Because I’m a 1st and 2nd Amendment absolutist, I’ll never be accepted as a progressive enough Liberal. Yet, because I believe in a State, I’ll forever be rejected by Libertarians.
But what is Libertarianism anyways?
It is the belief that free people are best left to themselves, and the government, as it exists, should be minimal, efficient, and extremely limited. Yet Libertarian culture is overrun by Anarcho-Capitalists, men and women who believe that the State should not exist at all.
The philosophy is sound, but the practical application, like all things, is a lot messier. To an Anarcho-Capitalist (Ancap for short), every person is his own sovereign, any person appointed over another is a violation of that sovereignty, and people should choose how to live and die of their own free will. The rule holding this all together is the Non-aggression principle. This is the stated rule that no one should transgress against another, and force is only justified in cases of self defense.
Queue the jokes about recreational nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers, to which most Ancaps laugh, and say,
“Why not?” and point to the abuses of our governments who do possess such weapons.
This argument is compelling in a world in which all men and women have the same faculties, are rational actors, capable of adhering to a personal moral code, and who only band together in cases of extreme danger. But this is not the world we live in. Anarcho-capitalism falls apart the second it is pulled off the drawing board because men and women are massively unequal in their faculties, are often irrational, and are very often tribal.
First counterpoint is that all men and all women are unequal. Ancaps are usually above average intelligence, hard workers, and capable of personal success through a variety of factors. They are often able bodied, of sound mind, and entrepreneurial. If everyone was like that, then no problem. But our world has schizophrenics. We have men and women with bi-polar disorder, we have people with uncontrolled diabetes, alcoholism, and substance abuse issues. We have people with debilitating childhood trauma, and a variety of other psychological issues both genetic and environmental. These people will not survive an Anarcho-capitalist society.
There’s two Ancap responses to this:
- Good. Let the dead wood burn. Social programs just prolong the suffering and dependence of useless people.
- If it was important enough to society, then free people would fund it voluntarily.
Answer to response 1 is I, and many others, do not want to live in a society where we allow the broken people of our world to suffer and die.
Answer to response 2 is free people wouldn’t fund it, coerced people already don’t.
These answers then play into the second counterpoint of human beings not being rational, or at least not fully rational. This acceptance, that I myself, someone who spends a lot of time wondering, thinking, and criticizing the world, am in fact irrational, was a huge part of growing up. For a long time, I worshiped my own intellect, believing I could find the answer to all of life’s problems if I just worked and thought hard enough. It is a vain and futile effort. I am a mortal creature, limited in my abilities, born of a dizzying reality, infinitely more complex and incomprehensible than myself. Existence itself is rarely rational, and yet rationality is one of our only tools to surf the sea of chaos.
But we can always justify our actions to ourselves. I was a jerk in high school because I thought it would attract girls and gain me friends. It worked, in spite of all the reasons it shouldn’t have. I joined the military to study conflict and death up close. That worked, but I risked my health, wealth, limbs, and life, for little more than an intellectual exercise. Where was the rationality in that? I joined a profession in which people curse my existence, and I exclusively deal with the angry, insane, and genuinely victimized members of our society. I could do anything else, making the same or more money, but I don’t. I have my justifications, but they don’t stand up to scrutiny. In the same way, members of an Anarcho-capitalist society could justify selfishness, in the face of immense human suffering.
If those people made different choices, they wouldn’t be suffering, why is it my problem?
This problem needs to be addressed, but not by me!
The money I spend on my pursuits benefit others in society already, I already do plenty for the world.
These wouldn’t be rational responses to unneeded human suffering, but rationalizations. There is an important difference.
Finally, human beings are tribal. Ancaps want to live in a Jeffersonian society, where independent men and women are able to access goods and services unhindered. These free people are then able to negotiate their existence on an even footing with their peers. This is a great ideal, but the truth is, there are men and women who are not as high minded.
Power hates a void, and I have met men who would band together, and seize what they wished. The non aggression principle might be a great concept for rational, responsible, kind people, but there are irrational, selfish, and cruel people the world over. An unorganized confederation of free men, bickering about equipment, organization, hierarchy, and funding, would be no match for a drilled, organized, militaristic, imperial, and feudal band of warriors.
I’ve met men who have fought for this country, and fought for the libertarian principles it espouses. But these men would be just as happy in a band of like minded warriors, pillaging a disorganized country side. In a land with no rulers, the barbarian would become king, and as much as he may have been civilized, there are plenty of barbarians walking among us.
And so I’m stuck in a political bind. Do I vote for the Republican Party, a corporatist, globalist, imperial, militaristic, mutant of it its original ideals?
Or do I vote for the Libertarians, a beautiful and principled party, overrun by a bunch of obnoxious idealists with no sense of incrementalism or pragmatism?
I don’t know, but I do know that Anarcho-capitalists are from a rational perspective, a silly bunch.
