Comments on Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism: Vulgar Libertarianism Watch, Part 1

Hi Kevin, the arguments at the top of the commen...

2009-11-09T10:26:48.240-08:00

Hi Kevin,

the arguments at the top of the comment form reiterating the "sweat shops are better than the alternative" are ridiculous.

the exact same argument could be made for slavery, slaves are better off as slaves than the alternatives that present themselves as freemen. its been made since the beginning of time.

when an injustice is eliminated that affords a class only basic survival and the option is an even a greater injustice, although lives are made more difficult, the problem is also made more glaring.

the NEED for change becomes self evident, rather than "they are better off than if a stick was shoved....".

the depression is a great example. roosevelts social programs although aleviating the needs of the people, also eliminated the "need" for drastic change within the system and enabled the continuation of the monopoly capital state industrial economy. without roosevelt's relief programs, great change would have occurred, hopefully positive. people may have gone on to take greater control of their own lives.

corporations are supporting the tyranny in poor countries in exchange for profit, not alleviating it. if vulgar libs don't think part of the returns on this "cheap" labor isn't going from the corp to the corrupt fascist elites of the host country, they are dreaming. that is how the system works and we all would be better off without it.

gene

There is not the capitalist and the laborer. There...

2009-10-18T11:10:21.837-07:00

There is not the capitalist and the laborer. There are only fractal levels of capitalists wherein only the null hypothesis leads to the nomenclature of a laborer. And now that we have raised the minimum wage even farther we just decimated that category almost to oblivion. You don't have a clear understanding of libertarianism and individual rights as there is nothing vulgar about pursuing what makes you happy as long as you do not violate the rights of others. It's a simple concept. You offer no alternative.

Um, what "facts" are you talking about stating, Ja...

2009-01-14T10:23:00.000-08:00

Um, what "facts" are you talking about stating, James?

The "fact" that people just happened to choose factory work as the "best available alternative," and expropriation of their land in the Enclosures had nothing to do with it?

The "fact" that big business arose from superior performance in a free market?

The "fact" that big business is just a victim of the state, and does not depend on big government for its very existence?

The "fact" that a free market economy would just be the existing corporate economy without any welfare or regulations?

I believe I've demonstrated, over and over again, that all these "facts" are LIES, and I'm not too "whimpy" to CALL them lies. And the main purpose of the lies was to sugarcoat the principles of the free market to make them attractive to the plutocracy--which has resulted in a mainstream libertarian movement that tailors its agitprop to what corporate interests want to hear, and in turn is very well kept by its patrons.

Vulgar libertarianism....meaning people stating fa...

2009-01-14T03:00:00.000-08:00

Vulgar libertarianism....meaning people stating facts without sugar coating on them for the terminally whimpy....?

Being a bit precious aren't we?

One policy change I am working very hard to bring ...

2006-12-14T15:55:00.000-08:00

One policy change I am working very hard to bring about is mandatory compliance with journalists. My definition of this is anyone who is a recognized public figure MUST agree to a certain level of examination by the press. Anythnig else is tyranny via secrecy.

Journalists need a way to report unresponsive public figures and have pressure put on them. I dont’ think prison would work but maybe a gentle system of civil penalties is the way go to, as people have the right to know what is going on!

My upcoming book on prostitution could not have been researched any other way. A prostitute with a web page is a public figure. I used this argument with a great deal of success in convincing police departments in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and of course the District of Columbia to work with me towards a common objective.

You will see the results in bits and pieces if not fits and starts in Reason Magazine starting in 2007. The book will be finished in late 2007 and I hope for it to be published in 2008.

I would like to thank the Competitive Enterprise Institute for supporting me. The CEI is a great place!

All the best for the new year!

John Berlau

jberlau@cei.org
www.cei.org/experts/berlau

Fracturation (is that a word) all the way to the i...

2006-05-25T17:25:00.000-07:00

Fracturation (is that a word) all the way to the individual is what I see, group-think going the way of Dino.

What will be the result?

When the individual is in control of only himself, who would know?

Dear Kevin,Well done. Your page sums up everything...

2006-05-02T12:16:00.000-07:00

Dear Kevin,

Well done. Your page sums up everything I despise about looneytoonians (what you call vulgar libertarians).

Yours,
Wes

Thanks very kindly, Lady Aster.And your correction...

2006-01-13T08:41:00.000-08:00

Thanks very kindly, Lady Aster.

And your correction is very much on the mark. I realized after Mutualist Political Economy had already gone into print that I'd conflated the Plato-Dionysius and Aristotle-Alexander stories.

Kevin-I'm glad to see a burgeoning left-libertaria...

2006-01-13T00:44:00.000-08:00

Kevin-

I'm glad to see a burgeoning left-libertarian world online. My background is in Randian libertarianism, but I always saw in Rand a sense of the total libertation of the human personality whose implication seemed broader then libertarianism- not primarily a defense of the grandeur of the American order.

After getting out into the real world and finding that capitalism and patriarchy were among the worst forces crushing romantic individualism, I rather went through a period of confusion until I encountered other left-libertarian writers like Roderick Long and Arthur Silber. Reading hard-edged writing like yours drawing clear lines for a left-libertarian future brings a smile to my face.

So thank you. I do have one correction tho': wasn't it *Plato* who tried to act as tutor to the tyrant Dionysius II of Syracuse, while Aristotle tried to educate Alexander the Great? Sorry, this kind of thing rankles to me.

Lady Aster
San Francisco
(who would prefer to be advising Pericles)
)(*)(

This is interesting stuff.I am what you might call...

2005-11-14T20:28:00.000-08:00

This is interesting stuff.I am what you might call a non-aligned socialist who has recently become aquainted with a number of thoughtful anarchists and so have been exploring this theory and practice more extensively.On the one hand it is heartening to learn of the existence of more people seeking radical change, on the other hand,it seems that everywhere I turn I find more sectarian splintering.Collectivist,mutualist, individualist,syndicalist, libertarian,anarchists, and then all the factions on the socialist and communist side of the equation.I begin to wonder if all this dispersed energy isn't counterproductive to our common expressed values and goals such as self-determination, justice and liberty.We seem to recognize a common oppressor but then fragment on issues of theory and strategy. I can see you are very busy but I am attempting to create a process where some synthesis might be possible so that theory can turn to praxis.To that end there is a discussion at my blog on where we might find enough common ground to produce the consensus needed to energize our struggle in the here and now.Id' love your comments.

This brings me to my critique of your programme which is the tired but true: What is to be done? The solutions you propose are antithetical to the maintenence of the priveledge the ruling class now enjoys and while they demonstrate a willingness to accept reform as a form of that "maintenence" they will not initiate structural change simply at the behest of a much less powerful class.You document the degree to which they rationalize injustice.I would also like to hear an explanation of how the crises caused by over-accumulation are averted in a libertarian designed market. If you agree labor power is exchanged for use-value, expressed as a commodity, how is profit justified? Out of whose pocket does that use-value come and if there is no profit , how is a fair rate of exchange established? Hour for hour?, What keeps full employment in a labor market where surplus is necessary to keep wages low? If there is not full employment, what ethical consideration is used to decide who works? What happens to those who don't?

That's high praise indeed, Erin! Thanks.

2005-01-23T04:02:00.000-08:00

That's high praise indeed, Erin! Thanks.

Thanks for starting this blog! I got involved in p...

2005-01-22T16:26:00.000-08:00

Thanks for starting this blog! I got involved in politics in 2004 and started out as a liberal, but have become totally disgusted with how much control the government has and all of our military adventures. I didn't think there were any options because Republicans digust the hell outta me and libertarian to me meant "anything for a profit with no regard for the environment or justice". It's great to discover all of these new ideas (well, new to me). I came here from Orcinus, by the way. Your comments there were always the most interesting.
-Erin

Thanks for the kind words, matt.

2005-01-19T07:50:00.000-08:00

Thanks for the kind words, matt.

Glad to see that you have your own blog now. I've ...

2005-01-18T21:21:00.000-08:00

Glad to see that you have your own blog now. I've always enjoyed reading you comments on Hit and Run and various other places around the libertarian blogosphere. Your commentary is always interesting and often has me reconsidering my own entrenched beliefs.

Regards,

matt

Mike and Jesse, I agree that taking sweatshops aw...

2005-01-13T09:16:00.000-08:00

Mike and Jesse,

I agree that taking sweatshops away without preparation and without any other changes would probably cause dislocations and leave sweatshop workers worse off.

I don't want to "ban" anything. Just end all the existing subsidies and special privileges government provides to sweatshops, and force them to compete for labor in a free market. Such a free market would include, among other things,

1) a land reform that left a much larger portion of the laboring classes in direct possession of alternative means of subsistence so that they had more bargaining power in the labor market;

2) a radical scale-back of international property law that ceased to lock Third World countries into the role of providing sweatshop labor to Western-owned countries; and

3) and end to transportation subsidies, which would force big business to internalize all its own long-distance shipping costs and result in a world where everybody (in the West and the TW both) buys stuff made close to home.

Mike makes the salient point: "that still does not...

2005-01-13T08:51:00.000-08:00

Mike makes the salient point: "that still does not mean that taking them away would make the situation better."
Third-world sweatshops might not be the 'natural' result of a free market, but within the constraints of the society those workers live in, they may well be the least bad option available. Simply banning them would be as destructive as trying to help exploited prostitutes by banning prostitution, or trying to help exploited illegal aliens by deporting them.

Kevin-- I want to start by thanking you for your ...

2005-01-12T20:38:00.000-08:00

Kevin--

I want to start by thanking you for your writing. I am always impressed by it and find it useful and thought provoking, usually mind altering--at least to some extent.

I agree with you. Sweatshops are not the only alternative.

However, that still does not mean that taking them away would make the situation better. You really have not made a case for that as I see it.

Mike

The alternative to sweatshops may well be "leaving...

2005-01-12T19:59:00.000-08:00

The alternative to sweatshops may well be "leaving land in the hands of a majority of people", but is boycotting Taco Bell going to achieve that end? I have my doubts.

That having been said, ripping "encouraging 'socially conscious' shopping" and "seeking to use the coercive power of the state to achieve their goals" in the same breath is quite a conflation of radically different behaviors for a supposedly libertarian website like Mises.

Thanks for commenting. The alternative to sweatsh...

2005-01-12T19:20:00.000-08:00

Thanks for commenting. The alternative to sweatshops, IMO, is leaving land in the hands of a majority of people, eliminating patents as a barrier to indigenous control of modern production technology, and encouraging the native population to mobilize their own investment capital through mutual banks. Hernando de Soto has shown the amount of collateral for such investment in the form of small, distributive property.

And in a society where most people were small peasant properietors or self-employed artisans, local communities might well prefer to adopt the kind of decentralized, human scale technologies described by E.F. Schumacher.

So sweatshops are not the only alternative to nothing at all. They depend, rather, on coercively closing off alternatives.

Kevin-- You make very good points. I just don't s...

2005-01-12T19:10:00.000-08:00

Kevin--

You make very good points. I just don't see much of a conclusion or the dichotomy between pointing out the injustice of the capitalist system (as you do) and about half of the "vulgar libertarian" rhetoric you cite. You do a good job in pointing out the injustice in the situation. You don't do a very good job demonstrating that the current situation minus the sweatshops is better that the current situation with them.

Even though the sweatshops are a product of an unjust system, that does not disprove the fact that taking away the sweatshops and the factories that go with them will improve the situation or make it more just. It would seem that that there are three alternatives (actually there are many, but these seem to be the relevant ones): land reform, no land reform but keep sweatshops, no land reform and no sweatshops--or factories or continued economic development for that matter. The second still seems preferable to the third.

If justice requires getting rid of sweatshops, it also requires leaving people employed by them worse off. Now there may be exploitation involved. However, if we can't change the land situation in these countries, it seems hardly necessary to choke their development.

Also, the more sweatshops, the more economic development. The more economic development then the more likely these nations will not remain dictatorships. The arguments for allowing sweatshops seem to me to be somewhat like the arguments for ending trade sanctions against countries like Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, and the former trade sanctions against Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mike Enright (menright77@yahoo.com)