You may look at the title of the blog and see it as a contradiction: does not “libertarian” mean limited government? Libertarians are not crazy, after all, and do support some type of order. A common definition of “anarchy” is: “confusion; chaos; disorder.” Indeed, the most common perception of anarchy is a state in which there is no government, and the necessary result to that situation is chaos.
We, Jacob Ezell and Josh Cardosi, look at anarchy in a different light. Inspired by brilliant economists and philosophers such as Murray N. Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Frederic Bastiat, Lysander Spooner, Tom Woods, Walter Block, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and many more, we are anarcho-capitalist bloggers spreading the ideas of free market capitalism. We are some of the few libertarians to apply libertarian principles consistently: that is, that individual rights are not to be deprived by any entity, including government. Since government, by its very definition, cannot exist without having a monopoly on violence and initiating force on the masses, the logical conclusion is to have a society without a state. We believe that the initiation of force is one of the most sombre subjects in human history, and should be approached in this fashion. In short, we define anarchy not as the above, but in the classical definition of political philosophy: “A theoretical social state in which there is no governing person or body of persons, but each individual has absolute liberty (without implication of disorder).”
In other words, an anarchist society, as Murray Newton Rothbard once wrote, is one “where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual.”