Left-libertarianism is concerned with fair distribution of land and its (occasional) ownership, one’s relationship with that space and an emphasis on equal use of resources (hence the strong value placed on social welfare as a useful tool to assist in apportioning those resources). It works under the premise of equal, shared, mutual use of the world's content and places emphasis on humanist qualities as being the only ones able to do this. The state- capitalist and generally psychopathic- has little or no place in libertarian society and, if agreed that it must exist at all, does so purely to facilitate actions in the best interest of all living things (such as rare interventions to regulate financial markets, social welfare, etc).
Left-libertarians believe in self-ownership, autonomy as independence from authority and in socialist ethics. They reject capitalist teachings as being strongly competitive-based and authoritarian: a traditional ethos of the Right. Generally they are advocates of a free-market economy.
It is a common mistake of those with a capitalist stake to think that "anti-capitalists" simply believe in the opposite of capitalism (which has more than one opposite- anarchism, socialism, statism and so on). As with religious people believing that atheists are defined by what they are not ("a-theist") the truth is very different- anti-capitalism (and atheism) is the default starting point for normal human actions. Babies are anticapitalist, babies are atheist- the foundational human position is to experience an absence of economic greed and of religious belief and so one can become enlightened to all that one wishes to be, thereafter.
It is a common mistake of those with a capitalist stake to think that "anti-capitalists" simply believe in the opposite of capitalism (which has more than one opposite- anarchism, socialism, statism and so on). As with religious people believing that atheists are defined by what they are not ("a-theist") the truth is very different- anti-capitalism (and atheism) is the default starting point for normal human actions. Babies are anticapitalist, babies are atheist- the foundational human position is to experience an absence of economic greed and of religious belief and so one can become enlightened to all that one wishes to be, thereafter.
A tenet of left-libertarianism must therefore be a general rejection of organised government and an active avoidance of as much of the states’ influence on the lives of individuals.
For humans to flourish and to live a life rich in beneficence they need to be to be free of external negative influence (money, ownership, the state, authoritarianism, etc) so they can focus, unencumbered, on qualities most helpful for living things- empathy, decentralisation of power, worker-ownership, equal distribution of resources, fairness, working collectively with our individual identities.
For humans to flourish and to live a life rich in beneficence they need to be to be free of external negative influence (money, ownership, the state, authoritarianism, etc) so they can focus, unencumbered, on qualities most helpful for living things- empathy, decentralisation of power, worker-ownership, equal distribution of resources, fairness, working collectively with our individual identities.
As an organisation grows, it distances its' relationship with the individual and it is this coldness, at first an inevitability of growth and thereafter a state being sought due to the corruptive abilities of power, that is self-perpetuating- the dehumanising nature of corporate power is directly proportional to its growth. As it grows, it finds its nature is to push away from the unconcious responsibilities of collective altruism as this is ineffective for competitive growth. Therein exists a remorseless grandiosity which it deems necessary to be able to sell itself over competitors. The larger a corporation becomes the greater its degree of guiltlessness due, in part, to its degradation of empathy.
The financial addiction to gain capital transforms into a craving for stimulation and of change, of fluidity. Thereafter comes distrust, and eventual rejection, of reflective criticism as there is no time to stop and think. An inevitable consequence of this is the eventual loss of control over corporate behaviour, often paraded as an increase in creative impulsivity but, more accurately, as long-term irresponsibility.
And there lies the crux of the matter- an entity without compassion or empathy, that exists entirely for its personal gain. It feels it necessary to have a massively inflated idea of self, is bereft of guilt and shows no remorse even after terrible life-changing abuses.
Any human with these traits would be called a psychopath. This is the engine that fuels capitalism.
Any human with these traits would be called a psychopath. This is the engine that fuels capitalism.
So what then? If capitalism utterly fails to address any true sense of human proliferation of value, what counts?
What is necessary, therefore, is to focus directly on human relationships as being the most relevant for human flourishing.
Women do most of the worlds' work and earn less money than men while they do it. Women are less represented than men in most institutions, in politics, religions, educational establishments and other areas of power and influence. Women are not even allowed full control over their own bodies in many parts of the world including my home country of Ireland and this patriarchal oppression is the primary method of control over women. Contraception is sometimes difficult to get and abortions are not legal or safe (of course abortions go on all the time and, in countries where they are illegal, abortions have always occurred and continue daily). But I often think about the potential for the fair distribution of wealth, fair distribution therefore of food, of resources, of education, even of love and equality if there existed an absolute freedom of corporeal autonomy for all women, worldwide. It follows therefore that to have complete control over ones contraception is to likely have complete and international equality.
It makes sense to me that if all women had bodily liberty the worlds' population would be under control, food, resources and wealth would be distributed equally, international political influence would be relevant to individuals as well as countries and that life, on planet Earth, could be a type of bliss.
My amazing wife, Claire.
