OMG! Libertarian Socialism is for Real: Part 1 (My Version vs. Reality)

Once again one of my great ideas turns out to have already been thought of by someone else. Yes, Jill there really is such a think as Libertarian Socialism and minds such as cognitive theorist and philosopher Noam Chomsky are among Libertarian Socialism’s most notables. All hail the great Gods of Knowledge residing at the Oracle of Wikipedia.

Naturally, Wikipedia is not a perfect font of knowledge so more research is required to pin this elusive monkey down. But, at least for now, my great wheel has been flattened. I guess you really cannot reinvent the wheel. I suppose it is hubris for me to think that I would ever be counted among the great minds of this world. I will now turn my attention back to lesser pursuits such as golf, Dean Koontz novels and Hillbilly television. I might even start up masturbating again. I have nothing else better to do.

Truck Nutz all around.

Hey red neck put it on my tab.

I was so caught up in my cleverness that it never dawned on me to actually Google Libertarian Socialism. Maybe deep down I knew I would be setting myself up for heartbreak. As it was I was pushing the envelope when I typed in Liberals vs. Libertarians into a search engine. You see I have noticed the similarity between the words liberty, liberal and libertarian – see what I am getting at here? They all come from the same root. I know –Duh!

I believe it was the good folks at Libertarianism.com who pointed out on one of their FAQ sheets that once upon a time Liberals and Libertarians were the same animal. They at least tied their horses to the same hitching post. This was circa the 1800’s. It was with the advent of Marxist Socialism that a division occurred among these free thinking and free wheeling people.

Perhaps what may even be more difficult for some of you to believe is that once upon a time this idea of Liberal or Libertarian meant Republican. Yup, the Republicans were the Liberal thinkers and politicians of their time. Naturally our post modern understandings have been based on an experience quite different from pre-Civil War America.

Today there exist a number of significant differences between those who call themselves Liberal and those who call themselves Libertarians. Although, once again the good folks at Libertarianism.com like point out that social liberals and fiscal conservatives have more in common with Libertarians than they might care to think. Social liberals and fiscally conservative – sounds like what the media keeps trying to suggest is the category that the majority of the American voting public falls into.

Prior to the Marxist – Socialist political revolution Liberals and Libertarians – being basically the same – shared a love of personal liberty and a distrust of the state. In the early 1800’s liberals were highly individualistic and believed strongly in free market economics. Since the onset of socialism they have abandoned a lot of these early ideas and tend to embrace the state rather than distrust it. Liberals today can be said to be interventionists. The state is a tool to be wielded to ensure economic opportunity and social equality. Previously liberal thinkers, being distrustful of state power, worked toward less government interference. This makes sense given that the root of liberal is liberty. Modern Libertarian thinkers believe that the liberals today have been seduced by socialist ideologies.

I have always believed that our countries founders were informed by Libertarian idealism when they created the framework for our democratic republic. Freemasonry, the writings of Francis Bacon and others, and Deism all played a role in the philosophy of our countries creation. Among these ideas was the respect for individual liberty, property rights and the concern regarding the states influence on the lives of private citizens.

In theory I am a Libertarian. I detest authority and being told how to live my life. I value private property and want to pursue my interests unimpeded. I value separation of church and state, believe women should have the right to an abortion and make other choices regarding their health care. I believe that gay couples should have the right to get married and enjoy the benefits and frustrations of that institution the same as their heterosexual counterparts. I believe that people have the right to determine how they will live and die. I want fewer taxes and not more. The list goes on.

But, with all this Libertarian idealism comes a huge responsibility. A libertarian must be a person of high ethical standards. Libertarians share the same ethics that many neo-pagans profess, “An it harm none, and do what thou wilt.” The big operative here is “an it harm none.” How do you define harm? This is where my distrust of human nature comes in. It takes a highly developed sense of ethics, personal integrity and honesty to live your life in this way. Much of the time it is easy to see how our actions may harm or benefit others. For those of good nature the right decision is obvious. But, it is those moments where we can’t clearly see where harm to others may lie that we must trust a person to give full attention to the decision they make and hope that integrity informs their decision.

Human nature being what it is finds us all motivated largely by self-interest. Some are able to set that aside and occasionally work for the common or greater good or to even stand in the gap for those who are less fortunate or less able then the rest of us. But, then there are those whose hearts are filled with high levels of greed and avarice. They will to acquire wealth and power and don’t care who they harm in order to achieve their goals.

How shall we protect the weakest and least able of our society from those who are up to nefarious purposes? Can we trust individuals or do we give the power to the state to act on behalf of us? This is where I struggle! When I am doing well in my personal life I tend to lean heavily toward a more libertarian approach. When things start to tank I find myself a willing if somewhat reluctant socialist.

That’s how I came up with my idea of Libertarian Socialism which turns out to not be anything like real Libertarian Socialism. We will get to that shortly. However, when I first “coined” the term Libertarian Socialist I really was saying that if I trusted human nature more and felt inclined to trust the markets implicitly I would be a Libertarian. But, that being stated, I see a need for a certain amount of social insurance.

I believe that Medicare and Social Security are good ideas. I detest the Libertarian notion that Social Security should be privatized. If you want a privatized retirement program open up an account with Smith Barney or Edward Jones. Social Security is there to provide a supplement or assistance to those that do not posses the resources to invest or lack the common sense, ability or intelligence to do so. I for one am not a great master of financial wizardry and have lost more than I have earned investing in “the markets.”

Social Security is a safety net – a fall back position – and it is sad that way too many people rely on this as their primary source of income after retirement. Something needs to be done to change this. However, I do not think that this should fall into the government’s purview. The government should never be the primary source of a person’s livelihood.

During my tenure as a life insurance agent and financial planner (1995 to 2000) it became painfully apparent to me that the average person has no idea what “money” really is or how it actually works. Most people’s priorities are off kilter and they spend most of their working years actually working against the best interests. The majority of people will retire poor, if they retire at all, and find that they will be working as greeters at WalMart to supplement their pitiful Social Security stipend. That is assuming that Obama and the gang can fix this shit before it breaks for good.

Education is a key factor and finance and life planning should be part of the average teenagers schooling before the graduate. It is far more important to know this then to have read the Scarlet Letter, although I love Nathaniel Hawthorne and minored in American Literature. But, life skills are important too.

As for those who fail or do not engage in goal setting and life planning I am not certain it the publics responsibility to care for them. It’s one thing to need help, especially if you have no appreciable aptitude, but another altogether if you have no ambition or just lack good old fashion common sense which is not my fault if you lack or fail to develop it.

That’s Social Security. Medicare is also a good idea. We also need to fix the health care system and I have favored Single Payer Health Insurance for a number of years now. Most people fail to understand that single payer is not socialized medicine, but it certainly isn’t fiscally conservative or Libertarian either. But these are the safety nets that I am talking about. I would prefer that we didn’t have them, but it appears that we need them. The goal would be to create enough opportunity to keep as many people as possible from needing to rely on it.

This brings us to welfare – my favorite bugaboo! I hate welfare. It is a completely broken and dehumanizing system that hurts more than it helps. We need to get rid of it. That isn’t to say that we shouldn’t have public assistance for those who need some help – we should. But, we really need to rethink how it works. As it stands rather than empowering the majority of the people for which it was designed to help it has consigned them to poverty. It has also created a welfare class. We are now several generations into these programs and we can find some who were born into welfare families and have gone on to create welfare families of their own.

This is not only a broken system. It is expensive. Instead of giving people what they need to step up and out of poverty it keeps them in it. I firmly believe that people who know better often do better. They just have to get the knowledge, training and the skills needed to do so.

I am on a tangent. Let’s sign off today by basically stating the Libertarian Socialism a la Todd is maximum liberty, minor government intervention. Cover the basics and leave the rest up to the individual. While I have concerns about Capitalism I am not anti-free market either. A balance between regulation and free enterprise can be achieved. Over regulation is to be feared as much as under regulation or complete laissez faire.

We shall see next that true Libertarian Socialism is anti-capitalist and also seeks ultimately the abolition of the state among other things.

Next: Would the real Libertarian Socialism please stand up!