Libertarian advocates of minimal government, such as the late Robert Nozick (Anarchy, State, and Utopia, 1974), have feared that individuals in a stateless libertarian society would face corrupt or careless protection firms that used "risky" rights-enforcement procedures to determine guilt or liability. Innocent people might be held responsible for offenses they did not commit, while guilty individuals avoid paying restitution to their victims. Obviously, that would be undesirable.
Without a minimal monopoly state to prohibit such abuse and protect "procedural rights," how could innocent people pursue their happiness securely? Nozick speculated that in an anarcho-capitalist society, a protection agency using reliable procedures would emerge as dominant, properly preempt risky competitors (while compensating them for putting them out of business), and eventually become a monopoly minimal government. All this would happen through a nonaggressive invisible-hand process. Nozick's innovative theory drew critiques from the biggest names in the libertarian anarchist world, especially Murray Rothbard, Roy A. Childs Jr., and Randy Barnett. (See the Journal of Libertarian Studies 1, No. 1, Winter 1977).
The late George H. Smith, one of the premier libertarian philosophers of modern times, also provided an answer to the minarchist's concern about risky procedures in "Justice Entrepreneurship In a Free Market" (Journal of Libertarian Studies 3, No. 4, 1979). This neglected article is well worth examining. (Also see Smith's reply to critics.)
