Topic: Libertarian my ass! - page 11. (Read 9502 times)

That is true only for the US - and that doesn't change that the modern US interpretation of "libertarian" is a mystification of the original term. I would just like people understanding that.



That gives me the chance to deepen my exposition.

What I exposed on the OP are FACTS. More facts:

- anarchism and modern liberalism have a common origin: the pre-capitalist liberalism of the XVI Century (from Russeau to Humboldt)
- in the XIX century modern liberalism (free market capitalism) and anarchism were born, sharing a common origin (pre-capitalist liberalism) but splitting because a totally opposite conception of capitalism. For modern liberalists capitalism is: the natural way; for anarchists capitalism is: the non-natural way.

The US libertarians and the "original" libertarians have only one thing in common: they are both anti-state. But for original anarchists anti-capitalism is as important as anti-state. Otherwise, they would just be ultra-liberals, wouldn't they?

You should know that Anarchism is a left movement because Anarchism founders participated in the First International (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen's_Association), and they actively cooperated with communists until Bakunin realized that Trotsky's and Lenin's intentions were totalitarian. In fact, in Bakunin's own words, "the red burocracy is going to be the biggest lie in this century", as he saw Lenin's view as state-based capitalism, where workers were told what to do by super-structures outside their direct control (like modern businesses and enterprises, by the way).

You seem to have an odd - specifically communist - definition of "Anarchism." Let's see if we can correct that.


Nothing about a desire for a voluntary society that is specifically anti-market. Indeed, Murray Rothbard defined the market as:

In contrast, State actions are almost always not voluntary, for instance, taxation. They're going to take the money whether you want to pay them or not. Now, many past anarchists have been anti-market, or anti-property, but that does not mean that anarchy means no market. It only means no government. In fact, the logical conclusion of free-market principles is anarchism. I hope I have helped clear up your misconceptions of Anarcho-capitalism. If you have any further questions, I'll be glad to answer them.

Irrelevant points. Libertarianism has meant the "right" version in most of the world, and even generally in Europe, for the past thirty or so years. Many libertarians are anarchists and would dispute that anarchism is inherently anti-capitalist. Meanwhile, socialists stole the words "liberal" and "progressive" from us a long time ago, but you don't see anyone posting "Liberal my ass!" threads.

Well, I wrote my post to get the feedback you just gave me - thanks for that, you understood 100% of what I wrote. Hope I also made you interested in reading some of the books that founded the libertarian philosphy. I recommend Bakunin, Kropotkin and Proudhon for the philosophyc side, and Rudolph Rocker for the economic side.

I think it's important to understand that words and concepts are tight together - and it's important to know the origins of the terms we are using, even if we decide to give them "another meaning".

It's a good thing people start realizing this outcome. I personally would recommend productivity-based population control to prevent B) happening en masse, but the vast majority seems to prefer the starving. Or maybe they don't care, which is a more plausible explanation.



Regarding "libertarian": I call myself that and guess you won't like that. I'm mostly a capitalist liberal in the literal sense, with a major exception against the forming of monopolies. That's long and most people still don't understand what it means. What should I call myself?

I'm certainly not an anarchist, statist, communist or conservative, nor do I fully agree with the mainstream approach to economics that produces gigantic corrupt entities. I'm annoyed myself that "libertarian" seems to be ill-defined. It still seems to be the closest word.

I suppose I should bear in mind that I'm sorta just waking up while reading this, but reading your post makes me think that you've had the cluster fucked teaching and been told all kinds of bullshit when you were young and now you're just discovering that people have different definitions of things and have different beliefs. Yes, people think Libertarianism means something else than what you think and yes, people think Anarchism means different things, they come up with their own archetypes of Anarchism and Libertarianism. This is partly because as well that you have to deal with all sorts of bullshit propaganda regarding certain groups like these so people seek out new names and identities so they won't be automatically grouped in with them. A perfect example would be conservatives, because people in that group have gotten sick of being labelled as women hating religious fanatics they've decided to label themselves more clearly as fiscal conservatives or free market conservatives and so on.

Welcome to the real world Rampion, the more you dig through history and facts the more you'll realise what you're told is all bullshit and you have to find your own answer, for me the free market isn't an adopt or die scenario, it's consent, as long as people consent to all trades out there and deals etc. by their own will then that's a free market to me. To be fair as well the free market thing you've described sounds a lot like the sort of propaganda that's cooked up by what I call Imperial loyalists ( yeah I know but I'm using the dictionary definition which works ) they love to make out that we're all heartless rich people only obsessed with gaining wealth and would leave people out in the street to die and so on, of course as most of us would say here that's a load of crap.

A lot of these people have never heard of charity organisations or foundations which I wholly support lol .

It's funny how US people take concepts born in Europe to turn them upside-down.

Specifically, it's amazing how US folks call "libertarians" free market capitalists of the likes of Ron Paul, most of the times without even knowing the origins of this word.

Libertarian comes from latin word "libertas" = freedom (libertá in italian; libertad in spanish; liberté in french; etc.)

The term "libertarian" was used for the first time by the free thinkers of the Illustration: at the beginning it was only a metaphysical and philosophic concept opposed to the determinist philosophy. Nothing to do with politics or economics.

After that, it was used for the first time in a POLITICAL and ECONOMICAL way by Joseph Déjacque and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon as a synonym of ANARCHISM. And my friends, ANARCHISM is by definition AGAINST capitalist free market.

If you want to understand deeply why anarchism is against capitalism, and why anarchists are for a cooperativist and mutualist types of economy (but against totalitarian communism), please read:

• God and the State, by Bakunin
• The Mutual Aid, by Kropotkin
• What is the private property? By Proudhon (the famous thinker, not the famous btctalk bear )
• Anarcho-syndicalism, by Rudolph Rocker

Even more specifically: the libertarian revolution was made by the workers of the region of Aragon, in Spain, in 1930. They lived from 1930 to 1938:

• isolated from the republican state that ruled Spain
• exchanging goods and services for other goods and services (yes, almost without any money)
• without police, judges or any institutions
• and as a side note, without any crimes in 7/8 years (because you know that 99,99% of the crimes are related to private property, don't you?)

All this until they were crushed by the fascist counter-revolution.

You can read a detailed report of how they lived in: Anarchosyndicalism, libertarian communism and the state: the CNT in Zaragoza and Aragón, 1930-1937, by Kelsey Graham. Online you will easily find a PDF of this book and the others mentioned earlier.

These guys were "the libertarians", and they would hang themselves if they'd hear a free market capitalist calling himself a libertarian. Just call him an ultra-liberal, an ultra-capitalist, a free market capitalist or an anti-state capitalist: that'd more precise.

And now, do you want to understand quickly why Anarchists (or libertarians) are AGAINST capitalism? Because they are against any kind of coercive power, and CAPITALISM is coercive by nature. "Free market" is not free at all for an anarchist, because its freedom gives you two choices only:

A) You adapt to free market rules or B) you starve to death. That's not the kind of freedom a libertarian/anarchist is looking for.

This is why somebody calling himself an "anarcho-capitalist" or a "capitalist libertarian" is a joke. It's a like a "nazi-jew" or a "capitalist free market communist". I mean, it's an OXYMORON, full stop.