(cf. David Friedman)". I'm sure that you wouldn't suggest that his book
Machinery of Freedom is just one big "oxymoron". I've been reading your
postings for a couple years now, and I still have literally no idea how
or whether you disagree with thinkers like Friedman who call themselves
anarcholibertarians and say they favor competition in the provision and
enforcement of laws. Let's just stipulate that no informed libertarian
takes "anarchy" to mean "no rules", and that we all understand the
state/governance distinction, and try to move on.
Again, if you (or anyone) can point to (or create) any text that
explains how your position differs from Friedman's, that would help me
replace the asterisk in my head that for a couple years has been telling
me: "Kevin Bjornson may have an idea (which he associates with the Roman
common law of nations) that is different from both minarchist federalism
and from so-called private-law anarcholibertarianism."
Since Friedman disagrees with Rothbard about whether private courts
would/should all converge on a libertarian natural law, I suspect that
(despite your quibbles with Rothbard's terminology) you are closer to
him than to Friedman.
