On the increasing irrelevancy of certain terms
I’ve argued before, and still maintain, that certain strands of Rothbardian market anarchist thought from Rothbard’s alliance with the New Left phase in the 1960’s are better described as “libertarian socialism” in the same sense that Tucker was a “socialist”, and modern Tuckerite mutualists are also “socialists”, but not state socialists. This despite Rothbard’s culturally Right tendencies and erroneous naming of his ideas as “anarcho-capitalism”.
The context of my arriving at that position, though, was a long period of discussion in the left libertarian blogosphere, mostly sparked by Kevin Carson, about the meaning of the terms “capitalism” and “socialism” and the general consensus arrived at — that one ought to be willing to define one’s terms anytime one uses either of those terms.
With all of that as background, let me arrive at the reason for this post. From Dave Haxton’s MacRaven we learn about a choice quote from Time magazine illustrating the perceived difference between “capitalism” and a “free market” of zero state intervention in the market (i.e. a stateless society). Remarks Dave:
“Ya know, this’s pretty funny. ‘Cause not too long ago using economic policy to influence public behavior was called socialism.”
The quote from Time he’s talking about:
“Using economics to influence public behavior is something this country is built on  it’s called capitalism.”  New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is considering a mandatory fee to drive in the heart of Manhattan
The radical ultra-Rothbardian and Konkinite agorist take on this particular issue of municipal traffic congestion fees, of course, is that it’s injustice since the city government doesn’t rightfully own the streets anyway and hence has no business charging for their use. The Cato-ite libertarian moderates typically defend this nonsense, of course, because it’s “market oriented” — as if the job of libertarians were to be efficiency experts for the coercive State instead of the intellectual vanguard of liberation. Shame on them and the confused Rothbardians who follow their lead.
One is reminded of the brutal Pinochet’s sycophantic lapdogs — the Chicago Boys, who did so much to make the term “free market” disreputable. The State is a system of plunder. Legitimizing and stabilizing it is intellectual sloth and a betrayal of its victims.
Share This
[...] Praxeologically defining marketA personal requestA Night of GI Resistance on National TelevisionSDS fights the good fight, show your supportRisk and counter-economicsOn the increasing irrelevancy of certain termsConservative does not equal libertarianAgorism: NLM in French!Counter-economics: Peer-to-peer micro-lendingMore on why Iraq is likely to get EVEN worse [...]