Leftist larvae

September 9, 2013 § 14 Comments

Libertarianism is a political philosophy for children living off of a patrimony they don’t understand, the existence of which they simply take for granted. Libertarians actually seem to think it is possible to enforce property rights without “initiating force”, and this “live and let live” pseudo-passivity becomes the central moral justification for everything in their politics.

A leftist is just a libertarian who realizes that property is a form of traditional patriarchal lordship or authority (perhaps after reading a little Marx: the Marxist critique that classical liberalism is no true liberalism is quite trenchant). The relation between libertarian and leftist is similar to (and likely a modality of) the relation between modern and postmodern.  In each case the idealogue realizes a fundamental problem with his philosophy.  But rather than abandoning his philosophy as false he “maintains frame,” ups the ante, and embraces the incoherence.

Conservatism is just liberalism with a sea-anchor attached to keep it from moving too quickly in any given direction.  This helps conserve liberalism by preventing it from dashing itself on the rocks of mother nature.

This would all be rather academic and amusing if liberal modernity had not murdered orders of magnitude more innocent human beings than all previous political philosophies combined.

§ 14 Responses to Leftist larvae

  • 7man says:

    Critics Say, “You Libertarians Are Soulless Materialists”

  • Zippy says:

    Videos can be great as entertainment, but I don’t understand why people post them as supposedly substantive responses to ideas. I can read many pages of dense text in the time it takes to watch a ten minute video with a tiny fraction of the substantive content. People are welcome to post videos, but the odds that I will watch them are slim to none.

  • Zippy says:

    Certainly the title of the video, which is all I will ever see, is an attempt at a reframe if it is supposed to be a response to my post. My post doesn’t criticize libertarianism on the basis that libertarians are soulless materialists.

  • Elspeth says:


    I wouldn’t have agreed 2 years ago, because I identified with libertarianism to a large degree. At least until I recognized how twisted the ideology is on a macro level.

  • Mike T says:

    Libertarianism has the advantage today that most of its critiques of the state seem to be correct, mainly due to the corrupt behavior of the modern state. Since most people assume that as it is, it has always been, this lends libertarianism a lot of support it doesn’t deserve.

    Still, I would say that most libertarian policy prescriptions on the domestic front are better than the alternatives. I’ve seen very few conservatives who are willing to grok that no, really, you cannot have a “war on drugs” without the abuses that we see it produce. Dial back the police powers within constitutional limits and you’ll barely even scratch the surface because it’s a consensual crime. That’s only one example, but a glaring one of conservatives simply not grasping the delta between their ideals and the facts on the ground.

    In the absence of a conservatism that is willing to conserve anything besides our Cold War-era troop strength, libertarianism is probably the best tool we have for putting the power back into the hands of the average conservative to effect change. A libertarian state, for example, would not care at all if you shot dead someone stealing your property and would at least hypothetically be more inclined to smack around someone who violated a marriage contract governed by Catholic Canon Law than our current judiciary. To say nothing of the complete ambivalence it would show toward employers who wanted to openly discriminate against homosexuals.

  • Zippy says:

    Various liberal factions come up with various policy proposals, and as a practical matter some policy proposals are better than others. I’ve said as much about the favorability of various libertarian policy proposals in the past.

    But if we are in the domain of practical concerns there is little point in worrying about what an aridly idealistic libertarian[*] state would or wouldn’t do. In the real world liberalism is an angry synthesis of its warring factions, each treating the others as though they were opposites and sworn enemies rather than siblings with the same underlying political philosophy. At the least, the notion that one faction of liberalism can be distilled to purity and left to operate on its own rests on all sorts of unstated and likely unfounded assumptions.

    [*] First we’d have to decide what kind of libertarianism we are talking about, since kinds of libertarianism are legion.

  • 7man says:

    The “Austrian” school economic model should be the basis of government policy along with honest money rather than debt-based fiat currency. With this, inflation will not rob people of their savings (earned by their labor). Remember that Jesus got quite upset at the moneychangers because they were dishonest in their weights and measures and cheated people on the exchange rate.

    Political classifications would be less of an issue if we had an honest monetary system consistent with the intensions of the founding fathers of These united States of America.

  • Zippy says:

    I’m not a big fan of any of the modern economic theories: Austrian, Chicago, Keynsian, MMT, etc. Each of them makes occasional worthy insights, but they all go off the rails in one direction or another, and it is better to have no theory than to treat a bad theory as if it were true.

    Here is a post on what I think of fiat money (short version: I’m for it because it is more honest and creates less value distortion than so-called “hard currency”); and I’ve written quite a bit about usury here and elsewhere.

    Beyond that, I think that trying to reduce politics to economics is a disastrous idea. So it seems that there is plenty of divergence between your views and mine across a whole variety of subjects, 7man. Don’t let that discourage you though: most people come here to disagree with me.

  • 7man says:

    Zippy, I know you won’t listen to this, but maybe some of your readers will.

    You don’t fully understand the modern debt based fiat monetary system and I found your post on fiat money to be faulty, but it would be futile to debate this with you. Nevertheless G. Edward Griffin is a man I respect. I do believe that the moneychangers, banksters are part of the global elite PTB Illuminati Lucifrrians and their goal is to implement the New World Order.

    Also Dave Hodges has a post that I agree with and with similar insights to my understanding.

    What if…?

  • Zippy says:

    Edelweiss, my friend.

  • […] abortion and sodomite parodies of marriage, while in the economic domain simply defaulting to the classical liberal view of property. Another group might care deeply about different things. In those areas where they are passionate […]

  • […] to the false perception that right-liberalism is the opposite of left-liberalism, rather than both being instances of the same kind of thing.  Notice also that unprincipled exceptions are the rule here: no sane human being can function in […]

  • […] This is what libertarians are just too myopic to even begin to comprehend: that the monolithic managerial global all-encompassing liberal megastate is just libertarianism all grown up. Libertarianism is the larval stage of statist progressivism. […]

  • […] attempt by late stage liberalism to reduce ethnicity, sex , and other important human attributes to nothing but a […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Leftist larvae at Zippy Catholic.