Libertarianism

[Wings Of Redemption]

Can anyone explain to me what exactly libertarianism is? For me it's a pretty confusing topic since I see Libertarians quoting Ayn Rand and Ron Paul while at the same time some Libertarians claim to be on the left. Am I the only one who is dumbfounded here? :confused::confused::confused:

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Libertarian has historically been used to describe anarchist groups and other such assorted groups. The modern "libertarian" in the American political landscape has nothing in common with historical libertarianism.

Of course, I for one believe that such terms "libertarian" and "authoritarian" pose a false dichotomy. What might be "libertarian" for one group may be absolutely "authoritarian" for another. For example, all communists agree that the expropriation of bourgeois property is a move of liberty for the proletariat as a class, but a move of also great authority for the bourgeoisie as a class. To flip it, the right of private property is something very libertarian for the bourgeoisie, but very authoritarian to the proletariat (who face a state whose interests always fall on defending the right to private property, and consequently defending the bourgeoisie as a class).

Libertarian socialists, Libertarian Marxists and anarchists are the main groups that take the "Libertarian" label. These groups are mainly composed of revolutionaries with the same goals as other groups, such as the left communists, the recent communisation currents, etc. of class struggle with the success of the proletariat and the abolition of classes, money, the state, work, the market, etc.

[Wings Of Redemption]

Libertarian has historically been used to describe anarchist groups and other such assorted groups. The modern "libertarian" in the American political landscape has nothing in common with historical libertarianism.

Of course, I for one believe that such terms "libertarian" and "authoritarian" pose a false dichotomy. What might be "libertarian" for one group may be absolutely "authoritarian" for another. For example, all communists agree that the expropriation of bourgeois property is a move of liberty for the proletariat as a class, but a move of also great authority for the bourgeoisie as a class. To flip it, the right of private property is something very libertarian for the bourgeoisie, but very authoritarian to the proletariat (who face a state whose interests always fall on defending the right to private property, and consequently defending the bourgeoisie as a class).

Libertarian socialists, Libertarian Marxists and anarchists are the main groups that take the "Libertarian" label. These groups are mainly composed of revolutionaries with the same goals as other groups, such as the left communists, the recent communisation currents, etc. of class struggle with the success of the proletariat and the abolition of classes, money, the state, work, the market, etc.

Thanks for clearing that up. How exactly do Libertarian tendencies differ in theory from mainstream leftist tendencies (if any at all)?

[Comrade #138672]

Of course, I for one believe that such terms "libertarian" and "authoritarian" pose a false dichotomy. What might be "libertarian" for one group may be absolutely "authoritarian" for another. For example, all communists agree that the expropriation of bourgeois property is a move of liberty for the proletariat as a class, but a move of also great authority for the bourgeoisie as a class. To flip it, the right of private property is something very libertarian for the bourgeoisie, but very authoritarian to the proletariat (who face a state whose interests always fall on defending the right to private property, and consequently defending the bourgeoisie as a class). Some Anarchists would agree with you on that, but will then say that they are exactly doing that, and that Marxists are authoritarian, because they are willing to rule with a minority on behalf of the working-class, which would somehow create a new oppressive class. They accuse Marxists of substituting themselves for the working-class.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Thanks for clearing that up. How exactly do Libertarian tendencies differ in theory from mainstream leftist tendencies (if any at all)?

Self-described "libertarian socialists" usually do not support the use of the party as an effective means to organize the proletariat, "market socialism", and things of that nature. There really isn't a distinctive tendency of "libertarian socialism" and many self-described "libertarian socialists/communists" are really class-struggle anarchists. One example of such a writing:

The Organizational Platform of the Libertarian Communists (http://www.nestormakhno.info/english/platform/org_plat.htm)

[JPSartre12]

Some Anarchists would agree with you on that, but will then say that they are exactly doing that, and that Marxists are authoritarian, because they are willing to rule with a minority on behalf of the working-class, which would somehow create a new oppressive class. They accuse Marxists of substituting themselves for the working-class.

Marxism is not inherently "authoritarian". As a Marxist, I can say that I am not "willing to rule with a minority of behalf of the working-class" or create new oppressors. That suggests a sort of élitist vanguard substitutionism.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Some Anarchists would agree with you on that

Not many at all.


but will then say that they are exactly doing that

Doing exactly what?


and that Marxists are authoritarian, because they are willing to rule with a minority on behalf of the working-class

This is not true. The dictatorship of the proletariat is nothing more than the proletariat organized in society as the ruling class. Marxists advocate the direct administration of the dictatorship by the proletariat as a class. Plus, as I stated before, the authoritarian/libertarian dichotomy is a false one.

[cyu]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian the term basically meant anarchists until post WW2, when American "Cold Warriors" attempted to hijack the term to refer to pro-capitalists.

Anarchist communist philosopher Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as "libertarian". According to anarchist historian Max Nettlau, the first use of the term "libertarian communism" was in November 1880, when a French anarchist congress employed it to more clearly identify its doctrines.

during early twentieth century, the terms libertarian communism and anarchist communism became synonymous within the international anarchist movement as a result of the close connection they had in Spain (see Anarchism in Spain) (with libertarian communism becoming the prevalent term).

In the 1950s, many with "Old Right" or classical liberal beliefs in the United States began to describe themselves as libertarian.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

It's an odd example of how one word can mean two very different things in two different places.

Example: In Europe, a 'liberal' is a person who adheres to classical liberalism, whereas in the U.S. a liberal is a progressive (yes, that even includes socialists).

Likewise, libertarianism was originally another word for anarchism (in its various tendencies). But in the U.S., during the 60s and 70s it became a catchall term for various forms of pro-capitalist minarchists, 'anarchists', conservative populists and old hippies burned out on the New Left. The actual U.S. Libertarian Party was born in the early 70s.

It's an odd mishmash of ideas, partly because of its odd mishmash of figures who inspired it. You got everyone from old-school isolationists like Ron Paul, science fiction writers like Robert Heinlein (who never really had a coherent ideology), anti-capitalist market anarchists like Samuel Edward Konkin III, conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, and wannabee philosophers like Ayn Rand.

Then in the early 80s the Koch brothers started to buy up the various Libertarian organizations (shutting out the more radical elements like the previous mentioned Konkin), and now we are in the situation we are today.


(Despite my loathing of the predatory 'free market' capitalism the ideology supports, some Libertarian magazines like Reason are actually worth reading every once in awhile, especially when concerning civil liberties issues).

[Anticommi]

I'm a libertarian so I know what they're talking about. Our core belief is that people are free to do as they choose unless it negatively affects someone else. Meaning, if you want to smoke crack then go right ahead. If you steel from someone to obtain crack that's when it gets complicated(for you)!! You will be fried for it. Now, unlike bullshit communism that totes equality through forced will, libertarianism is true equality through freedom. Fuck these communist wanna be kids. Come to the free side.

[cyu]

unlike bullshit communism that totes equality through forced will, libertarianism is true equality through freedom.


Pro-capitalist "libertarians" are taught that evil communists will tax away all their earnings. They are not taught that employees can simply assume control of their companies, and will no longer be forced to give any extra profits to the board of directors.

http://www.lushquotes.com/pics/kim-stanley-robinson/That's-libertarians-for-you---anarchists-who-want-police-protection-from-their-slaves..jpg

[Geiseric]

U.S. libertarians are basically fascists, at least their leadership is against the big bad statist civil rights bill, historically speaking, and against immigrants. They spew double speak every day and are directly funded by the Koch brothers.