Political Philosophy and Ethics discussion
Political Philosophy and Law
>
Classical Liberalism; Libertarianism and Anarchocapitalism; Objectivism
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
That is a very good question. If I recall correctly (it’s been decades since I read it), this was at least partially answered in Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, first published in 1835 (first volume) and 1840 (second volume). Tocqueville was a French aristocrat who visited the United States in order to study its government and society. He pointed out that, unlike France and other European countries, the United States did not have extensive experience with an established church or churches (actually, American colonies did have established churches in the seventeenth century, but established churches in the United States disappeared the early nineteenth century and had been prohibited to the federal government by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, effective 1791, to the U.S. Constitution). The political orientation of the established churches in Western Europe had discredited them in the eyes of Europeans, who saw them as political rather than religious institutions. In contrast, by the time Tocqueville visited the United States, religion was mainly a private affair. As such, it was (and remains) much more popular among the people at large. Although seventeenth-century New England Puritanism has always exerted a powerful influence on the American religious mind, its theocratic aspects were largely absent until they were revived later in the nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first centuries.
This is a complicated history that is covered, to some extent, in my book on Roger Williams.
Alan wrote: "Abdul wrote: "Abdul wrote: "Tell me Alan, why do you think it is becoming more pronounced and why hasn't America moved in the direction of the general social liberalism of Western Europe? Afterall,..."Thanks Alan for that insightful answer. The part about religion being discredited in Europe really rings true, plus I must say you seem to have quite the memory. I have read Democracy in America. Did so at some point in the last few years and must confess the part about experience with established churches seems to have skipped my mind. Pardon me if this isn't the right place but Roger Williams was a Founding Father right? I ask because I had never heard of him until I joined this forum. How influential was he, compared to the more famous Founding Fathers (At least outside the U.S) like Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin and Madison??
EDIT: It just occurred to me after thinking about that part of the churches in Europe being viewed as political organisations that should the Christian Reconstructionists end up gaining the reins of power, they might just be creating their own demise because all the problems in Europe that eventually led to separation of Church and State will end up repeating itself. Afterall isn't this what partly drove The Pilgrims to the new world? Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks
Mod
Because it’s been so long since I read Democracy in America, I’m not certain whether what I said in my earlier post was from that book or just from general reading over the decades. Regarding Democracy in America in general, see my 1993 essay “Why Read Tocqueville?”: https://www.academia.edu/27927274/Why.... This article was written shortly after my last (to date) reading of Democracy in America.
I call Roger Williams the “First American Founder” because he taught complete church–state separation (corresponding to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) and freedom of conscience (corresponding to the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment) more than a century before the United States ratified the Constitution. In these teachings, he was far ahead of his time. I elaborate all of this, as well as his influence, in my 600-page book The First American Founder: Roger Williams and Freedom of Conscience. Excerpts from this book are freely accessible at https://www.academia.edu/15406575/_Th... and https://www.academia.edu/16792349/_Ro.... See also the collection of my papers and book reviews on Roger Williams (especially the first two items) at https://chicago.academia.edu/AlanJohn....
Alan wrote: "Abdul wrote: "Thanks Alan for the that insightful answer. The part about religion being discredited in Europe really rings true, plus I must say you seem to have quite the memory. I have read Democ..."Thanks Alan. I am sure you have sent me these links before. I need to create the time to go through them.
Mod
Yes, and this is happening to an extent right now in the United States as a result of the backlash against the recent abortion decision ( post 34, July 17, 2022) of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Pilgrims created their own theocracy in Plymouth (now in Massachusetts). Like the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay, they wanted freedom of religion only for themselves, not for others.
Alan wrote: "Abdul wrote (#103, August 7, 2022): "EDIT: It just occurred to me after thinking about that part of the churches in Europe being viewed as political organisations that should the Christian Reconstr..."Okay. Thanks Alan.
Mod
After watching the Netflix series Silicon Valley, I was well prepared to understand the scary contents of the November 23, 2022 Politico article “Elon Musk’s Twist On Tech Libertarianism Is Blowing Up On Twitter”: https://www.politico.com/news/magazin.... It’s hard to believe, but it’s a “thing.” Art imitates life, or vice versa.
Bearing in mind this forum is not for idle chat --much less lazy character-assassination --I searched at length before posting this link (below). I reviewed all previous Ayn Rand posts, but did not find any prior discussion of this minorly-intriguing controversy. It does seem a paradox worth noting, for followers of Rand.Ayn Rand Collected Social Security Benefits
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ayn...
Mod
Rand claimed to adhere absolutely to the nonaggression principle: no one has a right to initiate force against another. Although Locke, for example, intended this principle to apply to individual relationships, thus underpinning the criminal law, Rand and other Objectivists and libertarians extended it to government. In their view, government has no right to impose mandatory taxation or regulation. As Murray Rothbard—the leading architect of anarchocapitalism in the twentieth century–pointed out, this logically leads to anarchocapitalism, i.e., the entire abolition of government and its replacement by private, voluntary, capitalistic institutions. Somehow, Rand still clung to her vision of extremely limited government—the “night watchman state,” as they used to call it. But both Rand and Rothbard were totally unrealistic: their conceptions of political philosophy were impossible to achieve in practice, especially in a complex society, economy, and world like the one we live in. It might be possible in a hunter-gatherer society, but we have not seen such a society for many millennia except in a few isolated cultures, untouched by time, in some remote areas.
In chapter 1 (provisionally titled “Is Government Necessary?”) of my work in progress, Reason and Human Government, I will discuss these and other forms of anarchism and limited government and why they are impossible today.
Fun libertarian historyIn the early 1800s --before municipal fire companies --at least one early firehouse was privately established and run by the Sun Insurance Co. The Sun Insurance fire station only put out fires for Sun Insurance policy-holders. Dwellings of Sun clients were identified with a plaque on the outside of the building.
https://www.littlehamptonmuseum.co.uk...
Mod
In the early 1800s --before municipal fire companies --at least one early firehouse was privately established and run by the Sun Insurance Co. The Sun Insurance fire statio..."
Anarchocapitalists from Murray Rothbard on have advocated such privatization of essential governmental services, e.g., police protection and defense against foreign aggressors. In my view, this is nuts.
Per https://www.franklinva.com/government..., "Ben Franklin founded the Union Fire Company in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1736. This fire company was the first volunteer fire company of its kind in the U.S. Soon after this volunteer fire company sprung up, more and more fire companies spread across the city and soon all over the country." Franklin was, however, public-spirited, and his company's services were not limited to paying customers: see http://www.benjamin-franklin-history.....
Mod
See this November 19, 2023 Wall Street Journal article titled “Javier Milei, a Self-Described Anarcho-Capitalist, Is Elected President of Argentina”: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/.... (Although I do not have a Wall Street Journal subscription, I was able to access this article with the foregoing link.)
Here are a few excerpts from this article:
“Javier Milei, a libertarian political outsider who pledged to flatten Argentina’s political establishment, won the presidency Sunday by an overwhelming margin in a major shift for a country buffeted by one of the world’s highest rates of inflation and mounting poverty after years of populist rule.”
“The victory of the firebrand economist over the ruling Peronist movement opens the door to a broadscale economic overhaul that he has promised for this country of 46 million people. Milei’s proposals include adopting the U.S. dollar as the national currency, scrapping the central bank, prioritizing commerce with capitalist nations like the U.S. over China, and dramatically reducing a bloated state sector.”
“Milei opposes abortion, has said he would support creating a market to buy and sell organs, and doesn’t believe climate change is man-made.”
“Milei’s agenda is likely to face fierce pushback from labor unions, social movements, and the powerful left-leaning political forces in congress, the biggest bloc in that body, and in provincial and municipal governments. It means that Milei, a self-described anarcho-capitalist who became known to millions through TikTok and YouTube but had no entrenched movement of his own, will have to rely on a coalition with centrist and conservative political factions who would likely moderate his more radical proposals.”
“Inflation is running at 143%, more than 40% of the population is living in poverty, and factories have been forced to halt production because of a shortage of dollars to pay for imports. Argentina’s crisis is considered by economists to be the worst since a $100 billion debt default in 2001 that led to a revolving door for five presidents in two weeks and riots that resulted in more than 30 deaths.”
Reports in other media that I have read state that Milei is a promoter of baseless conspiracy theories and is Trump-like in many ways. The Wall Street Journal is, of course, more conservative (libertarian-leaning) than many mainstream media outlets. In any event, we will see what happens.
Mod
See this May 23, 2024 opinion essay by Peter Goettler (president and chief executive of the Cato Institute, a traditional libertarian organization): https://wapo.st/44VwwJz. (As a result of my Washington Post subscription, the foregoing link can be accessed without charge for fourteen days, notwithstanding the usual Washington Post paywall.)
Mod
For updates regarding Trump’s appearance at the 2024 Libertarian Party convention, see https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05..., https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05..., and https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi....
May 28, 2024 Note:
For the results of the 2024 Libertarian Party convention, see https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05....
Mod
I have reviewed Murray N. Rothbard’s For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto at https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
Anarcho-capitalism, being a system based entirely on free markets and the absence of a state, presents a series of significant risks, especially in scenarios of financial crises or drastic changes in the global market. These risks stem from the lack of a central regulatory entity and the complete reliance on the market to resolve structural and social problems. Here are some of the main risks of this regime:1. Lack of Stabilization Mechanisms in Financial Crises
Without a government or central bank to intervene during a financial crisis, such as a recession or depression, the market would be fully exposed to the natural fluctuations of capitalism. There would be no monetary policies (such as printing money or adjusting interest rates) to stabilize the economy, nor fiscal stimulus to rescue collapsing sectors.
Risk: In a major crisis, businesses would fail en masse, increasing unemployment. Without welfare or security programs, people would have no economic safety net.
Historical Example: During the Great Depression of 1929, government intervention was crucial in stabilizing the economy through the New Deal in the U.S. In an anarcho-capitalist system, there would be no such intervention, leaving the economy at the mercy of total collapse.
2. Extreme Inequality
Anarcho-capitalism could exacerbate economic inequalities, as the wealthiest and most powerful would have greater control over resources and services. Without state regulation to redistribute wealth or provide basic public services like health and education, disparities between rich and poor could rapidly widen.
Risk: The richest classes would control most of the resources, while the working and poorer classes would have little or no protection. The concentration of wealth in the hands of a few could lead to significant social tensions.
Example: Companies and corporations could monopolize essential sectors like health and security, creating a society deeply divided between those who can afford these services and those who cannot.
3. Fragility in Times of Global Crises
Global crises, such as pandemics, climate change, wars, or natural disasters, require centralized coordination and significant resources for mitigation. In anarcho-capitalism, where there is no state to coordinate efforts, these crises could become catastrophic.
Risk: In a global pandemic, for instance, the lack of coordination to provide vaccines, containment measures, and affordable healthcare would be a major problem. Private companies might charge exorbitant prices for essential services, excluding most of the population.
Recent Example: During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments worldwide coordinated efforts to distribute vaccines and support those most affected economically. Without such state intervention, many would have been left helpless.
4. Monopolization of Power
Although anarcho-capitalism advocates for free competition, in practice, the absence of state regulation could lead to the formation of monopolies and cartels, where companies dominate entire sectors of the economy. These companies could dictate prices and conditions for access to essential services like security, health, and justice.
Risk: Large corporations could monopolize sectors such as security and justice, creating private "mini-governments" with enormous power over people's lives. Without regulation, these corporations could act authoritatively, with little concern for social welfare.
Example: In regions where private security forces replace the state, there could be abuses, discrimination, and exploitation, as companies would be motivated by profit rather than public service.
5. Lack of Social Safety Nets
In an anarcho-capitalist system, there would be no welfare programs like unemployment insurance, public health assistance, social security, or education support. This means that individuals would be responsible for providing everything for themselves, including security, healthcare, and education.
Risk: People facing personal crises, such as job loss or severe health issues, would have no support from public networks and would be completely dependent on their financial capacity.
Example: Without a public health system, poorer people could die from treatable diseases simply because they couldn't afford private healthcare services.
6. Difficulty in Coordinating Large Projects and Infrastructure
Large-scale projects, such as building infrastructure (roads, bridges, power grids), are difficult to carry out without state coordination and funding. In anarcho-capitalism, private companies would have to bear the costs, and there wouldn't always be an incentive to carry out these projects in less profitable areas.
Risk: Rural and less economically attractive areas could be neglected, leading to a lack of development and infrastructure in these regions. Additionally, essential services like energy and water could be controlled by a few companies, which would charge high prices.
7. Difficulty in Resolving Conflicts
In anarcho-capitalism, justice systems would be private and hired by interested parties. This could lead to unequal justice, where the wealthiest could hire the best private courts, while the poor would be disadvantaged in disputes.
Risk: Access to justice would be determined by financial capacity, creating a system where the wealthiest have the upper hand in any conflict or legal dispute.
In Summary:
Anarcho-capitalism, in situations of financial crises or changes in the global market, presents significant risks such as extreme inequality, economic instability, and the absence of social safety nets. Without a state to intervene during critical moments, society would be vulnerable to monopolies, social exclusion, and the collapse of essential services. Global crises, like pandemics or natural disasters, could also be worsened by the absence of state coordination and the prioritization of private profit over public welfare.
Okay... I am aware that Western Europe is broadly liberal socially speaking and doesn't have this religious schism that the U.S has, which you say is becoming more pronounced, at least among the political class, which if you ask me probably mirrors the wider populace. Tell me Alan, why do you think it is becoming more pronounced and why hasn't America moved in the direction of the general social liberalism of Western Europe? Afterall, the Calvinism and other strands of Protestantism that are fuelling this came from Europe right?