What's a l(L)ibertarian?

[enso]

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

[gellfex]

@GulliverFoyle

Erinaceinocracy (rule by hedgehogs) is the future anyway

We’re there, Drumph is plenty prickly.

@GulliverFoyle

That’s part of the problem I have with canned politics in general. The word isn’t that important. But most people (Americans especially) are unaware (or perhaps simply don’t care) that there is political dialogue that predates their birth

Reminds me of the idiot arguing that Hitler was a socialist because the party was named National SOCIALIST!

[enso]

@gellfex

Reminds me of the idiot arguing that Hitler was a socialist because the party was named National SOCIALIST!

Except I see Republicans making that argument constantly.

[gellfex]

@enso

Except I see Republicans making that argument constantly.

I don’t see you contradicting me, unless you mean I should have used the plural, idiots.

[Snowlark]

Yes! The term ‘libertarianism’ when used in the U.S. almost invariably refers to right-libertarianism. Few people are aware (myself included not too long ago) that there is an entire branch of left-libertarian thought. Like @Medievalist said, most of these philosophies are ardently anti-authoritarian but also respectful and protective of public lands and natural resources. Chomsky is a modern example of this kind of libertarian.

[gellfex]

@Snowlark

Yes! The term ‘libertarianism’ when used in the U.S. almost invariably refers to right-libertarianism. Few people are aware (myself included not too long ago) that there is an entire branch of left-libertarian thought. Like @Medievalist said, most of these philosophies are ardently anti-authoritarian but also respectful and protective of public lands and natural resources. Chomsky is a modern example of this kind of libertarian.

If there is a philosophy that protects the commons and the plebs while disempowering the state in general, it needs a new name and press agent. I live in a city with numerous brownfields and rivers poisoned by “capitalists” who made their millions and dumped their poisons for someone else to deal with. How would you like your kid to go to school next to a hexavalent chromium dump site? That’s the face of libertarianism to me. And that’s what the incoming US administration has in mind to return to with giving power to idiots who talk of disbanding the EPA, FDA, OSHA and Energy depts to “set business free”.

[Medievalist]

Thank you for taking the time to write that out, it’s an interestingly nuanced viewpoint.

But I don’t care for Ayn Rand, personally; I read all her stuff and I think you make a better advocate for enlightened individualism than she was. ;).

[SheiffFatman]

@Snowlark

Chomsky is a modern example of this kind of libertarian.

Chomsky has been known to identify as a small-‘c’ conservative, though I’m not sure if he’s driving trollies or merely seeking to (re)appropriate the term.

[Gyrofrog]

@stinkinbadgers

the emphasis on social norms over laws for whatever one’s goals are

By that standard, I’m not sure we’d have a Civil Rights Act, nor the things that it protects (or, protected). I could get behind the rest of what you mentioned.

[nemomen]

If small-l libertarian is primarily valuing freedom as a central civic value, and you want to keep the term despite popular usage shifting/diluting the meaning of the term, then why not just use ‘liberal’? Is it just the emphasis on negative liberty vs. positive liberty?

[Gyrofrog]

@nemomen

why not just use ‘liberal’?

Every so often I’ll see someone describe themselves as “liberal, in the classic sense,” which I gather is supposed to be synonymous with libertarianism, and/or Libertarianism.

[anon50609448]

@Gyrofrog

By that standard, I’m not sure we’d have a Civil Rights Act, nor the things that it protects (or, protected). I could get behind the rest of what you mentioned.

I think the Civil Rights Act is a great example of why I’m not a fan of libertarianism under the “I don’t see how freedom-based analysis of law leads to better law category” (I’d like to think I’m about to elaborate on something I already said, but maybe I’m just repeating myself).

In his famous 1963 speech, MLK said:

We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities.

Which I think struck me the first time I heard it. It’s sort of a unique problem - sure, emblematic of wider discrimination and segregation - but quite specific to a particular industry (which, I can only assume, was a particularly problematic industry). So the Civil Rights Act has a section that specifically addresses that issue (201(b)(1)).

Which society is more free? One in which all people, regardless of the colour of their skin, are guaranteed equal access to road-side motels as they travel? Or one in which all people who own motels are guaranteed the right to pick between clients based on whatever criteria they wish?

To me, the intuitive answer is that the Civil Rights Act is increasing freedom with a provision like this one. But if someone else felt it was intuitively decreasing freedom with this provision, what could we learn about the law or whether to implement it by having that debate?

I recently saw a panel discussion about an invite-only sex-fueled pub crawl at the University of Ottawa. They opened by discussing whether it was or was not an example of “rape culture.” At some point the only person at the table who seemed to know what “rape culture” meant (and who had said nearly nothing) said, “I don’t think we should get bogged down in a semantic discussion” and moved on to talk about what was actually troubling about the pub crawl instead of trying to figure out whether to use a particular term to describe it.

Until that point the discussion was a horrific shitshow that wasn’t worth anyone’s time. I worry that’s what freedom-based discussions of policies are doomed to become.

I can’t think of a policy that has a defect of curtailing freedom and that is otherwise a super great idea, so I don’t see how freedom is going to be an important balancing factor.

[enso]

@anon50609448

Which I think struck me the first time I heard it. It’s sort of a unique problem - sure, emblematic of wider discrimination and segregation - but quite specific to a particular industry (which, I can only assume, was a particularly problematic industry).

The problem was bad enough that Black folks had a guidebook for traveling in order to know where they could stay, be allowed to eat, get gas, etc. without being harassed.

The Negro Motorist Green Book

[Snowlark]

Giving this some more thought: the other facet of right-libertarianism, as I see it, is that it’s not merely individualist but also anti-collectivist. This is a stark contrast with left-libertarianism, which values not only the freedom of individuals but also communities–a freedom that doesn’t seem to get much discussion in the media. It took the massive protests of the North Dakota pipeline to get them talking about it.

[emo_pinata]

I think libertarians fundamentally over-value the worth of a single person pretty much across the board. It’s not a bad thing… well until it becomes over-valuing “me” and “people like me.” Which is also a pretty common trend in libertarians. I just don’t jive with the arguments outside very poor countries that do benefit from free markets and lack of regulation attracting global interests.

[popobawa4u]

@Snowlark

it’s not merely individualist but also anti-collectivist

Which is painfully obvious to anybody who has tried to start a commune, register a communal car, start a bank or school, or wanted to start a NPO. Laws define “incorporation” as being hierarchical, which is paradoxical if one is trying to establish a communist, anarchist, or otherwise egalitarian group.

This is why my personal and social life is such a mess. To interact with people I need a framework for trade and organization. Since the existing ones don’t fit my ethics, I need to create some. And since the existing countries prohibit those, I am in conflict with the classical nation-state as well. All so I can simply work, and travel, and eat without selling my soul into state capitalism.

@emo_pinata

I think libertarians fundamentally over-value the worth of a single person pretty much across the board.

The more fundamental problem is how does one create or join collectives when you are part of a state that forbids this? You need to secure your freedom as an individual first to make your collective real.

[the_borderer]

@nemomen

If small-l libertarian is primarily valuing freedom as a central civic value, and you want to keep the term despite popular usage shifting/diluting the meaning of the term, then why not just use ‘liberal’?

- YouTube

[anon6955837]

@popobawa4u

I think of it as meaning generally “anti-authoritarian”

I think that has become the palatable use of the word for me.

@Medievalist

I am anti-libertarian in the sense that I don’t think people should be able to plunder and destroy natural commons like air, water and culture for private profit.

Yes! I think the social inequities inherent in Libertarianism stem from this allowing accumulated wealth to suppress individuals. Ironic, no?

@AcerPlatanoides

too little emphasis on interpersonal responsibility and community with either spelling of the word.

I think that hits the heart other than the corruption of the word by Libertarian party. Bias towards the individual doesn’t necessarily exclude communal responsibility (think 55/45 split).

@AcerPlatanoides

privatize gain, socialize risk, repeat.

100%

@M_M

It means that someone is really good at organising books and knows things like Dewey and stuff.

Oh, you!

@the_borderer

. Basically, I believe welfare and business regulations are the very last thing we should get rid off, only when getting rid of government seem plausible and there are alternatives in place to take over. I also view business with the same suspicion as I do the government and organised religion.

This strikes a chord with me, but what kind of timeline do you envision here? What happens when the last regulation is dead and someone decides the community well is the closest place to chuck their garbage?

@SheiffFatman

anarchocapitalism

As though property rights don’t arise from the state? Ridiculous indeed.

@enso

Little ‘l’ libertarians lost the battle over the name decades ago. Every time I meet one, I ask them “How often do you have to pull out your canned lecture when you tell people that you’re a ‘libertarian?’”

I’m afraid you are completely correct. Now I just tell people the planks of my platform are nomads and molotov cocktails.

@stinkinbadgers

so the thread title was like a red flag and thought it might be useful to post.

It was! I’m sorry for stressing you out, it was an honest question I asked. Thank you for sharing your response even though you were skeptical.

@GulliverFoyle

Just as long as they don’t dismiss the ideas that libertarian socialist thinkers advanced without first having some understanding of them, simply because they used a term for it that meant something different to them.

Thus the thread!

@MikeTheBard

I grew up on the writings of Ayn Rand, and to this day I believe she made an excellent argument on behalf of capitalism and individual liberty.

I’m going to pile on with the Rand hate, but other than that great insight and thank you. I really like the stipulation of maximum personal liberty, not absolute personal liberty so many think it should mean (if I’m reading you right?).

@the_borderer

we call ourselves “cute fluffy kittens”,

Sign me up for the newsletter. Also, keep up the fight.

@anon50609448

I think the Civil Rights Act is a great example of why I’m not a fan of libertarianism under the “I don’t see how freedom-based analysis of law leads to better law category”

This is usually the argument I go to with Libertarian friends. State’s Rights didn’t do a whole lot of the population too much good.

@Snowlark

as I see it, is that it’s not merely individualist but also anti-collectivist.

Aren’t all Americans lone cowboys out carving a nation from the wilderness?

[anon6955837]

Playing ethnicky jazz to parade your snazz on your five grand stereo…

[crenquis]

@gellfex

If there is a philosophy that protects the commons and the plebs while disempowering the state in general, it needs a new name and press agent.

tribal councilism?