Friday, September 11, 2009

6 Thesen

die ausgesprochen hilfreich sind zur linkslibertären Positionsbestimmung von Roderick T. Long:

Libertarians, and especially left-libertarians, need to focus more on simply getting our position recognised. Getting it recognised is of course not enough – one then has to argue that the position is correct – but I think such argument and defense are to a large extent pointless if people can’t see what the position being defended even is.

Our vital task, then, is to get the word out that there is a position out there that includes the following theses:

1. Big business and big government are (for the most part) natural allies.

2. Although conservative politicians pretend to hate big government, and liberal politicians pretend to hate big business, most mainstream policies – both liberal and conservative – involve (slightly different versions of) massive intervention on behalf of the big-business/big-government elite at the expense of ordinary people.

3. Liberal politicians cloak their intervention on behalf of the strong in the rhetoric of intervention on behalf of the weak; conservative politicians cloak their intervention on behalf of the strong in the rhetoric of non-intervention and free markets – but in both cases the rhetoric is belied by the reality.

4. A genuine policy of intervention on behalf of the weak, if liberals actually tried it, wouldn’t work either, since the nature of government power would automatically warp it toward the interests of the elite.

5. A genuine policy of non-intervention and free markets, if conservatives actually tried it, would work, since free competition would empower ordinary people at the expense of the elite.

6. Since conservative policies, despite their associated free-market rhetoric, are mostly the diametrical opposite of free-market policies, the failures of conservative policies do not constitute an objection to (but rather, if anything, a vindication of) free-market policies.

Of course we should be prepared to defend these theses through economic reasoning and historical evidence, but the main goal at this point, I think, should be not so much to defend them as simply to advertise their existence.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nicht die Armen brauchen den Staat sondern die Reichen!

Der Mutualist said...

planetarijm schreibt ergänzend dazu im "Center for a Stateless Society":

Indeed on point 3. For who has greater need of strong protection for private property than the poor, who suffer most when they lose what they own? And who has greater need of the lower prices brought on by highly competitive free markets? The poor need stable or lowering prices in order to make the most of their meager means. And who has greater need of the opportunities available in a truly free market? The poor need these opportunities to raise their income level.

The rich seem to demand protection from ever having to work hard, or at all.


Nur wie popularisieren wir diese Erkenntnis?

Markus said...

Was heißt den "linkslibertär"?

Ist "ad sinistram" in deiner Blogroll etwa linkslibertär? Linksradikal wäre wohl die passendere Bezeichnung.

Versuch`s doch mal mit dem "Infoportal". Das ist zwar auch nicht linkslibertär, aber linksliberal:

http://www.jjahnke.net/index.html
Informationsportal Globalisierung - Standort Deutschland - Neoliberalismus - Falsche Rezepte, Joachim Jahnke

Le Penseur said...

Schrecklich, das alles! Die Roten sind's sowieso, und jetzt auch die Schwarzen, die nur gleißnerisch den freien Markt preisen, um ihren Ostelbier-Junkern der Großindustriefraktion fette Pfründen zuzuschanzen! Und erst die Liberalen, die unter dem Deckmantel der Einsatzes für den kleinen Mann nur ebendiese Junker-Pfründner alimentieren.

Mit einem Wort:

Ganz Madrid steht unter Wasser und überhaupt, es ist fürchterlich!