<p>Its laughable how you start a paragraph with “Primarily because the purpose of this forum is to discuss Rice University, and not engage in political debates” and then follow with nothing at all related to Rice University. Its also a biting rhetorical stategy when you enumberate your accomplishments, like anyone cares what you have done in the past. I can really put faith into your “paper on Kantian metaphysics” and your “accurate depicition of libertarian ideology.” For all anyone knows, these could be made up, and even if they are not, they have no place here. Besides this thread is dead, so don’t scurry away under some guise of serving the public good.
Now for argument’s sake, there is nothing central to libertarian ideology that endorses anarchy. If you believe free-market economics and limited government control is anarchy, then your statement would be reasonable. Is this your intent?
I do not wish to pick a point on the political spectrum for libertarians, and any argument about this line is futile and elementary. I mean to say that I believe your are oversimplifying libertarianism by calling some aspects liberal and some conservative. It is true that LIBERALS tend to coincide WITH LIBERTARIANS on social issues and conservatives tend to coincide WITH LIBERTARIANS on economics issues, but this does not mark libertarianism as some mixture of liberal and conservative beliefs. Libertarianism can best be understood not in abstract moral descriptions, but by example. To say a libertarian favors a minimalist government, is sadly a meek description, but is reasonable based on your nature to argue as little as possible and use as much filler to accomplish well, nothing really.
By the phrase to “corroborate [my] claim,” it appears you are looking for some statistic. I am sorry, but this statement really does not lend itself to that. Libertarians are practical and recognize that we are a nation of laws that our society depends on, even if those laws are verbose and unnecessary. Libertarians wish to attack the agencies which defend the laws that violate individual freedom, not to attack the entire frame or concept of government. Sure it would be nice in the libertarian eye if we could eventually do away with laws as our society becomes used to running itself, rather than have the government make decisions (financial such as Social Security, social such as personal drug use) for you, but that is not the clear goal in mind, nor is it the defining element to libertarian philosophy.
It seems that you learn philosophy just for the sake of learning the lingo, as in logical fallacies, which are important, but spare me the advice to learn them. I believe you have more books on philosophy than ideas. If you care to disprove me, then please respond (and don’t give some weak answer that you have like 3 books, keep this mature and cerebral).</p>