One morning on my daily commute to our beloved OC dining hall, I came across a letter in Arthur that depicted every misconception possible of libertarianism and its associated schools of anarchic and liberal thought.
It is sometimes postulated that the end of the state or government would result in the death of health care, charity, compassion, and everything else that the human race has built in our history of sociobiological evolution. It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that without the government or state, corporations would rule, and equality between the sexes, races, and other categories would be annihilated completely. This is simply not the case.
Insofar as libertarianism compares to fascism, one can easily dismiss any possibility of similarity. Karl Hess, the notable libertarian anarchist, called libertarianism the anti-political movement. This is because, unlike fascists, libertarians see no inherent legitimacy in the state’s ability to discriminate based upon race, nor in their stealing money from people to fund their immoral wars and propaganda. In fact, libertarians see that if the state does exist, its only role is to protect people from physical aggression imposed by others. Thus, the claim that libertarianism is comparable to fascism is erroneous at best.
All ideologies and methodologies, especially those which pertain to reality, are subject to revision and refutation by colleagues and peers. This method of peer review is the main driving force in the scientific process. Libertarianism is a doctrine not exempt from this. It is easy to sum up perhaps the most prominent theorems of the libertarian by using the well-known “non-aggression axiom.”
It states that one should not harm another human being, provided that they do not harm you. This is an embarrassingly simple concept to demonstrate, although it has taken many forms historically. It is not “the narcissistic and selfish belief that other human beings are tools…[or merely]…buffers for one’s personal gain” (Arthur, 48.3 p.11). This only illustrates a blatant misunderstanding of the ideology. Libertarians and other proponents of anarchic ideology prefer the abolition or reduction of the state and the protection of all people from unjustifiable aggression.
Historically, there have been many systems which one could classify as anarchic or libertarian. The Ju’hoansi people of Namibia in the Kalahari desert historically did not have a formal “chief,” and dealt with economic and social matters in a decentralized, face-to-face manner. Murray Rothbard writes about the lack of necessity for a state in his book, For a New Liberty, where he illustrates the example of anarchist Ireland, an example so often forgotten about by the history books.
Somalia was a neat misdirection as well. Did you know that during their period of statelessness, their economy and industry grew to previously unsurpassed levels? Well it can’t be true. Everyone knows that a government is necessary to get anything done. Also, let’s get real. If it was a real libertarian paradise, “the state hardly fund[ing]” (Arthur, 48.3, p.11) education would be inaccurate. I would not want a state to exist, let alone fund your child’s political and subversive indoctrination.
Let us not forget the example of the Tea Party as well, for that was indeed a musing, a shitter, and a smile. Most republicans claim to be libertarian and claim to love freedom, but practice corporate shoe-shining. They often have views based on religious premises, and take the corporate lobbies as often as their sermons. Comparing libertarians, who want to limit power, to those who want corporations to dominate markets is like comparing apples and oranges. Sorry, cliché, but I’m not alone.
I don’t know. Perhaps in being a libertarian, I am absolutely incorrect. Our goddess really is Ayn Rand, but I wish she was a man so I could live under a patriarchal society run by corporate bigots. Atlas Shrugged can be our Bible which we will ardently force your children to read when we gain power through the people’s democracy. We will consume and consume and destroy the planet because, as libertarians, we have absolutely no regard for anything in our eternal masturbatory yelps of selfishness and hedonism.