Libertarian socialism

Learn more about Libertarian socialism

Jump to: navigation, search
Part of the Politics series on


Christian socialism
Democratic socialism
Libertarian socialism
Revolutionary socialism
Social democracy


Trade unionism
Utopian socialism


Class struggle
Equality of outcome
Proletarian revolution
Social justice

Key issues

Types of socialism
Socialist economics
History of socialism
Criticisms of socialism

People and organizations

List of socialists
First International
Second International
Socialist International

Politics Portal ·  <span class="noprint plainlinksneverexpand" style="white-space:nowrap; font-size:xx-small; {{{style|}"> |
}}v  d  e</span> 

</span> Libertarian socialism includes a group of political philosophies that aims to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies - a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals. This would be achieved through the abolition of private property, thereby giving direct control of the means of production and resources to the working class and other unpropertied classes. Additionally, its advocates have expressed the notion that libertarian socialism is a tendency of thought that informs the identification, criticism and practical dismantling of illegitimate authority in all aspects of social life. Accordingly they believe that "the exercise of power in any institutionalised form -- whether economic, political or sexual -- brutalises both the wielder of power and the one over whom it is exercised."<ref>Martha A. Ackelsberg, Free Women of Spain, p. 41</ref>

While many varieties of socialism emphasize the role of the state or political party in promoting liberty and social justice, libertarian socialists place their hopes in trade unions, workers' councils, municipalities, citizens' assemblies, and other non-bureaucratic, decentralized means of action. Many libertarian socialists advocate doing away with the state altogether, seeing it as a bulwark of capitalist class rule.

A well-known libertarian socialist ideology is anarchism, with anarchist communism and anarcho-syndicalism the most active sectors. Other prominent libertarian socialist ideologies include mutualism, council communism, autonomist Marxism, and Social Ecology. The terms anarchist communism and libertarian communism should not be considered synonyms for libertarian socialism.


[edit] Overview

In the United States, the term libertarian is usually associated with the free market philosophy of libertarianism (and of the United States's Libertarian Party); the term libertarian socialism therefore strikes many Americans as inconsistent. The first person to describe himself as a libertarian, however, was Joseph Déjacque,<ref name="dejacque">De l'être-humain mâle et femelle - Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque (in French)</ref> an early French anarchist communist. The word stems from the French word libertaire (synonymous to "anarchist"), and was used in order to evade the ban on anarchist publications, which were banned by law in France.<ref>Wikiquote, URL accessed on June 4, 2006</ref> In the context of the European socialist movement, libertarian has conventionally been used to describe those like Mikhail Bakunin who opposed state socialism.

Libertarian socialists typically argue that a socialist society can develop and endure without coercion. Anarcho-syndicalists believe that trade unionism, direct action, and mass organisation among free individuals would negate capitalism which, similarly, can only be saved by coercion. (As a side-note, libertarian capitalists reject the belief that capitalism needs coercion to survive just as fervently as libertarian socialists reject the belief that socialism needs coercion to survive.)

The basic philosophy of libertarian socialism is summed up in the name: management of the common good (socialism) in a manner that attempts to maximize the liberty of individuals and minimizes concentration of power or authority (libertarianism). It attempts to achieve this through the decentralization of political and economic power, usually involving the collectivization of most large-scale property and enterprise. Libertarian socialism denies the legitimacy of most forms of economically significant private property, since, according to socialists, when private property becomes capital, it leads to the exploitation of others with less economic means and thus infringes on the exploited class's individual freedoms.

In a chapter recounting the history of libertarian socialism radical economist Robin Hahnel relates that thus far the period where libertarian socialism attained its greatest impact occurred at the end of the 19th century through the first four decades of the twentieth century. "Early in the twentieth century, libertarian socialism was as powerful a force as social democracy and communism. The Libertarian International - founded at the Congress of Saint Imier a few days after the split between Marxist and libertarians at the congress of the Socialist International held in The Hague in 1872- competed successfully against social democrats and communists alike for the loyalty of anticapitalist activists, revolutionaries, workers, unions and political parties for over fifty years. Libertarian socialists played a major role in the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917. Libertarian socialists played a dominant role in the Mexican Revolution of 1911...And twenty years after World War I was over, libertarian socialists were still strong enough to spearhead the most successful revolution against capitalism to ever take place in any industrial economy, the social revolution that swept across Republican Spain in 1936 and 1937.<ref>Hahnel, Robin. Economic Justice and Democracy, Routledge Press, 138</ref>

[edit] Anti-capitalism

See also: Anti-capitalism

Libertarian socialists oppose all forms of illegitimate authority. They believe that when power is exercised, as exemplified by the social or physical dominance of one individual over another, the burden of proof is on the dominating agent to demonstrate that the predictable consequences of such actions are likely to result in moral and empowering outcomes for all parties. Typical examples of legitimate exercise of power would include the use of physical force to rescue someone from being injured by an oncoming vehicle, or for legitimate reasons of self-defence. Libertarian socialists typically oppose rigid and stratified structures of authority, be it political, economic, or social, insofar as they generate or reinforce class divisions based on property or social status, and inasmuch as they are judged obstacles to the generalized fostering of capabilities for self-management.

Libertarian socialists believe that all social bonds should be developed by individuals who have an equal amount of bargaining power, that an accumulation of economic power in the hands of a few and the centralization of political power both reduce the bargaining power—and thus the liberty of the other individuals in society. To put it another way, capitalist (and right-libertarian) principles lead to the concentration of economic power in the hands of those who end up owning the most capital. Libertarian socialism aims to distribute power, and thus freedom, more equally amongst members of society. A key difference between libertarian socialism and right-wing libertarianism is that advocates of the former generally believe that one's degree of freedom is affected by one's economic and social status, whereas advocates of the latter believe that freedom is essentially freedom of choice, or freedom of action. They would argue that even a poor, low-status individual is entirely free in a libertarian society in the sense that he has complete freedom to do whatever he chooses with those possessions and resources which he has.

Libertarian socialists believe if freedom is valued, then society must work towards a system in which individuals have the power to decide economic issues along with political issues. Libertarian socialists seek to replace unjustified authority with direct democracy and voluntary federation in all aspects of life, including physical communities and economic enterprises.

Like other socialists, libertarian socialists believe that objects should be held communally and controlled democratically; the only exception being personal possessions. Whereas "private property" grants an individual exclusive control over a thing whether it is in use or not, "possession" grants no rights to things that are not in use. A property title grants owners the right to withhold his property from others, or, if he desires, to require payment from those who wish to use it. "Possession," on the other hand, is not compatible with this form of "exploitation" or "extortion". Possession amounts to the right to use, rather than own, for oneself.

[edit] Opposition to the State

See also: Anti-statism

Part of the Politics series on

Schools of thought

Without adjectives

Anarchism in culture


Anarchist theory

Anarchism and capitalism
Anarchism and Marxism
Propaganda of the deed

Anarchism by region

English TraditionFrance
United States

Anarchism lists


Anarchism Portal
Politics Portal ·  <span class="noprint plainlinksneverexpand" style="white-space:nowrap; font-size:xx-small; {{{style|}"> |
}}v  d  e</span> 

The critique of states is built on the same principle opposing concentration of authority based on power, which in the libertarian socialist thought constitutes a form of oppression.

In lieu of states, libertarian socialists seek to organize themselves into voluntary institutions (usually called collectives, communes or syndicates) which use direct democracy or consensus for their decision-making process. Some libertarian socialists advocate combining these institutions using rotating, recallable delegates to higher-level federations. Others, however, have advanced strong critiques of federated systems, and these federations have rarely been carried out in practice. Spanish anarchism is a major example of such federations in practice. Contemporary examples of libertarian socialist organizational and decision-making models in practice include the Zapatista Councils of Good Government and the Global Indymedia network (which covers 45 countries on 6 continents). There are also thousands of indigenous societies around the world whose political and economic systems can be accurately described as anarchist or libertarian socialist, each of which is unique and uniquely suited to the culture that birthed it. For libertarians, that diversity of practice within a framework of common principles is proof of the vitality of those principles and of their flexibility and strength.

Contrary to popular opinion, libertarian socialism has not traditionally been a utopian movement, tending to avoid dense theoretical analysis or prediction of what a future society would or should look like. The tradition instead has been that such decisions cannot be made now, and must be made through struggle and experimentation, so that the best solution can be arrived at democratically and organically, and to base the direction for struggle on established historical example.

Supporters often suggest that this focus on exploration over predetermination is one of their great strengths. They point out that the success of science at explaining the natural world comes from its methods and its adherence to open rational exploration, not its conclusions; whereas traditional dogmatic explanations of naturalistic phenomena have proved almost useless at explaining anything in the natural world.

Although critics claim that they are avoiding questions they cannot answer, libertarian socialists believe that a methodological approach to exploration is the best way to achieve their social goals. To them, dogmatic approaches to social organization are just as doomed to failure as are non-scientific explanations of natural phenomena. Noted anarchist Rudolf Rocker once stated, "I am an anarchist not because I believe anarchism is the final goal, but because there is no such thing as a final goal" (The London Years, 1956).

Because libertarian socialism encourages exploration and embraces a diversity of ideas rather than forming a compact movement, there have arisen inevitable controversies over individuals who describe themselves as libertarian socialists but disagree with some of the core principles of libertarian socialism. For example, Peter Hain interprets libertarian socialism as favoring radical decentralization of power without going as far as the complete abolition of the state [1], and libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky supports dismantling all forms of unjustified social or economic power, while also emphasizing that state intervention should be supported as a temporary protection while oppressive structures remain in existence.

Proponents are most famous for opposing the existence of states or government. Indeed, in the past many refused to defend themselves in court because they did not wish to participate in coercive state institutions, instead choosing to go to jail or die.[citation needed]

[edit] Violent and non-violent means

Many libertarian socialists see violent revolution as necessary in the abolition of capitalist society. Along with many others, Errico Malatesta argued that the use of violence was necessary; as he put it in Umanità Nova (no. 125, September 6, 1921):

It is our aspiration and our aim that everyone should become socially conscious and effective; but to achieve this end, it is necessary to provide all with the means of life and for development, and it is therefore necessary to destroy with violence, since one cannot do otherwise, the violence which denies these means to the workers.<ref>Umanità Nova, n. 125, September 6, 1921 - a translation can be found at The revolutionary haste by Errico Malatesta. URL accessed on June 17, 2006</ref>

However, Proudhon, who people often term "the father of anarchism," argued in favor of a Non-violent revolution. The progression towards violence in anarchism stemmed, in part, from the various massacres of the communes that has sprung from Proudhon's own ideas. Anarcho-communists began to see a need for revolutionary violence as a form of collective defense against the involuntary restrictions upheld by property owners.

The non-violent anarchist movement today consists of organizations such as BAAM, Food Not Bombs, or Anarchist Black Cross.

[edit] Political roots

As Albert Meltzer and Stuart Christie stated in their book The Floodgates of Anarchy, anarchism has:

...its particular inheritance, part of which it shares with socialism, giving it a family resemblance to certain of its enemies. Another part of its inheritance it shares with liberalism, making it, at birth, kissing-cousins with American-type radical individualism, a large part of which has married out of the family into the Right Wing and is no longer on speaking terms. (The Floodgates of Anarchy, 1970, page 39.)

That is, anarchism arose as a cross between socialism and liberalism, incorporating the anti-capitalist attitude of socialists and the anti-statist, what would today be called libertarian, attitude of liberalism. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who is often considered the father of modern anarchism, coined the phrase "Property is theft" to describe his affinity for the labor theory of value, a socialist value.

Seventeen years (1857) after Proudhon first called himself an anarchist (1840), anarchist communist Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as a libertarian.<ref name="dejacque" /> In United States because the word "libertarian" is now commonly used by anti-state capitalists, non-authoritarian socialists ot that country often call themselves libertarian socialists to differentiate themselves. In the rest of the world, "libertarian" is a synonym of "anticapitalist". [2]

For these reasons the neologism "libertarian socialism" is today synonymous with anarchism. However, libertarian socialism has a more political connotation while anarchism has grown into a much wider and more philosophical set of ideas. Some individuals no longer consider anarchism to refer to anything more than the absence of the state, consequently an ideology known as anarcho-capitalism has come about which would not fall under the category of libertarian socialism. The phrase therefore has a more leftist tone to non-anarchists. In addition, some prefer the name because anarchy is often equated with chaos and can be a confusing word to use in political theory.

Perhaps specifically because libertarian socialism has its roots in both liberalism and socialism, it is often in conflict with liberalism (especially neoliberalism) and socialism simultaneously.

[edit] Conflict with Marxism

Main article: Anarchism and Marxism

In rejecting both capitalism and the State, libertarian socialists put themselves in opposition to both capitalist representative democracy and to authoritarian forms of Marxism, which has existed since the anarchist schism from Marxism. Although anarchists and Marxists are often said to share a belief in the ultimate goal of a stateless society, anarchists criticise most Marxists for advocating a transitional phase under which the state is used to achieve this aim. Nonetheless, libertarian Marxist tendencies such as autonomist Marxism and council communism have historically been intertwined with the anarchist movement. Anarchist movements have come into conflict with both capitalist and Marxist forces, sometimes at the same time, as in the Spanish Civil War, though as in that war Marxists themselves are often divided in support or opposition to anarchism. Other political persecutions under bureaucratic parties have resulted in a strong historical antagonism between anarchists and libertarian Marxists on the one hand and Leninist Marxists on the other and their derivatives such as Maoists. In recent history, however, libertarian socialists have repeatedly formed temporary alliances with Marxist-Leninist groups for the purposes of protest against institutions they both reject.

Part of this antagonism can be traced to the International Workingmen's Association, the First International, a congress of radical workers, where Mikhail Bakunin, who was fairly representative of the libertarian socialist view, and Karl Marx, whom anarchists accused of being an authoritarian, came into conflict on various issues. Bakunin's viewpoint on the illegitimacy of the State as an institution and the role of electoral politics was starkly counterposed to Marx's views in the First International. Marx and Bakunin's disputes eventually led to Marx taking control of the First International and expelling Bakunin and his followers from the organization. This was the beginning of a long-running feud and schism between libertarian socialists and what they call "authoritarian communists", or alternatively just "authoritarians".

Some Marxists have formulated views that closely resemble syndicalism, and thus express more affinity with anarchist ideas. Several libertarian socialists, notably Noam Chomsky, believe that anarchism shares much in common with certain variants of Marxism such as the council communism of left-wing Marxist Anton Pannekoek. In Chomsky's Notes on Anarchism, he suggests the possibility "that some form of council communism is the natural form of revolutionary socialism in an industrial society. It reflects the belief that democracy is severely limited when the industrial system is controlled by any form of autocratic elite, whether of owners, managers, and technocrats, a 'vanguard' party, or a State bureaucracy."

Autonomist Marxism and situationism are also regarded as being anti-authoritarian variants of Marxism that are firmly within the libertarian socialist tradition.

[edit] Notable libertarian socialist tendencies

[edit] Anarchist communism

Main article: Anarchist communism
Errico Malatesta, 1891

Anarchist communism was first formulated in the Italian section of the First International, by Carlo Cafiero, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa, and other ex-Mazzinian republicans. Out of respect for Mikhail Bakunin, they did not make their differences from standard anarchism explicit until after the latter's death. In 1876, at the Florence Conference of the Italian Federation of the International (which was actually held in a forest outside Florence, due to police activity), they declared the principles of anarcho-communism, beginning with:

"The Italian Federation considers the collective property of the products of labour as the necessary complement to the collectivist programme, the aid of all for the satisfaction of the needs of each being the only rule of production and consumption which corresponds to the principle of solidarity. The federal congress at Florence has eloquently demonstrated the opinion of the Italian International on this point..."

The above report was actually made in an article by Malatesta and Cafiero in the (Swiss) Jura federation's bulletin later that year. Cafiero notes, in Anarchie et Communisme, that private property in the product of labor will lead to unequal accumulation of capital, and therefore undesirable class distinctions.

Anarcho-communists hold that the only road to true liberation of the individual, as well as the abolition of wage slavery and the State, is the complete abolition of market systems; whereas some other anarchists and libertarian socialists advocate collective ownership with market elements and sometimes barter. Anarcho-communists believe the only true liberation comes with a gift economy operated by the collective under direct democracy. As such anarcho-communism is the most left-wing branch of libertarian socialism.

In anarchist communism, profit no longer exists. Not only that, but goods are given away as gifts in the certainty that others will also give products back. In an industrial setting, this would occur between worker syndicates as well as between individuals. If one syndicate does not share their products, they will not receive resources from other syndicates, making it in their best interest to share.

[edit] Anarcho-syndicalism

Main article: Anarcho-syndicalism
Image:Anarchist flag.svg
Flag used by Anarcho-syndicalists, The mix of red to black is usually interpretated as a transition from socialism to anarchism.

Anarcho-syndicalism is a branch of anarchism which focuses on the labor movement. Anarcho-syndicalists view labor unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers.

The basic principles of anarcho-syndicalism are:

  1. Workers' solidarity
  2. Direct action
  3. Workers' self-management

Workers' solidarity means that anarcho-syndicalists believe all workers—no matter their race, gender, or ethnic group—are in a similar situation in regard to their boss (class consciousness). Furthermore, it means that, within capitalism, any gains or losses made by some workers from or to bosses will eventually affect all workers. Therefore, to liberate themselves, all workers must support one another in their class conflict.

Anarcho-syndicalists believe that only direct action—that is, action concentrated on directly attaining a goal, as opposed to indirect action, such as electing a representative to a government position—will allow workers to liberate themselves.

Moreover, anarcho-syndicalists believe that workers' organizations (the organizations that struggle against the wage system, which, in anarcho-syndicalist theory, will eventually form the basis of a new society) should be self-managing. They should not have bosses or “business agents”; rather, the workers should be able to make all the decisions that affect them themselves.

Rudolf Rocker was one of the most popular voices in the anarcho-syndicalist movement. He outlined a view of the origins of the movement, what it sought, and why it was important to the future of labor in his 1938 pamphlet Anarcho-Syndicalism.

The International Workers Association is an international anarcho-syndicalist federation of various labor unions from different countries. The Spanish Confederación Nacional del Trabajo played and still plays a major role in the Spanish labor movement. It was also an important force in the Spanish Civil War.

[edit] Mutualism

Proudhon and his children, by Gustave Courbet, 1865

While still technically socialist, mutualism is the most individualist branch of libertarian socialism. [3] Pierre Joseph Proudhon, William B. Greene, Benjamin Tucker, and John Gray used the term to describe their economic theories. Proudhon's version of mutualism, and the versions of some American individualist anarchists are not identical, but they share some basic similarities. Unlike other anarchists, mutualists are not opposed to the private property in the product of labor. They oppose anarcho-communism where the products of labor go into a community of goods to be owned collectively and shared.

He sought to replace wage labour by workers' co-operatives, arguing "it is necessary to form an ASSOCIATION among workers . . . because without that, they would remain related as subordinates and superiors, and there would ensue two . . . castes of masters and wage-workers, which is repugnant to a free and democratic society." (The General Idea of the revolution). Proudhon supported individual possession of land rather than community ownership. However, he believed that an individual only had a right to land while he was using or occupying it. It the individual ceases doing so, it reverts to unowned land. [4]. Mutualists hold a labor theory of value, so they believe profit to be exploitative. They believe that no commodity should be exchanged for another commodity that took less labor to produce, because doing so would be stealing the labor of another person.

To accomplish this, they advocate using money in the form of labor notes that denote a given amount of labor stated on the currency. In Proudhon's version, wherever a great number of workers is needed, an association of workers is expected. However, the labor of a lone worker requires no association. They advocate mutual banks, owned by the workers, that do not charge interest. Most mutualists believe that anarchy should be achieved gradually through superiority in the marketplace rather than through revolution [5].

Worker cooperatives such as the Mondragón Cooperative Corporation follow an economic model similar to that of mutualism. The model followed by the corporation WL Gore and Associates, inventor of Gore-Tex fabrics, is also similar to mutualism as there is no chain of command and salaries are determined collectively by the workers. It is important to note that Gore and Associates has never identified itself as anarchist.

Mutualism's stress on worker association is similar to the more developed modern theory of Participatory Economics, although Participatory Economists do not believe in markets.

[edit] Council communism

Main article: Council Communism

Council communism was a radical Left movement originating in Germany and the Netherlands in the 1920s. Its primary organization was the Communist Workers Party of Germany (KAPD). Council communism continues today as a theoretical and activist position within Marxism, and also within libertarian socialism. The central argument of council communism, in contrast to those of Social democracy and Leninist communism, is that workers' councils arising in the factories and municipalities are the natural and legitimate form of working class organisation and government power. This view is opposed to the reformist and Bolshevik stress on vanguard parties, parliaments, or the State.

The core principle of council communism is that the state and the economy should be managed by workers' councils, composed of delegates elected at workplaces and recallable at any moment. As such, council communists oppose state-run "bureaucratic socialism". They also oppose the idea of a "revolutionary party", since council communists believe that a revolution led by a party will necessarily produce a party dictatorship. Council communists support a workers' democracy, which they want to produce through a federation of workers' councils.

The Russian word for council is "soviet," and during the early years of the revolution worker's councils were politically significant in Russia. It was to take advantage of the aura of workplace power that the word became used by Lenin for various political organs. Indeed, the name "Supreme Soviet," by which the parliament was called; and that of the Soviet Union itself make use of this terminology, but they do not imply any decentralization.

Furthermore, council communists held a critique of the Soviet Union as a capitalist state, believing that the Bolshevik revolution in Russia became a "bourgeois revolution" when a party bureaucracy replaced the old feudal aristocracy. Although most felt the Russian Revolution was working class in character, they believed that, since capitalist relations still existed (because the workers had no say in running the economy), the Soviet Union ended up as a state capitalist country, with the state replacing the individual capitalist. Thus, council communists support workers' revolutions, but oppose one-party dictatorships.

Council communists also believed in diminishing the role of the party to one of agitation and propaganda, rejected all participation in elections or parliament, and argued that workers should leave the reactionary trade unions and form one big revolutionary union.

[edit] Social Ecology

Main article: Social Ecology

Social Ecology is closely related to the work and ideas of Murray Bookchin and influenced by anarchist Peter Kropotkin. Social ecologists assert that the present ecological crisis has its roots in social problems, and that the domination of human over nature stems from the domination of human over human.

Politically, social ecologists advocate a network of directly democratic citizens' assemblies organized in a confederal fashion. This approach is called Libertarian Municipalism.

Economically, social ecologists favour libertarian communism and the principle "from each according to ability, to each according to need."

The Institute for Social Ecology founded in 1974 in Plainfield, Vermont offers a year-round B.A. and M.A. degree program, workshops, and academic conferences.

[edit] Criticism of libertarian socialism

Criticism made by non-socialist libertarians[citation needed], is that a free market will spontaneously arise (given modern populations) unless it is suppressed by force (with the exception of a market in information intangibles such as software, music, films, and literature, which requires active enforcement of intellectual property laws to keep from turning into a pure gift economy). Typically, non-socialist libertarians believe that a capitalist economy is natural, rather than artificial, so it would naturally develop in the absence of regulating factors. Thus they argue that a truly socialist libertarianism would be an oxymoron.

Non-socialist libertarians contend that libertarian socialism is based on a false view of human nature[citation needed], namely that humans will work and fulfill their natural potential without any thought of reward, which is thought to be unrealistic.

Finally, non-socialist libertarians [citation needed] contend that the libertarian socialist desire to bring democratic control to all areas of life will, by definition, eliminate individual control of any aspect of life. This, they say, brings to question the very use of the word "libertarian" in "libertarian socialist", since the word implies maximum individual freedom. If everybody owns something; nobody owns it.

Adherents of the Austrian School of economics argue that the distinction between "personal" and "productive" property is specious, and that consequently paradoxes in their division are doomed to arise regardless of the delineation chosen.

Some argue [citation needed] that freedom and equality are often in conflict with one another, and that promoting equality (as valued by socialism) will inherently require restrictions on liberty (as valued by libertarianism), forcing the society to choose one or the other as their primary value. (The Kurt Vonnegut story, "Harrison Bergeron", in which equality is enforced by imposing physical and mental handicaps on overachievers, can be seen as illustrating this point through exaggeration.)

[edit] Response to Criticism

Libertarian socialists typically see the alleged conflict between freedom and equality as a red herring. Radical egalitarians such as Noam Chomsky note that, "human talents vary considerably, within a fixed framework that is characteristic of the species and that permits ample scope for creative work, including the appreciation of the creative achievements of others. This should be a matter of delight rather than a condition to be abhorred." (Chomsky Reader, 199) The thrust of the work of another egalitarian, Karl Marx, was never to make human beings identical, but "the development of rich individuality which is as all-sided in its production as in its consumption", and "the absolute working out of (his) creative potentalities." [6] Libertarian socialists believe that the libertarian capitalist conception of 'freedom' as such, often amounts to little more than apologetics for the right of the powerful to do as they please often at the expense of the freedoms of the less powerful. As libertarian socialist Robin Hahnel has explained,

[I]t is, of course, a good thing for people to be free to do what they please- as long as what they choose does not impinge on more important freedoms or rights of others...I should not be free to employ you because my freedom of enterprise robs you of a more fundamental freedom to manage your own labouring capacities. I should not be free to bequeath substantial inheritance to my children because that robs the children of less wealthy parents of their more fundamental right to an equal opportunity in life. Although advocates of capitalism would not agree, there is little disagreement about any of this among those who believe we must go beyond capitalism if we are to achieve the economics of equitable cooperation. But are there additional freedoms and rights that others should not be free to violate in choosing to do what they please?...We think self-management is the only way to interpret what "economic freedom" means without having one person's freedom conflict with freedoms of others.(p.289)...I define self-management as decision making input in proportion to the degree one is affected.(p.40)(Hahnel- The ABC's of Political Economy)[7]

In addition, while Libertarian Socialists do not agree with every aspect of the Israeli kibbutz, these provide plentiful examples of social arrangements which have been stable for over half a century in their inclusion of personal property being private, alongside commonly owned productive property. Intentional Communities more broadly have been cited as examples of the compatibility of these two forms of property

[edit] Libertarian Socialism in the 2000s

Libertarian socialists in the early 2000s have been involved in the squatter movement; social centers; infoshops; anti-poverty groups like OCAP and Food Not Bombs; tenants unions; housing cooperatives; intentional communities generally and egalitarian communities such as those of The Federation of Egalitarian Communities in particular; anti-sexist organizing; grassroots media initiatives; digital media and computer activism; experiments in participatory economics; anti-racist and anti-fascist groups like Anti-Racist Action and Anti-Fascist Action; organizations protecting the rights of immigrants and promoting the free movement of people like the No Border Network and No one is Illegal; worker co-operatives, countercultural and artist groups; and the peace movement.

[edit] Prominent anarchists and libertarian socialists

[edit] Further reading

[edit] Books/Recources

  • "Anarchism. A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas[8]. Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300CE to 1939)" Robert Graham, editor. Black Rose Books, Montreal and London 2005. ISBN 1-55164-250-6.
  • Anarchism, George Woodcock (Penguin Books, 1962) (For many years the classic introduction, until in part superseded by Harper's 'Anarchy: A Graphic Guide')
  • Anarchy: A Graphic Guide, Clifford Harper (Camden Press, 1987) (An excellent overview, updating Woodcock's classic, and beautifully illustrated throughout by Harper's woodcut-style artwork)
  • The Anarchist Reader, George Woodcock (Ed.) (Fontana/Collins 1977) (An anthology of writings from anarchist thinkers and activists including Proudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin, Bookchin, Goldman, and many others.)
  • The Dispossessed, Ursula K. Le Guin (a 1974 science fiction novel that takes place on a planet with an anarchist society; winner of both the Hugo and Nebula Awards for best novel.)
  • Libertarianism without Inequality, by Michael Otsuka, (Oxford University Press 2003)
  • [9]"The 'Advance witout Autority': Post-modernism, Libertarian Socialism and Intellectuals" by Chamsy Ojeili, Democracy_&_Nature vol.7,no.3, 2001.
  • [10] "The End of Traditional Antisystemic Movements and the Need for a New Type of Antisystemic Movements Today" by Takis Fotopoulos, Democracy&Nature, Vol.7, no.3, 2001.

[edit] Periodicals

[edit] References

<references />

[edit] See also

Contrast: Libertarianism, Hierarchical organization

[edit] Links

[edit] Libertarian socialist general resources

[edit] Introductory articles

[edit] Libertarian socialist websites

[edit] Libertarian socialist history

es:Socialismo libertario fr:Anarchisme socialiste nl:Libertarisch socialisme ru:Либертарный социализм fi:Libertaari sosialismi sv:Frihetlig socialism

Libertarian socialism

Personal tools
what is world wizzy?
  • World Wizzy is a static snapshot taken of Wikipedia in early 2007. It cannot be edited and is online for historic & educational purposes only.