The more I ponder it, the more it seems minarchy is the ideal form of governance.
A minarchy is known as a “night-watchman state.” The power of the state is minimal, and limited to enforcing the non-aggression principle of libertarianism only.
19th century UK is an example of a minarchy that functioned quite well. 
It's also more palatable of a term.
Normies get triggered by their preconceptions of what Anarchy means.
Voluntarism is another term they deal with well.
You're on the right track. Keep going.
I've always been on the minarchist side... however some days I think the anarchist got the right idea since people eventually get lazy and delegate more and more authority to the minarchist state until it'sa leviathan.
I think it's a people problem. Along the lines of what Heinlein once said I believe the world is made up of three kinds of people. Those that want to be told what to do and who to follow, those that want to tell people what to do and lead, and those that want to be left alone. And that last group is tiny. The last three years confirmed it for me. That's why I think the anarchist fail. Those first two groups will not leave you alone and you'll have to spend all your time fighting petty tyrants wanting to impose their will on the land of Freehold (see book by same name)
