Home

Previous 25

Apr. 30th, 2009

eyes black and white

Confusing constants and variables in Political Economics

If many top notch computer programmers, in a field where people are largely selected for their ability to understand causes and consequences, fail to understand the difference between a constant and a variable with respect to a given choice, how can you expect people from professions that don't thus select their members to fathom the difference?

And so most people, most bright people even, have the greatest difficulty understanding the difference between variables under their control, and variables not under their control -- be them variables under someone else's control, hypotheses of a given thought experiment, natural phenomena, or universal constants.

Actually, the people who are trained to understand and explain the nature of a choice, its benefits and costs, are economists. And even most economists fail (cám ơn, Constant). Only austrian economists are properly trained, but they are marginalized in academia and media by statist economists whose very raison d'être is to produce cover stories for the depredations of the State, by denying of the very basic principles of economics.

This is how otherwise intelligent people believe that taxes and prohibition can abridge the consumption of services or goods with inelastic demand -- when by definition of inelastic demand, it will instead displace other consumption, and lead the victims of prohibition to poverty and crime when desperate measures are required to indulge in the inelastic behavior. What is constant is the inelastic demand for addictive drugs, that depends on the will of the people targeted by the prohibition, rather than the propensity of said people to abide by the law when the law is changed. And so what the prohibition law does is introduce more crime and law enforcement, displacing peaceful and productive activities at a huge cost to society.

The same people may believe that raising taxes and prohibitions (such as minimal wage) on services or goods with elastic demand will help them increase transfer of wealth from the designated victims (taxpayers, employers) to the designated beneficiaries (tax consumers, employees). But once again, what is constant when you enact laws is not the behavior of the victims, but their will, goals, desires and preferences. And so the consequence will instead be that less productive employees will not find a job, that taxed capital will either run away or be exhausted, taxed work will be less intensive, and black market activities will increase.

All in all, the only people who benefit from laws are for the professionals who specialize in either enforcing or countering the law: scammers, whether legal (politicians) or il-, racketeers, whether legal (bureaucrats) or il-, and their goons with guns, whether legal (cops) or il-.

Oppression thrives on people being systematically unable to properly understand the nature of choice and to apply this understanding to Political Economics. And yet, most anyone can be trained into understanding it. If you want to stop Oppression, start by extirping the seeds it sows inside you. Learn (Austrian) Economics. Knowledge will make you free -- and others with you.

Apr. 28th, 2009

eyes black and white

Constrained by Reality and Society

Statists will argue that individuals on a free market aren't really free to choose, because they are constrained by reality and society. Then they propose Government as the solution. But Government isn't above reality, and neither is it above society. Its choices are just as constrained. All Statists actually argue is that they support the arbitrary use of force by rulers to coerce citizens into doing their bidding.

Apr. 12th, 2009

eyes black and white

Ode to Surrender

While discussing with fellow libertarians about the foolishness of sacrificing one's own welfare for the sake of avoiding State taxes and control, I remarked that as a Frenchman, I well knew the blessings of unilateral surrender.

Read more... )

Feb. 5th, 2009

eyes black and white

Denying moral agency to justify Cosmic Sacrifice

Read more... )

A sane moral person shall not feel responsible for other person's pain, except when the first person indeed caused the pain by his own actions. And even despite any interference that one may suffer from other people, to claim that the primary responsibility on one person's fate lies in the acts of other people is to deny the fact that one is one's own moral agent. Temporarily denying one's responsibility on one's own fate is indeed to treat one as a child. Permanently denying one's responsibility on one's own fate is indeed to treat one as an animal. Those who deny this responsibility are not one's friends, but one's most mortal enemies.

Why should one be responsible for the fate of other people one has never interacted with? There is no reason, and cannot be one. On the other hand, there is a moral duty of justice, to not actively harm other people, to not violate on their life, liberty and property -- or to have compensate them for the trouble. And this basic duty specifically forbids us to sacrifice anyone in the name of any Grand Scheme.

Jan. 20th, 2009

eyes black and white

Missing Piece for Peace / Pièce manquante pour la paix

Read the article... / Lisez l'article... )

Thus, the situation in Palestine is caught in a vicious cycle that will not end anytime soon. For a peace that be something else than the silence that follows a genocide, what is needed in the Middle East is that on one side then on the other there should emerge an ideology that opposes the religio-national-socialism that not only goes undisputed but is supported world-wide on both sides. What is needed is an ideology at the same time universal and peaceful, capable of establishing a lasting peace. What is needed is this essence of civilization, that the West has won then lost for lack of having understood it: Libertarianism.

 

Ainsi, la situation en Palestine est prise dans un cercle vicieux qui ne prendra pas fin de sitôt. Pour une paix qui soit autre chose que le silence suivant un génocide, ce qu'il faut au Proche-Orient, c'est que d'un côté puis de l'autre surgisse une idéologie à l'opposé du religio-national-socialisme non seulement incontesté mais mondialement soutenu de part et d'autre. Ce qu'il faudrait, c'est une idéologie à la fois universelle et pacifique, capable de fonder une la paix durable. Ce qu'il faudrait, c'est cette essence de la Civilisation, que l'Occident a gagné puis perdu faute de l'avoir comprise: le Libéralisme.

Article cross-posté sur la Page Libérale

Oct. 6th, 2008

eyes black and white

La charité et l'État

En réponse à ceux qui me demandent comment telle ou telle autre catégorie de bénéficiaires de la charité publique (dont ils font généralement partie) feraient sans l'État, je réponds: croyez-vous vraiment que les hommes politiques se soucient le moins du monde de votre sort? Sont-ils la source d'où jaillit toute cette charité que l'État déverse sur la société? Ou au contraire, la source de cette charité se trouve-t-elle dans la générosité du peuple lui-même, les hommes de l'État n'étant que des intermédiaires? Pire, ces intermédiaires ne seraient-ils pas dispendieux, corrompus et corrupteurs, se servant allègrement au passage, et monopolisant par la force toute voie pour l'expression de cette générosité humaine? En prenant aux uns de force pour donner aux autres sous la forme de "droits" qui leurs seraient dûs, travaillent-ils à rapprocher les donateurs des bénéficiaires par la conscience et la jouissance d'un intérêt partagé, ou au contraire divisent-ils les uns et les autres en classes opposées aux intérêts contradictoires?

Vous pouvez croire effectivement que les hommes politiques sont la source de toute générosité. Mais alors, abandonnez toute illusion démocratique: ce que vous désirez, c'est la dictature, celle d'une aristocratie d'êtres autoproclamés supérieurs auxquels vous vous identifiez sans doute sur la masse du vil bas peuple, trompé et mené par le bout du nez "pour son propre bien".

Mais permettez-moi de douter de la supériorité de caractère de ces hommes politiques que vous désignez comme vos champions, et de vous trouver bien naïf de vous identifier à eux. Nous libéraux pensons que les hommes politiques se distinguent non par leur sens professé de l'intérêt public mais par la soif du pouvoir conjuguée à l'absence de tout scrupule. Et nous reconnaissons comme la source de toute générosité l'harmonie des intérêts et des sentiments parmi le peuple, quand elle n'est pas détruite par l'intervention liberticide et déresponsabilisante des hommes de l'État et autres bandits impunis.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
Le Mal ne consiste pas à comprendre le Bien et chercher son opposé (comportement psychopathique extrêmement rare voire inexistant). Le Mal ne consiste pas à avoir une notion imparfaite du Bien (de toute façon, personne n'a de notion parfaite du Bien). Le Mal consiste à user de la force pour imposer aux autres sa notion du Bien (qui est ipso facto corrompue par cette imposition). Ainsi, le Mal est l'essence même du pouvoir politique.

Sep. 18th, 2008

eyes black and white

Cooperation and Competition

Read more... )

The key to maximizing cooperation is to eliminate the negative sum games of predation that may happen between individuals. Which is exactly what individual property rights and only individual property rights can do. Any other political solution but opens a permanent war of all contenders against all other contenders about each and every resource over which individual property rights are denied, in which war the value of the resource is destroyed. And so, if we define Socialism as the dream of men cooperating with each other as much as possible, then Capitalism is indeed the utmost form of Socialism: Stygmergic Socialism (merci jesrad).

Sep. 16th, 2008

eyes black and white

It's Not Faré #1: Singeries - les machines

Last year, my friend Greg Bodylski with whom I worked on Bastiat.org sent me this drawing he made. English translated transcript follows.

Singeries - les machines

- Look at those machines on this construction site.
Can you imagine how many workers could have a job if we were giving them shovels and pickaxes instead?
- Imagine if we were giving them teaspoons!

The furthest I could Google back the teaspoon vs shovel meme was... Bob Formaini's 1998-01 introduction to Bastiat! But I can't find the story in Bastiat, and so far as I can tell it must be an addition by Formaini.

Sep. 13th, 2008

eyes black and white

It's Only Faré #1 - National Independence

Nationalists, Socialists and other Statists always celebrate how military conquest, forceful union, violent revolutions, decolonization wars, and other glorious events have brought to the world the wonders of...

National Independence:where individuals are Property of the Nation,and their shackles are MADE IN HERE.

Lucky are the inhabitants of the Third World for having received such a blessing!

Sep. 12th, 2008

eyes black and white

The Myth of the State as Something above Society

In his book Discover Your Inner Economist, Tyler Cowen notably explains why one should not give to beggars, by using an argument called rent exhaustion. I explained earlier why undiscriminating charity was indeed only fostering parasitism and vice (though I admit I've been so weak as to subsidize my local liquor store that way a few times since I wrote said article). My argument used the Law of Bitur-Camember, which indeed seems to be essentially equivalent to the argument of rent exhaustion as systematized and applied to any political rent. Unhappily, even amongst Economist (as opposed to mere econometrists), too many will not or dare not explicitly apply economic arguments to Politics itself. Tyler himself, though he doesn't seem to indulge too much in the fallacy of considering the State as above society, won't seem to openly come against it.

Great progress will be made when people cease to implicitly accept the Statist Myth of the State as some entity above society, beyond the laws of human behavior, capable of regulating from outside and violate, counter or alter the laws of human behavior to engineer people's lives according to whichever fantasies of the rulers. Many economists have worked to dispel this myth -- Gordon Tullock and James Buchanan being some of the first to explicitly apply the economic point of view to the systematic study of government. These days, while I like the blogs of many economists at GMU, including Tyler's, Don Boudreaux's blog stands out in its relentless effort to dispel the Statist Myth. But even they seem to do it without systematically conceptualizing it.

Now even many libertarians make the mistake of discussing various policies as if there really was a State above Society capable to turn arbitrary policies into new laws of human behavior at no cost. Actually, the policies that the State enacts are arbitrary neither in their causes nor in their consequences. On the one hand, they are the result of human actions that have great cost; on the other hand, they do not alter human nature, but only modify human behavior through violence and threats thereof.

Laws are only enacted but with powerful lobbies and ideologies behind them, that either are allowed to clash in an expensive war of all against all, or are given free reign as one hegemonic party imposes its one-sided will upon all. And the same parties that clash over each of their turfs always agree in their common cause against the public.

Then again, laws only affect those who get caught. It costs in violent law enforcement, enacted by bureaucrats empowered against the designated suspects. It costs in bureaucratic hurdles that people have to comply with to receive their subsidies and privileges.

Finally, the next best alternative that people find to openly acting as is officially prohibited is seldom to embrace the desires and tastes of the oppressor. People will do in private what they can't do in public. They will rather live in the dark rather than pay the tax on windows.

No one can decree a better mankind. Political power is no magic wand that can achieve that. Prohibiting the perceived symptoms of evil only spreads more evil and dulls out perception in a typical instance of the Law of Eristic Escalation.

Sep. 11th, 2008

eyes black and white

Bleg: Looking for an Artist for a Comic Strip

I've accumulated ideas for a short libertarian comic strip, and I am looking for an artist to illustrate them. If I can't find one, I may buy myself a tablet and try to draw my own stick-figure comic strip...

Aug. 26th, 2008

eyes black and white

The Problem of "National Debt"

In a fling of procrastination, and as a reaction to an online discussion, I translated to English my 2003 essay Le problème de la dette - Une solution libérale. The result is on my web site: The Problem of National Debt - a libertarian solution.

Aug. 23rd, 2008

eyes black and white

Who's It?

So I told this liberal colleague about my speaking at a Libertarian conference in Europe. They must be loaded was his immediate reaction. How much cognitive dissonance must it take to establish who's promoting the Synopsis, and who are the dissenters speaking truth to power?

Aug. 17th, 2008

eyes black and white

Oink, oink!

It's official: I'm an evil capitalist pig, oppressing a poor wage slave in a third world country, and dispossessing him from the productive surplus of his work for my own selfish profit!

Sure, I didn't make (and adamantly oppose) the statutes that prevent him from moving to a first-world country, where he could sell his valuable services for more than I can afford. Sure, I have to pay him almost three times what he was previously making in my bid to convince him to serve my multi-national company. Sure, he'll be working on a much more interesting project than he was at his previous job, under much better work conditions. Sure, I'm taking all the risks: in the faint hope of some uncertain future profit, I'm committing to months or years of bleeding money regularly and foregoing any short-term plan of parenthood, while my employee will be spending the same months and years in the certainty and comfort of a regular salary with which to enjoy family life. But you see, I'm the employer, a tyrant giving orders, so of course I'm evil, whether I'm an incompetent bungler, or much worse, a taker of profits.

At least, thus goes the formal discourse of the many factions of socialists. For the real reason why I'm evil in their eyes is not that I'm an employer. Indeed, if I were a goon of the State or of any other emanation of the Collective, embodying The People's Romance (gracias, PLIMO), then my employership would be pardoned, as well as any wealth I generate for myself. Not only would I not be the godawfullest monopolest exploitest of an employest, instead I would be the incarnation of everything that's Good about Society, leading All Of Us towards our Shared Destiny; my arbitrary orders would not be unbearable tyranny, they would be the Sovereign Will of The People, to be enforced with arbitrary ruthlessness upon any reluctant antisocial miscreant. But I'm a individual who dares to follow his own purposes and who refuses to submit to my Social Duties as proclaimed by the anointed representatives of the Common Good. And that is my mortal sin. Forget employership. The reason I'm irredeemably evil is thus: I'm selfish.

As for my venture, it doesn't have a name yet, but if you know me, you already know what it is all about. News at 11.

Jul. 8th, 2008

eyes black and white

Enjoying Polish Capitalism

Cross-posted to Bureaucrash, here is a little story where I meet the most authentic Polish Capitalist!

Read more... )

Jun. 20th, 2008

eyes black and white

La révolution!

Contexte )

La révolution sera gagnée non pas, comme le suggéreraient les sanguinaires socialistes, lorsque le dernier homme politique aura été étranglé avec les boyaux du dernier idéologue officiel, mais bien plutôt, comme le savent les bonhommes libéraux, quand les tentatives sans cesse répétées d'asservir le peuple par diverses idéologies collectivistes seront accueillies par le rire et noyées dans le ridicule par des hommes libres aussi bien armés intellectuellement que physiquement.

Références )

Jun. 18th, 2008

eyes black and white

Would YOU marry one of THEM? / Êtes-VOUS prêt à en épouser UN?

If you don't like the idea of their marrying us, you should consider letting them marry each other.

To me the single best argument in favor of our letting them marry each other is to consider the only available alternative as to whom else they may end up marrying. Personally, I'd rather it not be with me. Moreover, every homosexual means an according reduction in competition on the market for single males looking for females.

-- Faré, in what turned into a debate on gay marriage.

 

Si l'idée qu'ils se marient avec nous vous rebute, alors vous devriez accepter de les laisser se marier entre eux.

[I]l me semble que le meilleur argument en faveur de [les] laisser [...] se marier entre eux est de considérer l'unique alternative possible quant à savoir avec qui ils se marient. Personnellement, je préfère que ce ne soit pas avec moi. Et puis, un homosexuel de plus, c'est ça de gagné comme concurrence en moins sur le marché des mâles célibataires en quête de femme.

-- Faré, dans ce qui a tourné au débat sur le mariage homosexuel.

May. 16th, 2008

eyes black and white

Teach Your Kids Mental Hygiene!

When Patri mentionned the idea of religions and cults being memetic parasites, and the following discussion bore on the difference (if any) between religions and cults, and how a same religion could sometimes have both normal and fanatical followers, my answer (in the comments) was that often the same parasite could express itself in many different ways, depending on the hygiene of the victims.

I cited the example of tape worms, that cause a rather benign intestinal infection in people having decent hygiene standards, in a way that isn't contagious to other such people, but can cause brain damage and even death amongst people with low hygiene standards, in a way that is highly contagious to other such people and contagious to to cleaner people as well. The hygiene standards discussed here consist in systematically washing your hands after any risk of contamination, segregating your food from your feces, avoiding meat of dubious quality, properly cooking meat that isn't known to meet high standards of quality, avoiding contact with people with poor hygiene and cleansing thoroughly after such contact.

And I further argued that the very same applies in the case of those memetic parasites that religions are. I said that providing our children with proper standards of hygiene, mental as well as physical, was the most important part of parental education. It is of utmost importance that children be taught such mental hygiene rules as cleansing their minds after they've been potentially subjected to propaganda, segregating what they believe about reality from what they (and other people) fantasize, rejecting beliefs of dubious origin, thoroughly criticizing all beliefs but those that were grown using the highest standards of quality, being especially wary of people around you with low standards of hygiene.

I concluded: And be sure to teach that hygiene to your kids, early on. You can't change the rest of society, but if you can change the people who count most around you. And once enough people adopt good hygiene, and the people with bad hygiene are weeded out by their behavior (rather than being protected or subsidized by the state), the community's standards of hygiene will get higher and the parasite will disappear, except for small ostracized fringe communities.

Now, I like to say that I don't count the word god as sacred, so I don't think religions that use it are worse than religions that don't. People who believe that the word god is special will be relaxing their mental hygiene against religions that respectively do or don't use that word, depending on these people themselves respectively believing in god or not -- this is the reason why all religions, whether theistic, atheistic or neutral on this topic, tend to collaborate in spreading this superstition. This meta-superstition was interestingly discussed by Mencius Moldbug (MM) on his blog devoted to debunking this memetic parasite that is the (now) atheistic religion of progressives (and their conservative hysteresical followers) who view the State as the embodiment of societal progress.

Interestingly, applying evolutionary thinking to the study of religion doesn't stop to talking about it in terms of memes. Religions evolve. They compete with each other. And where there isn't an official monopolistic religion or ideology protected by the State, religions have to compete in a ruthless struggle over believers. This yields religions that strip themselves from useless or obvious superstitions, and focus on the essential vectors of infection and payback. While there is room for plenty of variants to accommodate plenty of niches, these religions loosely converge on what MM calls the Synopsis, a lean and mean kernel of beliefs that will justify State plunder in favor of those people and institutions who will further spread same beliefs in the State.

In one of my comments to that article (you may search for Faré), I note that the very nature of the Synopsis is that it conflates the true and the false [and as another commenter further quoted from Rand, Governmental encouragement does not order men to believe that the false is true, it merely makes them indifferent to the issue of truth or falsehood.], and tries to minimize the false needed (which both makes it more fragile and makes its slaves less productive) while maximizing the return on investment of the false.

And indeed it is in freer western societies that the worst strains of statist thinking evolve into existence, out-competing other strains in their struggle for power. From there, these strains spread to less free countries, where the most efficient memes from western ideologies have massively deadly consequences on weaker populations unable to resist. Guns, germs and steel -- and ideologies. In the third world, political devices are largely imported, just like all other technological devices. That's why MM is on the spot when he claims that communist regimes as well as third world dictatorships are emanations of western progressive ideological activity.

Happily, rational criticism, this natural defense against lies and bullshit, as promoted by infection-resistant or cured individuals is not wholly absent from the relatively free environment where these strains evolve, and this helps limit the morbidity of these pathogens, at least in western societies. But rational criticism has a cost that not everyone can afford, and the pathogens have evolved in a way that even people above average in intelligence and education can completely fail to see the edges where the web of lies falls apart. And so it's mainly the competition for more productive slaves that keeps in check the destructive effects of the Statist memes. However, this competition happens mainly between different countries rather than inside any given country, and so the political oligopoly of our world works toward increasing the level of political parasitism.

In conclusion, the biggest and most dangerous religion is Statism. It has benign and malignant modes of transmission. The best thing you can do to limit its bad effects upon you is to cultivate good mental hygiene for yourself and those you love. To avoid social disruption by epidemics of a severe form of mental infection, you may seek to spread hygiene in the society around you; failing that, your only recourse is to migrate to a society with better general standards of hygiene.

Apr. 14th, 2008

eyes black and white

Warsaw 2008-06-28

I will be in Warsaw on June 28th and 29th to speak at the Libertarian International 2008 Spring Conference.

Since I don't want to preach to the choir what they already know or will soon know anyhow, I chose to tackle the topic I think is most missing from such conferences. That's why I announced the title of my future speech to be The Art of Living Free.

Now I have to find a great speech to put under this great title.

Apr. 10th, 2008

eyes black and white

Simple Systemic Argument Why Democracy Can't Possibly Work

In a democracy as such, the total feedback control from the governed to the ruling is in the order of a few bits per year at most. Certainly, any process to satisfy millions of people with diverse preferences requires much more information than that. What is worse, the ruling class itself largely gets to define what those bits encode. And what damns the whole system, the individual incentives are for the ruled to not acquire such costly useless (to powerless them) information, and for the rulers to spread propaganda that will extend their power.

In other words, the powerful are pretty much out of control of the citizens. Certainly, a few bits per year of information might sometimes be better than none at all. But not for long, since the meaning of those bits is soon to be controlled by some variant of a two party system. The knobs controlled by those few bits will never allow to change the one thing that matters mosts: the irresistible growth of the power exerted over you, the fact that whoever is likely to be elected is a power hungry bastard backed by an organized predation system. Preserving and extending the power of politicians and bureaucrats upon citizens is a bi-partisan issue.

Inasmuch as some democratic societies work and others don't, it isn't due to democracy as such, but to other institutions completely independent of democracy, disconnected from it, and actually slowly but surely corrupted by it and destroyed by it as well as by any other form of political power: individual rights (as opposed to collective claims), common law (as opposed to statute), the rule of law (as opposed to the arbitrary power of politicians and bureaucrats), a culture of honesty (as opposed to having to weasel around imposed regulations), widespread self-reliance (as opposed to a sense of entitlement), and other personal moral values (as opposed to compulsory submission to "moral" rules edicted by others). These are the institutions of a market society, one where each one earns his living out of mutually voluntary cooperation.

Oct. 8th, 2007

eyes black and white

Debating Libertarianism

One way to procrastinate at work is to join the political mailing-list and flame away. One advantage of working at a place full of bright people is that you can have interesting discussions instead of content-less flames. I'll publish on my blog some of the better letters that I wrote. [In brackets, addenda that I forgot to include in my original answer.]

Read more... )

Sep. 19th, 2007

eyes black and white

The Citizen's Creed (in MP3) / Le Crédo Citoyen (en MP3)

Play it: The Citizen's Creed in MP3 (take 4).
Music & Lyrics by Faré, based on a previous work.
Thanks to the QL for publishing me!

 

Écoutez-le: Le Crédo Citoyen en MP3 (1ère prise).
Paroles et musique de Faré, d'après un travail précédent.
Merci au QL de m'avoir publié!

Read the lyrics... / Lisez les paroles... )

Sep. 11th, 2007

eyes black and white

Capitalism and Toleration

Toleration as a political norm is demonstrably invalid because it is obviously self-defeating: must we tolerate the intolerant who attack peaceful dissenters? if muslims threaten and kill those who dare criticize their religion, and some people say won't tolerate it, are you to tolerate the former or the latter? Effectively, you cannot tolerate the deeds of one party without approving intolerance towards the other party.

That said, there is indeed a political system that promotes toleration as a general phenomenon, and this system is Capitalism, not Socialism. And obviously so, because Capitalism is a system where everyone can create a domain where he can live according to his ideas unimpeded by others, namely his property, whereas Socialism (and after it the lesser forms of Statism) assumes communal domains where everyone is the victim of whoever manages to temporarily or permanently seize political power.

Read more... )

Sep. 9th, 2007

eyes black and white

Political Corruption is a Symptom - The Disease is Political Power

Instapundit supports and regularly reports the current efforts to eliminate pork from Washington. Larry Lessig announced that he's going to focus his work on fighting corruption. But corruption isn't the problem. It is the symptom. The problem is political power.

Do you prefer the untouchable political commissar who'll send you directly to a death camp, or the shady official who'll look away if you pay him?

Read more... )

Aug. 21st, 2007

eyes black and white

The vacuity of the Libertarian Socialist ideal

Libertarian Socialists believe in the world being organized in "freely organized" collectives of some kind. (Socialists in general vye for collectives maintained by force if need be.) But if that were all there was to it, well, we're already there, and everyone including all conservatives wholly approve. The world is already organized into "natural collectives", called families, with one-person families of bachelors being a degenerate case.

Oh, but this is certainly not what the Libertarian Socialists imagine. They imagine large collectives made of lots of people, that may or may not have sexual relations and children. As a Heinlein fan, I will certainly not object to the idea of large families, and as a libertarian, I don't think I have anything to say about who has sex with whom and children with whom inside a family that isn't mine. And so there again, the specificity of the socialist "collective" lies in the political norms relating the "collective" and its actual and potential members or non-members, and to other collectives.

Can a member have any kind of commerce with a non-member, or do you have to be members of the same collective so as to cooperate with each other or otherwise go through hierarchical channels? Yay for promoting cooperation. How does one become member of a socialist "collective"? can one leave afterwards and divorce from his family? or is the whole scheme some kind of an oppressive caste system? Can members split over some issue? can they form a schism? how do you divide existing resources? can one make a schism of one, and which part of the resources does he get? Can one leave for another collective? can one enter any existing other collective? can one found a new collective if none exists that suits him? including a one-person collective called "invididual"? Can a collective reject applicants or does it have to accept the first come parasite and treat him as well as those who work hard, and as those who worked hard in the past to get the collective where it is? How are conflicts settled between a collective and an individual? is a collective politically sovereign over its members to the point of exacting punishment and death on those who would reject its terms? What if the member says that he represents the collective and all the other ones are the schismatics who reject the proper collective will? Is there a justice system outside of this collectivist construction?

How do collectives interact with each other? With a collective of collectives, etc., in a hierarchical order? If collectives cannot disassociate, then the topmost collective is indeed a State, and the Libertarian Socialist chimera is indeed but another Totalitarian Socialist State in disguise (as attempted in Spain). If collectives can disassociate, then these collectives are with each other in a Capitalist order, where collectives trade with each other. If furthermore individuals can secede and become their own "collective", we have a full Anarcho-Capitalist order, and the Libertarian Socialist chimera is but distracting ramblings on top of an Anarcho-Capitalist society. If on the other hand individuals cannot secede, then indeed each Libertarian Socialist collective is a State, these States span the world, and Libertarian Socialism is but distracting ramblings on top of the usual Statist Oligopoly, to be recomposed after an optional bloody revolution.

Whichever way you split things, Libertarian Socialism has nothing new to propose in terms of political norms.

Previous 25

eyes black and white

June 2009

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Advertisement

Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com