Anarchism vs. Right Libertarianism

Why do people on the left and right both call themselves "libertarian"?

[CyberJellos]

Many people here seem to be confusing capitalism with corporatism.

[ReichWingWatch]

Great video. Very straight forward and you nail all the key points of disagreement between the libertarian left and right.

[iowasenator]

Explain something to me, please. How can Libertarian Leftists truly be Libertarian at all? For example: After the state is destroyed, what if a certain number of folks FREELY CHOOSE to engage in capitalistic endeavors? How do Libertarian Leftists plan to prevent this?

[iowasenator]

Which system is more conducive to FREEDOM and human LIBERATION???? Consider this: In a Right-wing Libertarian system, Libertarian Leftists would be FREE TO EXIST and voluntarily operate amongst themselves however they wished. Yet, in a Leftist Libertarian system, Right-wing Libertarian activity or groups wouldn't be allowed!

[hgheadS]

Most right-libertarians either haven't considered what damage an unregulated multi-national corporation can do, or they don't care.

[quatele]

In the absence of a State, how would you stop people from freely trading with each other?

[TommHBr]

Libertarian Capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism creates Authority.

[RyanPrice]

Anyone claiming capitalism is a system based in coercion is clearly not functioning with a full set of marbles. Coercion literally means no choice to do otherwise. Under capitalism you’re free to produce for whoever will hire you (including yourself), or not produce at all. Capitalism is diametrically opposed to coercion.

[libertarian]

We need some authority to keep people from stealing, killing, and other serious crimes

[skylarpatterson]

Capitalism means making your own money. A free market. Not a market controlled by three companies.

[reoffending]

OK, let me ask you this: how are you going to prevent a free market without a state? It's impossible, because people will always voluntarily trade for goods and services. It's delusional to think an anarchist society would be Socialist, considering the literal definition of Socialism is *state* ownership of the means of production. The "people" owning the means of production is... literally Capitalism.

[scotsway]

Good video. It should be pointed out, however, that *some* Left Libertarians (Anarchists), while we oppose Capitalism, wouldn't preclude Free Market exchange per sey.

[empyrean]

America has transitioned through political-economy periods. Starting with: Classical conservatism (Burkean), classical liberalism (Locke, Adam Smith), libertarian or (anarcho) socialism (Prodhou, Emma Goldman) spurred on by industrial capitalism of the previous classical liberal economy. Then modern (embedded) liberalism the progressive era which addressed the ‘Gilded Age’ of wealth inequality. The current phase of our political-economy is neoliberalism.

[bassbuckmaster]

Milton Friedman videos will help your economic questions.

[rbetts]

Libertarianism is big tent, not right or left wing

[wpyx]

Right-wing usage of the word Liberty did not first occur in the 1950s. In fact this term was being thrown around before the founding of the country, was used during the revolution and subsequent periods.

[Competitive_Antagonist]

I'm not much of a fan of socialism, but this was a great explanation of the difference between anarchy and right wing libertarianism.

[niksterrr]

Libertarianism was an idea that was made as an opposition to Authoritarianism. Anarchism was also an idea that was made as an opposition to Totalitarianism. Libertarianism and Anarchism have no correlation with economics. Which is why there can be Libertarian Socialists and Capitalists, and Anarcho-Capitalists and Anarcho-Communists.

[blurgh]

How would you do this without establishing a pseudo-hierarchy to look after the old hierarchy? And what happens when that pseudo hierarchy becomes corrupt? Would this then require another, and then another, until it all collapses?

Things are the way they are for a reason. It is depressing, but a moot point, since this is simply the way things go. We began as a lawless world because there was an empty void of power.
As we grew, our influence grew and so did our need for established power and rules become greater. A free society is one with few people, but a free society never stays that way, for very long, anyway.. No society is ever stagnant, nor does it lay still. We established the divine rights of kings, the most simple and robust governmental system to date (lasting thousands of years!).

And, even that crumbled under the weight of an ever growing and restless population, demanding equal representation for themselves, to rule themselves and to have control over the tariffs collected from them. All of this has culminated into a high input, high output technological society that is hellbent on consuming the resources left over from the past 2000 years of extraction.

We will turn this planet HOLLOW - and then move on to other planets, like a little cancer reaching its' suckers out onto other healthy, pure cells. An amalgamous formation destined to rot in its immature, incomplete, mediocre form. That's humanity. That is the nature of all things. Anarchism (and all of leftism) is the noble but ultimately futile notion that man can ever hope to improve himself, which is to say the least.. impossible.


God is dead, but we didn't kill him. He was never alive, and we just planted a false sense of hope in us that died as soon as the liquor dried up.. and we were made sober to reality.

[albinveselka]

This clown thinks that private property is anti-liberty. You have to be pretty far gone to buy into that non-sense.