"We are adversaries, and yet the goal which we both pursue is the same. What is the common goal of economists [i.e., classical liberals] and socialists? Is it not a society where the production of all the goods necessary to the maintenance and embellishment of life shall be as abundant as possible, and where the distribution of these same goods among those who have created them through their labor shall be as just as possible? … Only we approach this goal by different paths…. Why do you refuse to follow the path of liberty alongside us? … If you became certain that you had been mistaken as to the true cause of the evils which afflict society and the means of remedying them … you would come over to us." -Gustave de Molinari, "Letter to Socialists"
LibertarianAnarchy.com - Government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn't work!
Socialist ends, libertarian means
Are not compatible.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
liberty student: Socialist ends, libertarian means Are not compatible.
Depends what you mean by "socialist ends". I would argue that centralising power in the hands of a few individuals (statism) is hardly a good way to engender equality. So if one means material equality by "socialist ends", then one could easily argue that libertarian means are compatible with them.
The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.
Thedesolateone:I would argue that centralising power in the hands of a few individuals (statism) is hardly a good way to engender equality.
I never claimed it was.
Thedesolateone:So if one means material equality by "socialist ends", then one could easily argue that libertarian means are compatible with them.
The only way to accomplish material equality is by force. That has been the socialist modus for some time. Force everyone to be equal, and eventually everyone is equally poor. It requires aggression.
Libertarianism has nothing to do with equality, which is an end. Libertarianism is about means. The ends of those libertarian means are left to each individual to decide.
Sage:
To see Roderick in action, check out his analysis of the Green Party platform here.
Libertarianism has nothing to do with equality, which is an end.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Juan:Libertarianism has everything to do with equality before the law
But not equal laws.
Juan:and with the rejection of authority
The rejection of aggression.
liberty student:The only way to accomplish material equality is by force
"It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But the half-wit remains a half-wit and the emperor remains an emperor." ~Dream
Snowflake:He claimed that the socialist agenda was material wellbeing for the masses rather than equality
It would be interesting to either see quotes from the elite vanguard of marxists, or otherwise a social sciences type 'scientific' polling of the ideas of modern socialists as to whether they are opposed to 'absolute poverty' or 'relative poverty'
I don't think the answer is obvious, it would be really illuminating to know.
Maybe LaughingMan could chip in here?
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
nirgrahamUK:It would be interesting to either see quotes from the elite vanguard of marxists, or otherwise a social sciences type 'scientific' polling of the ideas of modern socialists as to whether they are opposed to 'absolute poverty' or 'relative poverty'
liberty student: Thedesolateone:I would argue that centralising power in the hands of a few individuals (statism) is hardly a good way to engender equality. I never claimed it was. Thedesolateone:So if one means material equality by "socialist ends", then one could easily argue that libertarian means are compatible with them. The only way to accomplish material equality is by force. That has been the socialist modus for some time. Force everyone to be equal, and eventually everyone is equally poor. It requires aggression. Libertarianism has nothing to do with equality, which is an end. Libertarianism is about means. The ends of those libertarian means are left to each individual to decide.
You know I'm not arguing for socialism
I'm arguing that if the socialists truly desire equality, the best way for them to "accomplish" it is through freedom, not the power of the state.
Soviet Communism was a place of extreme inequality, and no movement, whereas the USA in its freest periods allowed the rise (and fall) of millions.
Thedesolateone:You know I'm not arguing for socialism
tbh, I wasn't sure. I get nervous whenever someone starts talking about socialism with less than complete disdain. I don't see socialists as allies.
liberty student:tbh, I wasn't sure. I get nervous whenever someone starts talking about socialism with less than complete disdain. I don't see socialists as allies.
I wrote a topic on this issue a while back:
The Libertarian Revolution: The Proletariat Revolution?
'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition
liberty student:Socialist ends, libertarian means Are not compatible.
liberty student:Libertarianism is about means. The ends of those libertarian means are left to each individual to decide.
Well, which is it?
Sage:Well, which is it?
You know what I am saying. Sure, one can pursue socialist ends with libertarianism. Whatever socialism without genocide, slavery and destruction of property looks like.
But to say that libertarian ends are socialist ends? Gimme a break.
Socialism was a confused and hybrid movement because it tried to achieve the liberal goals of freedom, peace, and industrial harmony and growth — goals which can only be achieved through liberty and the separation of government from virtually everything — by imposing the old conservative means of statism, collectivism, and hierarchical privilege. ~ Rothbard, For a New Liberty, The Libertarian Heritage
Though I do agree, socialists tend to be control freaks with an utter disdain for liberty and enlightenment...
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap