# Let's discuss minarchism **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 5, 2026, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515 "2026-11-05T20:43:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2026, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515/22 "2026-11-07T14:19:22Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > The problem is not the size of the government; the problem is the lack of effective checks and balances. Yeah, there’s a lot of legacy “government by custom and protocol” in the US system which executives have traditionally followed because it was expected. Even though there aren’t specific legal guardrails requiring it. This enabled the infamous _”But…what if we **didn’t**?”_ approach among Republicans, especially Trump himself, where they just blew off customary expectations about accepted procedures, and got away with it. There’s going to have to be a lot more legislation explicitly spelling out how the executive is allowed to operate, in ways that the nation’s founders didn’t bother articulating because it was obvious to them that nobody unprincipled enough to disregard the unwritten protocols could ever be elected President. Well, here we are though. This started bugging me back in 2016 when Trump just didn’t bother to release his tax returns, which I found outrageously disrespectful to the electorate. And it still bugs me, although my outrage meter scale has been sufficiently expanded during ten years of MAGA shenanigans that this particular issue doesn’t rate very high for me any more. But it’s going to be a long rebuilding process. We can’t ever accept just going back to executive “government by custom and protocol”, because now we’ve seen what sustained abuse of that system can do. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2026, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515/23 "2026-11-07T16:30:09Z")
I think the classical divide and question is more of “Is this a proper function of government?” followed closely by “Is this a right and proper expenditure of tax money?” Most of the time, the fights aren’t around stuff like “Should the government enforce clean water standards?” but rather more philosophical fights around stuff like “Is adressing social wrongs a function of government?” along with “If so, to what extent?” That’s for example why healthcare is so contentious. Many believe that healthcare isn’t something the government should be responsible for- that’s your own problem and choice. Others look at the government as the ultimate way that people who can’t afford health care to get it. So the people who are crowing about “small government” are really wanting to get rid of all the stuff that they don’t see as the proper functions of government. They’d be against things like after school programs run by cities, or culturally related programs, or efforts to increase equity, because they consider all those things extraneous. They generally aren’t proposing to downsize water departments or things like the military. Where it gets really weird is in supporting functions, like say… a city or state’s fleet management or IT department. They often have weird ideas that these departments should be run on an absolute shoestring, because they themselves aren’t actual government functions and should only get the bare minimum necessary for them to support the actual government functions. It’s absurd and ultimately counterproductive, but that’s how they think. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2026, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515/24 "2026-11-07T16:51:29Z")
Eh. I think your causation is almost entirely backwards. The reason they want to shoestring the supporting functions is because that’s exactly what they want to do to almost _all_ the other functions. To folks of that bent, every dollar that leaves their wallet to go to the government’s wallet is an outrage, an _outrage_ I say! There was a huge fight right down partisan lines to create the EPA and pass the Clean Water Act. Conservatives were appalled at the idea of such an outrageous imposition of public will on their (conveniently cheaper) personal freedom to drink dangerously polluted water in exchange for less taxes and higher business profits. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2026, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515/25 "2026-11-07T19:01:49Z")
> [@bump](#): > > Most of the time, the fights aren’t around stuff like “Should the government enforce clean water standards?” but rather more philosophical fights around stuff like “Is adressing social wrongs a function of government?” along with “If so, to what extent?” And in the meantime, the rest of the world is asking, “What clean water standards should the government enforce?” ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2026, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515/26 "2026-11-07T23:13:03Z")
Not sure I’m getting your post. We’ve got plenty federal and state standards for water quality and treatment. And they’re enforced with vigor. It’s not a political issue, hence my comment. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-discuss-minarchism/1034515.md?page=1)