Libertarian Socialists Unite!

[nazz]

My ideas are based more on the tribal organizations of peoples like the pre-Christian Germanic and Celtic tribes, who had a more democratic, tight-knit social structure, because I believe that social set up is more natural to humans as we lived in such ways for 10s or 100s of thousands of years.

So I would a:
anarco-communist
neotribalist
green anarchist
individualist anarchist
communitarian
Heathen anarchist
anarcha-feminist
queer anarchist

Of course, I'm a radical anti-capitalist, too. Basically, it's all about individual freedom, respect and care for the environment, social egalitarianism and localized focus on smaller communities (the world an individual and community lives in).

Right, understood. But how does that play out with individual issues facing us in this country is what I'm getting at. For instance I am sure you favor recognition of same sex marriage as I do. I'm just wondering is we would always agree politically speaking.

 

[Disposable member]

Right, understood. But how does that play out with individual issues facing us in this country is what I'm getting at. For instance I am sure you favor recognition of same sex marriage as I do. I'm just wondering is we would always agree politically speaking.

Ah. Yes, of course I support same-gender marriage. I also support plural marriage between consenting adults.

 

[nazz]

Ah. Yes, of course I support same-gender marriage. I also support plural marriage between consenting adults.

Yes, I would too.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My ideas are based more on the tribal organizations of peoples like the pre-Christian Germanic and Celtic tribes, who had a more democratic, tight-knit social structure, because I believe that social set up is more natural to humans as we lived in such ways for 10s or 100s of thousands of years.
Of course, I'm a radical anti-capitalist, too. Basically, it's all about individual freedom, respect and care for the environment, social egalitarianism, sexual/relationship freedom and localized focus on smaller communities (the world an individual and community lives in).

Add favoring matriarchal descent over patriarchal descent (which many pre-Christian tribes had), and in a nut-shell that sums up my views. But it's the anti-Capitalist stance that has me so confused as to why my views are so often lumped under Left Wing Libertarianism. I do support a free exchange of stuff (especially in the form of barter where individuals get to decide the exchange value of a good or service per transaction), but in my ideal world McDonald's would be illegal on the grounds of being a significant hazard to public health.

 

[Disposable member]

Add favoring matriarchal descent over patriarchal descent (which many pre-Christian tribes were), and in a nut-shell that sums up my views. But it's the anti-Capitalist stance that has me so confused as to why my views are so often lumped under Left Wing Libertarianism. I do support a free exchange of stuff (especially in the form of barter where individuals get to decide the exchange value of a good or service per transaction), but in my ideal world McDonald's would be illegal on the grounds of being a significant hazard to public health.

Matrilineal descent is a good idea, to be honest. It makes more sense.

In the society I would like, McDonalds wouldn't really exist as it's a giant transnational corporation. There would be small, local eateries, though.

 

[nazz]

Add favoring matriarchal descent over patriarchal descent (which many pre-Christian tribes were), and in a nut-shell that sums up my views. But it's the anti-Capitalist stance that has me so confused as to why my views are so often lumped under Left Wing Libertarianism. I do support a free exchange of stuff (especially in the form of barter where individuals get to decide the exchange value of a good or service per transaction), but in my ideal world McDonald's would be illegal on the grounds of being a significant hazard to public health.

But the libertarian side of me says people should make their own health choices. It also begs the question if McDonald's was democratically managed how that might affect policy regarding the quality of their products. Now pro-capitalist Libs would probably be against mandatory food labeling but that is something I would support. We need to be free to make our own choices but we also deserve the right to be informed.

 

[nazz]

I'm thinking I really prefer the term "left libertarian" for a number of reasons. One, it avoids the associated stigma of the socialist label and two, it puts more focus on issues rather than underlying philosophy. Tactics over strategy.

 

[Disposable member]

But the libertarian side of me says people should make their own health choices. It also begs the question if McDonald's was democratically manged how that might affect policy regarding the quality of their products. Now pro-capitalist Libs would probably be against mandatory food labeling but that is something I would support. We need to be free to make our own choices but we also deserve the right to be informed.

Great post. I'm opposed to banning food, drinks, smoking, alcohol, etc. on the grounds of public health. I believe that people have the right to put whatever they want into their bodies, as long as they're informed.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But the libertarian side of me says people should make their own health choices. It also begs the question if McDonald's was democratically manged how that might affect policy regarding the quality of their products. Now pro-capitalist Libs would probably be against mandatory food labeling but that is something I would support. We need to be free to make our own choices but we also deserve the right to be informed.

While that is true (and certainly applies to things like alcohol), things like McDonald's are so unhealthy and so destructive to health, not too mention it's power to eliminate competition and diversity of goods/services offered (I'm also in favor of local diners), the massive amount of resource consumption, and the massive amount of waste (this would require changes to the procedures of food preparation), but it is a good question of what would McDonald's be like if it was more democratically run.

 

[nazz]

When I tell people I'm a socialist they usually freak out. But when I really explain my philosophy in detail they calm down and sometimes even agree.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So is pro/anti-Capitalism about the only real thing we all disagree on? It seems that though our views on that differ, the societies our views would produce wouldn't differ that much.

 

[Disposable member]

Who is pro-capitalist here?

 

[nazz]

Who is pro-capitalist here?

I think it depends on how capitalism is defined. There are aspects of capitalism I agree on like a free market, competition, etc. But if it means that capitalists (money investors) hold all the economic power then no. Unless they are sole proprietors/independent contractors.

 

[Disposable member]

I think it depends on how capitalism is defined. There are aspects of capitalism I agree on like a free market, competition, etc. But if it means that capitalists (money investors) hold all the economic power then no. Unless they are sole proprietors/independent contractors.

So I guess you support a sort of "reined in" capitalism?

 

[nazz]

So I guess you support a sort of "reined in" capitalism?

Again, on a practical level, yes. I think that is about the best we can hope for at this time. But I would support going much further in empowering workers. I do recognize that people who invest money into a company (as opposed to those who supply only labor) should have a fair say in how the company is run as well as a share of the profits but in a more equitable manner that equally recognizes the contribution of labor.

 

[Tarheeler]

I intended the title to be "Libertarian Socialists Expound!" because that is more what I'm after, but it looked too bland, so I went with something exciting.
I'm curious about this strange flavor of libertarianism, so I'm asking those who identify as such to explain what their philosophy is, how it differs from what you might call free-market-capitalist libertarians, & what political party feels most like home.
Note:
Let's not get caught up in any debates here.
This thread is about understanding perspectives.

Note #2: Ignore the thread in the Capitalist Only forum.

I've outlined it before, but I'll summarize my stance here.

I believe in freedom from coercion and the use of force; where I differ from right-libertarians is that I include freedom from economic coercion in that. I believe that capitalism is inherently coercive, and wage slavery is still slavery. Natural resources and land should be managed communally, workers should receive the full fruits of their labor, and the means of production should be controlled by the workers and the community.

 

[nazz]

BTW, if anyone wants to see if they fit into the left libertarian orbit here is a good test:

The Political Compass

 

[At The Left Hand ov God]

Reporting for duty!

 

[Adramelek]

I'm a Libertarian free marketer. I'm very liberal on social issues and pretty conservative on economics. I hope this doesn't dim the views of my friends Lvcifer Invictvs and Shadow Wolf of me.

 

[Adramelek]

I also think that if the U.S. was more energy independent it could become more isolationist and not involve itself so much in the business and politics of other nations.