To the claims of minarchists

Unfortunately there never has been a minimalist/federalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution by it's government. Some factions tried valiantly for a while, but the tireless efforts of ealry American Mercantilists, beginning with Alexander Hamilton and culminating with Abraham Lincoln, saw too it that minimalism and federalism were dead by 1865.

The whole idea of "strict constructionism" came about after the constitution was (illegaly) adopted, when Madison had a change of heart, realizing that he had written a document that gave essentially cart blanch to the Federal Government. Strict constructionism and "ennumerated powers" doctrines were an attempt to put the genie back in the bottle. But of course it was too late.

Personally, if the Constitution had not granted certain powers to the Federal Government, which were immediately (and by design) exploited to make certain men rich and powerful (e.g. Hamilton), things might have gone better for longer. But government would have continued its inexorable trend in the several States in any event, so it's hard to say.

There is absolutely no reason at all that the federal government should have the power to regulate foreign trade any more than it has the power to regulate interstate trade. And the interstate commerce clause was so poorly worded that it has come to be used for exactly the opposite of it's original intent, it is now cart blanch to regulate any and all domestic industry, when the original intent was simply to prevent interstate trade barriers and protectionism. There is no reason at all the the Federal government needs to run a postal system. There is no reason at all that the Federal government needs to "promote the general welfare," (i.e. engage in mercantilism and socialism, both demonstrable economic disasters). There was no reason for the Federal government to monopolize the coining of money (except to make Alexander Hamilton rich).