism, as to an inability on the part of the central government to effectively administer most of its territory. I doubt any of these countries meet the definition of a night-watchman state, but they definitely have minimal governance.

An example of such a region would be Zomia, which spans the highlands of 10 Southeast Asian countries.

Tamzin
  • 144
  • 3
  • Where do those places exist in America? I think I'll move there. –  Jun 27 '15 at 19:43
  • 1
    @RobertHarvey "Americas" as in probably South or Central America – lazarusL Jun 27 '15 at 19:59
  • 1
    @RobertHarvey When you look at the US: the self-governed Indian reserves might be an example. – Philipp Jun 28 '15 at 10:22
  • 1
    @Philipp Well the Indian reservations are still subject to federal regulation. (Though many legal scholars say the Constitution does not actually give the feds this power.) It is true that the federal government's role on reservations is often quite limited, but I don't think it's comparable to how limited the central governments' roles are in Zomia, or the Congo Basin, or the Amazon rainforest. – Tamzin Jun 28 '15 at 11:27