The Futility of "Limited Government"

Too many "conservatives" and certain breeds of Libertarians argue for the benefits of "Limited Government"; that some Government is necessary, of course, it just needs to be restrained by the Governed. Anyone (like anarcho-capitalists)attempting to argue beyond that will be labeled Starry-Eyed Voluntaryist Utopians or Naive Idealists.

The following from Murray Rothbard's For A New Liberty, accurately addresses the issue:

In contrast, it is the seemingly far more realistic conservative believer in “limited government” who is the truly impractical utopian. This conservative keeps repeating the litany that the central government should be severely limited by a constitution. Yet, at the same time that he rails against the corruption of the original Constitution and the widening of federal power since 1789, the conservative fails to draw the proper lesson from that degeneration. The idea of a strictly limited constitutional State was a noble experiment that failed, even under the most favorable and propitious circumstances. If it failed then, why should a similar experiment fare any better now? No, it is the conservative laissez-fairist, the man who puts all the guns and all the decision-making power into the hands of the central government and then says, “Limit yourself”; it is he who is truly the impractical utopian.

For an expanded discussion, click here.