Is (Radical) Libertarianism a Utopia?

1
Is (Radical) Libertarianism a Utopia?

• Carlo Lottieri
• Leuven, IES
• July 16th, 2007

2
1. Radical LibertarianismA Consistent
Version of Classical Liberalism

• A radical version of libertarianism.
• But many classical liberals argue that this
  version of libertarianism (often called
  anarcho-capitalism) has to be rejected.

3
2. What Is Anarcho-capitalism?

• Anarcho-capitalism is the theory of a society
  where all the functions and the services
  (defence, protection and law included) are
  provided by private enterprises.
• 1849 the starting point (G. de Molinari).
• Contemporary versions Rothbard, D. Friedman and
  others.

4
3. Anarcho-capitalism different leanings and
essential ideas

• Natural law individual rights.
• Utilitarianism freedom to choose and economic
  growth.

5
4. Abolishing eminent domain and political
obligation

• Eminent domain the power of taxing, taking and
  regulating.
• Political obligation the power to force people
  to accept duties .

6
5.Three Classical Liberal Attacks to
Anarcho-capitalism

• Radical libertarianism as a Utopian Vision A New
  Mankind
• Radical Libertarianism as an Impossible
  (Unrealistic)Blueprint
• Radical Libertarianism as a Dangerous Project

7
6. Anarcho-capitalism is an Ethical Criterion

• Anarcho-capitalism is a criterion we have
  always to choose liberty and refuse coercion
• Is it an abstract criterion? But all criteria are
  abstract!

8
7. Can a radical libertarian society exist?

• Yes and no. Society is a pure product of human
  wills, but at the same time many men have
  anti-libertarian attitudes.
• National societies and (parallel) libertarian
  institutions.

9
8. Libertarianism doesnt need a New Man

• 19th century socialist anarchism implied a New
  Mankind a sort of rebirth
• On the contrary, libertarianism is a realistic
  theory and it moves from an analysis of the
  nature of actual men.

10
9. Libertarianism doesnt imply the reject of any
authority

• 19th century socialist anarchism was against God,
  the family, and all authorities.
• On the contrary, for classical liberals and
  libertarians a society with legitimate
  autorithies is in a better situation vis-à-vis
  the power.

11
10. Libertarianism isnt an alternative to Law

• State and Law are not synonymous.
• On the contrary, under a State there is a legal
  war of all against all.

12
11. Is reasonable the libertarian claim to
eliminate any aggression?

• From a realistic point of view, all future
  societies will be forced to fight criminality and
  other troubles.
• But a theory of justice must prospect a model and
  for this reason a libertarian perspective has to
  suggest the end of any sort of aggression.

13
12. Can competitive governments protect us
better than the State?

• It is Molinaris argument no need to reject
  classical liberal principles in some special
  sectors.
• Lockean theory natural rights.
• Classical economics competition.
• Private companies (arbitration courts and private
  armies) can substitute bureaucratic State.

14
13. Stateless Society isnt a synonymousof
Free-Market Society

• A Free-Market Society is a just society.
• A Stateless Society is only a Society without
  State, with many institutions and agencies of
  different nature (peaceful or aggressive).

15
14. Does a stateless society become fatally a
State?

• Following Nozick (Anarchy, State, and Utopia),
  state of nature cannot last. All stateless
  societies are doomed to leave room to a legal and
  coercive monopoly.
• 3 possibilities
• One agency (the strongest)
• Many local agencies (division of the
  territory)
• A cartel (a way to unify independent
  institutions)
• But there is no reason to reject the possibility
  of a market of peaceful private governments.

16
15. A Cartel Is Always a Danger?

• It depends.
• POLITICS
• United Nations this is a cartel of states, with
  the purpose to build a World Government. The
  outcome is negative.
• ECONOMICS
• A cartel of companies can be the effect of the
  efforts to cooperate in order to satisfy the
  needs of the consumers. The outcome is positive.
• But some aspects of present legal institutions
  are  economic  (for instance the problem of
  extradition).

17
16. Pure economic theory is enough?

• No.
• Market competition is different from
  military/political competition.
• In fact, economic competition requires law. But
  how can be protect the competitive order of a
  stateless society?
• Anarcho-capitalists must convince that the
  absence of a coercive monopoly is the best
  pre-condition of a market society.

18
17. Economic behaviour in a stateless society

• Critics of radical libertarianism say that a
  stateless society can be conquered by a State. It
  is true.
• But at the same time we can foresee that many
  people (utilitarian and rational) will be
  oriented to avoid growing and aggressive
  institutions. Opportunistic behaviours will
  contrast the tendencies towards a massive
  unification

19
18. Is There a Greshams Law for the Governments?

• Greshams Law Where there is a legal tender
  currency, bad money drives good money out of
  circulation.
• But it is true if there is a LEGAL TENDER. In a
  competition among governments there is no reason
  for the customers to opt for aggressive and
  expensive governments.

20
19. Cooperation Is it Possible?

• Aristotle man is a social and rational animal.
• Robert Axelrod game theory and prisoners
  dilemma.

21
20. Good Guys and Bad Guys A Simple Argument

• Three possibilities
• All the men are criminals.
• Only a minority are criminals.
• The majority are criminal.
• For the good guys a stateless society is better
  than a State society, where the aggressive groups
  can use the coercive monopoly to dominate honest
  people.

22
21. Is Radical Libertarianism against
anyTerritorial Monopoly of Force?

• NO. There are two different forms of legitimate
  monopolies
• All the land is owned by only one agency and the
  government doesnt force people to remain in the
  country. Ex gated communities, or even Vatican
  City.
• Government receives a free support by all the
  people and it leaves them the (potential)
  opportunity to organize privately their own
  defence or switch to other providers. This is the
  standard anarcho-capitalist model (see for
  instance Morris and Linda Tannehill).

23
22. How some local, monopolistic governments can
create a market

• A country is controlled by many local territorial
  governments.
• But these cities or counties accept that their
  citizens, or customers, can change their provider
  (Bruno Freys model). Thanks to this
  institutional competition, we have a
  marketization of the security.

24
23. First Problem None Should Be a Judge in
Ones Own Case

• John Locke and the birth of the government.
• In a radical liberarian society a man could
  decide by himself (without courts) the punishment
  of the criminal, but this behaviour would be very
  dangerous for the criminal and for the victim.
  The latter could be punished if the penalty is
  excessive.
• So, even in an anarcho-capitalist society we
  would this specialization (judges job).

25
24. Second ProblemWithout a State, No Court of
Last Resort

• In an open and competitive legal system, we have
  to face many problems.
• If people can choose different providers for law
  and security, what about the possible chaotic
  consequences?
• Many criminals could switch from an organization
  to a different one each time they risk to be
  condamned.

26
25. Second Problemfollows

• These objections are serious, but we should
  compare pros and cons of the possible solutions.
• In a closed system, if you control the top of
  the pyramid you can obtain a complete impunity.
• Without a free market of courts, there is no
  competition among the judges (quality of the
  sentences, costs, etc.).
• A free-market legal order would be the result of
  two opposite forces the will to choose freely
  protection and law the will to receive services
  of a good degree of integration.

27
26. Third ProblemThe Need of an Integration

• A radical libertarian society would be a
  free-market society, where all companies would be
  called to satisfy the needs of the other people.
• But a chaotic legal order is not what people
  desire. For this reason, we can foresee that in a
  radical libertarian society we would have a mixed
  situation nor atomistic nor monopolistic.
• What about the degree of this partial
  integration? We cannot decide and it must be the
  outcome of the preferences and the choices of
  customers and providers.

28
27. Are We Sure that West Never Knew a
Competition of Governments?

• In the past, we did some experiences of societies
  without State, and also of quasi-libertarian
  legal orders.
• Ancient Ireland and Iceland, American West,
  Native Indian Americans, etc.
• But in my opinion a much more intersting
  historical epoch is European Middle Ages.
  Capitalism is the best product of the medieval
  anarchy (Jean Baechler) and of the legal
  complexity of a society based on overlapping
  institutions (Harold Berman).

29
28. Conclusion

• Anarcho-capitalism as normative idea
• Stateless society is not a libertarian society
• But a stateless society is the path towards a
  libertarian order

30
29. Short Bibliography

• Ayn Rand, The Nature of Government, in
  Capitalism The Ideal Unknown (New York New
  American Library, 1967).
• Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New
  York Basic Books, 1974).
• Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty
  (Atlantic Highlands Humanities Press, 1982).
• Bruce Benson, The Enterprise of Law (San
  Francisco Pacific Research Institute for Public
  Policy, 1990).
• Tibor R. Machan, Anarchism and Minarchism A
  Rapprochement, Journal des économistes et des
  études humaines, vol.12, n.4, December 2002.
• Vari Auctores, Symposium Market Anarchism, Pro
  and Con, The Journal of Libertarian Studies,
  vol.21, n.1, Spring 2007.