My understanding of a libertarian society is that it has a small government, or none in extreme forms, where there are little to no laws limiting personal freedoms again, depending on how extreme the society is. As time progresses, the world as a whole seems to be shifting to a more leftist way of thinking, likely due to the fact that it tends to appeal more people, due to its generally accepting nature. A common belief in more rightist societies is that of Capitalism which, when uncontrolled, allows for monopolies to sprout up and for companies to take advantage of their workers by paying little money and having them work long hours, much like America during the industrial revolution. On the contrary, a common belief in leftist societies is that of everyone working together to help each other and the community as a whole, as everyone is equal and should be getting as equal of a chance as possible to do what is desired. Under a primarily capitalist society, money is heavily emphasized as an important part of society and allows for a select few people to become incredibly powerful and wealthy, while the rest of the civilians to live in extreme poverty. Under a more social society, money would not necessarily need to exist, allowing for people to help others without having to worry about their limits of money. Take the society in the popular Science Fiction series "Star Trek" as an example. In their society, there is no money, people learn what hey want to learn to learn, work the job they want to work, and don't have to worry about learning enough money to support themselves; they work as a society to support each other and better the society as a whole. That being said, that is a rather extreme and shaky system, comparatively to the majority of people's outlooks currently. In any sort of left libertarian society however, people would be able to learn what they want and work where they want to work, as money would be less of a factor overall; again similar to the comparison of Star Trek. The current problem is that people tend to be selfish and are not as willing to work together in order to improve the lives of others, along with themselves. This does not allow for this sort of society to work very well. In closing, I feel that this society could work incredibly well, but not for a long time.
A Libertarian society will bring responsibility back to the forefront. Unfortunately we (in US) will never see it happens because Congress will never pass laws that is needed to change it. Both the Liberals and Republicans are too busy protecting the irresponsible. They have to, otherwise they won't get their precise votes.
Most people who are against libertarianism completely misunderstand what libertarianism is. It does not mean "no government." It does not mean "no business laws." It is a broad term that, at its core, basically means "more personal freedom, less governmental restrictions." Personally, I believe that most people are libertarians, albeit moderate ones. Most people do not care about what other people do inside their own homes, so long as it does not disturb the rights of others.
I see it as a win win situation for both of the two major parties people politically align themselves with. Before being introduced to the libertarian view, I considered myself a conservative. But republicans are just as bad as liberals with big spending and lots of control. Only flaw I see is abortion, I am a male, but regardless. That is not a victimless crime. This victim never even gets a chance. The victim here was conceived, he or she was made. May not have been born and given a government issued social security number. But the life is existent and in the process of doing so before having his or her life ending so early. The victim here was going to be an American too.
I don't believe right-libertarianism would work. As capitalism has vastly uneven distribution of land, resources and money between people a state involving at least police, army and intelligence to make sure people don't come and take what they may or may not feel should be theirs too. These things could be privately funded in theory, but that would just begin to resemble if not fully become a state once more.
It would be nice to give both varieties a proper chance although few governments (understandably) would be willing for that to happen. It would legitimise the idea that we can live without government, it would make people think that we have more choices, and if successful it would severely undermine the idea that government is is some way necessary and/or beneficial.
Libertarian socialism seemed to work for people in certain parts of Russia and Catalonia, and by accounts it was pretty awesome. Catalonia as example, whether it would have worked for more than a few years is uncertain. Fighting off both Soviets and Fascists, the USA funneled money, petrol etc to Franco so he could crush a democratic system and the filthy reds within and install a dictatorship. Yay.
Small co-operative societies of farmers in northern Spain existed and functioned but were unfortunately snuffed out by general Franco during the Spanish Civil War. The state is unnecessary and very often commits criminal acts by its own standards or by those of international law. Not only can libertarian socialism work, it is also a desirable system in which power is decentralized and people are able to do work that they enjoy and express natural human qualities in their work which is relatively impossible for most people in contemporary western society. Roughly 80% of people in society are unhappy in their work and that is not going to change until we use a more just and appropriate division of labor for an advanced technological society.
While a Libertarian society might have been able to work in earlier times. The set-up of modern society would almost guarantee inequality and tyranny that has not been seen since ancient times.
If you think about it, the fundamental thing that keeps inequality in check is paying taxes, something Libertarians seem to want to do away with, which keep modern societies healthy and functioning. If you do not pay taxes it threatens the stability of society, for free market Capitalism would have no financial incentive to make sure everyone, for example, has an education. Whether or not someone obtained an education in such a society would likely depend on the circumstances of your birth. A libertarian America would not be able to keep up with the rest of the developed world because of these reasons.
We need taxes. God, George Bush,
Made them to stop the queers and the mexicants from taking advantage of our great country. Taxes are God's way of saying we are doing fine. Jesus would have payed his taxes so should those crack sniffin, heroin injecting, gay libertarians. #MakeAmericaGreatAgain Less Taxes on the rich.
Let's be clear: people are terrible and selfish. A libertarian society would exist for about a week until someone finally got a leg on everyone else, and then used that leg to keeping pushing them down until they were the supreme ruler of everything and everyone. The reason we have government is so nobody tramples over everyone else and everyone's natural born rights stay in tact.
It assumes that without a government or defined power structures there will never be a law maker or a hierarchy. It's such a fantasy.
With the absence of power there is a void that inevitably will be filled. And people won't be opposed to it being filled because with it comes stability and security. Rather than the never ending fight to fill the void.
That is why Libertarians are incapable of showing prior examples of civilisations that are similar. Because it would be unstable and would be replaced relatively quickly.
This idea, that if we take away a centralized government, that good people will rise up, and fill the void of government is bonkers. In EVERY single example in human history of this happening, a force does arise to fill the void, and it's usually in the form of a crime syndicate, an oppressive religion, or gangs. A feudal state will emerge, because people WANT a safety net. They prefer it run by a warlord or a gang to utter chaos. There seem to be many claims that Libertarianism is working in all sorts of places, which is absurdly not true. There is not one single nation that functions like anything even remotely resembling a libertarian society. Every example that's listed is a short-lived supposed utopia. Spain's dabbling in anarchism for a whopping 3 years produced sporadic results at the best of times. What you actually end up with is places like Somalia, or Afghanistan, etc… Take a hard look at all the places of the world with a decentralized government, see how it's working out.
The basic fundamentals to libertarianism is unadulterated capitalism which would open a huge wound on the working class in society. It would allow full blown exploitation due to the corporations being granted special powers. Even though the libertarian god Ron Paul says corporations should stay out of politics, he has secretly met with corporations to fund his campaign and he promised he'd give them more power in Washington. This form of society would further the working class into being desperate beings scavenging the land for work in return for a meal. If you want a perfect example of a libertarian society, look towards Somalia and how bad it is. They have total "liberty".