April 13th, 2007

One of the most consistent questions I've been asked by libertarians and others would have to be, "What is left libertarianism?" There's enough confusion about just the word "libertarian" without the bizarre qualifier. Well, Richmonders interested in exploring that vein of thought have no paucity of opinions available to choose from. Of course, there's leftlibertarian.org, a site where the best bloggers in the Blogosphere of the Libertarian Left are syndicated. But in this post I thought I'd share some different personal statements on our philosophy from around the internet.

Joseph Van Hoven at Complicated Visionary is a good starting point, as he attempts to define the sociological distinctions within the libertarian movement, including the left-leaning variety, the special category in which he places himself:

Left Libertarians believe big, powerful government is as oppressive and bad as big, powerful corporations. They are anti-war (including the War on Drugs), pro-choice, and against government favors for corporations (or against large corporations altogether). They usually favor participatory action and mutual aid over government for social justice and environmental causes, as well as smaller, more local businesses and community-centered marketplaces. They may caucus with right-libertarians (“vulgar libertarians” is a commonly used phrase) for strategic purposes, which is the primary reason they are on the list at all. They are also likely to work with Green parties. Often Georgist on physical property and against extensive and restrictive intellectual property (and a major front behind Open Source), they are related to others of the broad libertarian left--agorists, mutualists, libertarian socialists, cyberpunks and anarchists; also “Buddhist Economics.”

Brad Spangler advocates for a left libertarianism in line with agorist revolutionary theory:

Among the variety of political labels I claim for myself is “Left Libertarian”. That should, however, be a redundancy and I believe that it will come to be regarded as such. Genuine libertarianism is very much left wing. It’s revolutionary. The long and tragic alliance of libertarians with the right against the spectre of state socialism is coming to a close, as it served no purpose after the fall of the Soviet Union and so-called “conservatives” have subsequently taken to letting their true big-government-on-steroids colors fly.

Longtime political blogger James Leroy Wilson at Independent Country was one of first left libertarian writers I encountered. His explanation of left libertarian themes, on which he further elaborates, identifies some of the key distinguishing traits of our adherents:

By being both anti-authoritarian and anti-corporate monopoly, Left Libertarians present a clean break from right-wing coalition of neo-cons, the Religious Right, and Big Business. In opposing the war, in promoting local control (which many Greens do), in fighting state-sanctioned corporate privilege, and in fighting to protect our civil liberties, the Libertarian Left has far more in common with the Left than with the Right as it is presently identified.

What this does not mean is that I prefer Hillary to Congressman Ron Paul. It does not mean outright partisanship in which liberals are my friends and conservatives my enemies. I still feel a sense of common cause with many on the Right, especially strict Constitutionalists. But historically the Right has been the party of the Establishment, of landed privilege. The Left has been opposed. Libertarianism ultimately belongs on the Left.

In a recent post on my blog, I identified many of the issues I think are wrapped up in my identification as left libertarian:

I don’t claim to possess any extraordinarily superior spark of insight, but I do think many libertarians suffer from a failure of imagination when applying libertarian principles thoroughly to these issues. Corporations are creations of government privilege which are granted limited liability, preferred access to our leaders, and constitutional rights as if they were living, breathing human beings whose interests were no different than ours. The power differential they exploit is not “laissez faire” economics, but rather the result of State intervention in the otherwise voluntary, human-scale economy, resulting in artificially bloated organizational behemoths. We are certainly not becoming freer, and direct government manipulation, while ever present, is only dwarfed by big business’s need for a rational, sanitized, intimidated customer base to dump junk on. Environmental problems go deeper than mere property rights issues and get down to the incentives and privileges afforded industry by the State. Poverty, suffering, and unfair labor practices here and around the world cannot be the result of a “free market” if what we have now is demonstrably not free. So why shouldn’t we oppose them on the same grounds that we oppose other side-effects of central planning and top-down command? What are the alternatives to the institutions, practices, and concepts that have created these problems?

And finally, I just wanted to thank fellow Richmonder Robert Russo at RichmondLiberty.org for his perspective on left libertarianism:

I believe Alliance bloggers themselves will admit the term "left" is not to emulate the divisions of mainstream politics by calling other libertarians "right", but is a perspective on libertarianism itself. (The first time I heard a non-lib speak of our party they described us as being "on the far left". To anyone who has seen the world's smallest political quiz, libertarianism is actually "up".) Basically the material on these sites focuses on the achievement of our lifestyle, culture and philosophy in ways that don't appear in most party discussions because the electoral process is not the means (i.e. libertarianism within the home, in business and around the globe), and for those who feel unrepresented by the idea that the LP should stick to "party line" issues because it leaves many stones unturned, whereas this site is for a more general audience. Quelle difference insignifiante!

My only response to Russo's comments is that for many left libertarians, we feel that libertarianism is a radical tradition. We are seeking long-term social, organizational, even psychological change that will inevitably result from more freedom and less centralized control. And yes, in part our label is a reaction to the long-running libertarian alliance with the Right. If eight years with Bush is not enough to put those notions to rest, one wonders what kind of empty philosophy "right libertarianism" must necessarily be.

I'm interested in collecting different personal statements on left libertarianism, so if you have one - or you want to write one - let me know and I'll be sure to put it up here!