From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Left-libertarianism (or left-wing libertarianism)[note 1] names several related but distinct approaches to politics, society, culture, and political and social theory, which stress both individual freedom and social justice. Most notably, radical left-libertarians tend to be analogous with left anarchism while more moderate types tend to be closer to Green Party[1] philosophy. Unlike right-libertarians, they believe that neither claiming nor mixing one's labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights,[2][3] and maintain that natural resources (land, oil, gold, trees) ought to be held in some egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Those left-libertarians who support private property do so under the condition that recompense is offered to the local community.[3]

Left-libertarianism generally refers to five related and overlapping schools of thought:

Libertarian socialism[edit]

Main article: Libertarian socialism
Noam Chomsky, a noted left-libertarian of the libertarian socialist school.

Libertarian socialism (sometimes called social anarchism[7][8] or left-libertarianism)[4][9] is a group of political philosophies that promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic society without private property in the means of production. Libertarian socialists believe in converting present-day private productive property into common or public goods, while retaining respect for personal property.[note 2] Libertarian socialism is opposed to coercive forms of social organization. It promotes free association in place of government and opposes the social relations of capitalism, such as wage labor.[note 3] The term libertarian socialism is used by some socialists to differentiate their philosophy from state socialism,[10][note 4] and by some as a synonym for left anarchism.[7][8][11]

Adherents of libertarian socialism assert that a society based on freedom and equality can be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control certain means of production and subordinate the majority to an owning class or political and economic elite.[note 5] Libertarian socialism also constitutes a tendency of thought that promotes the identification, criticism, and practical dismantling of illegitimate authority in all aspects of life.[note 6][note 7][note 8][note 9][12][note 10][13]

Accordingly, libertarian socialists believe that "the exercise of power in any institutionalized form—whether economic, political, religious, or sexual—brutalizes both the wielder of power and the one over whom it is exercised".[14] Libertarian socialists generally place their hopes in decentralized means of direct democracy such as libertarian municipalism, citizens' assemblies, trade unions, and workers' councils.[15]

Political philosophies commonly described as libertarian socialist include most varieties of anarchism (especially anarchist communism, anarchist collectivism, anarcho-syndicalism,[16] and mutualism[17]) as well as autonomism, Communalism, participism, libertarian Marxist philosophies such as council communism and Luxemburgism,[18] and some versions of utopian socialism[note 11] and individualist anarchism.[note 12][note 13][note 14]


Henry George (1839–1897) proposed the abolition of all taxes except those on land value.

Georgists believe that humanity rightfully owns all land in common. People in this movement are often referred to as "single taxers," since they believe that the only legitimate broad based tax is land rent.

They argue that no person deserves a greater amount of freedom than anyone else, and claiming the surface of the planet as ones' exclusive domain necessarily diminishes the freedom of everyone else to use the land as they see fit. To reconcile the competing claims, and allow exclusive use whilst acknowledging everyone's equal share of the Commons, georgists propose that the rental value of the land be used for public purposes, or given as a Citizen's Dividend. But the buildings and improvements are to be exempt from taxation.

Henry George believed that people ought to own the value of the improvements they make, and the fruits of their labor. Thus, he was opposed to income taxes, sales taxes, taxes on improvements, and all other taxes on production, labor, trade, or commerce.

George was among the staunchest defenders of free markets, and his book Protection or Free Trade was read into the U.S. Congressional Record.[19] Yet, he did support direct management of natural monopolies as a last resort, such as right-of-way monopolies necessary for railroads. George advocated for elimination of intellectual property arrangements in favor of government sponsored prizes for inventors.[20][not in citation given]

The Steiner–Vallentyne school[edit]

John Locke, the "Father of Classical Liberalism."

Contemporary left-libertarian scholars such as Hillel Steiner,[21] Peter Vallentyne,[22] Philippe Van Parijs,[23] Michael Otsuka,[24] and David Ellerman[25][26] root an economic egalitarianism in the classical liberal concepts of self-ownership and land appropriation, combined with geoist or physiocratic views regarding the ownership of land and natural resources (e.g. those of John Locke and Henry George).[note 15] They hold that it is illegitimate for anyone to claim private ownership of natural resources to the detriment of others.[note 16][verification needed][note 17][note 18] Instead, unappropriated natural resources are either unowned or owned in common, and private appropriation is only legitimate if everyone can appropriate an equal amount or if private appropriation is taxed to compensate those who are excluded from natural resources. This position is articulated in contrast to the position of other libertarians who argue for a (characteristically labor-based) right to appropriate unequal parts of the external world, such as land.[27] Most left-libertarians support some form of income redistribution on the grounds of a claim by each individual to be entitled to an equal share of natural resources.[28] A number of left-libertarians of this school argue for the desirability of some state social welfare programs.[29][30]

The Steiner–Vallentyne school of left-libertarianism takes a distinctive position regarding the issue Robert Nozick called the "original acquisition of holdings,"[note 19] i.e., how property was originally acquired.[31] It maintains that "wilderness" is commonly owned by all the people in a given area. Since there is no predetermined distribution of land and (they argue) there is no reason to believe that—all things being equal—some people deserve more property than others, it makes sense to think of resources as commonly owned. Thus this brand of left-libertarianism denies that first use or "mixing labor" has any decisive bearing on ownership: land should be treated as presumptively owned in common. Different proponents of this school of thought have different ideas about what can be done with property. Some believe that one must gain some kind of permission from their community in order to use resources. Others argue that people should be allowed to appropriate land in exchange for some kind of rent and they must either pay taxes on the profits made from the appropriated resources or allow the products of those resources to become common property.

Left-wing market anarchism[edit]

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, the first self-identified anarchist, supported a left-wing market anarchism called mutualism.

Another contemporary school of left-libertarianism is Left-wing market anarchism which is associated with scholars such as Kevin Carson,[32][33] Roderick T. Long,[34][35] Charles Johnson,[36] Brad Spangler,[37] Samuel Edward Konkin III,[38] Sheldon Richman,[39][40][41] Chris Matthew Sciabarra,[42] and Gary Chartier,[43] who stress the value of radically free markets, termed freed markets to distinguish them from the common conception which these libertarians believe to be riddled with statist and capitalist privileges.[44] Referred to as left-wing market anarchists[45] or market-oriented left-libertarians,[41] proponents of this approach strongly affirm the classical liberal ideas of self-ownership and free markets, while maintaining that, taken to their logical conclusions, these ideas support strongly anti-corporatist, anti-hierarchical, pro-labor positions in economics; anti-imperialism in foreign policy; and thoroughly liberal or radical views regarding such cultural issues as gender, sexuality, and race.[note 20][verification needed] This strand of left-libertarianism tends to be rooted either in the mutualist economics conceptualized by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, American individualist anarchism, or in a left-wing interpretation or extension of the thought of Murray Rothbard.

Arguing that vast disparities in wealth and social influence result from the use of force, and especially state power, to steal and engross land and acquire and maintain special privileges, members of this school typically urge the abolition of the state.[page needed] They judge that, in a stateless society, the kinds of privileges secured by the state will be absent, and injustices perpetrated or tolerated by the state can be rectified. Thus, they conclude that, with state interference eliminated, it will be possible to achieve "socialist ends by market means."[46] According to libertarian scholar Sheldon Richman:

Left-libertarians favor worker solidarity vis-à-vis bosses, support poor people's squatting on government or abandoned property, and prefer that corporate privileges be repealed before the regulatory restrictions on how those privileges may be exercised. They see Walmart as a symbol of corporate favoritism—supported by highway subsidies and eminent domain—view the fictive personhood of the limited-liability corporation with suspicion, and doubt that Third World sweatshops would be the "best alternative" in the absence of government manipulation. Left-libertarians tend to eschew electoral politics, having little confidence in strategies that work through the government. They prefer to develop alternative institutions and methods of working around the state.[41]

Gary Chartier has joined Kevin Carson, Charles Johnson, and others (echoing the language of Benjamin Tucker and Thomas Hodgskin) in maintaining that, because of its heritage and its emancipatory goals and potential, radical market anarchism should be seen—by its proponents and by others—as part of the socialist tradition, and that market anarchists can and should call themselves "socialists."[47]

Cultural politics[edit]

Contemporary free-market left-libertarians also show markedly more sympathy than mainstream or paleolibertarians towards various cultural movements which challenge non-governmental relations of power. For instance, left-libertarians Roderick Long and Charles Johnson have called for a recovery of the nineteenth-century alliance with radical liberalism and feminism.[48]

While adopting familiar libertarian views, including opposition to drug prohibition, gun control, civil liberties violations, and war, left-libertarians are more likely than most self-identified libertarians to take more distinctively leftist stances on issues as diverse as feminism, gender and sexuality, class, immigration, and environmentalism. Especially influential regarding these topics have been scholars including Chris Matthew Sciabarra, Roderick T. Long, Charles W. Johnson, and Arthur Silber.


The genealogy of contemporary market-oriented left-libertarianism—sometimes labeled "left-wing market anarchism"[note 21]—overlaps to a significant degree with that of Steiner–Vallentyne left-libertarianism as the roots of that tradition are sketched in The Origins of Left-Libertarianism. Carson–Long-style left-libertarianism is rooted in nineteenth-century mutualism and in the work of figures such as Thomas Hodgskin and the individualist anarchists Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner. While, with notable exceptions, market-oriented libertarians after Tucker tended to ally with the political right, relationships between such libertarians and the New Left thrived in the 1960s, laying the groundwork for modern left-wing market anarchism.[49]

Benjamin Tucker and his contemporaries[edit]

American individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker, known for his libertarian journal, Liberty

American individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker identified as a socialist,[50] and argued that the elimination of what he called the "four monopolies"—the land monopoly, the money and banking monopoly, the monopoly powers conferred by patents, and the quasi-monopolistic effects of tariffs—would undermine the power of the wealthy and big business, making possible widespread property ownership and higher incomes for ordinary people, while minimizing the power of would-be bosses and achieving socialist goals without state action. Tucker influenced and interacted with anarchist contemporaries—including Spooner, Voltairine de Cleyre, Dyer D. Lum, and William B. Greene—who have in various ways influenced later left-libertarian thinking.[51]

Alliance between market-oriented libertarians and the New Left[edit]

Karl Hess

The doyen of modern American market-oriented libertarianism, Austrian School economist Murray Rothbard, was initially an enthusiastic partisan of the Old Right, particularly because of its general opposition to war and imperialism.[52] But Rothbard had long embraced a reading of American history that emphasized the role of elite privilege in shaping legal and political institutions—one that was thus naturally agreeable to many on the Left—and he came increasingly in the 1960s to seek alliances on the Left—especially with members of the "New Left"—in light of the Vietnam War,[53] the military draft, and the emergence of the black power movement.[54]

Working with other radicals like Ronald Radosh[55] and Karl Hess,[56] Rothbard argued that the consensus view of American economic history, according to which a beneficent government has used its power to counter corporate predation, is fundamentally flawed. Rather, he argued, government intervention in the economy has largely benefited established players at the expense of marginalized groups, to the detriment of both liberty and equality. Moreover, the "Robber Baron" period, hailed by the right and despised by the left as a heyday of laissez-faire, was not characterized by laissez-faire at all, but was in fact a time of massive state privilege accorded to capital.[57] In tandem with his emphasis on the intimate connection between state and corporate power, he defended the seizure of corporations dependent on state largesse by workers and others.[58]

Rothbard himself ultimately broke with the left, allying himself instead with the burgeoning paleoconservative movement.[59] However, drawing on the work of Rothbard during his alliance with the left and on the thought of Karl Hess, some thinkers associated with market-oriented American libertarianism came increasingly to identify with the Left on a range of issues, including opposition to war, to corporate oligopolies and state-corporate partnerships, and an affinity for cultural liberalism. One variety of this kind of libertarianism has been a resurgent mutualism, incorporating modern economic ideas such as marginal utility theory into mutualist theory. Kevin A. Carson's Studies in Mutualist Political Economy helped to stimulate the growth of new-style mutualism, articulating a version of the labor theory of value incorporating ideas drawn from Austrian economics.[60] Other market-oriented left-libertarians have declined to embrace mutualist views of real property, while sharing the mutualist opposition to corporate hierarchies and wealth concentration.[61] Left-libertarians have placed particular emphasis on the articulation and defense of a libertarian theory of class and class conflict, though considerable work in this area has been performed by libertarians of other persuasions.[62]

Green libertarianism[edit]

Green libertarianism (also known as eco-libertarianism) is a hybrid political philosophy that has developed in the United States. Based upon a mixture of political third party values, such as the environmental platform from the United States Green Party[1] and the civil liberties platform of the United States Libertarian Party,[63] the green libertarian philosophy attempts to consolidate socially progressive values with libertarianism. Green libertarians tend to be most commonly associated with the United States Green Party though, in recent years, green libertarianism has grown to encompass economic liberals, or laissez faire capitalists, that commonly identify with the right-libertarian United States Libertarian Party. A green libertarian would be an individual who adheres to libertarian political philosophy as well as to green ideology.[64]

The left-libertarian political philosophy, like that of the greens, derives from Individualist and Communitarian Anarchism. Peter Kropotkin, a Russian Prince and leading opponent of the laissez-faire Social Darwinists, provided a scientific explanation of how "mutual aid" is the real basis for social organization in his Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution. (See also mutualism. Murray Bookchin and the Institute for Social Ecology founded and elaborated these ideas much further. Bookchin was one of the main influences behind the formation of the German Green Party – the first green party to win seats in state and national parliaments.

Some, more moderate, green libertarians are both egalitarian and democratic. New England Transcendentalism (especially Thoreau and Bronson Alcott) and German Romanticism, the Pre-Raphaelites, and other "back to nature" movements combined with anti-war, anti-industrialism, civil liberties, and decentralization movements are all part of this tradition. The modern Green Party of the United States,[1] is an attempt to apply these ideas to a more pragmatic system of democratic governance as opposed to contemporary individualist or left anarchism.


Main article: Agorism

Agorism is an anarchist tendency founded by Samuel Edward Konkin III which advocates counter-economics, working in untaxable black or grey markets and boycotting as much as possible the unfree, taxed market with the intended result that private voluntary institutions emerge and outcompete statist ones.


Main article: Geolibertarianism

Geolibertarianism, an anarchist form of Henry George's philosophy, is considered left-libertarian because it assumes land to be initially owned in common, so that when land is privately appropriated the proprietor pays rent to the community.[65]


Criticisms of the different schools of left-libertarianism have come from the right and left alike. Right-libertarians like Robert Nozick, holding that self-ownership and property acquisition need not meet egalitarian standards and that they must merely avoid worsening the situation of others, have rejected left-libertarianism of the Steiner–Vallentyne school. G. A. Cohen extensively criticized the claim, typical of this school, that self-ownership and equality can be realized simultaneously. In Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality, Cohen claims that any system that takes equality and its enforcement seriously is not consistent with the full emphasis on self-ownership and "negative freedom" of market libertarian thought.[66] Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long points out that, as natural resources are required not only for the production of goods but for the production of the human body as well, the very concept of self-ownership can only exist if the land itself is privately owned.[67]

Murray Rothbard criticized what amounted to the cultural aspect of left-libertarianism of the Carson–Long school (left-wing market anarchism), challenging the tendency of proponents of libertarianism to appeal to "'free spirits,' to people who don't want to push other people around, and who don't want to be pushed around themselves" in contrast to "the bulk of Americans," who "might well be tight-assed conformists, who want to stamp out drugs in their vicinity, kick out people with strange dress habits, etc."[68]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Related, arguably synonymous, terms include libertarianism, left-wing libertarianism, egalitarian-libertarianism, and libertarian socialism.
  2. ^ Berkman, Alexander (1929). Now and After: What Is Communist Anarchism?. "The revolution abolishes private ownership of the means of production and distribution, and with it goes capitalistic business. Personal possession remains only in the things you use. Thus, your watch is your own, but the watch factory belongs to the people." 
  3. ^ Chomsky, Noam (2003). For Reasons of State. India:Penguin Books. p. 376. "A consistent anarchist must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer".
  4. ^ Guérin, Daniel (1970). "Anarchism: A Matter of Words." Towards a Libertarian Socialism. Monthly Review Press. "Some contemporary anarchists have tried to clear up the misunderstanding by adopting a more explicit term: they align themselves with libertarian socialism or communism."
  5. ^ Mendes, Silva (1896). Socialismo Libertário ou Anarchismo. 1. "Society should be free through mankind's spontaneous federative affiliation to life, based on the community of land and tools of the trade; meaning: Anarchy will be equality by abolition of private property (while retaining respect for personal property) and liberty by abolition of authority".
  6. ^ McLaughlin, Paul (2007). Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism. AshGate. 2007. p. 1 "Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the 'sociology of power') and the correlative duty to obey (as explored in the 'philosophy of practical reason'). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations – by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power – and, practically, by its challenge to those 'authoritative' powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."
  7. ^ "Principles of The International of Anarchist Federations." "The IAF - IFA fights for: the abolition of all forms of authority whether economical, political, social, religious, cultural or sexual."
  8. ^ Goldman, Emma. "What it Really Stands for Anarchy". Anarchism and Other Essays. "Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations."
  9. ^ Tucker, Benjamin. Individual Liberty. "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, — follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism...Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx."
  10. ^ Anarchist historian George Woodcock reports of Mikhail Bakunin's anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (pg. 9)...Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."
  11. ^ Bromley, Kent (1906). "Preface." The Conquest of Bread. Bromley considered early French utopian socialist Charles Fourier to be the founder of the libertarian branch of socialist thought, as opposed to the authoritarian socialist ideas of Babeuf and Buonarroti." New York and London:G. P. Putnam's Sons.
  12. ^ "An Anarchist FAQ. "[Benjamin] Tucker referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be 'Anarchistic socialism.'"
  13. ^ Armand, Émile. "Anarchist Individualism as a Life and Activity". "inwardly [the individualist anarchist] remains refractory – fatally refractory – morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)"
  14. ^ Sabatini, Peter. "Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy". "[In the United States of the] early to mid-19th century, there appeared an array of communal and 'utopian' counterculture groups (including the so-called free love movement). William Godwin's anarchism exerted an ideological influence on some of this, but more so the socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. After success of his British venture, Owen himself established a cooperative community within the United States at New Harmony, Indiana during 1825. One member of this commune was Josiah Warren (1798–1874), considered to be the first individualist anarchist."
  15. ^ Scholars representing this school of left-libertarianism often understand their position in contrast to other libertarians who maintain that there are no fair share constraints on use or appropriation that individuals have the power to appropriate unowned things by claiming them (usually by mixing their labor with them), and deny any other conditions or considerations are relevant, and that there is no justification for the state to redistribute resources to the needy or to overcome market failures. Left-libertarians of the Carson–Long school (called left-wing market anarchists), referenced below, typically endorse the labor-based property rights Steiner–Vallentyne left-libertarians reject, but hold that implementing such rights would have radical rather than conservative consequences.
    • Vallentyne, Peter (20 July 2010). "Libertarianism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University.
    • Vallentyne, Peter (2007). "Libertarianism and the State." Liberalism: Old and New. In Paul, Ellen Frankel; Miller, Jr., Fred; and Paul, Jeffrey. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. p. 199.
  16. ^ Vallentyne, Peter. "Libertarianism." "combin[ing] the libertarian assumption that each person possesses a natural right of self-ownership over his person with the egalitarian premise that natural resources should be shared equally."
  17. ^ Kymlicka, Will (2005). "Libertarianism, Left-." Oxford Companion to Philosophy. In Honderich, Ted. New York:Oxford University Press. "[left-libertarians maintain that] the world's natural resources were initially unowned, or belonged equally to all, and it is illegitimate for anyone to claim exclusive private ownership of these resources to the detriment of others. Such private appropriation is legitimate only if everyone can appropriate an equal amount, or if those who appropriate more are taxed to compensate those who are thereby excluded from what was once common property."
  18. ^ Some left-libertarians of the Steiner–Vallentyne type support some form of income redistribution on the grounds of a claim by each individual to be entitled to an equal share of natural resources:
    • (2000). Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. In Steiner, Hillel and Vallentyne, Peter. London:Macmillan p. 1.
    • (2004). Handbook of Political Theory. In Gaus, Gerald F. and Kukathas, Chandran. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. p. 128.
  19. ^ They differ in this respect from other libertarians, right and left, who tend to believe that property rights in physical objects are the most basic rights of all, or that all genuine rights can be understood as property rights rooted in self-ownership.
  20. ^ Writing before the rise of the Carson–Long school of left-libertarianism, historian of American anarchism David DeLeon was disinclined to treat any market-oriented variant of libertarianism as leftist; see DeLeon, David (1978). The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indigenous Radicalism. Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 123.
  21. ^ Chris Sciabarra is the only scholar associated with this school of left-libertarianism who is skeptical about anarchism; see Sciabarra's Total Freedom.


  1. ^ a b c http://www.gp.org
  2. ^ Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilbur R. The social history of crime and punishment in America. London: Sage Publications. p. 1007. ISBN 1412988764. "[Left-libertarians] disagree with right-libertarians with respect to property rights, arguing instead that individuals have no inherent right to natural resources. Namely, these resources must be treated as collective property that is made available on an egalitarian basis."
  3. ^ a b Narveson, Jan; Trenchard, David (2008). "Left Libertarianism". In Hamowy, Ronald. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. p. 288. "[Left libertarians] regard each of us as full self-owners. However, they differ from what we generally understand by the term libertarian in denying the right to private property. We own ourselves, but we do not own nature, at least not as individuals. Left libertarians embrace the view that all natural resources, land, oil, gold, trees, and so on should be held collectively. To the extent that individuals make use of these commonly owned goods, they must do so only with the permission of society, a permission granted only under the proviso that a certain payment for their use be made to society at large."
  4. ^ a b Bookchin, Murray and Biehl, Janet (1997). The Murray Bookchin Reader. Cassell: p. 170. ISBN 0-304-33873-7
  5. ^ Kymlicka, Will (2005). "libertarianism, left-". In Honderich, Ted. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. New York City: Oxford University Press. p. 516. ISBN 978-0199264797. "'Left-libertarianism' is a new term for an old conception of justice, dating back to Grotius. It combines the libertarian assumption that each person possesses a natural right of self-ownership over his person with the egalitarian premiss that natural resources should be shared equally. Right-wing libertarians argue that the right of self-ownership entails the right to appropriate unequal parts of the external world, such as unequal amounts of land. According to left-libertarians, however, the world's natural resources were initially unowned, or belonged equally to all, and it is illegitimate for anyone to claim exclusive private ownership of these resources to the detriment of others. Such private appropriation is legitimate only if everyone can appropriate an equal amount, or if those who appropriate more are taxed to compensate those who are thereby excluded from what was once common property. Historic proponents of this view include Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, and Henry George. Recent exponents include Philippe Van Parijs and Hillel Steiner."
  6. ^ Chartier, Gary. Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Minor Compositions. pp. 1-11. ISBN 978-1570272424
  7. ^ a b Ostergaard, Geoffrey (1991). "Anarchism". A Dictionary of Marxist Thought. Blackwell Publishing. p. 21.
  8. ^ a b Chomsky, Noam and Otero, Carlos Peregrín (2004). Language and Politics. AK Press. p. 739.
  9. ^ Hicks, Steven V. and Shannon, Daniel E. (2003). The American journal of economics and sociology. Blackwell Pub. p. 612.
  10. ^ Zarembka, Paul (2007). Transitions in Latin America and in Poland and Syria. Emerald Group Publishing p. 25.
  11. ^ Ross, Dr. Jeffery Ian (2000). Controlling State Crime. Transaction Publishers. p. 400. ISBN 0-7658-0695-9
  12. ^ Ward, Colin (1966). "Anarchism as a Theory of Organization". Archived from the original on 25 March 2010. Retrieved 1 March 2010. 
  13. ^ Brown, L. Susan (2002). "Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism". The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism. Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing. p. 106. 
  14. ^ Ackelsberg, Martha A. (2005). Free Women of Spain: Anarchism and the Struggle for the Emancipation of Women. AK Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-1-902593-96-8. 
  15. ^ Rocker, Rudolf (2004). Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice. AK Press. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-902593-92-0. 
  16. ^ Sims, Franwa (2006). The Anacostia Diaries As It Is. Lulu Press. p. 160. 
  17. ^ A Mutualist FAQ: A.4. Are Mutualists Socialists?. Mutualist.org. Retrieved on 2011-12-28.
  18. ^ Murray Bookchin, Ghost of Anarcho-Syndicalism; Robert Graham, The General Idea of Proudhon's Revolution
  19. ^ http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/ei/ei0502.pdf
  20. ^ George, Henry. Progress and Poverty (1879; Garden City, NY: Doubleday 1912).
  21. ^ Steiner, Hillel (1994). An Essay on Rights. Oxford:Blackwell.
  22. ^ (2000). Left Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. In Vallentyne, Peter; and Steiner, Hillel. London:Palgrave.
  23. ^ Van Parijs, Philippe (2009). Marxism Recycled. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  24. ^ Otsuka, Michael (2005). Libertarianism without Inequality. New York:Oxford University Press.
  25. ^ Ellerman, David (1992). Property and Contract in Economics: The Case for Economic Democracy. Cambridge MA:Blackwell.
  26. ^ Ellerman, David (1990). The Democratic Worker-Owned Firm. London:Unwin Hyman.
  27. ^ Rothbard, Murray N. (1982). The Ethics of Liberty. Atlantic Heights, NJ:Humanities.
  28. ^ Gaus, Gerald F. and Kukathas, Chandran (2004). Handbook of Political Theory. Sage Publications Inc. p. 128.
  29. ^ Van Parijs, Phillippe (1998). Real Freedom for All: What (If Anything) Can Justify Capitalism? Oxford:Clarendon-Oxford University Press.
  30. ^ Daskal, Steve (1 January 2010). "Libertarianism Left and Right, the Lockean Proviso, and the Reformed Welfare State." Social Theory and Practice. p. 1.
  31. ^ Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic.
  32. ^ Carson, Kevin A. (2008). Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. Charleston, SC:BookSurge.
  33. ^ Carson, Kevin A. (2010). The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto. Charleston, SC:BookSurge.
  34. ^ Long, Roderick T. (2000). Reason and Value: Aristotle versus Rand. Washington, DC:Objectivist Center
  35. ^ Long, Roderick T. (2008). "An Interview With Roderick Long"
  36. ^ Johnson, Charles W. (2008). "Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism." Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country? In Long, Roderick T. and Machan, Tibor Aldershot:Ashgate pp. 155-88.
  37. ^ Spangler, Brad (15 September 2006). "Market Anarchism as Stigmergic Socialism."
  38. ^ Konkin III, Samuel Edward. The New Libertarian Manifesto.
  39. ^ Richman, Sheldon (23 June 2010). "Why Left-Libertarian?" The Freeman. Foundation for Economic Education.
  40. ^ Richman, Sheldon (18 December 2009). "Workers of the World Unite for a Free Market." Foundation for Economic Education.
  41. ^ a b c Sheldon Richman (3 February 2011). "Libertarian Left: Free-market anti-capitalism, the unknown ideal." The American Conservative. Retrieved 5 March 2012.
  42. ^ Sciabarra, Chris Matthew (2000). Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism. University Park, PA:Pennsylvania State University Press.
  43. ^ Chartier, Gary (2009). Economic Justice and Natural Law. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  44. ^ Gillis, William (2011). "The Freed Market." In Chartier, Gary and Johnson, Charles. Markets Not Capitalism. Brooklyn, NY:Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 19–20.
  45. ^ Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism. Brooklyn, NY:Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 1–16.
  46. ^ Chartier, Gary (2009). Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays. Tulsa, OK:Tulsa Alliance of the Libertarian Left.
  47. ^ See Gary Chartier, "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Oppose Capitalism," "Free-Market Anti-Capitalism?" session, annual conference, Association of Private Enterprise Education (Cæsar's Palace, Las Vegas, NV, April 13, 2010); Gary Chartier, "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Embrace 'Anti-Capitalism'"; Gary Chartier, Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays. Cp. Tucker, "Socialism."
  48. ^ Long, Roderick T.; Johnson, Charles W. (1 May 2005). "Libertarian Feminism: Can this Marriage Be Saved?" Molinari Society.
  49. ^ Long, Roderick T. (2006). "Rothbard's 'Left and Right': Forty Years Later." Rothbard Memorial Lecture, Austrian Scholars Conference.
  50. ^ Tucker, Benjamin (1897). "State Socialism and Anarchism: How Far They Agree and Wherein They Differ." Instead of a Book: By a Man Too Busy to Write One. New York
  51. ^ On the nineteenth-century American individualist anarchists, see James J. Martin, Men against the State: The Expositors of Individualist Anarchism in America (Colorado Springs, CO: Myles 1970).
  52. ^ See Justin Raimondo, An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard (Amherst, NY: Prometheus 2001).
  53. ^ Cp. Raimondo 151–209.
  54. ^ See Brian M. Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement (New York: Public Affairs 2007) 338.
  55. ^ See Murray N. Rothbard and Ronald Radosh, eds., A New History of Leviathan: Essays on the Rise of the American Corporate State (New York: Dutton 1972).
  56. ^ Cp. Karl Hess, Dear America (New York: Morrow 1975).
  57. ^ On partnerships between the state and big business and the role of big business in promoting regulation, see Gabriel Kolko, The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900–1916 (New York: Free 1977); Butler Shaffer, In Restraint of Trade: The Business Campaign against Competition, 1918–1938 (Auburn, AL: Mises 2008).
  58. ^ Rothbard, Murray N. (15 June 1969). “Confiscation and the Homestead Principle." Libertarian Forum. 1:6. pp. 3–4.
  59. ^ See Raimondo 277-8; Doherty 562-5.
  60. ^ See Kevin A. Carson, Studies in Mutualist Political Economy (Charleston, SC: BookSurge 2007). This book was the focus of a symposium in the Journal of Libertarian Studies.
  61. ^ See, e.g., Roderick T. Long, “Land Locked: A Critique of Carson on Property Rights,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 20.1 (Winter 2006): 87–95.
  62. ^ Sheldon Richman, “Class Struggle Rightly Conceived,” The Goal Is Freedom (Foundation for Economic Education, July 13, 2007); Nock, Our Enemy, the State; Franz Oppenheimer, The State (San Francisco: Fox 1997); Tom G. Palmer, "Classical Liberalism, Marxism, and the Conflict of Classes: The Classical Liberal Theory of Class Conflict," Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice (Washington: Cato 2009) 255-76; Wally Conger, Agorist Class Theory: A Left Libertarian Approach to Class Conflict Analysis (Agorism.info, n.d.); Kevin A. Carson, “Another Free-for-All: Libertarian Class Analysis, Organized Labor, Etc.,” Mutualist Blog: Free-Market Anti-Capitalism (n.p., Jan. 26, 2006); Walter E. Grinder and John Hagel, “Toward a Theory of State Capitalism: Ultimate Decision Making and Class Structure,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 1.1 (1977): 59–79; David M. Hart, “The Radical Liberalism of Charles Comte and Charles Dunoyer” (PhD diss., U of Cambridge, 1994); Hans-Hermann Hoppe, “Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 9.2 (1990): 79–93; Roderick T. Long, “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Class,” Social Philosophy and Policy 15.2 (Sum. 1998): 303–49.
  63. ^ http://www.lp.org
  64. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_libertarianism
  65. ^ "Geoanarchism by Fred Foldvary". Anti-state.com. 2001-07-15. Retrieved 2013-03-26. 
  66. ^ Tom G. Palmer has responded to Cohen's critique:
    • Palmer, Tom G. (2009). "G. A. Cohen on Self-ownership, Property and Equality." Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice. Washington, DC:Cato. pp. 129-54.
    • Palmer, Tom G. (1998). "The Literature of Liberty." The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman. In Boaz, David. New York:Free. pp. 415-55.
  67. ^ Roderick Long. "Self-Ownership and External Property (Bleeding Heart Libertarians, April 25, 2012)". Retrieved 2012-07-07. 
  68. ^ Murray N. Rothbard, letter to David Bergland, June 5, 1986, qtd. Raimondo 263-4. Rothbard emphasized that this was relevant as a matter of strategy: the failure to pitch the libertarian message to Middle America, he wrote, might result in the loss of "the tight-assed majority."

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]