revolutionary_jam
26-12-2008, 04:07 PM
I know this will rub some people up the wrong way, but hopefully if you don't agree with all the points you can at least see some of them
I find this ideology hypocritical,
the idea of the state intervening to help the most needy members of society with welfare is the most abhorrent thing to a libertarian
but they're more than happy for the state to intervene to protect the so-called "property rights" of the ruling class, and the richest members of society
the truth is, *shock horror!!!* there are no innate property rights,
you are only entitled to as much property as everyone else agrees is yours,
if you own to much stuff and people go "this guy is just a greedy fucker, who always flies everywhere in a private helicopter and has 27 houses, we're gonna get ours!" you can't come crying to mummy, the state, and ask her to get daddy (the police/army) to protect you with public money, it's well out of order!
A person who owns too much land is a monarch! pure and simple!
And libertarianism is supposed to oppose monarchy
Whats the difference between being having to pay rent and paying local taxes anyway?
The landlord contributes no labour does he? it's a protection racket! And it's only possible because the state enforces it,
it's like - here's this thing you NEED to survive, a roof over your head, lets charage you... I dunnooooo... as much money as you can possibly afford to pay for it?
Why is it okay for people who own massive portions of companies but do no work at all to receive their big fat dividend cheques just because someone in their family was lucky enough to come into lots of money which they "invested", even though they contribute sweet FA to society in terms of personal labour
isn't having shareholders directly opposed to the needs of employees and consumers since the organisation must focus on making as much money for the shareholders rather than producing the best possible product or makign sure the workers have good conditions?
before anyone asks I AM NOT an anarcho-communist, I lean towards the MARKET ANARCHY side of the spectrum, but within reason for godsakes! Anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms since a corporation is afforded special privelages by.... dun dun dun... the state
I also have problems with what the market does to art and culture, but thats a seperate matter
I find this ideology hypocritical,
the idea of the state intervening to help the most needy members of society with welfare is the most abhorrent thing to a libertarian
but they're more than happy for the state to intervene to protect the so-called "property rights" of the ruling class, and the richest members of society
the truth is, *shock horror!!!* there are no innate property rights,
you are only entitled to as much property as everyone else agrees is yours,
if you own to much stuff and people go "this guy is just a greedy fucker, who always flies everywhere in a private helicopter and has 27 houses, we're gonna get ours!" you can't come crying to mummy, the state, and ask her to get daddy (the police/army) to protect you with public money, it's well out of order!
A person who owns too much land is a monarch! pure and simple!
And libertarianism is supposed to oppose monarchy
Whats the difference between being having to pay rent and paying local taxes anyway?
The landlord contributes no labour does he? it's a protection racket! And it's only possible because the state enforces it,
it's like - here's this thing you NEED to survive, a roof over your head, lets charage you... I dunnooooo... as much money as you can possibly afford to pay for it?
Why is it okay for people who own massive portions of companies but do no work at all to receive their big fat dividend cheques just because someone in their family was lucky enough to come into lots of money which they "invested", even though they contribute sweet FA to society in terms of personal labour
isn't having shareholders directly opposed to the needs of employees and consumers since the organisation must focus on making as much money for the shareholders rather than producing the best possible product or makign sure the workers have good conditions?
before anyone asks I AM NOT an anarcho-communist, I lean towards the MARKET ANARCHY side of the spectrum, but within reason for godsakes! Anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms since a corporation is afforded special privelages by.... dun dun dun... the state
I also have problems with what the market does to art and culture, but thats a seperate matter