/libertypol/ - Libertarian General

Libertarianism is a political ideology that seeks to maximize liberty of the people.
It opposed any form of authoritarianism, and, in the measure that private property is used to exploit the worker class, seeks to abolish private property and prefers instead collective ownership of the means of production.
Typical libertarians are the anarchists, but other libertarians include libertarian marxists.
An example of a libertarian system is Revolutionary Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War of the '30s (anarcho-syndicalist). It was led by a libertarian worker movement.

>>55

>Er… I'm aware of that political tradition and certainly would not exclude it, but I'm not sure where you got that particular definition from. Was the collectivist camp utilizing the term prior to their capitalist counterparts? If so, source?
The earliest use of the term libertarianism I can find was in 1857 used to refer to anarchists like Proudhon. Additionally, the Spanish Civil War, had many movements that defined themselves as libertarian. They followed anarchist ideology and philosophy (for instance, Bakunin's and Kropotkin's). The revolution proper lasted from 1936 to 1939, but the social movements were developed prior to the break of the actual revolution.

>By far, I'm pretty certain that most people that identify as libertarians are not in favor of the abolition of private property and would be staunchly opposed to anything even resembling the form of collectivism that you're referencing.
As far as I can tell, the use of libertarian to refer to free markets (which, by the way, was the classical postulate of liberals) stemmed from the politics of the "Libertarian Party" of the US, which was founded in 1971.
This is the reason libertarian only really means free market capitalism in the US and politically associated countries. Internationally, it is still used synonymously with anarchism. As for free market capitalism, that is either liberalism or neoliberalism, which the US has also seen fit to rebrand for political propaganda reasons.

>ITT that's what folks like me are trying to get away from. Large, powerful groups of people stealing or otherwise telling us what to do with our crap.
Fair enough. I just figured I'll let you know about historical meaning of the word "libertarianism".
How would you describe your ideology? Do Adam Smith's ideas resonate with you?

Free speech and social liberty are only the surface and aren't unique to Libertarianism. Most people don't have a problem with that part of Libertarianism. The real fun begins when you apply liberty to economics.

>>57
Truth.

>>60
>small business subsidies
Automatic no, unless we're talking about private subsidies.

Taxation = theft. Government subsidies = tax funded. Therefore they're unacceptable, even for a minarchist. (Assuming they really are a minarchist and not a confused Republican.)

But as Walter Block would say, "The money is there, like it or not. Somebody is going to get it either way. Why not benefit from it?" That's a paraphrase, but accurate to his meaning.

Whether you consider it acceptable to benefit from programs that we have no power to abolish really depends on whether you're a purist or a pragmatist, I guess. Not sure what the majority view would be, but I'd imagine a fairly even split.

>>56
>Fair enough. I just figured I'll let you know about historical meaning of the word "libertarianism".
I appreciate it. I've heard the argument against the use of the term anarchist being used to apply to capitalists, but not libertarian.

I'd like to discuss your views with you, they interest me academically. Started a new thread.
http://8chan.co/libertypol/res/63.html

> "As far as I can tell, the use of libertarian to refer to free markets (which, by the way, was the classical postulate of liberals)"
Absolutely. Rothbard himself and others have made mention about how the capitalists that weren't in favor of the state started using libertarian because the term liberal had been co-opted by socialists and fascists.

That's why many minarchists and anarcho-capitalists will also identify as classical liberals, to differentiate themselves from the modern sort.

In the past, there had to have been some text-book definition of the term that attracted the capitalist camp to it, as well as the term anarchist.

I'm sure we can both see what that is: mutual desire of both proper anarchists and free market capitalists to see the dissolution of unwanted state interference, or otherwise very ardent desire for general freedom.

We have some different ideas about what exactly it is that's oppressing people, is the difference.

> "How would you describe your ideology? Do Adam Smith's ideas resonate with you?"
I'm not familiar with Adam Smith. I could look him up, but you can probably summarize him better.

I would identify as a voluntaryist. I haven't yet found anything that I disagree with Murray Rothbard on, and you're quite welcome to pick at any weird issues you can think of.

>>64

I do like what you've said. We can fight like rabid hounds over everything and still end up voting similar.

>>87
Yep. That's the beauty of sharing certain core values. It brings a great deal of unity and enables you to iron out the specifics, which you can't do with someone that has a different ideological foundation. Have to lay that foundation first.