The Libertarian argument

[SidBh]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want? How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

[The Man]

Tell them to read Marx, and stop listening to Glenn Beck.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Tell them to read Marx, and stop listening to Glenn Beck.

Pretty much this. I mean they get their notions about communists from the media. There really isn't any way to counter this but tell them to get educated about what communism actually is and isn't. Communism encourages personal freedoms more so than other system.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Ask if they own a large quantity of either arable land or productive machinery.
if they don't, tell them you don't give a fuck about their property.

[Nox]

Tell them that freedom and capitalism are incompatible.

[DeBon]

I think the better question should be, when you tell someone to read Marx and stop watching Glen Beck and to educate themselves, and they go "OMG!!! I KNOW WHAT KOMMUNISM IS I WAS THERE WHEN THE USSR COLLAPSED I KNOW BETTER THEN WHAT YOU DO ABOUT WHAT KOMMUNISM I BET YOU DIDN'T EVEN KNOW KARL MARX SAID THE 'N WORD OMG DON'T TELL ME I DON'T KNOW WHAT KOMMUNISM IS!!!" :sleep:

[Desperado]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want?

Communists can't take away private property from the masses, because the bourgeoisie already have. The abstract equal rights of liberalism don't translate into reality - indeed, their very design is to defend the real economic inequalities which allow for our exploitation. The abstract right of all to private property; that is, of all to under law become bourgeoisie; is empty if by definition and economic reality this is reserved only for an (ever diminishing) minority.

Explain to them this - making sure that they understand the socialist definition of private property (property in the means of production). If they are theoryphiles, give them Marx's On the Jewish Question.


How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

They don't. Communism only occurs by the willing action of the masses. Ask them how many people chose to live according to private property and capitalism.

[NewLeft]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want? How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

1) Private proverty vs. property intended for personal use
b) See the essay, minorities vs majorities
2) Capitalism uses a similar function through its market coercion and institutions.

[Revolution starts with U]

Private property itself requires aggression for its defense. It's absurd to think those defending themselves from the aggrssion of private property are the actual aggressors.

Other than that, what the posts I thanked said :lol:

[Azraella]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want? How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

Libertarianism(especially hardcore minarchism and anarcho-capitalism; thick libertarianism not so much) have a really fucked up vision of what freedom is. Capitalism takes away freedom and it takes away agency. Communism does so as well but communism is completely voluntary. I can stake out a place and homestead if I chose too. Capitalism requires expansion and propping up itself on the less fortunate to survive. The amount of leeway a minarchist or anarcho capitalist society would give the bourgeois of it would be incredibly fucked up. Vertical movement would freeze, the underclass would become thicker, violence and poverty would become more rampant... yeah if that is freedom than I reject their reality and substitute it for mine.

[W1N5T0N]

"whereas the libertarians of the right seek to abolish the state because it hinders the freedom of property, the libertarians of the left seek to abolish the state because it is a BASTION of property".

one of my favorite deLeon quotes.

:star:

[ZeroNowhere]

(For reference, that's David, not Danny.)

[Unclebananahead]

When Marxists refer to "private property" we refer specifically to the capitalist phenomenon of the private ownership of the means of production, or society's productive assets (e.g. mines, mills, ore, minerals, lumber, factories and so forth). This is quite distinct from personal property, which are things a person uses, well, personally, such as a car, a single dwelling, a toothbrush, a shirt, and so forth.

I can assure you that no Marxist is in favor of taking away your toothbrush. Rather, what we wish to abolish is the right under capitalism for a single private individual or group to own a toothbrush factory (or any factories for that matter). We Marxists do not recognise their 'property claims' of ownership over the MOP (means of production) as legitimate. Rather, we recognise that the true source of wealth is human labor.

Since the foregoing is the case, and the bourgeoisie clearly derive an income disproportionate to the amount of labor they exert into their projects, It's clear that their profit derives not from themselves, but is instead expropriated from another source. Marxists locate this source in the exploitation of human labor, or more specifically in the extraction of surplus value. Surplus value refers to that portion of labor which goes unpaid by the capitalist. If an hour of work by a laborer makes a capitalist $75, but the capitalist pays him $25 an hour, then the worker is paying the capitalist $50 an hour for the privilege of working for him.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

Tell them to move to Somalia to see how these magical "free markets" work out.

[SidBh]

So in a stateless communist place, a person will be able to buy or sell houses? Will he/she be able to buy and sell stuff online? What if he/she wants to do that, will he/she be prevented from engaging in such activities? Moreover doesn't redistribution of wealth require you to take away people's private money by force?

[Le Rouge]

How to respond when they say that because not everybody is willing to give away their propriety/land/company, a bloodbath will ensure?

[mrmikhail]

So in a stateless communist place, a person will be able to buy or sell houses? Will he/she be able to buy and sell stuff online? What if he/she wants to do that, will he/she be prevented from engaging in such activities? Moreover doesn't redistribution of wealth require you to take away people's private money by force?

People's private money doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made worthless, which is not difficult to do.

But in a stateless communist society, a barter system would essentially be the means of transfer, so yes you could buy and sell houses and any other economic activity, but there'd be no currency as we know it...it'd just be trading of whatever comes of your labour

[La Comédie Noire]

Well Capitalism takes private property from people and redistributes it into concentrated centers of capital. The private property of the many is supplanted by the private property of the few, to paraphrase Marx. Capitalist just justifies this appropriation of property by rationalizing the distribution of property as "fair", the harder you work the more capital you accumulate ect. When in reality it takes a good deal of coercion, trickery, and in the final instance, luck, to become successful in capitalism. Not to mention plenty of Capital, which doesn't just fall from the sky mind you.

I don't know, Right Libertarians and Marxists just come from two totally different perspectives and there is nil communication. We might as well be speaking two different languages and in a way we are!

[W1N5T0N]

(For reference, that's David, not Danny.)

?

[Savage]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want?

But we do want to do that

[Oswy]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want? How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

The so-called 'right' to private property is actually just the monopolisation of the earth by some to the exclusion of the rest, it's not a legitimate concept. And don't forget that when people claim a portion of the earth as 'theirs' they invariably use force (barbed-wire fences, guns or the instruments of government) to defend their claim. Communism, on the other hand, recognises that the earth and its resources are finite and that only those arrangements which ensure everyone gains equitable benefit from their use are legitimate.

[Tim Cornelis]

Libertarian logic:

Majority decides something = mob rule, therefore undemocratic rule of a minority is better.

[Veovis]

People's private money doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made worthless, which is not difficult to do.

But in a stateless communist society, a barter system would essentially be the means of transfer, so yes you could buy and sell houses and any other economic activity, but there'd be no currency as we know it...it'd just be trading of whatever comes of your labour

Forgive me, but straight up bartering seems kind of... primitive and inefficient to me. There needs to be some sort of medium of exchange.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

Forgive me, but straight up bartering seems kind of... primitive and inefficient to me. There needs to be some sort of medium of exchange.
Then we're right back to formal currency and capitalism before anyone realizes what just happened.

Many on the revolutionary left support a gift economy over the barter system ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

[Ocean Seal]

How should Communists face the libertarians who claim that communism takes away their right to private property and freedom/liberty by force and makes them do what they don't want? How can Communists counter the libertarian argument which says that Communists force people to change according to their own ideas and force their way of thinking (and how life should be lead) on other people?

-Ask them why it is that they care about private property?
-If they assert some kind of moral rather than material basis for this, you can immediately forget the debate.
--Such a moral basis includes but isn't limited to well the rich work hard and deserve that property.
--If they present the my house is going to get stolen, remind that they're wrong and that socialists are only interested in collectivising productive property.

[norwegianwood90]

I recall Marx stating in The Communist Manifesto that capitalists complain about our desire to do away with private property, yet the capitalist system itself has removed productive property out of the reach of the overwhelming majority of the human population. It's therefore historically irrational on their part to commiserate about our desire to make productive property collectively owned.

A lot of the individuals who espouse the propertarian/right-libertarian arguments are, from a Marxist perspective, working-class individuals--they own no land and possess no productive property. Their justifications for the position they take are based largely on two concepts, I believe: 1) A thorough misunderstanding of 'property'--they believe that communists/socialists/anarchists want toothbrushes and beds to be shared by anyone and everyone, and 2) They think and act based on future aspirations--they believe they are somehow different and will, in the future, become wealthy and obtain productive property. They therefore take actions and hold beliefs they feel will benefit them in the future.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Tell them that when you hold private ownership of the means with which people sustain their livess, you practically hold private ownership of those people. The exclusivity inherent in property will always centralize power.