a Libertarian Argument for small local government
I’m gonna elaborate more on the title as I believe it may not be descriptive enough, but I’d like to make an argument that there is a strong Libertarian argument for small and local governments enforceable by the people who live there.
Imagine you’ve been living with your family is a small home in a rural part of the country, one day an oil company shows up and begins fracking a mile down the road. Fracking is risky, and can pollute local water supply which would make it very difficult to continue living at the home you’ve made for your family, and most importantly for the sake of my argument, absolutely tank the land value. You have a tangible financially stake in the operations of this oil company, and it’s not a stake you agreed to voluntarily. To draw a parallel, I believe we can all agree that if I were to slash your tires and key your car, I’d be expected to financially compensate you for the damages and face prosecution. Well, as an extension of property rights, the individuals in an immediate area around a potential development should be able to decide what happens assuming it could drastically affect their environment and property value.
I believe this should happen through two means. firstly, individuals who’s land falls within the theoretical affected radius of a development should be able to, with a majority vote, stop said development until the company involved can prove there’s low/no risk of high loss of property value. Secondly, if the project does cause damage to the environment, those affected should be able to seek compensation for the losses, both in land value but also emotional compensation for potentially not being able to live on land they’ve been living on their whole lives.
Article from r/Libertarian: For a Free Society