Comment: I like to think of it this way

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I have a question for the (see in situ)

I like to think of it this way

Our present state of affairs is similar to a man who is an alcoholic. Alcohol is poison, and drinking poison is bad, and he never should have started, but here we are, but if he quits abruptly, he will die.

That's a nice parallel to where we're at now with government; we have issues like nukes and 50 million dependent on welfare (which never should have started, but here we are), and if the government disbanded overnight, society could literally die.

Just as an alcoholic must wean off of alcohol, we must wean ourselves off of government. The private sector must be allowed to take over the roles that have been usurped by the state, and this will only happen once the attitude of the public changes.

"Once you give that authority it grows like a monster. We've seen over and over again powerful people getting to powerful, then it all crashes. The power is taken away, but the whole process starts over again once someone gets authority. So how do you avoid this?"

You've spotted the danger in "limited government". It inevitably grows, because once you've accepted some government, adding a little more is very easy However, even the most violent and repressive government relies on public consent. As soon as it becomes unacceptable to the public for coercion to be used in any amount, by criminals with or without badges, that's when anarchy will work. It doesn't require everyone to agree with the NAP, it doesn't require pure and virtuous people, and it isn't safe from regression/corruption, but a society where life and property aren't systematically violated and people are free to interact peacefully is a society worth striving for.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito