Libertarianism

[Nyder]

Has anyone ever heard of Libertarianism? It is philosophy based on personal and economic freedom, and backed up by Adam Smith, Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand to name a few.

Libertarians advocate only a small government to protect the property rights of citizens, uphold contracts and maybe provide a police/military and courts system. It also may provide for things the market cannot provide like public works. Everything else is left to the domain of voluntary trade and tax rates would be very low.

This would work as a libertarian would be a prosperous society without burdensome taxes and regulations. People would be free to do what they like as long as it doesn't harm others. Businesses and jobs would flourish because the costs imposed by governments would be very low.

lib·er·tar·i·an ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lbr-târ-n)
n.
One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
One who believes in free will.

Libertarianism is not a forceful ideology. Under communism and socialism, you are coerced into submitting to the collective (or the minority who controls the collective).

[Guest1]

Sorry to tell you, Adam Smith was not a Libertarian. Adam Smith believed that things like social services should be provided outside of the market system to ensure they work for the greater good. Libertarians believe that, as much as possible, the government should not interfere. This also means taking the public sector down, and giving private firms the opportunity to compete to provide services the government should be providing without seeking profit. He is, however, pretty much in line with the rest of their views. Just a slight bit more human than most make him out to be.

Furthermore, the Libertarianism you speak of, is right wing, no matter how you try to fig-leaf it. Even Ayn Rand doesn't have the balls to classify it like that. It is also nothing new, it's just what capitalists have been driving for for a long time. For more info on Right-wing Anarchism:

The Capitalism Site (http://www.capitalism.org/)

[Hoppe]

Simple classical left-right rhetoric cannot be applied on this one. Historically right-wingers were conservatives. Libertarians believe in a great amount of personal freedom thus that makes them left-wing. Economic freedom makes them right-wing. You need another axis.

Nyder,

Unless you are a follower of Rand I shouldn't name her as she'll upsets a lot of people. Objectivism can be rather harsh. :D
Have you by any chance read the "the libertarian idea" by Jan Narveson, mny say that this contains probably the best defense of the ideology.

[Desert Fox]

Adam Smith,
the bloke of the "invisble hand" he wanted that the goverment helped the industry when the price was too low and the people when the price was too high. Sounds nice in theory, but in the real world only the first thing is done by the goverment <_<

[The Feral Underclass]

In an anarchist (Libertarian Communist) sense, Libertarianism is about individual freedom outside the context of capitalism. That human beings should have the freedom to organize and administrate society co-operativly and without the use of a state, at all&#33;

To add to your dictionary definition of Libertarianism, it is about absolute freedom. Freedom from wage slavery, descrimination and lack of opportunities.


Libertarianism is not a forceful ideology. Under communism and socialism, you are coerced into submitting to the collective (or the minority who controls the collective).

This is a misunderstanding. Communism is not about coercing people into collectives. Communism is what Marx described as a conclusion to a workers revolution. He called the first stage, or the transition from capitalism to communism, Socialism.

If you look at many examples of this theory in practice it is true that these so called workers regimes did in fact force collectivisation. That is not communism&#33;

However the point I am making is, communism is not about coercing people into anything, it is a word to describe society after the state has been destroyed.

Then of course you get into arguments about how you achieve that. In my opinion you can not do it until the vast majority of working people have understood their oppression and have decided, volunteraly, that libertarianism (in anarchist terms) is how they want to structure society.

[Hoppe]

Anarchist,

There is no libertarian who opposes private property. The freedom libertarians are referring to is freedom from coercion, not wage slavery, discrimination etc.

Communist anarchists and anarcho-capitalist are not very much alike and I doubt Nyder was referring to the first.

[The Feral Underclass]

Hoppe. Sorry but I have absolutly no idea what your talking about. I was simply making a destinction between what capitalists call Libertarianism and what anarchists/real communists call libertarianism.

I dont know whether the capitalists bankrupted libertarianism or anarchists/real communists extended it....?

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Libertarians are the right-winged version of anarchists :/

[Don't Change Your Name]

Libertarianism is a term used to speak about a group of liberal capitalists who want to reduce state&#39;s responsibilities to the minimal. They are not completely anarchists.
It was once a word that described ideals which were anti-state, including Anarchism but these people addopted it.

And as they are capitalist they are right wing. That&#39;s the current way of diving economic ideals. Socialism = left, Capitalism = right

[The Feral Underclass]

Libertarians are the right-winged version of anarchists

WHAT??? :blink:

[Misodoctakleidist]

Libertarianism is not a forceful ideology. Under communism and socialism, you are coerced into submitting to the collective (or the minority who controls the collective).

As i&#39;ve already explained to you on a previous occasion, nyder, communism is a classless society and can be liberal or authoritarian, democratic or autocratic ect.
You&#39;re asserion that libertarianism is neither left nor right wing couldn&#39;t be futher from the truth. There are two definitions of the word libertarian, one describes a specific group of very liberal capitalsts while the origional definition just meant extremely liberal with no regard to left or right economic position and so could be left wing or right wing, either way your assertion is incorrect.

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 30 2003, 03:25 PM
Hoppe. Sorry but I have absolutly no idea what your talking about. I was simply making a destinction between what capitalists call Libertarianism and what anarchists/real communists call libertarianism.

I dont know whether the capitalists bankrupted libertarianism or anarchists/real communists extended it....?
That&#39;s unfortunate. I think the communists corrupted it. Libertarianism was a name adopted by liberals in the US because socialists started to call themselves liberals as well.


And as they are capitalist they are right wing. That&#39;s the current way of diving economic ideals. Socialism = left, Capitalism = right

And this distinction is a bit too simple. pls look at Political Compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org)


Libertarianism is a term used to speak about a group of liberal capitalists who want to reduce state&#39;s responsibilities to the minimal. They are not completely anarchists.

Libertarianism consists of minarchists (minimal state) and anarcho-capitalists.

[Pete]

As i&#39;ve already explained to you on a previous occasion, nyder, communism is a classless society and can be liberal or authoritarian, democratic or autocratic ect.

Wrong. In a classless society there are no classes, of any kind. Communism = anarchy, just with different methods of getting there (marxism, socialism, leninism, ect ect). Liberal, authoritarian, democratic, and autocratic societies still have a powerstructure of some sort, and are thus not classless and not communistic.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 03:57 PM

And as they are capitalist they are right wing. That&#39;s the current way of diving economic ideals. Socialism = left, Capitalism = right

And this distinction is a bit too simple. pls look at Political Compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org)
as he already said, right-wing and left-wing define their economic breed. that is exactly what political compass speaks of.

libertarians would just be down on the libertarian/authroitarian scale.

so no, calling them libertarian capitalists is not a narrow definition. it&#39;s also exactly what you are telling us to do. but we have done that, so let&#39;s get back to arguing the ideas rather than simantics.

[Nyder]

Let me make this simple:

There are 4 ways society can be organised:

Economic and social control

This is in the domain of authoriatian socialists like Hitler, and authoriatian communists like Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong Il. This is the most likely scenario if communism or socialism is ever tried to be implemented.

Economic control and social freedom

A nationalised economy yet the Government doesn&#39;t interfere with people&#39;s personal freedoms (like abortion, drugs, prostitution, pornography, gay rights, etc). This is traditional domain of the &#39;left&#39; in democratic countries.

Economic freedom and social control

These are the free market conservatives like Ronald Reagan, John Howard and George Bush Jnr (keep in mind that they are not like that to the full extent, but generally).

Economic freedom and social freedom

Libertarianism. THE ONLY SYSTEM THAT GIVES TOTAL FREEDOM TO PEOPLE. Of course it is not exactly anarchism. There would still be a government to enforce laws against property, murder, assualt and theft. An individual would be free to do anything he/she likes as long as it doesn&#39;t violate the right of everyone to their life, liberty or property. Taxes would be abolished and the courts, police and military would be funded by voluntary contributions.

[Nyder]

And communist anarchism is a contradiction in terms because you would need a state (or a governing authority with a monopoly on force) to coerce people into adopting the business practices mandated by communists (ie. distribution of profits to the workers).

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2003, 12:11 PM
And communist anarchism is a contradiction in terms because you would need a state (or a governing authority with a monopoly on force) to coerce people into adopting the business practices mandated by communists (ie. distribution of profits to the workers).

why exactly? the workers would already have the money, they own the means of pproduction, so who are you suggesting would need to distribute it? have you already forgoten that there iss no bougoisie in communism? it was only yestersay that i pointed that out to you.

[The Feral Underclass]

Nyder

You do not seem to understand what communism is. It has been explained to you why communism is not about coercing people. I am sorry if you do not believe me.

I will repeat what I said to you before.

The Anarchist Tension

Communism is not about coercing people into collectives. Communism is what Marx described as a conclusion to a workers revolution. He called the first stage, or the transition from capitalism to communism, Socialism.

Communism in essence has the same principles as anarchism...no state, no cenralisation..human beings working and living co-operativly. Anarchism and communism therefore can not be contradictions as they are almost the same thing. If not all together the same thing.

your ideas about a libertarian society are not addressing the real problems that exist in society. Alienation, unfair destribution of wealth and labour...wage-slavery. Your society is not better than it is now.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Well said AT

[Hoppe]

Nyder will probably agree with me that is not so much the end that is disputable, but that the road to get their will not bring you there.

Anarchist Tnesion,

Is there a formula for "fair distribution" like A^2 + B^2 = C^2?

Alienation from what? Friends, family, the dog?

[The Feral Underclass]

Nyder will probably agree with me that is not so much the end that is disputable, but that the road to get their will not bring you there.

Who is this directed too? I am also unclear what it means?


Is there a formula for "fair distribution" like A^2 + B^2 = C^2?

Workers control&#33;


Alienation from what? Friends, family, the dog?

marx talked about alienation at the work place being something that is created by the fact you are simply a machine. or more correctly an extension of the machine you use to create whatever product it is. This can be used as a metaphore for most jobs, but lets take a shoe factory for instance. If you produce shoes eight hours a day fivce days a week, all you are is a machine. You press the material you shape it, and then it goes down the conveyor belt, you do it again, and again, and again, and again. You do not benifit from this. the shoe is not yours. you can not even say what is going to be done with the shoe. And all the while you know, that from your back breaking work, some twat in a leather chair is making millions.

What kind of reaction does the human brain have from this. It makes you bitter. it makes you withdraw. It makes you depressed because you can not fulfill your dreams. You have to work. For a wage, for absolutly no money at all, just so you can pay it all back out again.

This alienation then creates a feeling of worthlessness. It makes people think that this is their lot in life. That it can never change. It disempowers people. And because you have to survive the best you can, you battle with your fellow emloyees, competeing to make money, to get better positions. It alienates people from each other. You withdraw into your home. with your nice fence and conservatories. You watch your neighbours brand new car being cleaned and hate them because they can afford it and you cant. Your son get bullied at school because they arent wearing nike...your daughter is laughed at because she dosnt have the latest barbie. Human beings are set against each other. They hate each other. they envy and they fight and they do it because they all desperatly want to be the richest. The trendyist. The newist and most beautiful. This is alienation. This is what capitalism has done&#33;

[Hoppe]

Workers control&#33;

That&#39;s not very mathematical is it? So we are going to let the workers democratically decide what is fair I suppose?

In a communist society people still need to wear shoes so the same works needs to be done. Or is it that because they know get a piece of the profit this feeling suddenly disappears? That would be a bit materialistic, would it not?

[The Feral Underclass]

That&#39;s not very mathematical is it? So we are going to let the workers democratically decide what is fair I suppose?

No I suppost it isnt very mathematical. But it dosnt make it any less effcient. Workers would control all aspects of life. They would work co-operativly in federation with each other. They would control the means of production and more importantly their own lives. At some point after a revolutionary situation society would be organized in such a way that people would have free time to puruse what ever they wanted, while still doing certain amounts of &#39;socialy necessary work&#39;. Maybe 8 hours a week, and in turn for it, they would be provided for by the collective.


In a communist society people still need to wear shoes so the same works needs to be done. Or is it that because they know get a piece of the profit this feeling suddenly disappears? That would be a bit materialistic, would it not?

You&#39;re over simplifying the significance of it. They wouldnt get a "piece of the profit" because profit would not exist. They would control and organinze the production of society themselves. It will be socially necessarey work that will be carried out with pride..

It has nothing to do with materialistic tendancies, it is about having control over your life.