The author constructs a ridiculous false dichotomy of tallists vs shortists as a comparison for libertarianism vs statism to say that you cannot equate non-libertarian views with statist views. However, he immediately follows this by stating that some American Libertarians believe government can do no right and private industry can do no wrong.<p>The author is confusing the central tenet of libertarianism with a false dichotomy of the author's own construction between government and private enterprise. The primary goal of libertarianism is individual liberty. Each person should be able to live their life as he or she chooses without having force used against their person to coerce them to do things they otherwise would not do.<p>To interpret some American Libertarians views as 'all government is bad and all private industry is good' shows an incredible amount of naiveté. The author is inferring a general principle from specific arguments having missed the primary point. The reason you see so many specific arguments against government and for private industry in the modern day USA is not because anyone believes that government is inherently wrong but rather because what the government provides must necessarily be provided by the use of force. The government's chief source of income is taxation which is the application of force to private citizens to extract money.<p>Most libertarians support the government providing a few limited key services such as national defense and operating a police force. Where you see libertarians start balking at government services is when they reach out beyond the scope of protecting an individual from the use of force by another. In so expanding its scope, the government becomes that which it was created to defend against.
"0.5: Why write a Non-Libertarian FAQ? Isn't statism a bigger problem than libertarianism?<p>Yes. But you never run into Stalinists at parties. At least not serious Stalinists over the age of twenty-five, and not the interesting type of parties. If I did, I guess I'd try to convince them not to be so statist, but the issue's never come up."<p>Well I guess the author lives in a wrong country. I've ran into many, if not Stalinists, then certainly Marxists and Leninists in my life.
> Another example of externalities would be a widget factory that spews carcinogenic chemicals into the air. When I trade with the widget factory I'm benefitting - I get widgets - and they're benefitting - they get money. But the people who breathe in the carcinogenic chemicals weren't consulted in the trade.<p>Well, actually, polluting the air is not a problem by itself, of course... but there is another perspective: if you're spewing chemicals into the air, you are forcedly taking the rights in lungs, fields, and other property of people living nearby.<p>That's an act of aggression, and therefore libertarianism is against it. But the article makes it sound as if "voluntary exchange" is all libertarianism is about, ignoring nonaggression principle.
Given that there's only a very occasional link to any sort of supporting evidence this should not be labeled a FAQ. It's more of a manifesto.