Libertarian Logic is Cronyism with White Power…Post-Post-Colonialism & The Free Market…The Poop Standard…Writing not Occupying
- If it’s government regulating business, it’s cronyism.
- If it’s business owners regulating business, it’s capitalism.
- If it’s laborers regulating business, it’s communism.
- Capitalism is good. Therefore, business owners are good.
- Communism is bad. Therefore, laborers are bad.
It’s a word game. And it, like most capitalist logic, purposefully misses the point. Abuses simplistic logic. Has no ground in history nor in fact.
There’s no mention of labor in libertarian ethics. Read Von Mises. He mentions consumers, not workers. Read Hayek. He’s dismissive. And there’s a reason for the omission and derision. The politicians and the business owners are the same people. Furthermore, libertarian ethics was developed by economists and theorists who were working with one goal in mind. They were attempting to make the impulse towards socialism in democratic society appear like the impulse towards slavery and oppression in order to protect the wealth of the capitalist classes. The theory is in service of the consolidated wealth and resources of the wealthiest members of Western society. It’s post-colonial, too. Why colonize when you have all the wealth already. Get the Africans to kill each other for Shell Oil. Pay them off. Send in the Christian Churches to evangelize the laborers to pacify them with hope for wealth in the next life. And libertarians use stupid concrete images like bondage and slavery because it’s the opposite of freedom. Who wants to be enslaved by socialism? Not me, dammit. It requires only a knee to jerk to understand and sympathize with capitalist libertarianism. (Never mind that books like The Road To Serfdom have proven to be overblown and incorrect.)
I know. I’m just a cynical communist. I’ve read and been told: business owners listen to consumers; prices are set by consumers; we can have free choice without the government; it’s all about catallactic competition; we need to find universally valid prices and the free market will self-adjust to find the most objective standards. I’m told I should just accept that these mechanisms and their ideas work and are reasonable even though I see evidence everyday that their treasured force of nature, the liberal social order, does not even exist. I’m cynical for seeking proof that such a system exists. And they’re the positivists, and I’m the hopeless romantic. This is what liberalism gets you: heads for tails.
The capitalist libertarian impulse to abolish the state, as libertarians like to romantically represent their drive towards deregulation, is an impulse to fully separate and segregate the working classes from the means of production, distribution and wealth. Thus, we can say, without misrepresenting the movement, that crass libertarianism is a drive to fully objectify labor. We are talking about people who see no need for cooperation between employer and employee because the liberal social order will institute standards that will determine just wages and prices for labor and goods and services. The crass libertarian goal is, in fact, to make illegitimate the legal structure that permits contract negotiation. In a deregulated free market, employees would be compelled to work for a minimum wage or starve. This is something I never understand about all the crass libertarian whining about coercion. Without regulation, do we really believe that employers would cooperate with organized labor? We know from history that business owners would rather murder employees than bargain with them. Let’s keep that in mind. Crass libertarians care only about coercion government applies to the capitalist class. They do not care about coercion corporations and capitalists apply to consumers and employees.
Wealth is mostly inherited. It is not earned. That in itself is coercive. It’s certainly aristocratic.
In a deregulated free market, we would no longer compete for higher wages. We would compete for open positions. Wages would likely become standardized. And for obvious reasons. Employers would cooperate with one another rather than with employees. And that is coercive, is it not? For example, as productivity increases, today, do employee wages increase? No. In fact, wages have been stagnant for decades relative to productivity and profits both increasing. Resources could be fully exploited. And products could be fully standardized. Where did we get the notion that in a deregulated market that products would become more diverse? When has consumer behavior ever historically proven that a desire for diversity outweighs a desire for convenience? How can people read Von Mises with a straight face when he insists that consumers are the captains of the ship? When has consumer choice driven production. Consumers wanted organic food and the food industry found a way to put the word organic on almost everything.
In a deregulated market, catallactic competition, which libertarians highly praise, would become moot. Or, I should say the hope that prices would become objective and universally valid (industry determined and standard) rather than based on value judgments (made by consumers) would be fully realized. The need for dynamic entrepreneurism would become moot as well. Whately’s concept of the catallaxy would no longer be necessary. Consumer choice would no longer matter. And what about public services, police and fire forces, and the military? Could you imagine living in a society with militaries for hire?
Consumers would have what is provided them and at fixed and standard prices. We know, in fact, that the standardization of prices has already occurred. The pipe dream that prices can be traced back to the point where a consumer makes choices is already a sick joke. And with most libertarian philosophy, it could never be proven anyway. Libertarians blame the government for this, but the government has the power to prevent standardization and hasn’t. The government can insist on diversity but hasn’t. And it hasn’t because the Capitalists are the government. This explains why you see poor white shlubs out with their yellow and black flags hoping that they too can someday be rich and dominant like their capitalist heroes. This is the bargain poor white men make with rich white men: you get to be white and have a shot at getting rich and we keep our wealth.
Libertarian logic is often portrayed by libertarians as logically positive. In other words, they believe their theory is scientific. However, we all know it’s thoroughly idealistic and unscientific. Capitalism has reached a point where the capitalist class has secured enough value that it no longer needs to pretend to care about The Constitution, Law, justice, equality, freedom of contract, employment at will, consumers, et al. See what capitalism does in its backyards. See Africa, China, Indonesia, India. In its front yard, it looks promising to the upwardly-mobile and status-seeking West. But its realities are thousands of miles away.
I’m from Colorado. I can take you to the site of the Ludlow Massacre. But that’s in the past. We do have starvation in the US, but we blame that on families and culture. We’re racists after all. White power works to promote upward mobility and the myths of merit and middle class life. We cultivate a contempt for the poor and we cherish the rich. Look at Herman Cain and Ron Paul. Fucking embarrassments of success. There are not two men more out of touch with the reality of everyday existence for their fellow citizens.
I’m in a shitty mood after what I was stuck reading on tumblr yesterday. Privileged assholes whining about the gold standard. It’s embarrassing. All this education wasted on white assholes who want to make it easier for a small minority of people to secure even more of the finite wealth our ecosystem offers us, all in hopes that they can find an easy and comfortable path to success for themselves.
Pardon the cynical post for today, but I’m too upset to do anything else. I’d be at an Occupy site, but I’m too far away. I think I could have been in New York for the beginning and be there now because I’m privileged enough not to have to work while I write my novel. I could be doing something more productive. And I’m not able to right now.