Scott Gordon (“The New Contractarians.” Journal of Political Economy, 84, 3 (June 1976), 573-590) objects to libertarianism: “a philosophy which condemns one on grounds of justice to live with filthy streets even though everyone would prefer some quantity of street cleaning to other goods of equal cost is somehow wrong.”
In the first place, if streets are owned by the state, then it is unsurprising that the state will lay taxes for their maintenance. But perhaps we could find ways to privatize the suckers.
Second, taxation for the sake of clean streets is indeed unjust, but there is more to life that justice. We might agree to acquiesce in injustice for the sake of some other good.
“Even if Nozick should be able in a future work to provide a theory of entitlement which advances on Locke’s, it would only be one of the pillars of justice and must share the burden of carrying the house of polity with other great ethical principles, such as ‘utility,’ ‘freedom,’ ‘equality,’ and Rawls’s ‘fairness.'”
Ok, but again justice is justice and not utility or freedom. We might be willing to sacrifice justice for utility, but we should not say that utility is part of justice.