Libertarian End-Game and the State
What is the end-game of Libertarianism, if there were no
opposition? What about your personal philosophy?
An interesting question. Does the libertarian have an end-game? Yes and no. There is an end-game in a general sense but really this end-goal is more of a medial goal. The general, medial goal of the libertarian is to ensure that liberty reigns in his world. Now I use the term world in a specific manner, not to mean "planet", but rather as a "realm that is rightfully his to exert control over". I use this term rather than "nation", "community", "state", and so on, because this realm of control is variable dependent on individual circumstance. I shall explain this further below.
The libertarian seeks to make his interactions voluntary but the amount that this is possible is very dependent on a variety of factors. Libertarians, in general, don't (or logically can't) seek to promote world-wide liberty. I say "can't" because many do not want liberty and as such would be forced to be free, and it is a violation of the non-aggression principle to do so. It's also a fool's errand anyway, which is why you don't see forced liberty promoted very much. Liberty always manifests at smaller life circles before it can manifest at the larger ones. The libertarian may be only to make his own familial interactions voluntary. Other libertarians may own businesses and thus have the ability to make more voluntary interactions through business. If the libertarian is a citizen of a large nation like the US, then his end-goal would be to try make his life as an American as free as possible. Some use voting for this end, while others just do it through daily choices. In essence, the libertarian's goal is have liberty in as many of her life circles as possible, and this will manifest accordingly based on life situations and place of residence.
The challenge here is whether or not there can be a single end-game in a thought system that emphasizes the individual, and because of this I say that there cannot be a single end-game. Going back to what I said before, the libertarian end-game is more of a medial goal than a true ending point. Becoming free and exercising voluntary choices are not necessarily the end-game, but instead are the middle of a greater goal. Instead, obtaining liberty is just the means and the end is the ability to lead life on one's own terms. The end-game, so to speak, is to choose your own end-game. Being free isn't just about being free, it's about being able to use your freedom in accordance with will.
My own personal philosophy has more of a specific goal that builds on the medial goal of acquiring liberty. Without saying too much or too little, it's my political goal to live in a world where people are absolutely free to choose how to live and with whom to associate, where people are free to follow divine law and true will. I envision a world where like-minded people can work together towards common goals for their own benefits, and to usher forth creativity and inspiration towards the goal of self-development and realization of the spirit. I don't see this as Utopian, for I already have had glimpses of such interactions and possibilities in my own life. Rather than Utopian, I see this as what will occur when people have the radical freedom to do what they wilt and form new tribes with mutually shared ideas in mind.
♠
At what point does rejection of the state become dismantling
of the state? Does Libertarianism anticipate an entropic end of the state or
does it call for violent overthrow or revolution like Communism?
I will keep my answer to this question rather brief, since others have written more and better upon it than I myself could wish to at this point. Libertarians wouldn't need a violent revolution or war of any kind. Indeed, a revolution would imply replacing an old order with a new one. So really, libertarians seek independence rather than revolution. And a libertarian war for independence need not be fought with fire and steel, but rather with dollars and consent. Recall what I've said previously about smaller circles of life impacting larger circles of life. As libertarians realize their freedom more and more in their daily lives, they can produce more tangible changes in larger life circles over time. Eventually libertarians will only have to begin to slowly and consistently withdraw their consent to be governed, and to slowly drain the state of its ability to tax them. As time goes on, the state will wither away and become hallow as it has its power to coerce (via taxation) is diminished. No violence is necessary in such a scenario, unless it is in self-defense against a slowly dying state seeking to control people one last time in its death throes.
For a more detailed and eloquent description of this, see this piece from Hans-Hermann Hoppe:
♠
No comments:
Post a Comment