If you look up Milton Friedman he is most often depicted as a libertarian, and sometimes even more extreme (especially by his opponents). But it isn’t that easy. There has been a lot of criticism towards Friedman and his policies even from the liberal/libertarian camp – especially those that wanted to go one step further, the anarchocapitalists.
Much of the difference between Friedman and his anarchocapitalist critics is over proposals to get partway to a private solution. Anarchocapitalist polemicist Murray Rothbard attacked Friedman for supporting tax-funded school vouchers. In 1991, in The Individualist magazine, he wrote that Friedman was “the Establishment’s Court Libertarian” and a “statist.” Rothbard attacked a lot of people; it was his way. It wasn’t Friedman’s, who would explain patiently and politely that his aim was to dismantle the education monopoly, an action that would help millions of people. They could worry later about state financing. “I would like to see the government out of the education business entirely,” he told Reason, but government had been in education so long that the only way to remove it would be in steps. Vouchers were a big step and — in contrast with abolition — a possible step.
With this example, we can see a true divergence of opinions between Anarcho-Capitalism and Libertarianism. Some would argue that there’s even a third school of thought to take into consideration – classical liberalism. Friedman himself once said that “I’d rather use the term ‘liberal’ than ‘libertarian.’.