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 Movement carried out.

This could lead to the desegregation of businesses and put social pressure on owners to allow LGBT people to be served. Sheldon Richman provides us with history attesting to its usefulness:. How so? Through sit-ins, boycotts, and other kinds of nonviolent, nongovernmental confrontational social action. Read moving accounts here and here. Sheldon provides additional evidence of the practicality of this approach in another piece :. Howard led a boycott of national gasoline companies that forced their franchisees to allow blacks to use the restrooms from which they had long been barred.

These bills make an Orwellian use of terms like freedom. The ability to exclude people for irrational and arbitrary reasons is not an instance of liberty. Libertarians will earn the wrath of decent LGBT people everywhere without offering a solution other than state force to the problem of discrimination. We have a chance to show that our individualist principles apply to persecuted minorities as much as non-minorities.

What about the issues of private property rights and trespass? One way to approach that question is through contextual or dialectical libertarian methodology. Private property rights are contextual and relate to occupancy or use.

They are one value among others to consider in assessing the morality of an action. In the context of bigots irrationally excluding people from spaces otherwise open to the public, the value of private property rights is trumped by the need for social inclusion. Civil Rights protesters were even entitled to use defensive force against the thugs who used violence against them for conducting sit-ins.

The same would apply to contemporary LGBT protesters. I am not saying private property rights are always trumped by other concerns. I am saying that morality demands trade offs sometimes.Secure Payments by. Many libertarians are unaware of what left-libertarianism is or what it entails, and until recently its nature and scope have remained fuzzy and obscure.

His article will be used for the following analysis. Prior to delving into the critique, an explication of the scope of libertarianism is in order. This ethic states that all scarce goods are subject to private ownership given they are acquired via original appropriation or voluntary exchange.

Ownership entails the exclusive right to use, occupy, or employ a good free of aggressive interference. Finally, aggression is defined as the uninvited initiation of physical interference with the persons or property of others, or threats thereof. The Non-aggression principle NAP may be extrapolated from the private property ethic. This simply condemns all aggression as being unjustified and criminal.

Keep in mind the purpose of the libertarian ethic is to reveal under what conditions the use of physical force is justified and likewise under what conditions it is unjustified and criminal.

Pubg equalizer settings for footsteps 2019

It is this purpose which confines the scope of libertarianism to the aforementioned principles. Such terms generally have positive connotations and make room for a variety of personal and sometimes mutually exclusive interpretations while being vague enough to avert any attempt at their critique. A left-libertarian LL can and usually does assert an objector is engaging in a strawman argument by claiming a different interpretation of said terms than the one being critiqued.

If so libertarians can all agree as they contend private property rights the root of all legitimate rights apply universally to all moral agents. Of course the latter interpretation is something wholly different than the former.

As exemplified in the quote above, left libertarians often assert a false dichotomy between capitalism and markets. Capitalism is simply that economic environment where all scarce goods including land and other means of production are subject to private ownership.

In other words, it is that environment where there is an institutional or systematic respect for and recognition of private property. Such an environment, far from being mutually exclusive with markets, is extremely conducive to them. Finally, an opposition to racism, sexism, homophobia, and the like has nothing to do with libertarianism.

One may be a nasty bigot or be absolutely free of such prejudice and still coherently identify as libertarian. Again, libertarianism is only about private property and the NAP, hence such extra social issues belong in a separate realm of inquiry altogether.

Examples may include things such as non-profits or corporations. More vague terminology can be seen in the above quote. Anarcho-capitalism is interchangeable with libertarianism as defined in the beginning of this critique. There are a few issues with this. Second, corporate firm types are no more or less conducive to sustaining liberty than co-operatives…they are just different ways to legally organize firms.

Their impact on the sustenance of liberty is neutral. Although it is true that this is a rare combination it does happen.

intervista a un left-libertarian

This is contradictory. If Tucker truly were only for a society sans the State and violence then his preferred form of libertarianism would require no prefix. Of course all of us have values that exist beyond private property and the NAP, however it does not follow from this that such values should be conflated with our libertarian disposition.We here at TOL assume that most of our readers are familiar with the concept of left-libertarianism.

However, sometimes we take our readers for granted, and it may be time for an introduction.

Sign Up for the Good Stuff

Like broad libertarianism and right-libertarianism, left-libertarians emphasize the liberty of the individual. Left-libertarians may quibble with the rest about whether individual property ought to extend to what could arguably be deemed community resources land, air, water, natural resources, etc. Left-libertarianism stands in opposition to the notion that libertarianism belongs under the umbrella of conservative political philosophy.

Moreover, most left libs are not convinced that religious belief — even a popular religion such as evangelical Christianity — should dictate the social norms for society. But psychonauts and the sexually-adventurous sexonauts? Women, academics, and libertarian-leaning people with an eye for social justice make up a large portion of left-libertarians. In recent years, some left-libertarians have attempted to build a bridge with the American left.

Openpli download

On a few issues, particularly technology policy surveillance, privacy, etc. You can usually spot a Left-libertarian by the political news stories he or she shares on Twitter. To the left lib, issues like the growing police state, the war on drugs, electronic surveillance, racial and gender inequality, military interventionism, free speech, and marriage equality take precedence, at least rhetorically, over issues like gun rights, marginal tax rates, regulations on businesses insofar as they are an inherent evil—business regulations certainly have relevance to the issues left libs care abouthealth care reform, and judicial activism.

In this respect, left libertarians have a lot in common with civil libertarians, and arguably the far-Left though notably, a Leftist and a Left-libertarian will usually disagree on how to get to a shared goal — cooperation versus coercion, markets vs. Left-libertarians are interested in analyzing power dynamics beyond the individual-state model.

For example, many left-libertarians recognize that the employee-employer relationship has the potential to be nearly as damaging as the individual-state relationship. Only the state can throw you in jail, but the employer can make your life miserable, up to and including limiting your ability to take your labor elsewhere excessive non-compete contracts, for example.

Left-libertarianism sees peace, prosperity, cooperation and human flourishing as the ends, to which liberty is a means.

intervista a un left-libertarian

Contrast this to the idea, held by many libertarians, that liberty is an end itself, or that liberty is the best way to promote civil society and social stability. Defining left-libertarianism by its priorities: You can usually spot a Left-libertarian by the political news stories he or she shares on Twitter.

Defining left-libertarianism by its overarching goals: Left-libertarians are interested in analyzing power dynamics beyond the individual-state model. Want to learn more about left-libertarianism? But Wait—There's More! Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.Si tratta insomma di dare spazio ad una fantasia produttiva e liberale, riscoprendo metodi di gestione urbanistica che sognavamo ma che la storia ci ha consegnato come esempi cui ispirarsi.

Posta un commento. Grab questo Headline Animator.

intervista a un left-libertarian

Forum Domenico Letizia. Pubblicato da Domenico Letizia a Nessun commento:. Iscriviti a: Commenti sul post Atom. Ricordando Colin Ward. Alliance Left-Libertarian.

A3 Agora! Profilo Personale Domenico Letizia Left-libertarian. Antimilitarista, non-violento sostiene movimenti antirazzisti e per l'apertura di tutte le frontiere. Collabora con numerose riviste e siti anarchici e libertari. Appassionato dello studio e dell'applicazione della Contro-economia, sostiene tesi ultraliberiste, agoriste e antistataliste.

Tra i fondatori del Centro Studi Libertari Calustrofobia. Tesserato Simpatizzante del Partido de la Libertad Individual spagnolo.

Studente di Storia. Vice-presidente dell'Ass. Vendetelo agli Italiani UsemLab. Il capitalismo ha fallito?

intervista a un left-libertarian

I Titan, la rivoluzione della finanza. Firma contro il "Trattato di Lisbona" Clicca e Firma. Interventi Domenico Letizia.

Interventi Libertari.In recent years the political philosophy of libertarianism has gained in popularity and interest.

Switch template

Libertarianism as a philosophy concerns itself with the justified and unjustified use of force in society. This is the scope and focus of libertarianism. One of the compelling aspects of libertarianism and the non-aggression principle is that it is clear, specific, and fundamentally simple to grasp.

Identify interpersonal actions and determine if said behavior qualifies as aggression between persons and their property. If certain behavior does constitute aggression, it is justified to use violence to limit, repel, punish, or defend against such violence through certain norms means.

Under the scope of libertarianism and the norms therein, much can be said and appreciated. However, as previously stated, libertarianism provides a constrained area of political philosophy to demarcate interpersonal activity that does and does not fall under the banner of aggression with the task of determining when violence is justified.

It does not seek to define, answer, or resolve every single cultural, moral, or social issue. In a similar manner, and to his credit, Gary Chartier wrote an article in an effort to elaborate on the leftist positions of left-libertarianism.

Chartier defines Left-libertarianism as follows:. Left Libertarianism [LL] is authentically libertarian both because it is anti-statist the LLs who come readily to mind are all anarchists; We take it as a given here that the LL is an anarchist or something close enough for the difference to be irrelevant and because it affirms the value of markets and property rights.

Noam Chomsky on Libertarian Socialism

At the same time, LL is authentically leftist because it seeks to challenge privilege, hierarchy, exclusion, deprivation, and domination—both ideologically and practically—and because it can exhibit a genuine commitment to inclusion, empowerment, and mutual respect. An authentically leftist position, I suggest, is marked by opposition to subordination, exclusion, and deprivation. One person, A, is subordinate to another, B, when B has significant, persistent power over A.

The power involved may be physical, but it may also be economic, psychic, social, or cultural. The important thing is that B determines, to some meaningful degree, what A does.

Thus the rest of the conversation is based on assumptions of what these words mean or imply. Second is the implication that power is bad. Power is a tool, and just like any tool the user is the person responsible for the outcomes of its use. This is how some contracts work. If A enters into a contract with B, and B is subordinate, then B has voluntarily agreed to such a relationship.

However, if A captures B and makes him work under the threat of physical punishment, then A has acted against the will of B.

The ‘Left’ in Left-Libertarianism

In both instances A exerts power over B. Perhaps they disagree with the mission of the company, the pay, or the number of hours worked.

However, B had a choice. There is an opportunity cost, and he might have worked for C, D, or E. Would unions not also be guilty of this since it includes the significant and persistent influence of unions over bosses? We both have power over each other, because of this daft insensibility. For instance, if you offer someone money while in a position of authority over them and they have little to no authority, either due to your own system or outside constraints, then it could still be considered a subordinating experience by leftist standards.

You are significantly and persistently influencing their behavior because they are under you via hierarchy. If I hire you to stop by once a week and maintain my lawn, I get to tell you what I want for my money.

Ty dolla sign

Is something wrong with that? In other words, hierarchies are bad because of subordination, which is bad because hierarchy. Chartier never tells us why they are bad to begin with, he just starts the argument based on that assumption.

Peirates tainies online

He must first prove they are bad before building his next argument. Next, Chartier plunges into the topic of exclusion. Now, for any position that a viewpoint holds, it must be able to be contrasted against other viewpoints.Interest in the work of Antonio Negri is considerable these days, and can be measured by a variety of means.

Within the various circles active against global capital, interest in Negri has also been marked, with his ideas concerning the changing nature of the world capitalist system widely debated.

Such curiosity has brought a number of interesting developments in its wake. Certainly the situation was very different 25 years ago. English-language readers stumbling across operaismo in the late s were greatly limited in the texts they could access, and it seemed even harder then to find anyone with whom to discuss them.

What Italian texts in circulation were largely available through the efforts of a small number of individuals chief amongst them, Ed Emeryand two journals then important within the post US New Left — Radical America and Telos. In I was As an undergraduate greatly influenced by council communism, I knew more about Bordiga than the post left in Italy.

Towards the end of that year, I was invited by one of my lecturers — a Communist Party of Australia member for whom I felt great respect, whatever our political differences — to an informal evening discussion of the contemporary situation in Italy.

Hearing this account threw many of my previous assumptions about class politics into crisis: in particular, the belief that forms of participatory and direct democracy were inherently anti-capitalist and anti-statist.

Here were young people and some not so youngmany of them workers, who sought not to self-manage the economy, but instead challenge the very assumption that we should live in order to work. A few other texts from that time are also worth mentioning. By the beginning of the s — in some cases spurred on by the mass arrests of April 7, —f ive or six longer accounts had appeared in English.

One was an edited collection of letters sent to the Lotta Continua daily newspaper, written for the most part during Kunzle, I have suggested elsewhere Wright, that the manner in which operaista texts have hitherto appeared in English has tended to emphasize the works of some theorists at the expense of others. Still, it was perhaps not surprising that each of these works tended to express the affinities and preoccupations of those preparing them for publication. In certain ways, and without necessarily intending to do so, they too helped to engender myths about Settantasette.

Perhaps the most important of these myths, however, was that the Autonomia Operaia of the time was in its spirit and practice libertarian through and through. More likely, it was inferred from the observation that those in the English-speaking world most influenced by operaismo — from the Wages for Housework tendency, to editors of the journal Zerowork such as Cleaver — were themselves quite explicitly non-Leninist in their politics De Angelis, In my own case, it would require a trip to Italy in for a more direct confrontation with such apparent anomalies.

There I discovered not only back issues of Primo Maggio, within which Bologna played a central role, but also Collegamenti, a journal and political project that did fuse left libertarian precepts with a commitment to class composition analysis.

Instead, and with good reason, the focus of attention for those English speakers most interested in operaismo commonly turned to publicizing the fate of Negri and those arrested with and after him. Most of what did appear in English at this time were translations of works by Negri.

On the other hand, while Julian Bees translated essays by Panzieri, Gambino and the Dalla Costa sisters for a variety of publications, it would take until the middle of the s for an anthology Virno and Hardt, to appear of texts by other writers associated in some way with operaismo.

As Matteo Mandarinipp. In Italy, the spread of squatted, self-managed social centers, and a modest rise in industrial conflict, provided a backdrop more conducive to the reconsideration of operaista sensibilities.

On the translations front, the past decade has seen yet more Negri books come out in English, as well as a series of articles in the British journal Common Sense from workerists of a rather different bent, such as Sergio Bologna and Ferruccio Gambino.Libertarian is not a single viewpoint, but includes a wide variety of perspectives.

Libertarians can range from market anarchists to advocates of a limited welfare state, but they are all united by a belief in personal liberty, economic freedom, and a skepticism of government power. Liberals favor government action to promote equality, whereas conservatives favor government action to promote order. Libertarians favor freedom and oppose government action to promote either equality or order. The central idea of libertarianism is that people should be permitted to run their own lives as they wish.

Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others.

In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud.

A number of prominent thinkers are associated with libertarian ideas, from economists to philosophers. Below are just a few of the key figures associated with libertarian and classical liberal ideas on individual liberty and economic freedom. At IHS, we believe in the power of freedom to create a more just, peaceful, and thriving future. IHS connects students and professors to a community of individuals committed to the power of freedom and ideas.

Who is Libertarian? James Madison. Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Paine. Isabel Paterson. Rose Wilder Lane. Ayn Rand. Ludwig von Mises. Milton Friedman. John Locke. Frederic Bastiat. Alexis de Tocqueville. Who Is IHS? Interested in learning more about IHS?

Dr jin episodes

Sign up for email updates:. Learn Liberty Discover powerful ideas of freedom that impact the world. Watch More Videos. Our Community.


Replies to “Intervista a un left-libertarian”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *