|
privatizing police isn't all that common a libertarian concern. it's one of the cartoons used to dismiss the moral arguments of libertarianism.
because fair courts are a strong and nearly universal libertarian concern, and ending the war on drugs and the outlawing of consensual adult behaviors is a nearly universal libertarian concern, much of the "work" that police, courts, lawyers, prisons, and the whole crime industry do on taxpayer money would be ended, and police would be focused on investigating violence and property crime.
police departments would dramatically shrink, and the multi billion dollar a year crime industry would dramatically shrink, saving taxpayers trillions over time.
which is what libertarian theory says they should be doing.
then, individuals and communities can contract out extra private police services if they chose. They shouldn't have to do so as much, without the crime industry to promote crime.
just as providing for the common defense is considered a legitmate role of government (but NOT wars of adventure), most classic libertarians say having a much reduced police force for investigating REAL crimes (not the artificial ones created by government decree, typically based covertly on enforcing a religious precept, like the war on drugs or prostitution and other moral "crimes") is part of governments legitimate role.
now the flaw in this theory is also obvious - who enforces the rulings of the courts? if the rich can buy private armies, how does the court protect the weak?
of course none of his can happen, because the crime industry (police, courts, prisons, lawyers, psychologists, and all teh institutions) is rich and powerful, and they aren't going to give up their cash cow.
libertarians can't govern, and even a small amount of thinking will reveal why.
|