"capitalism is the fullest expression of anarchism, and anarchism is the fullest expression of capitalism." -Murray Rothbard
If you consistently respect the integrity of persons and their property, then you arrive at anarcho-capitalism as an inescapable conclusion. Most people will be capitalists in the absence of collectivist brainwashing received from their families, religious institutes, public schools, and the mainstream media, because capitalism simply means economic interactions that are free of the threat of initiatory violence.
The internet is itself a massively successful approximation of what a free society might look like. And our descendents may look back on this early electronic era as the beginning of the end of the popular legitimacy of "governments" and "nations".
I truly empathize with libertarians' fundamental ideology of total and absolute freedom, yet in the current political climate their cause is being rallied by the neo conservatives whom happen to share the same means but not the same ends. Consequently both neo conservatives and libertarians both want less government, a flat tax, and no government interference of the economy. Libertarians hope this will make everyone free to excel and plunder at their own leisure, neo conservatives know this will make them a butt load of money. Libertarians are ideologically in the right, yet if we cut straight from the socioeconomic climate that we are in to hard liner libertarian policy, the effects would be disastrous and wholly contrary to the vision libertarian share of a truly free America. The best government is a self governing peoples.
The tenets of personal and societal liberty (freedom) are a charming and very worthy goal. However, we no longer live in an age where we have enough space or the low population figures to allow for personal oversight. Allowing a person's morals to guide them leaves us open to the pitfalls of moral black holes. Still, there are very strong themes of personal freedom that should not be abandoned. In a day and age where people sacrifice choice for security, we would do well to reflect upon other options.
By 'libertarianism' i am assuming you are referring to the right-wing nut-job minarchists in America who think that the free-market is gonna solve all the problems with the U.S. and make it so much nicer.
This is nothing close to anarchism. Anarchism itself is mostly anti-capitalist and it's amusing that you tried to even compare the two.
However, right-wing libertarians are still legally insane. No debate on that.
Although anarchism has more than one definition, I believe that generally it is perceived as lawlessness due to a lack of government. No government would mean no political ideology. Libertarianism is defined as a political philosophy of government funded voluntarily and has power only to protect individuals from violence and coercion. The lawlessness of anarchy would seem in contrast to a government whose duties are to protect against violence. This leads to the conclusion that libertarianism is not a form of anarchism.
In my opinion, Anarchy and Libertarianism can not even be compared to each other. Although Libertarians do, generally, want the government to stay out of as many issues as possible. They do not want chaos and lack of efficient control in the population. This country was built on freedom and human rights, and libertarians would like it re-focus on those ideals. Anarchy is not the answer.
Libertarians are not anarchists. While it is true that some individuals favor a political system of competing vigilante committees, and refer to this position as "anarcho-capitalism" (a view formerly held by libertarian economist Murray Rothbard), this is a confusing misnomer based on an apparent failure to clearly distinguish between the nature of market institutions (which do not involve the use of coercion at all, either initiatory or retaliatory) and the nature of coercive entities (criminal or legal). Actually, libertarianism rests on the concepts of individualism, self-ownership, private property, & voluntary (market) exchange. Classical anarchism not only opposed the political state, but also some voluntary organizations of which it disapproved. Most importantly, true anarchists opposed private property - without which no voluntary relationships are possible. Today's libertarians are in the classical liberal tradition of Algernon Sidney, John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Edmund Burke, Herbert Spencer, and Frederic Bastiat - not the anarchist tradition of Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Bakunin. Virtually all the major thinkers and writers which inspired the libertarian cause -- Frederic Bastiat, Herbert Spencer, Auberon Herbert, Henry Hazlitt, F. A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Leonard Read, Ayn Rand, George Reisman -- whatever differences they may have had, they all supported the libertarian position of advocating a general policy of laissez faire be imposed on government -- and they all opposed anarchy and anarchism as antithetical to liberty.