Perhaps the most fundamental question in political philosophy is whether any state is justified. The most impressive modern attempt to justify the state is in part 1 of Robert Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia . Nozick argues that a minimal state, and only a minimal state, is compatible with our having natural rights. Here, I clarify the logic of Nozick’s strategy and show that his attempt to justify the state fails at every step. A central issue is that Nozick implicitly adopts a restricted, rather than absolute or even bounded absolute, conception of natural rights. I argue that the nature of Nozick’s failure should make natural rights theorists doubt that any state is justified. My discussion also clarifies the historical background to Nozick’s work and explains his later (apparent?) turn away from libertarianism.
Jared Warren (Wed,) studied this question.