Libertarianism

Libertarianism does not work.  It's like Communism:  Nice idea on paper, but cannot possibly work out in practice.  Well, not as the primary guide for politico-economic function.

Look at the root concepts:  maximize individual freedom and minimizing involvement of the state.  What is the extent of maximizing individual freedom?  Or minimizing state involvement?  Does that mean do anything you want and have no overarching policing force (although maybe many security agents/agencies)?  Does that mean complete freedom without impinging on the rights of others?  What are those rights?  By restricting my ability to graffiti your picket fence, you're impinging on my right to creative expression.  By allowing it, I'm impinging on your rights to property ownership and protection.  Slander and libel become quite interesting questions.  And so do medical experiments on clients without the ability to make sound decisions (although those medical experiments might lead to advances that save your spouse, and the subjects could be strangers or criminals). 

Do we have the right to equitable competition?  I can compete for the same jobs as you can; the same resources are available to us both.  Do I have a chance at the same education as you if the public education system is abolished?  Do I have the same medical care, or even the nutrition that's proven to help develop smarter, more physically capable children out of identical infants?  If we're both looking for the same job and I'm black, living in a once rich area that suffered white-flight, and you are the white-anglo-saxon-protestant teenage son of a member at an all-white country club where the business's white CEO golfs, are we on equal footing?  If I'm Pentacostal (or even Southern Baptist) and you're atheist and we're applying for a job teaching science at Stanford and they've decided to ask about faith in an interview, do we have similar chances?  Keep in mind, scientists and California.  A major university.  Southern (as in SE US) Baptists and Pentacostals are pretty much a joke to the Southwest and Northeast.  Not saying it'd be a slam dunk for the atheist, but I think without enforcement of Equal Employment Opportunity, which costs tax dollars that sure as shit would disappear under pure libertarian rule, the Christian would be looking at a much harder time being taken seriously.

Same with women in business.  Or women in science.  Or women in sportscasting.  Or women in video-game development.  Or women in construction.  Or certainly women in upper management.  If you're into progressive feminist ideals, I don't feel like fiscal conservatism is going to get you there because the regulatory agencies we pay for in our taxes would not be guaranteed.  And in a country where men already have disproportionate power (even after decades of work on the part of women who want to be equals) you'd be pretty foolish to assume less government intervention is going to lead to a natural market correction that favors your contribution equally. 

Progress in a fiscally conservative society means money trickles up as the rich can buy more small businesses and see increasing profit for decreasing cost, driving competitors out of business.  Eventually, it's aristocracy.  And the government we pay taxes to (at a MUCH lower rate than any other first-world nation) is the only thing that's intervened on the behalf of the largest chunk of small business owners so far.  It's not perfect.  Never will be.  But without it, we'd be in a deeper hole with more clearly divided territories.  Unguided capitalism can create kings.  What else is a king but a person with the money and influence to control an army and buy sufficient governmental support to get his nearly-every whim met?