Matthew Yglesias may be the most left-libertarian friendly liberal commentator out there. Not only is he unusually open to free market ideas, but he’s also repeatedly shown strong sympathies for open-source and post-scarcity approaches to economic organization. In fact, he’s practically built his brand around setting himself against the two defining features of American liberalism…

Lynn Stuart Parramore recently wrote an Alternet article titled “3 Things That Make Libertarian Heads Explode“. She identifies three areas where our heads will supposedly explode. They are inequality, public goods, and regulation. She evidences no awareness of the existence of left-wing market anarchists or any other type of libertarian leftist. In her world, the…

Jeremy Rifkin anuncia o “crescimento do anti-capitalismo” (“The Rise of Anti-Capitalism“, The New York Times, 15 de março), citando o paradoxo de que: “O dinamismo inerente aos mercados competitivos está diminuindo tanto os custos que muitos bens e serviços estão se tornando quase gratuitos, abundantes e não mais sujeitos às forças de mercado.” Os argumentos…

C4SS Media presents Natasha Petrova‘s “Good Piece In The Jacobin,” read by James Tuttle and edited by Nick Ford. “The key word here is ‘most’. A left-libertarian market anarchist transformation would involve a free market anti-capitalist or laissez faire socialist democratization of the market through freed market means. This could conceivably involve expropriation of state corporatist or…

Jeremy Rifkin heralds “The Rise of Anti-Capitalism” (New York Times, March 15), citing a paradox whereby “[t]he inherent dynamism of competitive markets is bringing costs so far down that many goods and services are becoming nearly free, abundant, and no longer subject to market forces.” Rifkin’s arguments about how reductions in marginal cost affect economic relationships…

Num texto recente publicado no site da Foundation for Economic Education chamado “Contra o brutalismo libertário“, Jeffrey Tucker pede para que os libertários reflitam sobre os motivos que os fizeram adotar essa identificação e descreve dois perfis mais gerais de libertários. São elas: 1. O humanitário, que se identifica como libertário porque se preocupa com…

In a recent post for the Foundation for Economic Education, called “Against Libertarian Brutalism,” Jeffrey Tucker calls upon each libertarian to self-reflect on their reasons for adopting the label and in doing so, identifies and describes two broad categories of libertarianism. These are: 1.  The humanitarian, who identifies as libertarian because he’s concerned about the freedom…

Big changes are often terribly disruptive, even among those who favor the changes. For an example, one need look no further than the libertarian movement’s struggles to address itself to recent social, legal and political developments on what I’ll call, for brevity’s sake, “the same-sex marriage front.” Libertarian opinions on that issue run across a…

Very soon, S4SS will begin issuing its monthly newsletter, The New Leveller. It will be a running discussion devoted to radical libertarian and individualist anarchist thought, and, drawing off of nineteenth-century periodicals like Benjamin Tucker’s Liberty and Moses Harmon’s Lucifer, the Lightbearer, it will feature plenty of fire. The primary purpose of the New Leveller is to provide…

Wie opkomt voor vrijheid steunt vreedzame en vrijwillige uitwisseling tussen mensen en strijdt tegen gewelddadige beperking van deze uitwisseling. Het hoeft echter niet direct te betekenen dat een systeem van vreedzame, vrijwillige uitwisseling “kapitalisme” genoemd hoeft te worden. Er zijn uiteraard sommigen die vinden dat dit overduidelijk is wat “kapitalisme” betekent. Ik kan ook niet…

Left-libertarians need a psychological theory and practice to augment their philosophical framework. Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy (REBT) represents a good choice for left-libertarians, because it emphasizes individuality and social interest. It was formulated and begun by the psychologist, Albert Ellis. The central idea of it is that our beliefs about things that happen to us…

Será que o governo deveria punir coletivamente donos de empresas que, por aparentes razões religiosas, se recusassem a servir alguns grupos de consumidores? Embora esse comportamento seja repugnante, a recusa em prestar serviços por conta de raça, etnia ou orientação sexual é um exercício de auto-propriedade e da liberdade de não-associação. É um ato não-violento…

“愚蠢——是会让人头痛的！” 那只是一种比喻。但是在有些情况下却是毫不夸张的事实。Bob Garfield写的情人节的情书（“我爱大政府”， Slate, 2月15日）就极端地接近于此。相比之下顽固的右派分子更加容易被容忍。他们热爱政府做的可怕的事情因为他们本身就是令人厌烦的人。他们深知政府就是关于一群穿着制服的恶棍到处威胁和杀害人。他们陶醉于其，因为他们是通过霍布斯政治哲学，沾满鲜血的獠牙与利爪，戴着有色眼镜来看这个世界。中立或左派的软蛋们则试着去用正面的，关怀的，“为什么妈咪是民主党”之类的修辞来形容政府，这让人非常的反胃。 最糟糕的是Garfield像大多数中立——左派人士一样无法辨别到底他认为“好的”事情（路易斯安那购地， “保护民众免受恐怖袭击”等等）和他觉得是失误的事（维护奴隶制度一个世纪， 美国中央情报局推翻外国政府等等）是多么紧密的结合在一起的。 Garfield对政府“结束奴隶制度”大加赞扬，同时推脱说它之前对奴隶制度的维护是不需要作出解释的。但是对奴隶制度的维护是最初宪法安排的固有本性，而且可能会永远的持续下去如果不是因为一连串的意外。奴隶制度的废除全部应该归功于这些意外。1860年的民主党是一个支持奴隶制的政党，并且种种迹象表明会一直长期的继续下去。他们失败了只是因为那些一心用偏执和无理来支持奴隶制的狂热分子与适度的支持奴隶制的大多数人决裂了，从而让林肯赢了总统选举。但是即使林肯是总统他们还是会得到一个永久的民主党占多数的国会，这将把林肯贬谪成一只跛脚鸭，把共和党写到历史的注脚，如果不是因为美国深南部的赞成奴隶制的狂热分子愚蠢到要脱离联邦，从而给予共和党多数治理权。1850年的美国政府是保护奴隶制的一个强而有力的堡垒。它拥有较严厉的逃跑奴隶法，严密的审查废除奴隶制的宣传信件而且对参议院就废奴隶制相关的辩论发出禁言令。所以奴隶制度应该会永远持续下去，如果不是因为赞成奴隶制的力量一方本身的愚蠢。 同样令人哭笑不得的是Garfield看不到“好的”路易斯安那购地，坏的奴隶制和坏的血泪之路之间的联系。杰斐逊总统购地主要是为了促进老西南部的农学家们的利益，他们想要免费在密西西比河上航行，也想通过新奥尔良给他们的经济作物的出口找一条安全的线路。你知道，就跟贪图“文明化五部族”的土地，后来安德鲁-杰克逊把土地给了他们的那些贪婪的农民是一样的。 至于“有保证的向西扩张”一事，这让我该从何说起呢？ 嗯，我真的不应该指出这一点，但是在购买之前，路易斯安那领地已经有人居住了。而且出售所得的款项被拿破仑用于支持对海地的奴隶争取自由进行的大规模屠杀。 Garfield像大多数无知的自由派人士一样赞扬“进步”的政府措施却不知这些措施完全服务于财阀和大公司的利益，比如像汉密尔顿提倡的“还清革命战争的债务。” 哦，对了，比较左派的历史学家查尔斯-比尔德和Merrill Jenson 对从满面灰尘的农民那里征税，然后按面值价还给持有这些债劵的富有的投机者，而这些人仅以几便士的打折价买了这些债劵一事有话要说。 “先进的”横贯大陆的铁路也许是美国历史上最大的企业福利计划，不仅有政府债劵的资助同时也有政府免费赠予铁路公司相当于法国面积大小的批地。政府补贴长途运输的直接后果是中央企业经济在19世纪后期迅速成长和电力被大规模生产工厂而不是分散型的的地方工业区所采用。 《宅地法》并不是一种“土地重新分配计划”。西部土地的合法拥有者——也就是指真正空置的还没有被印地安人所使用的那部份——应该是使用了那片土地却没有得到任何人许可的拓荒者。相反的，美国政府独占了依据《瓜达卢佩——伊达尔戈割地条约》应是墨西哥的土地，选择了一小部分给移民定居，余下的储备为铁路批地或者以优惠的价格和条件租给伐木，牧场，矿石与石油开采。因此就美国政府的土地政策而言，如果说它允许了任何的开垦和移民， 不如说它也只是允许事情顺其自然的发生。但有些人却因此给予该政策许多感谢。其实大部分的分配计划的目的是为采掘业谋取福利。 以汇丰银行“助长贩毒集团洗钱”的不法行为当例子是特别的滑稽有趣。你知道还有谁对洗钱感兴趣吗？中央情报局。 它用洗来的钱去支持世界各地的黑色行动例如用资金赞助中美州的敢死队。 将“防恐怖袭击”和“失误的行为”比方说中央情报局推翻外国政府放在一起相提并论实在是令人哭笑不得。如果不是美国持续性的推翻政府，支持军事独裁和全世界的敢死队——这一所作所为都是为了保护跨国公司的利益不受地方工厂的干扰——以及自1948年起成为种族隔离状态的巴勒斯坦的最忠实的盟友和资助者， 现在根本不会有任何恐怖分子。 政府并没有“保护人民大众不受垄断的侵害”。 它通过法律限制竞争从而造成垄断。被资助的基础设施项目，如国家铁路系统，民航（全部由政府基金创建）和州际铁路的建设使公司可以将长途运输和批发成本外部化给大众从而将实力达到全国范伟内的巩固和扩张。 “知识产权法”允许公司通过卡特尔的方式进行专利的交流和汇集（例如通用电器和西屋）。这些专利和商标至今还使跨国公司对实际生产产品的血汗工厂实行控制，同时给在越南只需花五美元的鞋加上二百美元的商标费。 在他所举的例子中有一个Garfield倒是触及了真相——不过他认为是一件好事。他错误的以为是政府在“自由企业”的成长中起到了作用。通过资助基础设施和社会化人力资源再生的成本去帮助“将女人当男人用，将男人当牲口用”的大企业。是的，政府确实起了作用。但我认为支撑着大企业的统治是一件坏事。 那些社会安全网计划又是怎么回事呢？他们是次要的反措施，在小幅度范围内试图去抵消企业通过国家强制垄断租金的方式从员工和消费者身上吸金所造成的不良后果。大型企业和财阀从工人，消费者和纳税人身上剥削金钱达到了前所未有的规模完全是依靠美国政府的直接援助和密谋。然后政府从盗来的赃款中拿出一小部分去还给大众，仅仅是为了防止饥饿和无家可归达到最糟糕的程度因此而威胁到资本主义的存亡。 我谢谢你了，山姆大叔。 州政府是一个经济统治阶级的执行委员会，它为百姓做的任何好事都是它做坏事的副作用或者是修正一部分为真正控制它的企业谋利时所造成的混乱。自由派们不理解这些，只有真正的左派，像我们一样的左自由主义者才明白。

C4SS Media presents Thomas L. Knapp‘s “When Killer Cops Get a Pass, There are Consequences,” read by James Tuttle and edited by Nick Ford. “The jury’s acquittal of Ramos and Cicinelli was a vote for the latter outcome. It was also a vote for continuing and escalating police lawlessness. The less the specifically guilty individuals pay for…

Should the government coercively sanction business owners who, out of apparent religious conviction, refuse to serve particular customers? While such behavior is repugnant, the refusal to serve someone because of his or her race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation is nevertheless an exercise of self-ownership and freedom of nonassociation. It is both nonviolent and nonviolative of…

C4SS Media presents Kevin Carson‘s “On The Worship Of Authority,” read by James Tuttle and edited by Nick Ford. “Until most people abandon their state-inculcated respect for uniformed authority, and their willingness to treat officially defined outsiders as the “other,” the Rodney King and Kelly Thomas verdicts — and uncounted such verdicts yet unnamed — will continue.”

Several states have recently considered passing laws allowing legal discrimination against LGBT people. These laws are based on the notion of religious freedom. What is the proper left-libertarian response to these laws? The answer is advocacy of direct action. If the laws pass, we left-libertarians should engage in sit-ins analogous to what the Civil Rights…

My blog post on the differences between conservatives and libertarians has caused some controversy. These criticisms and comments deserve to be answered. Let’s start with a comment made on this page by N8chz: Libertarian and conservative are practically opposites, but America is a special place. American libertarianism is a different breed of libertarianism and American…

The identification of libertarians with conservatives seems never ending. At the recent International Students for Liberty conference Justin Amash equated the two. Many leftists make similar equations with the intent of demonizing libertarians as right-wingers. What is the truth of the matter? We’re most definitely not conservatives. Liberty is a radical and revolutionary idea. One…

US Representative Justin Amash (R-MI) is far from the first, and is unlikely to be the last, politician to equate libertarianism and conservatism (“Rep. Justin Amash: Conservative and libertarian ‘basically the same philosophy,’” by Jack Hunter, Rare, February 16). But the comparison is not only just plain wrong: It benefits supporters of statism on both…