click here if you want to see your banner on this site

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - libertasbella

Pages: [1] 2
1

Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don’t.
– Ayn Rand

I first picked up a copy of Atlas Shrugged so I could destroy it at a book barbecue hosted by my local chapter of the Starbucks barista union. I wound up hanging onto it because I love video games and wanted to post a photo of the cover to r/bioshock. (I had 8.7 million karma at the time.)

I had always been told that the book is long-winded and boring by my liberal arts college professors. (They should know.) But I was already hooked after reading the first sentence: “Who is John Galt?” Perhaps this “John Galt” character would prove central to the plot later on. I resolved to find out.

But strange things started happening to me as I followed Dagny Taggart around on her adventures. I began to doubt whether the government bureaucrats’ efforts to throttle innovation and industry were really for the public good. Could such dull and dishonest people truly only be looking out for their own interests? I kept reading. I needed answers.

After I had finished what felt like 3,000 pages of John Galt’s legendary monologue, I saw everything clearly for the first time in my life. I quit my job at Starbucks, deleted my Reddit account, and dropped out of liberal arts college. I developed a new line of NFTs themed around Objectivism, made $180 million in two days, and then used that money to fund my newly discovered purpose in life: sabotaging copper mines.

Thank you, Ayn Rand!

Check out the Who Is John Galt Collection by Libertas Bella!

2
General Discussion, Non Crypto Stuff / The Masks Speak by Ben Garrison
« on: September 12, 2023, 04:09:03 AM »

Do you know what the worst part of the Plandemic was? It wasn’t the politicians, who will invent any grievance and exploit any crisis so long as it expands their power and lines their pockets. That kind of behavior is to be expected from politicians – especially those currently infesting the swamp.

No. The worst part of the whole ridiculous affair was how a certain subset of people reacted to it. Those spineless cretins weren’t content to submit to inhuman demands made by lunatics who hate them. They wanted to force you to do the same! They enthusiastically volunteered as rats in a medical experiment, but couldn’t stand the thought of you staying safely behind on the other side of the glass.

Don’t let the mask-kissers’ demonstration go in vain. Never forget how many people wanted to turn you into a second class citizen just because you aren’t a slave to alarmism. Remember how smugly they would gloat if you died of the kung fu bat flu. Don’t forgive them for begging the tyrants to create a police state.

But most of all, ridicule them with the help of the best in the business: the one and only Ben Garrison! America’s last unafraid editorial cartoonist penned “The Masks Speak” so you can show midwit leftist bootlickers that you know what’s really on their minds.

Check out The Masks Speak collection on Libertas Bella!

3

Do you remember when one of the vilest creatures ever to trail slime across the White House carpeting came out and called Trump supporters “a basket full of deplorables?” It was no revelation. Watching that wretched harpy wag her wrinkled talon in our direction only proved what we already knew in our hearts: we were – and are – on the right side of history.

Your dream is to reclaim America’s integrity. To see her cities no longer awash in human misery. Her children no longer bombarded with Marxist programming and taught that they’re evil. Her borders no longer reminiscent of Walmart’s front entrance on Black Friday.

You’re damn right we’re deplorable. It’s only natural that a nemesis of decency should hate such honorable ambitions. We’re everything a sniveling Deep State shrew should hate. Above your fear mongering. Immune to your propaganda. Determined to steer this country back on track with the same white-knuckle grit our ancestors built it with in the first place.

Don’t let the media deceive you into thinking you’re alone. You are one deplorable out of many – a legion of patriots, each a torchbearer for liberty who keeps the soul of America safe in their heart. Now say it loud and say it proud: MAGA.

“E Deploribus Unum” was created by Ben Garrison, America’s last unafraid editorial cartoonist.

Check out the E Deploribus Unum Collection by Libertas Bella!

4

My name is Apolonia Gramsci-Kuntz. I dual majored in women’s studies and Marxist theory at Radcliffe College, and would have gotten a PhD if my five separate mental illnesses hadn’t convinced me that I was a house cat from 2007 through 2015. Fortunately, the public education system welcomed me with open arms. I now teach/indoctrinate impressionable young children at an elementary school.
 
I love most children. Whether I’m helping them realize they’re perpetual victims because of things that happened to their ancestors – or demonizing them for historic injustices they were nothing to do with – I know I’m doing the Goddess's work. But some of them … well, some of them are so reprehensible that even my most abusive guilt tactics have no effect.
 
Case in point: the sandy haired boy who brought Ben Garrison’s official Trump Mug Shot Gadsden Flag merch to my class the other day. However loudly I screeched at him and his parents, that little brute refused to voluntarily forfeit his right to free speech. Now I have to look at the Bad Orange Man’s admonishing glare and a traditional symbol of American independence every time I go to work. It has already given me PTSD three times.
 
I’m writing to warn you against ordering this fine merchandise from Libertas Bella. I want to spare my fellow leftists from having conniption fits!

Check out the Trump Mug Shot Gadsden Flag Collection by Libertas Bella!

5

The pantheon of American cartoonists has its fair share of luminaries. There is Walt Disney, whose work was so inspired that it sparked the creation of a hideously large and evil media conglomerate. There is Jim Davis, whose brainchild compelled the entire world to unite over its shared disdain for Mondays. There is Charles Schulz, who taught us never to trust psychiatrists. And let us not forget Chic Young, who never failed to delight whenever he depicted Dagwood Bumstead in the process of creating or consuming a comically tall sandwich with lots of weird stuff in it.

But of all the cartoonists God will ever see fit to grace this country with, none is more controversial than Ben Garrison – the founder of GrrrGraphics. The Montanan artist owes some of his notoriety to his own work, which depicts Deep State darlings as the devils they really are. He can also attribute a large part of it to internet trolls, who took it upon themselves to edit his cartoons with their own unsavory touches.

But chief among Ben’s sins is portraying Donald J. Trump in a positive light. Such audacity! Imagine if just two or three more artists dared to voice their support for someone who ran for president without globalist oligarchs’ explicit approval. It might just pry public discourse free from the Deep State’s vulture-like clutches and restore it to … you know … the public. (Note to self: tell Ben to draw cartoon depicting Deep State as vulture, with words “Deep State” printed just above its head.)

Check out the Ben Garrison Cartoons Logo Collection by Libertas Bella!

6

Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don’t. – Ayn Rand

I first picked up a copy of Atlas Shrugged so I could destroy it at a book barbecue hosted by my local chapter of the Starbucks barista union. I wound up hanging onto it because I love video games and wanted to post a photo of the cover to r/bioshock. (I had 8.7 million karma at the time.)

I had always been told that the book is long-winded and boring by my liberal arts college professors. (They should know.) But I was already hooked after reading the first sentence: “Who is John Galt?” Perhaps this “John Galt” character would prove central to the plot later on. I resolved to find out.

But strange things started happening to me as I followed Dagny Taggart around on her adventures. I began to doubt whether the government bureaucrats’ efforts to throttle innovation and industry were really for the public good. Could such dull and dishonest people truly only be looking out for their own interests? I kept reading. I needed answers.

After I had finished what felt like 3,000 pages of John Galt’s legendary monologue, I saw everything clearly for the first time in my life. I quit my job at Starbucks, deleted my Reddit account, and dropped out of liberal arts college. I developed a new line of NFTs themed around Objectivism, made $180 million in two days, and then used that money to fund my newly discovered purpose in life: sabotaging copper mines.

Thank you, Ayn Rand!

Check out the John Galt Collection by Libertas Bella!

7

We figured that our boy would take an incredible mug shot. But man, were we ever unprepared for this.

Donald Trump’s expression is aimed at two groups. The first are the reprobates, the scoundrels, the traitors who have perverted this once great nation into their personal money laundering scheme. At them Trump directs a steely gaze of pure defiance – a promise that no amount of persecution can deter his righteous fury. It is derisive contempt for the Deep State and its vile cronies who know their days are numbered.

The second are the people – the patriots, who will never abandon our hero however stridently the Democrats and their Fake News Media puppets squawk their fictitious grievances. By demonizing their greatest enemy, they only galvanize our resolve to support the true President of the United States … and perhaps one day exact true justice on the mendacious cadaver currently putting stains on the Oval Office upholstery. Trump’s determined visage underscores what real Americans have known all along: that freedom and liberty only belong to those who will stand up and fight for them.

Trump mug shot merchandise is currently about as rare as air molecules. But only Libertas Bella offers this piece of American history as interpreted by Ben Garrison (the world’s greatest editorial cartoonist according to everyone whose opinion actually matters). Don’t miss your chance to show your support for the 45th – and soon the 47th – president.

Check out Ben Garrison's Donald Trump Mug Shot Collection on Libertas Bella!

8
Hey everyone! Just want to let you know that we’re pivoting our focus to be more crypto-centric. You can still find our beloved pro-Second Amendment T-shirts and flags on our new offshoot site: 2ndAmendmentShirts.com

9
Can libertarians be of the Left?

Many would laugh at such a question. After all, libertarianism tends to be a fervently pro-free market ideology. But all ideologies have their shades of grey. With libertarianism being no exception to the trend.

The left libertarian tradition is one that champions equality and social justice under the framework of a free-market economy. The leftist libertarian political economy stresses a separation of economy and state while championing mutual ownership of resources in a voluntary manner.

Left Libertarians’ Unique Views

A strong skepticism of the prevailing mixed economy defines what is a left libertarian.

Their beliefs on ownership are particularly nuanced. Natural resources such as land, oil, and trees can be subject to collective ownership. While left libertarians respect private property more than most of the prominent forces on the left, they do not fully eschew collective forms of property ownership.

Voluntary co-operatives, communes, and other worker-driven arrangements can be used to empower workers and allow them to enjoy material benefits without having to face capitalist exploitation.

Going back to natural resources, individuals in a leftist libertarian order can still use the aforementioned commonly-owned goods. But there’s a catch: The use of such resources can only occur after society grants these individuals permission. In order to gain permission, individuals must make a payment to society at large.

The Intellectual Basis for Left Libertarian Economic Thought

Such logic is inspired by the thought of 19th century economist Henry George, who pushed for a land tax. George’s views on property rights were somewhat unique by United States standards, which tended to be more rooted in classical liberalism or free-market conservatism. In contrast, George saw land as a commonly-held resource and could not be held exclusively by an individual.

This conception of land ownership stood in contrast to the views of John Locke, who believed that land could be privately owned and homesteaded by individuals. Lockean views of private property tend to be more prevalent among Republicans, right-wing libertarians, and other classical liberal adjacent movements.

The Overlap and Differences Between Leftist Libertarians and Anti-Property Movements

Left-wing libertarians have a lot in common with collectivist and Marxist views on private property, at least in a conceptual sense. Although the similarities have limits. Advocates of collectivism on the authoritarian left are more likely to use state power to achieve their ends at the expense of individual freedom.

At the end of the day, left libertarians come in all shapes. They don’t generally dismiss the insights of Marxism and incorporate some of the anti-property beliefs of the renowned left anarchist thinker Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.

Proudhon is widely viewed as the father of the political philosophy of anarchism and is famous for his quip “property is theft.”

Like libertarian socialists, the libertarians of the left go beyond concepts of self-ownership and stress the need for voluntary institutions that close inequality gaps. Left-wing libertarians sympathize with economic redistribution of resources, albeit in a voluntary manner to correct disparities in inequality.

American philosopher Gary Chartier is a prominent anarchist who blends certain facets of libertarian thought with an anarchist agenda to create a stateless society. Chartier’s brand of anarchism doesn’t take a statist approach to addressing the question of allocating resources, but his vision for a stateless society remains rather unique.

Continue reading Left Libertarian: A Tradition That Champions Equality and Social Justice on Libertas Bella

10
Can black markets lead to a libertarian society?

According to agorists, interactions in black markets and grey markets can lay the groundwork for a nonviolent revolution against the present-day administrative state.

Agorism refers to a political philosophy that advocates for the use of counter-economics and similar ideas to create a libertarian society based on voluntary exchanges and associations.

The Etymology and Origins of Agorism

American libertarian philosopher Samuel Edward Konkin III coined the term agorism. To understand the principles that define agorism, we must look towards the ancients.

The word is derived from the Ancient Greek word (Ancient Greek:  ἀγoρά), which refers to an open space where people can assemble and engage in commerce at in a polis— the Ancient Greek word for city-state (πόλις).

Konkin admired free markets and was part of the budding libertarian movement of the 1970s. His sympathies for libertarianism and anarchism made him a natural opponent of the modern-day state. SEK3 was particularly inspired by the works of the Ausrian School economist Ludwig von Mises and his acolytes who pushed for free markets.

The Debates Within the Libertarian Movement on Strategy

In addition to creating a political movement, Konkin gained fame for coining the term “minarchism”, which refers to a form of libertarianism that advocates for a minimal state.

Konkin was functionally an anarchist in his approach to the state. He viewed the state as an immoral entity that not only stifled economic progress but also transgressed on basic human liberties.

In the libertarian movement’s embryonic stage, there were constant debates about how liberty should be ultimately secured. Some libertarian figures advocated for traditional political methods to advance these ideas. The Libertarian Party was viewed as the primary vehicle for effecting change in the traditional political sphere.

There were other libertarians who agreed that the political route was the only way for their ideas to become politically relevant. But they held one caveat: Libertarians should run in the Republican Party. They reasoned that the GOP had libertarian factions within it and a mainstream party with its resources could propel those ideas to new heights.

Others focused on educational means of spreading their message through think tanks, educational institutions, and general culture. Certain schools of libertarianism inspired by Friedrich A. Hayek’s Intellectuals and Socialism, firmly believed that the diffusion of ideas is paramount towards generating change.

Why Ideological Splits Still Matter

There were obvious ideological splits among libertarians as well. There were minarchists, who believed in a minimal state, and the anarchists, who opposed the concept of a state. The latter were more averse to traditional activism, while the former was not afraid to participate in party politics and take part in mainstream academia.

Anti-state individuals have been allured by the unique nature of agorism. What excited them about this free-market philosophy was how it offered a unique opportunity for them to put their principles in action. By carrying the agorist flag, these individuals see market interactions as vehicles of societal liberation from state coercion

The Konkin vs. Rothbard Debate on How to Achieve Liberty

Konkin rose to prominence around the same time as Murray Rothbard, the leading exponent of anarcho-capitalism of that time, became the intellectual pillar for libertarianism.

Apart from his radicalism, Rothbard was known for his political eccentricism. Rothbard was willing to forge alliances with both the Old Right and the New Left. The free-market stalwart was a political junkie through and through. He was fascinated by the intrigue of 20th century politics in America.

Rothbard advocated for conventional political action to advance libertarian ideas. He was initially a strong supporter of the Libertarian Party and saw political parties as vehicles to realize substantial political reforms in the United States. Konkin, by contrast, was not a fan of party politics.

The founder of agorism was of the view that playing in the direct politics game only perpetuates statism. Konkin’s political philosophy focused on direct action in the real world and avoided the political arena altogether.

Continue reading Agorism: The Revolutionary Philosophy of Counter-Economics on Libertas Bella

11
General Discussion, Non Crypto Stuff / What Is Paleolibertarianism?
« on: June 08, 2022, 10:17:03 PM »
No political movement is a monolith. Political movements have their own sub-sects and factions within them. Libertarianism has been no exception to this rule. One variety of libertarianism that stands out is paleolibertarianism.

The paleolibertarian strand of libertarianism fuses traditional cultural values and philosophical values with the standard libertarian antipathy of government intervention into private affairs.

The Etymology of Paleolibertarianism

Paleolibertarian thought emerged out of a well-established classical liberal tradition that put private property and market activity on a pedestal. The “paleo” qualifier is used due to how the paleo libertarian ideology has its origins in classical right-wing thought.

19th century classical liberalism and the Old Right largely influenced paleos. British historian Lord Acton is among the most prominent intellectual role models for paleos due to his opposition to centralized state power. This tradition of pro-small government views would be maintained by the Old Right in the first half of the 20th century. It became known for its opposition to the centralized managerial state and the missionary foreign policy the U.S. adopted since World War I.

Several politicians such as Howard Buffett and Senator Robert Taft  and writers such as Garet Garret and Albert Jay Nock espoused these principles. Paleos would later champion the aforementioned figures’ ideas.

Many proto-libertarian pundits and theorists started to gain notoriety during the New Deal. Although she was no libertarian, the Objectivist author Ayn Rand would also be a major source of inspiration for many paleos. Her free market beliefs made her popular across the majority of libertarian sects.

The Rothbard/Rockwell Duo

Figures such as the historian Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell, the founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, were instrumental in developing this segment of libertarianism. Both men were influenced by the Austrian school of economics and were actively involved in the advocacy  of anarcho-capitalism.

Their compilation of essays in the Rothbard-Rockwell report became the main guide for spreading Rothbard’s message of free markets, private property, and traditional western culture in the 1990s. Although the paleo movement is not exclusively anarcho-capitalist, its undeniable that pro-capitalist strains of anarchism have largely shaped its overall ideology.

The Schisms Within Libertarianism

The libertarian movement experienced a significant rise in the 1970s and quickly witnessed the Libertarian Party emerge as America’s leading third party. The Koch brothers, Charles and David, helped form the Cato Institute along with Murray Rothbard in 1977 –– signaling a promising new age for libertarians. However, it was not able to keep itself together for very long. Infighting due to disagreements on strategy and philosophical differences caused the movement to fissure. One of the most infamous splits was the Koch-Rothbard split in the 1980s.

In large part due to differences regarding libertarian strategy, Rothbard began to clash with his fellow Cato board members and eventually criticized the 1980s Libertarian Party presidential ticket of Ed Clark and David Koch for not taking radical stances on the issue of taxation. This led to Rothbard’s expulsion from the Cato Institute in 1981

From there, Rothbard teamed up with Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul’s former Chief of Staff, to form the Mises Institute. Even after Rothbard’s death in 1995, the paleo sect continued to remain a force within libertarianism. Rockwell’s website, which was founded in 1999, has been the hub of paleolibertarian discourse. It features notable writers such as Karen de Coster, Thomas DiLorenzo, and Tom Woods, among others.

The Paleo’s Break From Conservatism

The Cold War temporarily united libertarianism with conservatism through the “fusionist” movement, which coalesced around the issue of preserving a market-based economy and resisting a totalitarian state. However, once the Soviet Union collapsed, this alliance started to gradually collapse.

Many libertarians became skeptical of the Right’s interventionist streak that came about with the rise of the neoconservatives. Additionally, conservative’s inability to roll back the administrative state made libertarians realize that this movement was not following through with its rhetoric. In light of this, a number of  libertarians became convinced that aligning themselves with the acceptable Right and neocon adjacent groups was no longer a fruitful strategy.

Continue reading Paleolibertarian: Understand the Basics of the Paleolibertarian Strand of Libertarianism on Libertas Bella

12
Statism is nothing more than gang rule. A statist dictatorship is a gang devoted to looting the effort of the productive citizens of its own country.”
– Ayn Rand, War and Peace, The Objectivist Newsletter, Oct 1962

What is statism? Merriam-Webster defines it as the “concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry.”

In essence, statism is the belief that the state or government, regardless of its size or the amount of control it exerts over its subjects, is legitimate to at least some extent. In practice, a government becomes more statist as it exercises increasing control over the economy.

While libertarians often use the word “statism” to brand any state control they deem authoritarian and antithetical to the free market, a statist doesn’t necessarily endorse despotism, fascism, socialism, conservatism, or any other “ism.”

A statist may merely believe that some form of minimal government is necessary to provide society with a safety net, protections against theft and breach of contract, a court system, or other functions with which the free market doesn’t naturally concern itself. Even the most laissez-faire economist is unlikely to condemn the concept of a town fire department as a threat to civil society.

In contrast, anti-statism is the essence of pure anarchism. An anti-statist would assert that all state power and political power are illegitimate as well as an affront to liberty. They would argue that everything which people need to thrive and coexist peaceably could be provided by the private sector.

Who and What Is a Statist

Statists commonly believe that the government must play a central role in the means of production. They may reason that the private sector is unable to function within a vacuum of government influence; perhaps it will violate the rights of the citizenry, or pose a threat to the hegemony of the state itself.

Economic planning, a common facet of socialism in which the government actively decides how resources will be allocated among its citizenry, is a common feature of statism. Subsidies, which are sums of money granted by the state to help an industry or certain businesses, are also common in statism.

As explained above, a statist might technically only want a government which offers a police department and a guy with a shovel who is paid to fill in potholes. The title of “statist” is more frequently reserved for someone (typically a politician) who believes the government should have more legal power over its citizens and influence in business.

The individual is no longer their own master under statism – at least not entirely. Rather, they are subject to a system that purports to serve a higher goal. Whether that goal is the advancement of a race, religion, ideal, or even the expansion of the state’s borders is ultimately up to the whims of the ruling elites (typically politicians).

Examples of Statism

The rather loose definition of statism means it applies to several forms of government. Socialism, communism, national socialism, feudalism, fascism, tribalism, apartheid, theocracy, and even democracy are all examples of statism.

At face value, these systems share little in common, but they all seek to direct how their citizens’ collective efforts are spent. The goal of communism is common ownership of all things; thus the product of a citizen’s labor goes in part or in whole toward the good of all (or in practice the good of the political elite).

The goal of feudalism is ultimately to benefit the king; thus the serf tilling the field pays rent to their vassal who in turn provides military aid to the crown. The goal of theocracy is to benefit God; because God has little use for gold, which He can make as easily as snapping His fingers, the church benevolently accumulates it on His behalf.

Technically speaking, every American politician is a statist. Although he is very much in favor of limiting government interference in private life to the greatest extent possible, Ron Paul’s political view that the “proper role for government in America is to provide national defense, a court system for civil disputes, a criminal justice system for acts of force and fraud, and little else” includes several state-run services.

As American politics become more left-leaning, so too do they frequently become more statist. Hilary Clinton’s 2016 platform included imposing a tax on high-frequency trading and direct government intervention in the free market.

Bernie Sanders’ pledge to transform America’s energy system into 100 percent renewable energy, although environmentalist in tone, would needless to say have required massive bureaucratic intervention. And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s promise to illegalize capitalism while forcing all white, cis males to wear bomb collars is arguably just a tiny bit statist as well.

Final Thoughts

In her essay War and Peace, Ayn Rand wrote “The differences among statist systems are only a matter of time and degree; the principle is the same. Under statism, the government is not a policeman, but a legalized criminal that holds the power to use physical force in any manner and for any purpose it pleases against legally disarmed, defenseless victims.”

Statism exists wherever government exists – it is the degree to which statism is exercised which makes it reprehensible or not. But if one accepts that a person is a free and rational creature, whose sole obligation is unto themself, then any agency which forces them to behave a certain way or spend the product of their labor toward the advancement of any goal which they have not voluntarily accepted as their own is necessarily unjust.

What is statism? In essence, it is whenever any authority exerts control over your life. But doing away with statism entirely would quite possibly require the elimination of the entire world population minus one.

Statist: The Definition of How Government Rules Through Economy originally appeared on Libertas Bella

13
Are libertarianism and socialism diametrically opposed? The libertarian socialist would say no.

The political philosophy of libertarian socialism categorically rejects state interference in social affairs and instead proposes the abolition of authoritarian institutions that inhibit freedom and justice.

The rejection of state socialism and the current mixed economy define libertarian socialism. Instead, the libertarian socialism project calls for decentralized institutions that use direct democracy or voluntary associations to break up centralized institutions and institutions captured by rent-seeking capitalists.

What is a Libertarian Socialist?

The libertarian socialist believes in a free society, where individuals do not have to worry about being coerced by corporations or oppressive states. The political philosophy is focused on freedom and the individual’s quest to break free from institutions that shackle human thought and creativity.

Unlike their state socialist counterparts, libertarian socialists do not push central planning, state-owned enterprises, or outright nationalization. However, they do not reject the idea of collective ownership of property. The ability for free individuals to determine their own property-holding arrangements is crucial for socialist libertarians.

If people band together and collectivize the ownership of private property ona voluntary basis, this is perfectly in line with these precepts. There are numerous cases where private property is acquired through dubious means and is used by elites to cement their economic status and lord over the working classes.

A social libertarian stresses the importance of defending civil liberties, which made them staunch opponents of totalitarian socialist regimes throughout the 20th century. Since Vladimir Lenin successfully led the Bolshevik Revolution starting in 1917, Communism and its socialist cousins have been directly associated with totalitarianism.

What Is a Libertarian Socialist Approach to Governance?

Libertarians of all stripes never approved of one-party states. Communist regimes and totalitarian socialist adjacent political movements were marked by such arrangements. Ironically, these regimes banned many dissident socialist parties, which validated the initial libertarian socialist skepticism towards these kinds of regimes.

Instead, libertarians with socialist inclinations favored voluntary associations, economic democracy, and local governance. One of the contradictions they spotted with regards to 20th century communist experiments was how wealth inequality still persisted thanks to the concentration of power in the state.

This was a sign of how centralized political structures can allow for massive wealth and power consolidation. Which is why political decentralization is key for ensuring equality of political and economic opportunities. In sum, states have a tendency of centralizing and creating benefits for parasitic individuals, thus requiring a new way forward.

Unlike conventional free-marketers, libertarian socialists are concerned about economic inequality. A society marked by wealth inequality is oppressive and socially unstable. By phasing out the state, individuals would be free to live up to their economic potential now that they’re no longer shackled by the state’s laws and regulations.

Similarly, being free from excessive corporate power allows for people to chart their own economic paths free from sub-optimal employment arrangements. Additionally, individuals and communities would then be afforded the opportunity to set up economic institutions that provide real value to consumers while providing dignified work.

Although market interactions would be respected, many socialist libertarians called into question a number of economic assumptions and offered alternatives at the local level to address certain inequalities and worrisome social problems that corporate capitalism generally brought about.

Origin of Libertarian Socialism

It’s often forgotten that the word ”libertarian” had a different meaning in the 19th century. Anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism, and other forms of left-leaning anarchist movements of that century were often described as libertarians. These movements thoroughly opposed the state, as well as dominant business entities.

This stands in contrast to modern libertarianism, which focused more on economic freedoms and private property. This 20th century philosophy of liberty drew more from classical liberalism and generally held market activity in a much higher regard. There was much stronger emphasis on individualism and respect for private property.

In the 19th century, advocates of private property and free markets would generally be categorized as liberals. Broadly speaking, libertarian describes a pro-liberty outlook on politics, while socialism describes an economic system where wealth is distributed on a more equal basis.

Libertarian socialists try to fuse these concepts together to form a unique philosophy. Liberalism would be critiqued from a socialist perspective, while state socialism would be critiqued from a libertarian perspective. The goal was to create a new way of dealing with the problems of industrialization while protecting individual freedoms.

This unique philosophy tried to make political discussion more nuanced by recognizing the merits of both socialist and liberal thought. Political discourse tends to get stale at times, and often what’s needed is to recognize that certain competing political schools have valid points that can be combined to form news ways of thinking.

The rapid industrialization of the 19th century caught many people by surprise and required novel strategies to address its many unforeseen consequences. Socialist libertarians firmly believed they had the right answers to the many problems present during the industrial era.

Continue reading Libertarian Socialism: Does It Make Sense and How Does It Work? on Libertas Bella

14
Anarcho Capitalism refers to the philosophy that calls for the abolition of centralized states. In its stead, the state will be replaced by a system of private property which will be maintained by private institutions and civil society.

Anarcho-capitalism is truly radical in the sense that it strikes at the root of societal problems and attempts to offer solutions to these problems through market forces. Given the philosophy’s relatively young age, anarcho-capitalist thought merits a proper analysis in order for novices to fully comprehend it.

Understanding the Philosophy of Anarcho Capitalism

The concepts of self-ownership and the non-aggression principle largely define anarcho capitalism. Individuals have full control of their lives and can pursue their own goals as long as they do not transgress on other people’s rights. The non-aggression principle makes it clear that individuals cannot encroach on the person or property of any other individual.

The initiation of force against others is categorically rejected under this philosophy’s precepts. This does not only apply between regular individuals but also between the relationship of the individual and state.

The state itself is viewed as a coercive institution that is centered on said aggression through its practice of taxation and monopoly on violence. In addition, state activities such as economic and social regulation, prohibitions, and other forms of government intervention in people’s private affairs are categorically rejected by proponents of this philosophy.

The History of Anarcho Capitalist Thought

For starters, the word anarchy has a stereotypical perception of being associated with radical leftist political movements in most Western nations. However, the perception of anarchy as a leftist movement is warranted given its history.

Most strands of anarchism, above all, the European variants, tend to have origins on the Left. There is still a broad consensus among anarchists sects on issues of state authority, which they generally eschew.

Luminaries such as Peter Kropotkin, Joseph-Pierre Proudhon, and Mikhail Bakunin led the way in giving anarchism a coherent vision for people to follow during the nineteenth century.

The anarchism of 19th century European radicals viewed private property in a negative light and were skeptical of capitalism. In many respects, these groups were adjacent to the ascendant Marxist movement that grew concurrently with classical anarchist thought.

Some movements within the anarchist sphere had a revolutionary bent and were willing to engage in acts of political violence. Numerous statesmen such as Russian Tsar Alexander II and American president William McKinnley were assassinated by anarchists.

The impact of these assassinations firmly ingrained in Westerners’ minds the idea that anarchism was associated with violence, thus requiring states to put tabs on these movements.

However, the entry of anarcho-capitalism in the 1900s gave anarchism a new twist by not dismissing capitalism outright. In fact, the average anarcho-capitalist embraced the market and saw it as a tool to fight against the state. By taking a look at the roots of this subsect of anarchism, we can get an idea of how free-market anarchism came about.

Early European Figures of Anarchist Thought

Across the pond, existed some precursors to American-style anarcho-capitalism. Etienne de la Boétie (1530-1563), a French judge, was an early proponent of anarchist thought.

In his work, the Discourse on Voluntary Servitude, he advocated for civil disobedience and nonviolent resistance. Mr. libertarian himself, Murray N. Rothbard praised de la Boétie’s work for its emphasis on civil disobedience against unjust state actions.

The French intellectual Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) played an unheralded role during his career making the case for capitalism.

His political theory of liberty was spelled out in his magnum opus, The Law, in which he made the case for a laissez-faire economy and viewed the use of state power in economic affairs as an immoral act.

Although he was a minarchist, Bastiat was one of the 19th century’s strongest proponents of individual rights and an inspiration for Austrian economists such Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich A. Hayek in the subsequent century. Bastiat’s The Law remains an influential introductory text for pro-capitalist adherents.

Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912), a Belgian political theorist, was another European figure who gave a unique spin to the anarchist movement. De Molinari was one of the most notable pre-Rothbardian anarchist figures who blended anarchism with capitalist thought.

In his work, the Production of Security, de Molinari made the case for private defense and property rights and railed against state monopolies. Modern anarchist figures such as Hans-Hermann Hoppe have lauded de Molinari’s work for being ahead of its time in pushing for anarchism with capitalistic features.

The German philosopher Max Stirner also contributed to developing anarchist thought in Europe. Stirner was renowned for his emphasis on individualism and is seen as the father of modern individualist anarchism. His magnum opus, The Ego and Its Own is filled with anti-authoritarian and individualist themes that have been passed on to succeeding generations of anarchists.

Although not an anarchist per se, the British philosopher Herbert Spencer was known for his firm advocacy of capitalist principles in the latter half of the 1800s. Murray Rothbard described Spencer’s Social Statics as “the greatest single work of libertarian political philosophy ever written.”

Continue reading Anarcho Capitalism: A Definition and Guide on Why It Matters on Libertas Bella

15
What is a Minarchist?

A Minarchist is someone who believes that the state should only exist for the purpose of maintaining law and order. Minarchism is a Libertarian political philosophy where the state’s only function is protecting individuals from theft, breach of contract, fraud, and aggression.

The government would still maintain the military, police, courts, fire departments, prisons, and legislatures, but the state would have no ability to interfere with the capitalist interactions and transactions of the people.

These states are referred to as “Night-watchman states.” One of the biggest supporters of this philosophy was Robert Nozick and he talked about it in his book “Anarchy, State, and Utopia.”

Minarchists believe that this standby approach to the economy will result in improved economic prosperity compared to the current system. Essentially, the word “minarchist” means “minimal statism” or “minimal state.”

They want as little interference as possible other than to protect the contracts between two private individuals. They want the government and state to act as a checks and balances system rather than enforcement of the system.

This method of governing is most popular with Libertarianism of the United States and the right-libertarian political philosophy. That said, it’s also been popular with libertarian socialists and other leftists.

Some of them believe that a minimal welfare state is appropriate only when social safety nets are put in place for the working class. They believe that eliminating welfare programs would only make sense if you also eliminate capitalism. Some more extreme leftists believe that it would be better to repeal corporate welfare rather than social welfare for underprivileged and poor people.

Minarchism Definition

The minarchism definition means “minimal government intervention.” The main thing to remember is that people with this ideology believe that the government still has its role in society, but they need to take a step back and let the people transact as they please.

Many confuse minarchists with Anarchists who believe that the government has no role and should not have any purpose in maintaining checks and balances. Anarchists believe that you should be responsible for defending your property, enforcing your own laws, and backing up your own contracts with as much or as little force as necessary.

Ideology and Philosophy of a Minarchist

Many minarchists justify that a state still has its role in providing logical consequences for aggression. Some believe that it’s impossible to have any form of society without a state because the optional enforcement of laws makes for an unviable political system.

They’re saying that when you take away the state, you’re basically saying that the people should be responsible for defending themselves and everything they work hard for. This thinking would obviously not work in 99% of situations where there are many people unable to defend and protect themselves on their own.

Another issue is the privatization of defense and courts. Most minarchists believe that privatizing law enforcement, military, and courts would create a bias that would unevenly represent those who are capable of paying more for their protection.

Of course, there is a lot of skepticism over whether or not that happens in government already because a political system built on total government control has the potential for bias as well. Most minarchists believe that a night-watchman state can develop a political system that respects individual rights.

Taxation is another big issue addressed by minarchists and libertarians alike. Some support taxation because they believe it’s a necessary evil to prevent “free riders.” Others strongly oppose it and think that it’s wrong for the people to have to pay for government funding in a free society.

Ayn Rand is one of the most notable opponents of taxation, but she also believes that the removal of tax should occur gradually so as not to cripple the economic society. This also brings up the issue of whether or not a minarchy would require the people to pay tax or fees for the services provided.

When you call for a tow truck to tow your car, you have to pay for that service; it’s not a human right. In a capitalist democracy, police, firefighters, courts, and legislature are rights available to citizens provided that they pay the necessary tax to receive those rights.

It’s a grey area as to whether or not the minarchist state would pay for these services on a case-to-case basis and how they would enforce these rules.

Continue reading Minarchist: A Definition of the Night-Watchman State on Thought Grenades, the blog on Libertas Bella

Pages: [1] 2
Bitcoin Garden 2013-2024, All rights reserved | Privacy Policy | DMCA | About Bitcoin Garden | Support & Services