So the state announces yet another "solution": pervasive surveillance and new forms of coercion by bureaucratic decree. The German government, in predictable statist fashion, leverages horrifying domestic violence statistics to justify ramping up the surveillance state—GPS tagging citizens by executive fiat, expanding forced “rehabilitation,” ever longer sentences, legal paternalism, and a massive new trough of taxpayer funds feeding the social services industrial complex.

Let’s make it clear: domestic violence is abhorrent, and a rights-violating crime. But from a radical libertarian standpoint, the government’s ham-fisted response delivers yet another ratchet of state power with no evidence it will stop the root causes. The ankle bracelet scheme exemplifies Hayek’s warning against central planning: bureaucrats presume to channel social complexities—intimate relationships, conflict, rehabilitation—into neat, controlled technological panopticons, substituting real market innovation and civil solutions with police alerts and “mandatory trainings.” All they achieve is a swelling police and welfare apparatus with carte blanche for deeper intrusion, always with the promise of “security.”

Nozick would recoil at the expansion of state authority: The very idea of preemptively tagging people and monitoring them is the road to “protective associations” gone mad, violating fundamental rights against arbitrary detention and surveillance. These interventions routinely destroy the boundary between legitimate punishment for proven rights violations and preemptive, collective control. Under such schemes, every citizen is one bureaucratic suspicion from total loss of privacy, freedom, and autonomy.

And of course, Ayn Rand would shred the collectivist framing of “systemic, patriarchal violence” and “coordinated action”: the latest progressive cant justifying collectivized, state-driven solutions and further eroding individual responsibility, due process, and property rights. Instead of rooting out specific aggressors and empowering victims to defend themselves—via rights-based private security, property rights, or reciprocal, reputation-based civil society mechanisms—the state asserts its monopoly everywhere, treating every family as a potential threat and every taxpayer as an endless resource to fund their failed paternalism.

It never occurs to these statists that the problem festers on their own turf: state monopolized police fail to protect, state welfare fragments families and fuels dependency, and the anti-defensive gun laws leave the vulnerable disarmed in the name of “public safety.” Let free markets in security, real individual autonomy, property rights, and voluntary solutions reign. If every victim could immediately defend themselves, hire competing protection, and use robust arbitration without state interference, far less violence would persist—and none of it would justify the creeping, totalitarian dream of government watching your every step in the name of your “own good.” Every extension of state power here will be permanent, wasteful, and ultimately provide nothing but more violence, but this time from the hand of Leviathan itself.