For example, I have a friend who would never vote for Ron Paul over the leading Republican. He does so because he believes the Republican vote is "practical." He feels Republicans maximize his potential as a businessman.
This wouldn't be "fear", it would be "envy" (in the broad sense of greed and envy being nearly synonymous).
I don't think he envies anyone, but I probably misunderstand your application of the term.
I think mini-statists think they are more "practical" than (for lack of a better term) anarchists, not more fearful. I think they feel the state (properly limited--which is the logical fallacy, IMO) maximizes their liberty (the state which is powerful enough to protect your liberty is powerful enough--and more importantly, incentivized--to abuse it.)
They my think of themselves as practical, but what they think has no direct bearing on the reality of the situation. Afterall, who wants to think of themselves as fearful?
I agree they think feel the state maximizes their liberty. But their desire for the state to maximize their liberty is a result of their fear of losing that liberty should the state go away. And of their envy of a situation in which they could have more liberty.
Either way, it's still an expression of their desire to control others in order to achieve something for themselves - be it more profit or more liberty.
-Aahz
The reason I feel it's important that they think it practical is that they do not do so out of fear, but out of reason, that they find it logical to apply monopoly force to cause an overall good, rather than to protect from unspeakable horror. I honestly don't believe it occurs to them to be afraid. Again, I think the fear attribute is a projection of something that is not always present in them--and I gave an example from personal experience.
As for envy, I think that to be a miss-application of the term, as the ones I know have nothing to be envious of. They intend to keep their ability to claim wealth, and the believe the Republicans maximize it.
In terms of their desire to control others, I say they see it as no more of a desire to control others as when we desire to control others in our very personal space--that is, when we desire to protect our rights through more principled means.
We see it as a desire to control others.
They see it as a natural extension of the right of self-defense.
Do remember, there are those who believe our insistence on self-determination and property rights is, in itself, a violation of their right to live in a property-free and (for lack of a better term) utopian society.