1.

a ) To argue that the govt can never use “use of force” or coercion to get anyone to do something is to say that a democratically elected  federal government cannot actually govern. It would not be able to enforce any laws or get the populous to do anything. It wouldn’t be able to get anyone to do anything that is within your ideology or philosophy or anyone elses. The govt would be irrelevant. If you are an anarchist then this makes perfect sense.

b) What would be the difference if a state government instead of a federal government coerced an individual to do something against their will? ( Seeing as how libertarians and Republicans are always talking about states rights and states should decide damn near everything.) 

2. “Might Makes Right” Libertarians apparently HATE might makes right. However, allow me to deprogram you; in a society with no regulation and everything is privatized and the govt cannot coerce anything; “might makes right” would reign…because you would effectively be in a “state of nature”.