• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Basic question about being a "left libertarian"

NatMorton

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
37,056
Reaction score
18,258
Location
Greater Boston Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm trying to get my head around the concept of being "left libertarian." To any an all who consider themselves as such, this is Wiki's top-level definition:

Left-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as egalitarian libertarianism,[6][7] left-wing libertarianism[8] or social libertarianism,[9] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality. Left-libertarianism represents several related yet distinct approaches to political and social theory. In its classical usage, it refers to anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics such as anarchism, especially social anarchism,[10] whose adherents simply call it libertarianism.[11] In the United States, it represents the left-wing of the libertarian movement[10] and the political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10][12] This is done to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[13]
While maintaining full respect for personal property, socialist left-libertarians are opposed to capitalism and the private ownership of the means of production.[14][15][16][17] Other left-libertarians are skeptical of, or fully against, private ownership of natural resources, arguing in contrast to right-libertarians that neither claiming nor mixing one's labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights and maintain that natural resources should be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[18] Those left-libertarians who are more lenient towards private property support different property norms and theories such as usufruct,[19] or under the condition that recompense is offered to the local or even global community such as the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[20][21]
Left-wing market anarchism (or market-oriented left-libertarianism), including Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's mutualism and Samuel Konkin III's agorism, appeals to left-wing concerns such as class, egalitarianism, environmentalism, gender, immigration and sexuality within the paradigm of free-market anti-capitalism.[10][22] Although libertarianism in the United States has become associated to classical liberalism and minarchism, with right-libertarianism being more known than left-libertarianism,[5] political usage of the term until then was associated exclusively with anti-capitalism, libertarian socialism and social anarchism and in most parts of the world such an association still predominates.[10][23]


Would you describe this as fairly accurate?
 
Is this going to be the very first "I'm just wondering. Blah blah blah, blah?" threads that isn't sealioning? :rolleyes:

If you have an argument, make it. Asking people whether they think a partial wiki cutout is accurate has got to be the laziest way to get people to say the things you want to attack, so skip the noise, name the things, and make your attacks.
 
I'm trying to get my head around the concept of being "left libertarian." To any an all who consider themselves as such, this is Wiki's top-level definition:

Left-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as egalitarian libertarianism,[6][7] left-wing libertarianism[8] or social libertarianism,[9] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality. Left-libertarianism represents several related yet distinct approaches to political and social theory. In its classical usage, it refers to anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics such as anarchism, especially social anarchism,[10] whose adherents simply call it libertarianism.[11] In the United States, it represents the left-wing of the libertarian movement[10] and the political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10][12] This is done to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[13]
While maintaining full respect for personal property, socialist left-libertarians are opposed to capitalism and the private ownership of the means of production.[14][15][16][17] Other left-libertarians are skeptical of, or fully against, private ownership of natural resources, arguing in contrast to right-libertarians that neither claiming nor mixing one's labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights and maintain that natural resources should be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[18] Those left-libertarians who are more lenient towards private property support different property norms and theories such as usufruct,[19] or under the condition that recompense is offered to the local or even global community such as the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[20][21]
Left-wing market anarchism (or market-oriented left-libertarianism), including Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's mutualism and Samuel Konkin III's agorism, appeals to left-wing concerns such as class, egalitarianism, environmentalism, gender, immigration and sexuality within the paradigm of free-market anti-capitalism.[10][22] Although libertarianism in the United States has become associated to classical liberalism and minarchism, with right-libertarianism being more known than left-libertarianism,[5] political usage of the term until then was associated exclusively with anti-capitalism, libertarian socialism and social anarchism and in most parts of the world such an association still predominates.[10][23]


Would you describe this as fairly accurate?

The (naturally?) resulting ‘tragedy of the commons’ interferes with much of this thinking. The (general) failure of Libertarian ideals to be placed into practice is caused by the inherent conflicts between socialism (government controls as much as possible) and anarchy (government is unnecessary). My Libertarian ideas are essentially that while government is necessary, it should be implemented at the lowest levels possible.
 
Is this going to be the very first "I'm just wondering. Blah blah blah, blah?" threads that isn't sealioning? :rolleyes:

If you have an argument, make it. Asking people whether they think a partial wiki cutout is accurate has got to be the laziest way to get people to say the things you want to attack, so skip the noise, name the things, and make your attacks.
^^^ can never resist making it about the messenger.

My question has been asked. Answer it or ignore it. I don't care which.
 
The (naturally?) resulting ‘tragedy of the commons’ interferes with much of this thinking. The (general) failure of Libertarian ideals to be placed into practice is caused by the inherent conflicts between socialism (government controls as much as possible) and anarchy (government is unnecessary). My Libertarian ideas are essentially that while government is necessary, it should be implemented at the lowest levels possible.
I would consider that more right leaning libertarianism, yes?
 
Libertarian leftists are the ones that believe the State only exists to enrich the elites, and the only way to seize the means of productions is to do away with the State. Basically they believe any kind of Socialist state is a folly and will just create a new enriched elite. Only through abolishing the institution that only exists to protect Elites can a true Socialist society be born.
 
Libertarian leftists are the ones that believe the State only exists to enrich the elites, and the only way to seize the means of productions is to do away with the State. Basically they believe any kind of Socialist state is a folly and will just create a new enriched elite. Only through abolishing the institution that only exists to protect Elites can a true Socialist society be born.
While in theory that may be a consequence of what they believe, it's hard to believe that is their intent.
 
I would consider that more right leaning libertarianism, yes?

Why so? It is certainly not left leaning, but I don’t see it as right leaning simply based on that.
 
I'm trying to get my head around the concept of being "left libertarian."

Well, you're not going to. The whole thing is a giant mess of contradictions. The very first sentence:

Left-libertarianism, also known as egalitarian libertarianism, left-wing libertarianism or social libertarianism, is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality.

They never actually define what "social equality" is, but I'm pretty sure that their grand plans to impose it (without a state, no less (lol))are going to destroy the idea of individual freedom.

While maintaining full respect for personal property, socialist left-libertarians are opposed to capitalism and the private ownership of the means of production.

There is no meaningful distinction between personal property and the means of production. For example, the computer I'm typing this on is clearly both. Are they going to monitor how I use my computer, and confiscate it if I use it for production?

I'm going to stop there, because I know from extensive experience going all the way back to dial-up and alt.libertarian, that this is a gigantic waste of time.
 
While in theory that may be a consequence of what they believe, it's hard to believe that is their intent.
They are basically leftists that hate the government and believe the nature of the State is anti- socialist.
 
While in theory that may be a consequence of what they believe, it's hard to believe that is their intent.

Why buy something (e.g. tools or housing) if use of it is not controlled by the buyer? Placing some other(s) in control does not remove control - it only transfers it.
 
There is no such thing as dedicated libertarians. They’re just conservatives who want a bigger cut of the public resources while bootstrap-signaling.
 
Well, you're not going to. The whole thing is a giant mess of contradictions. The very first sentence:



They never actually define what "social equality" is, but I'm pretty sure that their grand plans to impose it (without a state, no less (lol))are going to destroy the idea of individual freedom.



There is no meaningful distinction between personal property and the means of production. For example, the computer I'm typing this on is clearly both. Are they going to monitor how I use my computer, and confiscate it if I use it for production?

I'm going to stop there, because I know from extensive experience going all the way back to dial-up and alt.libertarian, that this is a gigantic waste of time.
I hear what you're saying, and that is where I'm struggling. There does seem to be an inherent contradiction between the desire to control things (property, outcomes) yet somehow do it without an oppressive state.

That said, I can say I've studied this very much and am willing to hear what its supporters have to say about it.
 
I'm trying to get my head around the concept of being "left libertarian." To any an all who consider themselves as such, this is Wiki's top-level definition:

Left-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as egalitarian libertarianism,[6][7] left-wing libertarianism[8] or social libertarianism,[9] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality. Left-libertarianism represents several related yet distinct approaches to political and social theory. In its classical usage, it refers to anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics such as anarchism, especially social anarchism,[10] whose adherents simply call it libertarianism.[11] In the United States, it represents the left-wing of the libertarian movement[10] and the political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10][12] This is done to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[13]
While maintaining full respect for personal property, socialist left-libertarians are opposed to capitalism and the private ownership of the means of production.[14][15][16][17] Other left-libertarians are skeptical of, or fully against, private ownership of natural resources, arguing in contrast to right-libertarians that neither claiming nor mixing one's labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights and maintain that natural resources should be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[18] Those left-libertarians who are more lenient towards private property support different property norms and theories such as usufruct,[19] or under the condition that recompense is offered to the local or even global community such as the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[20][21]
Left-wing market anarchism (or market-oriented left-libertarianism), including Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's mutualism and Samuel Konkin III's agorism, appeals to left-wing concerns such as class, egalitarianism, environmentalism, gender, immigration and sexuality within the paradigm of free-market anti-capitalism.[10][22] Although libertarianism in the United States has become associated to classical liberalism and minarchism, with right-libertarianism being more known than left-libertarianism,[5] political usage of the term until then was associated exclusively with anti-capitalism, libertarian socialism and social anarchism and in most parts of the world such an association still predominates.[10][23]


Would you describe this as fairly accurate?

Yes, that describes my views reasonably accurately. What conservative strawman do you envision creating with that information?

The person who wrote that entry forgot Chomsky and the writers Bakunin, Prodioun, and Kropotkin.




Hmm… or simply closer to Communist. ;)
Do you understand that authoritarian communism is an oxymoron?
 
As a left-libertarian, I generally agree with the Wiki description. The emphasis of holding land/resources in common while respecting personal non-land property/possessions is a major feature and probably the biggest factor that pulled me away from right-libertarianism.
 
Yes, some left-libertarians are communist. Just not the Stalinist/Maoist tankie kind.

Yep, the fictional (theoretical?) kind are better than the actual (historical?) kind. ;)
 
As a left-libertarian, I generally agree with the Wiki description. The emphasis of holding land/resources in common while respecting personal non-land property/possessions is a major feature and probably the biggest factor that pulled me away from right-libertarianism.

I might add that a recognition there is a need for certain centralized functions of government (like schools, law enforcement, judicial functions, etc.) are necessary for peaceful co-existence might lead one to identify as a "Libertarian-Left." However, in my case I just put that as my "lean" because I've tested in that "section" on "The Political Compass Test" found at this link: https://www.politicalcompass.org/test .

However, I honestly consider myself more of a "classical liberal." The Test results simply place me a couple of points down and left of center in the results box.
 
Last edited:
I might add that a recognition there is a need for certain centralized functions of government (like schools, law enforcement, judicial functions, etc.) are necessary for peaceful co-existence might lead one to identify as a "Libertarian-Left." However, in my case I just put that as my "lean" because I've tested in that "section" on "The Political Compass Test" found at this link: https://www.politicalcompass.org/test .

However, I honestly consider myself more of a "classical liberal."
Where do you rate on that scale? A classical liberal is a right-libertarian. You logically can not be both a left librarian and a classical (right-libertarian) liberal, who are closer to anarcho-capitalists.
 
Fuzzy about your political orientation? Do you want to gain some insight?

Review the links, then take the Political Compass Test. Share your results. Give the OP @NatMorton something substantive to work with!


 
The Political Compass test put me almost smack in the middle of the Left-Libertarian Box. For those interested, you can flesh out my views by reviewing as many of my nearly 8000 DP posts as you want. I joined DP October 26, 2016.
 

Attachments

  • chart.png
    chart.png
    17.3 KB · Views: 0
As a left-libertarian, I generally agree with the Wiki description. The emphasis of holding land/resources in common while respecting personal non-land property/possessions is a major feature and probably the biggest factor that pulled me away from right-libertarianism.
Here’s the rub for me. If I claim property as mine (e.g. I build something; I grow something; I write something; whatever) how is it taken away from me and held “in common” without a strong central authority to do the taking?
 
Fuzzy about your political orientation? Do you want to gain some insight?

Review the links, then take the Political Compass Test. Share your results. Give the OP @NatMorton something substantive to work with!


The OP is not asking who is LL. It’s asking LLs if the Wiki definition is, more or less, accurate.
 
Back
Top Bottom