I don't think it's "officially sanctioned", I made it up myself, but my logic is as follows:

The only government programs that have ever succeeded at being early, under budget, and over productive: is government violence, destruction, and murder programs. Otherwise known as: warfare.

Effectively, the government is a weapon that exists to intimidate calm, coerce order, and repel borders.

This actually explains a lot about why the government fucks everything else up. The government has to take the money it stole from you, and pay private companies to build stuff for you, because guns can't shoot bridges into existence. Universal healthcare has quickly gone from being a terrible system that makes health care unaffordable, to a political weapon against dissidents who no longer qualify for "universal" coverage since they weren't "vaxxed", down to state sponsored euthanasia operations (4th leading cause of death in Ontario!). Otherwise known as murder programs. Public education? Creates violent criminals and savages, institutionalizes children, and is actually where most people will experience significant interpersonal violence for the only time in their life. You know what public schools don't do that? Military academies... because the government understands how to make weapons.

"But there are all sorts of other laws that don't end with death!" True, but only due to compliance. If you continue to resist the government, death from the government will be the only possible answer. It is the end point of every law, but for once, we are going to actually observe and respect that as a feature of what a government is.

So, let us maintain the basics of weapon handling and apply them to the government.

• Treat every weapon as if it were loaded
• Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot
• Keep your weapon on safe until you are ready to fire
• Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire

Okay, let's handle the government as a weapon:

• Treat every government like a loaded weapon
• Never point the government at anything you do not intend to shoot
• Keep your government from making a law until you are ready to shoot someone
• Keep from enforcing a law until you intend to shoot someone

This effectively reduces the government to it's absolute minimum form: A military presence designed, and expressly built, to kill the enemies of the people it serves as a vanguard for. We're actually removing most of the pre-amble to the constitution and focusing only on: providing for the common defense, and securing the blessings of liberty.

Should we fund public schools? No. Not unless these are going to be for training cobatives for the militia, or soldiers for the professional army.

How will the government provide universal healthcare? It doesn't, it exists to kill people, not give them medicine.

How will the government make my life better? It does not. It only makes your life worse, or less worse. "Less worse" is only the result of killing the man attempting to kill you for an illegitimate reason.

This actually is the basis for a quite a legitimate government. It's massive force presence, and strict use, means that it is only ever deployed for a serious reason. You don't ask for the government's help, unless you would be drawing your own gun. The government is your big, bad, back-up, BFG: Big Fucking Government. It is deployed, as with any military force, when something absolutely-positively-must-be-destroyed-overnight.

While the AnCaps would argue that a militia should be enough, and that no standing army is ever required, this is simply not the case; and is a fallacy that is purely the result of massive advances in offensive and fire-arms technology. In previous millennia, organization was typically the greatest force multiplier beyond equipment, surprise, and access to firearms. It is only within the past 3 centuries that the power of organized, professional soldiers were even able to fought to a draw by disorganized or irregular forces. Offensive military technology has swung so far that for the first time in recorded human civilization, individual soldiers fought entirely without armor from the 1750's to the 1980's. The ability for rapid movement, and decentralized firepower, has made the militia (both regular and irregular) a genuine fighting force. The Assyrians, Romans, and Greeks were recorded as finding disorganized militia's as utterly futile.

As the pendulum of military technology swings back toward defensive technology, and firepower continues to decentralize towards the individual, it means that militias can now serve a proper role in combat. However, the organization of a professional army, navy, air force, continues to be an absolute necessity; so long as collectivist armies continue to exist, and are prepared to take heavy casualties. The AnCap defensive strategy actually relies on defense-in-depth by making a collectivist force take heavy loses from a militia, by creating permanent house-to-house fighting. While this is useful, it means that the borders of a notional Ancapistan are permanently in flux. A marshal society is effectively permanently at war on it's borders.

To create a static border, a static and well-equipped professional force must be available, either permanently on station, or permanently mobilizable to active threats. OR you must already have that in the militia, and the standing army is effectively a template military that can call upon militias to form a regular army, again at a moment's notice.

For a Liberal/Libertarian society to defend itself from collectivism it must be prepared to organize more efficiently to a threat than the literally manually organized force arrayed against it, which can only be done from a standing military.

So, if we treat the government for what it is in reality: just the military, and we organize it as a rapidly deployable vanguard only against true threats to our direct life and property, then we will have a society which has much better secured the blessings of liberty, even more than an Anarchistic one.