Recently thinking of a lot of topics and reading discussions between left libertarians and non left libertarians ,I have come to see a range of areas where libertarianism needs to improve.These are not so much flaws,more bad habits.
Alliances: Without suggesting that we betray principles(which was never my intent) I think we should be more open to alliances and collaborations with other groups on an issue by issue basis.In the past Rothbard aligned with the left on war and peace and today I think we should seek to do the same.There is also other issues which they may be open to on which we can discuss.To clarify ,in seeking alliances we should neither be universally and unconditionally supportive nor universally and unconditionally opposed.I think this would do the reputation of the philosophy a world of good and endear us to the public at large by gaining us credibility and debunking myths about us being crusty old reactionary social darwinist Ayn Rand types.
Considering specifically Anarcho-Libertarianism ,this is a brilliant possibility which hasn’t really been tried before.We could seek an alliance with other anarchists(especially ’ Anarchists without Adjectives’ )who are willing to accept the illegitimacy of aggression against property and people(and willing to live in accordance with that principle) ,who reject violent methods of achieving anarchy and who are willing to work with us and come a free society, would allow co-existence.This too would help aid our mainstream public image.Yet again,I am not suggesting we give us or compromise our principles ,merely that we recognise that at minimal all true anarchists are united on the issue of abolishing the state and that really that’s all that’s necessary for us to agree on.Who knows we might just learn something new.
Capitalism: Related issues to the term have been thrown about,hased and re-hashed recently and so I don’t wish to cover old ground but I will say this,We must get out of the habit of talking of the economy today and in history as though it has been laissez faire,capitalist or libertarian.If you truly understand economics and history you know there has been no ‘golden ages of liberty’,there has been no time(excepting anarchist countries) when the state was not present and intervening.There has been no time when we haven’t had either state Socialism of a kind or Fascistic Corporatism(and mercantilism) of a kind.So it is a grave error for us to talk of the glories of Capitalism in raising the average person’s living standards.Instead we should talk of the market- the market’s ability to flourish to a limited degree even in spite of government regulation as well as these benefits coming from a time when government intervention was somewhat lesser than today(though by no means laissez faire,in Britain or the USA) Worse still ,talking of Capitalism as though it exists or existed, hands our opponents a spear on which to stab us with.We are giving them the weapons to use to say “look here is Capitalism! and look what it does”.
**Corporatism:**We have gotten into this terrible tendency to knee jerkedly defend big business any time it is criticized.Granted this sometime may be necessary given critiques made but we should not give blanket support to all big business(what Kevin Carson refers to as ‘Vulgar Libertarianism’).We must be aware of the omnipresence of the state and thus the temptation and inclination towards corporatism.This means we should be knowledgable( more so than the level now) of
how corporations benefit from the state and should not just dismiss any pejorative talk of them out of hand.For example ,while many critiques of Wal-mart are not valid inso far as they attack genuine constiutients of the market economy or when tax breaks are derided as subsidy (a common leftist error) we should also acknowledge that Wal-mart is involved in eminent domain,lobbying for laws which hurt smaller businesses and is also in part tax payer funded in respect to it’s infrastructure.On a lesser point, while we do good work on Corporatism and the Military-Industrial complex now, more needs to be done to push how important this issue is and how prevalent a problem it is.We must always make it clear that while we may be pro-big business in a specific case we are neither unconditionally in favour of them nor unconditionally against them(seeing them as inherently unjust).We must make a clear distinction between the Free market and the current Corporatism.It is vital if we are to succeed.
**Environmentalism:**Plenty good work has been written attacking statist environmentalism.This is all to the good.However these critiques can at times go too far in denouncing all environmentalism as statist or socialist and thus isolating us from people libertarian or not ,who may be environmentalist and can benefit from learning about our ideas on it. Walter Block and Terry L. Anderson among others have written plenty which would allow us to sketch out a full theory of environmentalism and environmental economics.I cannot emphasis how much we must resist knee jerk attacks of these ideas.Whether or not you believe in AGW this cannot cloud your mind to the fact that because we live on this planet our acts on the environment affect other people.We must come to see that though typically Environmentalism is Eco-centric,misanthropic and anti-market ,that it need not be so.It is easy to conceive of an Anthropocentric pro market anti-state Environmentalist philosophy.Furthermore on this topic we should also steer clear of knee jerk shootdowns of ‘global warming’.While it may or may not be happening(which is a seperate issue) we shouldn’t think that if it is,libertarianism is doomed and we must all become primitivists.We can be pro-free market and have solutions based on that should it be occurring.
Government and the Poor: We’re sound on the harmful effects of statism ,imperialism and a lot more but what we don’t cover enough is how the state harms the poor.It’s little mentioned and it should be mentioned ,if we wish to show we are not (as some non-libertarians belief wrongly) cold hearted or “anarchists for the rich”.We need to show two sides to the coin which is how it occurs in reality,that the state both privileges and at the same time harms the poor.
Socialism: We should follow Walter Block’s lead in admiting that Socialism need not by definition be statist and that a voluntary Socialism (or collectivism if you prefer) is possible and not inherently un-libertarian.Those Socialists who are anarchist and willing to accept our stance on non aggression should be ,for anti-statist purposes, our allies.