|Part of a series on|
Libertarianism (from Latin: libertas, meaning “freedom”) is a collection of political philosophies and movements that uphold liberty as a core principle. Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy, emphasizing freedom of choice, voluntary association, and individual judgment. Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power, but they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling for the restriction or dissolution of coercive social institutions.
Traditionally, libertarianism was a term for a form of left-wing politics. Such left-libertarian ideologies seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty. Classical libertarian ideologies include—but are not limited to—anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism, mutualism and egoism, alongside many other anti-paternalist, New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism. Modern right-libertarian ideologies, such as minarchism and anarcho-capitalism, co-opted the term in the mid-20th century to instead advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.
- 1 Etymology
- 2 Philosophy
- 3 Prominent currents
- 4 History
- 5 Contemporary libertarianism
- 6 Contemporary libertarian organizations
- 7 Criticism
- 8 See also
- 9 Notes
- 10 References
- 11 Bibliography
- 12 External links
As early as 1796, the word libertarian came to mean an advocate or defender of liberty, especially in the political and social spheres, when the London Packet printed on 12 February the following: “Lately marched out of the Prison at Bristol, 450 of the French Libertarians”. The word was again used in a political sense in 1802 in a short piece critiquing a poem by “the author of Gebir” and has since been used with this meaning.
The use of the word libertarian to describe a new set of political positions has been traced to the French cognate libertaire, coined in a letter French libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque wrote to mutualist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1857. Déjacque also used the term for his anarchist publication Le Libertaire, Journal du mouvement social (The Libertarian, Journal of the Social Movement) which was printed from 9 June 1858 to 4 February 1861 in New York City. Sébastien Faure, another French libertarian communist, began publishing a new Le Libertaire in the mid-1890s while France’s Third Republic enacted the so-called villainous laws (lois scélérates) which banned anarchist publications in France. Thus, libertarianism has frequently been used as a synonym for anarchism and libertarian socialism since this time.
The term libertarianism was first used in the United States as a synonym for classical liberalism in May 1955 by writer Dean Russell, a colleague of Leonard Read and a classical liberal himself. Russell justified the choice of the word as follows: “Many of us call ourselves ‘liberals.’ And it is true that the word ‘liberal’ once described persons who respected the individual and feared the use of mass compulsions. But the leftists have now corrupted that once-proud term to identify themselves and their program of more government ownership of property and more controls over persons. As a result, those of us who believe in freedom must explain that when we call ourselves liberals, we mean liberals in the uncorrupted classical sense. At best, this is awkward and subject to misunderstanding. Here is a suggestion: Let those of us who love liberty trade-mark and reserve for our own use the good and honorable word ‘libertarian'”.
Subsequently, a growing number of Americans with classical liberal beliefs began to describe themselves as libertarian. One person responsible for popularizing the term libertarian in this sense was Murray Rothbard, who started publishing libertarian works in the 1960s. Rothbard describes this modern use of the words overtly as a “capture” from his enemies, saying that “for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy. ‘Libertarians’ had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over”. Robert Nozick was responsible for popularizing this usage of the term in philosophical circles and Europe instead. According to common meanings of conservative and liberal, libertarianism in the United States has been described as conservative on economic issues (economic liberalism) and liberal on personal freedom (civil libertarianism) and it is also often associated with a foreign policy of non-interventionism.
|Part of a series on|
All libertarians begin with a conception of personal autonomy from which they argue in favor of civil liberties and a reduction or elimination of the state.
Left-libertarianism encompasses those libertarian beliefs that claim the Earth’s natural resources belong to everyone in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Contemporary left-libertarians such as Hillel Steiner, Peter Vallentyne, Philippe Van Parijs, Michael Otsuka and David Ellerman believe the appropriation of land must leave “enough and as good” for others or be taxed by society to compensate for the exclusionary effects of private property. Libertarian socialists (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists, council communists, Luxemburgists and DeLeonists) promote usufruct and socialist economic theories, including communism, collectivism, syndicalism and mutualism. They criticize the state for being the defender of private property and believe capitalism entails wage slavery.
Right-libertarianism developed in the United States in the mid-20th century from the works of European writers like John Locke, Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig Von Mises and is the most popular conception of libertarianism in the world today. It is commonly referred to as a continuation or radicalization of classical liberalism. The most important of these early right-libertarian philosophers was Robert Nozick. While often sharing left-libertarians’ advocacy for social freedom, right-libertarians also value the social institutions that enforce conditions of capitalism while rejecting institutions that function in opposition to these on the grounds that such interventions represent unnecessary coercion of individuals and abrogation of their economic freedom. Anarcho-capitalists seek complete elimination of the state in favor of privately funded security services while minarchists defend night-watchman states which maintain only those functions of government necessary to safeguard natural rights, understood in terms of self-ownership or autonomy.
Anarchism envisages freedom as a form of autonomy which Paul Goodman describes as “the ability to initiate a task and do it one’s own way, without orders from authorities who do not know the actual problem and the available means”. All anarchists oppose political and legal authority, but collectivist strains also oppose the economic authority of private property. These social anarchists emphasize mutual aid, whereas individualist anarchists extol individual sovereignty.
Libertarians have been advocates and activists of civil liberties, including free love and free thought. Advocates of free love viewed sexual freedom as a clear, direct expression of individual sovereignty and they particularly stressed women’s rights as most sexual laws discriminated against women: for example, marriage laws and anti-birth control measures.
Free love appeared alongside anarcha-feminism and advocacy of LGBT rights. Anarcha-feminism developed as a synthesis of radical feminism and anarchism and views patriarchy as a fundamental manifestation of compulsory government. It was inspired by the late-19th-century writings of early feminist anarchists such as Lucy Parsons, Emma Goldman, Voltairine de Cleyre and Virginia Bolten.
Anarcha-feminists, like other radical feminists, criticize and advocate the abolition of traditional conceptions of family, education and gender roles. Free Society (1895–1897 as The Firebrand, 1897–1904 as Free Society) was an anarchist newspaper in the United States that staunchly advocated free love and women’s rights, while criticizing “comstockery“, the censorship of sexual information. In recent times, anarchism has also voiced opinions and taken action around certain sex-related subjects such as pornography, BDSM and the sex industry.
Free thought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic and reason in contrast with authority, tradition or other dogmas. In the United States, free thought was an anti-Christian, anti-clerical movement whose purpose was to make the individual politically and spiritually free to decide on religious matters. A number of contributors to Liberty were prominent figures in both free thought and anarchism.
In 1901, Catalan anarchist and free-thinker Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia established modern or progressive schools in Barcelona in defiance of an educational system controlled by the Catholic Church. Fiercely anti-clerical, Ferrer believed in “freedom in education”, i.e. education free from the authority of the church and state. The schools’ stated goal was to “educate the working class in a rational, secular and non-coercive setting”.
Later in the 20th century, Austrian Freudo-Marxist Wilhelm Reich became a consistent propagandist for sexual freedom going as far as opening free sex-counseling clinics in Vienna for working-class patients as well as coining the phrase “sexual revolution” in one of his books from the 1940s. During the early 1970s, the English anarchist and pacifist Alex Comfort achieved international celebrity for writing the sex manuals The Joy of Sex and More Joy of Sex.
Many left-libertarians are anarchists and believe the state inherently violates personal autonomy: “As Robert Paul Wolff has argued, since ‘the state is authority, the right to rule’, anarchism which rejects the State is the only political doctrine consistent with autonomy in which the individual alone is the judge of his moral constraints”. Social anarchists believe the state defends private property, which they view as intrinsically harmful, while market-oriented left-libertarians argue that so-called free markets actually consist of economic privileges granted by the state. These latter libertarians advocate instead for freed markets, which are freed from these privileges.
There is a debate amongst right-libertarians as to whether or not the state is legitimate: while anarcho-capitalists advocate its abolition, minarchists support minimal states, often referred to as night-watchman states. Libertarians take a skeptical view of government authority.[unreliable source?] Minarchists maintain that the state is necessary for the protection of individuals from aggresion, theft, breach of contract and fraud. They believe the only legitimate governmental institutions are the military, police and courts, though some expand this list to include fire departments, prisons and the executive and legislative branches.
They justify the state on the grounds that it is the logical consequence of adhering to the non-aggression principle and argue that anarchism is immoral because it implies that the non-aggression principle is optional, that the enforcement of laws under anarchism is open to competition. Another common justification is that private defense agencies and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.
Anarcho-capitalists argue that the state violates the non-aggression principle by its nature because governments use force against those who have not stolen or vandalized private property, assaulted anyone or committed fraud. Linda and Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government’s citizenry can not desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.
Left-libertarians believe that neither claiming nor mixing one’s labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights and maintain that natural resources ought to be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.
Right-libertarians maintain that unowned natural resources “may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes his labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them”. They believe that natural resources are originally unowned and therefore private parties may appropriate them at will without the consent of, or owing to, others.
Left-libertarians (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists and left-wing market anarchists) argue in favor of socialist theories such as communism, syndicalism and mutualism (anarchist economics). Daniel Guérin writes that “anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man. Anarchism is only one of the streams of socialist thought, that stream whose main components are concern for liberty and haste to abolish the State”.
Many right-libertarians argue that socialist values are incompatible with libertarianism. Right-libertarians are economic liberals of either the Austrian School or Chicago school and support laissez-faire capitalism.
Left-libertarianism, also known as left-wing libertarianism, names several related yet distinct approaches to political and social theory which stresses both individual freedom and social equality. In its classical usage, left-libertarianism is a synonym for anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics, i.e. libertarian socialism, which includes anarchism and libertarian Marxism, among others. Left-libertarianism can also refer to political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.
While maintaining full respect for personal property, left-libertarians are skeptical of or fully against private property, arguing that neither claiming nor mixing one’s labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights and maintain that natural resources (land, oil, gold and vegetation) should be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Those left-libertarians who support private property do so under occupation and use property norms or under the condition that recompense is offered to the local or even global community. Many left-libertarian schools of thought are communist, advocating the eventual replacement of money with labor vouchers or decentralized planning.
On the other hand, left-wing market anarchism, which includes Pierre-Joseph Proudhon‘s mutualism and Samuel Edward Konkin III‘s agorism, appeals to left-wing concerns such as egalitarianism, gender and sexuality, class, immigration and environmentalism within the paradigm of a socialist free market. Joseph Déjacque was the first to formulate classical libertarian ideas under the term libertarian. Later philosophers on the left would go onto adding detail to his political philosophy to study and document attitudes and themes relating to stateless socialism (for Déjacque it was called libertarian communism).
Right-libertarianism, or right-wing libertarianism, refers to libertarian political philosophies that advocate negative rights, natural law and a major reversal of the modern welfare state. Right-libertarians strongly support private property rights and defend market distribution of natural resources and private property. This position is contrasted with that of some versions of left-libertarianism, which maintain that natural resources belong to everyone in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Right-libertarianism includes anarcho-capitalism and laissez-faire minarchist liberalism.[note 1]
Libertarian paternalism is a position advocated in the international bestseller Nudge by the economist Richard Thaler and the jurist Cass Sunstein. In the book Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman provides the brief summary: “Thaler and Sunstein advocate a position of libertarian paternalism, in which the state and other institutions are allowed to Nudge people to make decisions that serve their own long-term interests. The designation of joining a pension plan as the default option is an example of a nudge. It is difficult to argue that anyone’s freedom is diminished by being automatically enrolled in the plan, when they merely have to check a box to opt out”. Nudge is considered an important piece of literature in behavioral economics.
Age of Enlightenment
Elements of libertarianism can be traced as far back as the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu and the higher-law concepts of the Greeks and the Israelites. In 17th-century England, libertarian ideas began to take modern form in the writings of the Levellers and John Locke. In the middle of that century, opponents of royal power began to be called Whigs, or sometimes simply “opposition” or “country” (as opposed to Court) writers.
During the 18th century, liberal ideas flourished in Europe and North America. Libertarians of various schools were influenced by liberal ideas. For libertarian philosopher Roderick T. Long, both libertarian socialists and libertarian capitalists “share a common—or at least an overlapping intellectual ancestry—[…] both claim the seventeenth century English Levellers and the eighteenth century French encyclopedists among their ideological forebears; and […] usually share an admiration for Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine“.
John Locke greatly influenced both libertarianism and the modern world in his writings published before and after the English Revolution of 1688, especially A Letter Concerning Toleration (1667), Two Treatises of Government (1689) and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). In the text of 1689, he established the basis of liberal political theory, i.e. that people’s rights existed before government; that the purpose of government is to protect personal and property rights; that people may dissolve governments that do not do so; and that representative government is the best form to protect rights.
The United States Declaration of Independence was inspired by Locke in its statement: “[T]o secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it”. Nevertheless, scholar Ellen Meiksins Wood says that “there are doctrines of individualism that are opposed to Lockean individualism […] and non-Lockean individualism may encompass socialism”.
According to Murray Rothbard, the libertarian creed emerged from the liberal challenges to an “absolute central State and a king ruling by divine right on top of an older, restrictive web of feudal land monopolies and urban guild controls and restrictions” as well as the mercantilism of a bureaucratic warfaring state allied with privileged merchants. The object of liberals was individual liberty in the economy, in personal freedoms and civil liberty, separation of state and religion and peace as an alternative to imperial aggrandizement. He cites Locke’s contemporaries, the Levellers, who held similar views. Also influential were the English Cato’s Letters during the early 1700s, reprinted eagerly by American colonists who already were free of European aristocracy and feudal land monopolies.
In January 1776, only two years after coming to America from England, Thomas Paine published his pamphlet Common Sense calling for independence for the colonies. Paine promoted liberal ideas in clear and concise language that allowed the general public to understand the debates among the political elites. Common Sense was immensely popular in disseminating these ideas, selling hundreds of thousands of copies. Paine would later write the Rights of Man and The Age of Reason and participate in the French Revolution. Paine’s theory of property showed a “libertarian concern” with the redistribution of resources.
In 1793, William Godwin wrote a libertarian philosophical treatise, Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Morals and Happiness, which criticized ideas of human rights and of society by contract based on vague promises. He took liberalism to its logical anarchic conclusion by rejecting all political institutions, law, government and apparatus of coercion as well as all political protest and insurrection. Instead of institutionalized justice, Godwin proposed that people influence one another to moral goodness through informal reasoned persuasion, including in the associations they joined as this would facilitate happiness.
Rise of anarchism
|Part of the Politics series on|
As part of the political turmoil of the 1790s in the wake of the French Revolution, William Godwin developed the first expression of modern anarchist thought. According to Peter Kropotkin, Godwin was “the first to formulate the political and economical conceptions of anarchism, even though he did not give that name to the ideas developed in his work” while Godwin attached his anarchist ideas to an early Edmund Burke.
Godwin is generally regarded as the founder of the school of thought known as philosophical anarchism. He argued in Political Justice (1793) that government has an inherently malevolent influence on society and that it perpetuates dependency and ignorance. He thought that the spread of the use of reason to the masses would eventually cause government to wither away as an unnecessary force. Although he did not accord the state with moral legitimacy, he was against the use of revolutionary tactics for removing the government from power. Rather, Godwin advocated for its replacement through a process of peaceful evolution.
His aversion to the imposition of a rules-based society led him to denounce, as a manifestation of the people’s “mental enslavement”, the foundations of law, property rights and even the institution of marriage. Godwin considered the basic foundations of society as constraining the natural development of individuals to use their powers of reasoning to arrive at a mutually beneficial method of social organization. In each case, government and its institutions are shown to constrain the development of our capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of private judgment.
In France, various anarchist currents were present during the Revolutionary period, with some revolutionaries using the term anarchiste in a positive light as early as September 1793. The enragés opposed revolutionary government as a contradiction in terms. Denouncing the Jacobin dictatorship, Jean Varlet wrote in 1794 that “government and revolution are incompatible, unless the people wishes to set its constituted authorities in permanent insurrection against itself”. In his “Manifesto of the Equals”, Sylvain Maréchal looked forward to the disappearance, once and for all, of “the revolting distinction between rich and poor, of great and small, of masters and valets, of governors and governed”.
|Part of a series on|
Anarchist communist philosopher Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as a libertarian. Unlike mutualist anarchist philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, he argued that “it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature”.
According to anarchist historian Max Nettlau, the first use of the term “libertarian communism” was in November 1880, when a French anarchist congress employed it to more clearly identify its doctrines. The French anarchist journalist Sébastien Faure started the weekly paper Le Libertaire (The Libertarian) in 1895.
Individualist anarchism refers to several traditions of thought within the anarchist movement that emphasize the individual and their will over any kinds of external determinants such as groups, society, traditions, and ideological systems. An influential form of individualist anarchism called egoism or egoist anarchism was expounded by one of the earliest and best-known proponents of individualist anarchism, the German Max Stirner. Stirner’s The Ego and Its Own, published in 1844, is a founding text of the philosophy. According to Stirner, the only limitation on the rights of the individual is their power to obtain what they desire, without regard for God, state or morality.
Stirner advocated self-assertion and foresaw unions of egoists, non-systematic associations continually renewed by all parties’ support through an act of will, which Stirner proposed as a form of organisation in place of the state. Egoist anarchists argue that egoism will foster genuine and spontaneous union between individuals. Egoism has inspired many interpretations of Stirner’s philosophy.
It was re-discovered and promoted by German philosophical anarchist and LGBT activist John Henry Mackay. Josiah Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist, and the four-page weekly paper he edited during 1833, The Peaceful Revolutionist, was the first anarchist periodical published. For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, “[i]t is apparent […] that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews… William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form.”.
Later, Benjamin Tucker fused Stirner’s egoism with the economics of Warren and Proudhon in his eclectic influential publication Liberty. From these early influences, individualist anarchism in different countries attracted a small yet diverse following of bohemian artists and intellectuals, free love and birth control advocates (anarchism and issues related to love and sex), individualist naturists nudists (anarcho-naturism), free thought and anti-clerical activists as well as young anarchist outlaws in what became known as illegalism and individual reclamation (European individualist anarchism and individualist anarchism in France). These authors and activists included Émile Armand, Han Ryner, Henri Zisly, Renzo Novatore, Miguel Gimenez Igualada, Adolf Brand and Lev Chernyi.
In 1873, the follower and translator of Proudhon, the Catalan Francesc Pi i Margall, became President of Spain with a program which wanted “to establish a decentralized, or “cantonalist,” political system on Proudhonian lines”, who according to Rudolf Rocker had “political ideas, […] much in common with those of Richard Price, Joseph Priestly [sic], Thomas Paine, Jefferson, and other representatives of the Anglo-American liberalism of the first period. He wanted to limit the power of the state to a minimum and gradually replace it by a Socialist economic order”.
On the other hand, Fermín Salvochea was a mayor of the city of Cádiz and a president of the province of Cádiz. He was one of the main propagators of anarchist thought in that area in the late 19th century and is considered to be “perhaps the most beloved figure in the Spanish Anarchist movement of the 19th century”. Ideologically, he was influenced by Bradlaugh, Owen and Paine, whose works he had studied during his stay in England and Kropotkin, whom he read later. The revolutionary wave of 1917–1923 saw the active participation of anarchists in Russia and Europe. Russian anarchists participated alongside the Bolsheviks in both the February and October 1917 revolutions.
However, Bolsheviks in central Russia quickly began to imprison or drive underground the libertarian anarchists. Many fled to the Ukraine. There, in the Ukrainian Free Territory they fought in the Russian Civil War against the White movement, monarchists and other opponents of revolution and then against Bolsheviks as part of the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine led by Nestor Makhno, who established an anarchist society in the region for a number of months. Expelled American anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman protested Bolshevik policy before they left Russia.
The victory of the Bolsheviks damaged anarchist movements internationally as workers and activists joined Communist parties. In France and the United States, for example, members of the major syndicalist movements of the CGT and IWW joined the Communist International. In Paris, the Dielo Truda group of Russian anarchist exiles, which included Nestor Makhno, issued a 1926 manifesto, the Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists (Draft), calling for new anarchist organizing structures.
The Bavarian Soviet Republic of 1918–1919 had libertarian socialist characteristics. In Italy, from 1918 to 1921 the anarcho-syndicalist trade union Unione Sindacale Italiana grew to 800,000 members.
In the 1920s and 1930s, with the rise of fascism in Europe, anarchists began to fight fascists in Italy, in France during the February 1934 riots and in Spain where the CNT (Confederación Nacional del Trabajo) boycott of elections led to a right-wing victory and its later participation in voting in 1936 helped bring the popular front back to power. This led to a ruling class attempted coup and the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939). Gruppo Comunista Anarchico di Firenze held that the during early twentieth century, the terms libertarian communism and anarchist communism became synonymous within the international anarchist movement as a result of the close connection they had in Spain (anarchism in Spain) (with libertarian communism becoming the prevalent term).
Murray Bookchin wrote that the Spanish libertarian movement of the mid-1930s was unique because its workers’ control and collectives—which came out of a three-generation “massive libertarian movement”—divided the republican camp and challenged the Marxists. “Urban anarchists” created libertarian communist forms of organization which evolved into the CNT, a syndicalist union providing the infrastructure for a libertarian society. Also formed were local bodies to administer social and economic life on a decentralized libertarian basis. Much of the infrastructure was destroyed during the 1930s Spanish Civil War against authoritarian and fascist forces.
The Iberian Federation of Libertarian Youth (FIJL, Spanish: Federación Ibérica de Juventudes Libertarias), sometimes abbreviated as Libertarian Youth (Juventudes Libertarias), was a libertarian socialist organization created in 1932 in Madrid.
In February 1937, the FIJL organized a plenum of regional organizations (second congress of FIJL). In October 1938, from the 16th through the 30th in Barcelona the FIJL participated in a national plenum of the libertarian movement, also attended by members of the CNT and the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI). The FIJL exists until today. When the republican forces lost the Spanish Civil War, the city of Madrid was turned over to the Francoist forces in 1939 by the last non-Francoist mayor of the city, the anarchist Melchor Rodríguez García. During autumn of 1931, the “Manifesto of the 30” was published by militants of the anarchist trade union CNT and among those who signed it there was the CNT General Secretary (1922–1923) Joan Peiro, Angel Pestaña CNT (General Secretary in 1929) and Juan Lopez Sanchez.
They were called treintismo and they were calling for libertarian possibilism which advocated achieving libertarian socialist ends with participation inside structures of contemporary parliamentary democracy. In 1932, they establish the Syndicalist Party which participates in the 1936 Spanish general elections and proceed to be a part of the leftist coalition of parties known as the Popular Front obtaining 2 congressmen (Pestaña and Benito Pabon). In 1938, Horacio Prieto, general secretary of the CNT, proposes that the Iberian Anarchist Federation transforms itself into a “Libertarian Socialist Party” and that it participates in the national elections.
The Manifesto of Libertarian Communism was written in 1953 by Georges Fontenis for the Federation Communiste Libertaire of France. It is one of the key texts of the anarchist-communist current known as platformism. In 1968, in Carrara, Italy the International of Anarchist Federations was founded during an international anarchist conference to advance libertarian solidarity.
It wanted to form “a strong and organized workers movement, agreeing with the libertarian ideas”. In the United States, the Libertarian League was founded in New York City in 1954 as a left-libertarian political organization building on the Libertarian Book Club. Members included Sam Dolgoff, Russell Blackwell, Dave Van Ronk, Enrico Arrigoni and Murray Bookchin.
In Australia, the Sydney Push was a predominantly left-wing intellectual subculture in Sydney from the late 1940s to the early 1970s which became associated with the label “Sydney libertarianism”. Well known associates of the Push include Jim Baker, John Flaus, Harry Hooton, Margaret Fink, Sasha Soldatow, Lex Banning, Eva Cox, Richard Appleton, Paddy McGuinness, David Makinson, Germaine Greer, Clive James, Robert Hughes, Frank Moorhouse and Lillian Roxon.
Amongst the key intellectual figures in Push debates were philosophers David J. Ivison, George Molnar, Roelof Smilde, Darcy Waters and Jim Baker, as recorded in Baker’s memoir Sydney Libertarians and the Push, published in the libertarian Broadsheet in 1975. An understanding of libertarian values and social theory can be obtained from their publications, a few of which are available online.
In 1969, French platformist anarcho-communist Daniel Guérin published an essay in 1969 called “Libertarian Marxism?” in which he dealt with the debate between Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin at the First International and afterwards suggested that “libertarian Marxism rejects determinism and fatalism, giving the greater place to individual will, intuition, imagination, reflex speeds, and to the deep instincts of the masses, which are more far-seeing in hours of crisis than the reasonings of the ‘elites’; libertarian Marxism thinks of the effects of surprise, provocation and boldness, refuses to be cluttered and paralyzed by a heavy ‘scientific’ apparatus, doesn’t equivocate or bluff, and guards itself from adventurism as much as from fear of the unknown”.
Libertarian Marxist currents often draw from Marx and Engels’ later works, specifically the Grundrisse and The Civil War in France. They emphasize the Marxist belief in the ability of the working class to forge its own destiny without the need for a revolutionary party or state. Libertarian Marxism includes such currents as council communism, left communism, Socialisme ou Barbarie, Lettrism/Situationism and operaismo/autonomism and New Left.[unreliable source?]
From 1970 to 1981, in the United States there existed the publication Root & Branch which had as a subtitle A Libertarian Marxist Journal. In 1974, the Libertarian Communism journal was started in the United Kingdom by a group inside the Socialist Party of Great Britain. In 1986, the anarcho-syndicalist Sam Dolgoff started and led the publication Libertarian Labor Review in the United States which decided to rename itself as Anarcho-Syndicalist Review in order to avoid confusion with right-libertarian views.
Individualism in the United States
The indigenous anarchist tradition in the United States was largely individualist. In 1825, Josiah Warren became aware of the social system of utopian socialist Robert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony. When this group failed to come to an agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren “sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana”. Warren termed the phrase “cost the limit of price“ and “proposed a system to pay people with certificates indicating how many hours of work they did. They could exchange the notes at local time stores for goods that took the same amount of time to produce”. He put his theories to the test by establishing an experimental labor-for-labor store called the Cincinnati Time Store where trade was facilitated by labor notes.
The store proved successful and operated for three years, after which it was closed so that Warren could pursue establishing colonies based on mutualism, including Utopia and Modern Times. “After New Harmony failed, Warren shifted his ideological loyalties from socialism to anarchism (which was no great leap, given that Owen’s socialism had been predicated on Godwin’s anarchism)”. Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist and the four-page weekly paper The Peaceful Revolutionist he edited during 1833 was the first anarchist periodical published, an enterprise for which he built his own printing press, cast his own type and made his own printing plates.
Catalan historian Xavier Diez reports that the intentional communal experiments pioneered by Warren were influential in European individualist anarchists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries such as Émile Armand and the intentional communities started by them. Warren said that Stephen Pearl Andrews, individualist anarchist and close associate, wrote the most lucid and complete exposition of Warren’s own theories in The Science of Society, published in 1852. Andrews was formerly associated with the Fourierist movement, but converted to radical individualism after becoming acquainted with the work of Warren. Like Warren, he held the principle of “individual sovereignty” as being of paramount importance. Contemporary American anarchist Hakim Bey reports:
Steven Pearl Andrews… was not a Fourierist, but he lived through the brief craze for phalansteries in America and adopted a lot of Fourierist principles and practices… a maker of worlds out of words. He syncretized abolitionism in the United States, free love, spiritual universalism, Warren, and Fourier into a grand utopian scheme he called the Universal Pantarchy… He was instrumental in founding several ‘intentional communities,’ including the ‘Brownstone Utopia’ on 14th St. in New York, and ‘Modern Times’ in Brentwood, Long Island. The latter became as famous as the best-known Fourierist communes (Brook Farm in Massachusetts & the North American Phalanx in New Jersey)—in fact, Modern Times became downright notorious (for ‘Free Love’) and finally foundered under a wave of scandalous publicity. Andrews (and Victoria Woodhull) were members of the infamous Section 12 of the 1st International, expelled by Marx for its anarchist, feminist, and spiritualist tendencies.
For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, “[i]t is apparent that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews. William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form”. William Batchelder Greene was a 19th-century mutualist individualist anarchist, Unitarian minister, soldier and promoter of free banking in the United States. Greene is best known for the works Mutual Banking, which proposed an interest-free banking system; and Transcendentalism, a critique of the New England philosophical school.
After 1850, he became active in labor reform. “He was elected vice-president of the New England Labor Reform League, the majority of the members holding to Proudhon’s scheme of mutual banking, and in 1869 president of the Massachusetts Labor Union”. Greene then published Socialistic, Mutualistic, and Financial Fragments (1875). He saw mutualism as the synthesis of “liberty and order”. His “associationism […] is checked by individualism. […] ‘Mind your own business,’ ‘Judge not that ye be not judged.’ Over matters which are purely personal, as for example, moral conduct, the individual is sovereign, as well as over that which he himself produces. For this reason he demands ‘mutuality’ in marriage—the equal right of a woman to her own personal freedom and property”.
Poet, naturalist and transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau was an important early influence in individualist anarchist thought in the United States and Europe. He is best known for his book Walden, a reflection upon simple living in natural surroundings; and his essay Civil Disobedience (Resistance to Civil Government), an argument for individual resistance to civil government in moral opposition to an unjust state. In Walden, Thoreau advocates simple living and self-sufficiency among natural surroundings in resistance to the advancement of industrial civilization.
Civil Disobedience, first published in 1849, argues that people should not permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences and that people have a duty to avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. These works influenced green anarchism, anarcho-primitivism and anarcho-pacifism as well as figures including Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Martin Buber and Leo Tolstoy.
For George Woodcock this attitude can be also motivated by certain idea of resistance to progress and of rejection of the growing materialism which is the nature of American society in the mid-19th century”. Zerzan included Thoreau’s “Excursions” in his edited compilation of anti-civilization writings, Against Civilization: Readings and Reflections. Individualist anarchists such as Thoreau do not speak of economics, but simply the right of disunion from the state and foresee the gradual elimination of the state through social evolution. Agorist author J. Neil Schulman cites Thoreau as a primary inspiration.
Many economists since Adam Smith have argued that—unlike other taxes—a land value tax would not cause economic inefficiency. It would be a progressive tax, i.e. a tax paid primarily by the wealthy, that increases wages, reduces economic inequality, removes incentives to misuse real estate and reduces the vulnerability that economies face from credit and property bubbles.
Early proponents of this view include Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer and Hugo Grotius, but the concept was widely popularized by the economist and social reformer Henry George. George believed that people ought to own the fruits of their labor and the value of the improvements they make, thus he was opposed to income taxes, sales taxes, taxes on improvements and all other taxes on production, labor, trade or commerce.
George was among the staunchest defenders of free markets and his book Protection or Free Trade was read into the Congressional Record. Yet he did support direct management of natural monopolies as a last resort, such as right-of-way monopolies necessary for railroads. George advocated for elimination of intellectual property arrangements in favor of government sponsored prizes for inventors.[not in citation given]
Early followers of George’s philosophy called themselves single taxers because they believed that the only legitimate, broad-based tax was land rent. The term Georgism was coined later, though some modern proponents prefer the term geoism instead, leaving the meaning of geo (Earth in Greek) deliberately ambiguous. The terms Earth Sharing, geonomics and geolibertarianism are used by some Georgists to represent a difference of emphasis, or real differences about how land rent should be spent, but all agree that land rent should be recovered from its private owners.
Individualist anarchism found in the United States an important space for discussion and development within the group known as the Boston anarchists. Even among the 19th-century American individualists there was no monolithic doctrine and they disagreed amongst each other on various issues including intellectual property rights and possession versus property in land. Some Boston anarchists, including Benjamin Tucker, identified as socialists, which in the 19th century was often used in the sense of a commitment to improving conditions of the working class (i.e. “the labor problem“).
Lysander Spooner, besides his individualist anarchist activism, was also an anti-slavery activist and member of the First International. Tucker argued that the elimination of what he called “the four monopolies”—the land monopoly, the money and banking monopoly, the monopoly powers conferred by patents and the quasi-monopolistic effects of tariffs—would undermine the power of the wealthy and big business, making possible widespread property ownership and higher incomes for ordinary people, while minimizing the power of would-be bosses and achieving socialist goals without state action. Tucker’s anarchist periodical, Liberty, was published from August 1881 to April 1908.
The publication, emblazoned with Proudhon’s quote that liberty is “Not the Daughter But the Mother of Order” was instrumental in developing and formalizing the individualist anarchist philosophy through publishing essays and serving as a forum for debate. Contributors included Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Auberon Herbert, Dyer Lum, Joshua K. Ingalls, John Henry Mackay, Victor Yarros, Wordsworth Donisthorpe, James L. Walker, J. William Lloyd, Florence Finch Kelly, Voltairine de Cleyre, Steven T. Byington, John Beverley Robinson, Jo Labadie, Lillian Harman and Henry Appleton. Later, Tucker and others abandoned their traditional support of natural rights and converted to an egoism modeled upon the philosophy of Max Stirner.
A number of natural rights proponents stopped contributing in protest. Several periodicals were undoubtedly influenced by Liberty’s presentation of egoism, including I published by Clarence Lee Swartz and edited by William Walstein Gordak and J. William Lloyd (all associates of Liberty); and The Ego and The Egoist, both of which were edited by Edward H. Fulton. Among the egoist papers that Tucker followed were the German Der Eigene, edited by Adolf Brand; and The Eagle and The Serpent, issued from London. The latter, the most prominent English language egoist journal, was published from 1898 to 1900 with the subtitle A Journal of Egoistic Philosophy and Sociology.
Georgism and geolibertarianism
Henry George was an American political economist and journalist who advocated that all economic value derived from land, including natural resources, should belong equally to all members of society. Strongly opposed to feudalism and the privatisation of land, George created the philosophy of Georgism, or geoism, influential among many left-libertarians, including geolibertarians and geoanarchists. Much like the English Digger movement, who held all material possessions in common, George claimed that land and its financial properties belong to everyone, and that to hold land as private property would lead to immense inequalities, including authority from the private owners of such ground.
Prior to states assigning property owners slices of either once populated or uninhabited land, the world’s earth was held in common. When all resources that derive from land are put to achieving a higher quality of life, not just for employers or landlords, but to serve the general interests and comforts of a wider community, Geolibertarians claim vastly higher qualities of life can be reached, especially with ever advancing technology and industrialised agriculture.
The Levellers, also known as the Diggers, were a 17th century anti-authoritarian movement that stood in resistance to the English government and the feudalism it was pushing through the forced privatisation of land around the time of the First English Civil War. Devout Protestants, Gerrard Winstanley was a prominent member of the community and with a very progressive interpretation of his religion sought to end buying and selling, instead for all inhabitants of a society to share their material possessions and to hold all things in common, without money or payment. With the complete abolition of private property, including that of private land, the English Levellers created a pool of property where all properties belonged in equal measure to everyone. Often seen as some of the first practising anarchists, the Digger movement is considered extremely early anarchist communism.
Modern American libertarianism
By around the start of the 20th century, the heyday of individualist anarchism had passed. H. L. Mencken and Albert Jay Nock were the first prominent figures in the United States to describe themselves as libertarians; they believed Franklin D. Roosevelt had co-opted the word liberal for his New Deal policies which they opposed and used libertarian to signify their allegiance to individualism. In 1914, Nock joined the staff of The Nation magazine, which at the time was supportive of liberal capitalism. A lifelong admirer of Henry George, Nock went on to become co-editor of The Freeman from 1920 to 1924, a publication initially conceived as a vehicle for the single tax movement, financed by the wealthy wife of the magazine’s other editor, Francis Neilson. Critic H. L. Mencken wrote that “[h]is editorials during the three brief years of the Freeman set a mark that no other man of his trade has ever quite managed to reach. They were well-informed and sometimes even learned, but there was never the slightest trace of pedantry in them”.
Executive Vice President of the Cato Institute David Boaz writes: “In 1943, at one of the lowest points for liberty and humanity in history, three remarkable women published books that could be said to have given birth to the modern libertarian movement”. Isabel Paterson‘s The God of the Machine, Rose Wilder Lane‘s The Discovery of Freedom and Ayn Rand‘s The Fountainhead each promoted individualism and capitalism. None of the three used the term libertarianism to describe their beliefs and Rand specifically rejected the label, criticizing the burgeoning American libertarian movement as the “hippies of the right”. Rand’s own philosophy, Objectivism, is notedly similar to libertarianism and she accused libertarians of plagiarizing her ideas. Rand stated:
All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies who are anarchists instead of leftist collectivists; but anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism. That’s worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It’s a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. Anarchists are the scum of the intellectual world of the Left, which has given them up. So the Right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the libertarian movement.
In 1946, Leonard E. Read founded the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), an American nonprofit educational organization which promotes the principles of laissez-faire economics, private property and limited government. According to Gary North, former FEE director of seminars and a current Ludwig von Mises Institute scholar, FEE is the “granddaddy of all libertarian organizations”. The initial officers of FEE were Leonard E. Read as president, Austrian School economist Henry Hazlitt as vice president and David Goodrich of B. F. Goodrich as chairman. Other trustees on the FEE board have included wealthy industrialist Jasper Crane of DuPont, H. W. Luhnow of William Volker & Co. and Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society.
Austrian School economist Murray Rothbard was initially an enthusiastic partisan of the Old Right, particularly because of its general opposition to war and imperialism, but long embraced a reading of American history that emphasized the role of elite privilege in shaping legal and political institutions. He was part of Ayn Rand‘s circle for a brief period, but later harshly criticized Objectivism. He praised Rand’s Atlas Shrugged and wrote that she “introduced me to the whole field of natural rights and natural law philosophy”, prompting him to learn “the glorious natural rights tradition”.(pp121, 132–134) He soon broke with Rand over various differences, including his defense of anarchism. Rothbard was influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists and sought to meld their advocacy of free markets and private defense with the principles of Austrian economics. This new philosophy he called anarcho-capitalism.
Karl Hess, a speechwriter for Barry Goldwater and primary author of the Republican Party’s 1960 and 1964 platforms, became disillusioned with traditional politics following the 1964 presidential campaign in which Goldwater lost to Lyndon B. Johnson. He parted with the Republicans altogether after being rejected for employment with the party, and began work as a heavy-duty welder. Hess began reading American anarchists largely due to the recommendations of his friend Murray Rothbard and said that upon reading the works of communist anarchist Emma Goldman, he discovered that anarchists believed everything he had hoped the Republican Party would represent. For Hess, Goldman was the source for the best and most essential theories of Ayn Rand without any of the “crazy solipsism that Rand was so fond of”. Hess and Rothbard founded the journal Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought, which was published from 1965 to 1968, with George Resch and Leonard P. Liggio. In 1969, they edited The Libertarian Forum 1969, which Hess left in 1971. Hess eventually put his focus on the small scale, stating that “Society is: people together making culture”. He deemed two of his cardinal social principles to be “opposition to central political authority” and “concern for people as individuals”. His rejection of standard American party politics was reflected in a lecture he gave during which he said: “The Democrats or liberals think that everybody is stupid and therefore they need somebody… to tell them how to behave themselves. The Republicans think everybody is lazy”.
The Vietnam War split the uneasy alliance between growing numbers of American libertarians and conservatives who believed in limiting liberty to uphold moral virtues. Libertarians opposed to the war joined the draft resistance and peace movements, as well as organizations such as Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In 1969 and 1970, Hess joined with others, including Murray Rothbard, Robert LeFevre, Dana Rohrabacher, Samuel Edward Konkin III and former SDS leader Carl Oglesby to speak at two Left-Right conferences which brought together activists from both the Old Right and the New Left in what was emerging as a nascent libertarian movement. As part of his effort to unite right and left-libertarianism, Hess would join the SDS as well as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), of which he explained: “We used to have a labor movement in this country, until I.W.W. leaders were killed or imprisoned. You could tell labor unions had become captive when business and government began to praise them. They’re destroying the militant black leaders the same way now. If the slaughter continues, before long liberals will be asking, ‘What happened to the blacks? Why aren’t they militant anymore?'”. Rothbard ultimately broke with the left, allying himself instead with the burgeoning paleoconservative movement. He criticized the tendency of these left-libertarians to appeal to “‘free spirits,’ to people who don’t want to push other people around, and who don’t want to be pushed around themselves” in contrast to “the bulk of Americans,” who “might well be tight-assed conformists, who want to stamp out drugs in their vicinity, kick out people with strange dress habits, etc”. This left-libertarian tradition has been carried to the present day by Samuel Edward Konkin III’s agorists, contemporary mutualists such as Kevin Carson and Roderick T. Long and other left-wing market anarchists.
In 1971, a small group of Americans led by David Nolan formed the Libertarian Party, which has run a presidential candidate every election year since 1972. Other libertarian organizations, such as the Center for Libertarian Studies and the Cato Institute, were also formed in the 1970s. Philosopher John Hospers, a one-time member of Rand’s inner circle, proposed a non-initiation of force principle to unite both groups, but this statement later became a required “pledge” for candidates of the Libertarian Party and Hospers became its first presidential candidate in 1972. In the 1980s, Hess joined the Libertarian Party and served as editor of its newspaper from 1986 to 1990.
Modern libertarianism gained significant recognition in academia with the publication of Harvard University professor Robert Nozick‘s Anarchy, State, and Utopia in 1974, for which he received a National Book Award in 1975. In response to John Rawls‘s A Theory of Justice, Nozick’s book supported a minimal state (also called a nightwatchman state by Nozick) on the grounds that the ultraminimal state arises without violating individual rights and the transition from an ultraminimal state to a minimal state is morally obligated to occur. Specifically, Nozick writes, “We argue that the first transition from a system of private protective agencies to an ultraminimal state, will occur by an invisible-hand process in a morally permissible way that violates no one’s rights. Secondly, we argue that the transition from an ultraminimal state to a minimal state morally must occur. It would be morally impermissible for persons to maintain the monopoly in the ultraminimal state without providing protective services for all, even if this requires specific ‘redistribution.’ The operators of the ultraminimal state are morally obligated to produce the minimal state”.
In the early 1970s, Rothbard wrote. “One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy. ‘Libertarians’ had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over”. Indeed, the project of spreading libertarian ideals in the United States has been so successful that some Americans who don’t identify as “libertarian” seem to hold libertarian views. Since the resurgence of neoliberalism in the 1970s, this modern American libertarianism has spread beyond North America via think tanks and political parties.
A surge of popular interest in libertarian socialism occurred in Western nations during the 1960s and 1970s. Anarchism was influential in the counterculture of the 1960s and anarchists actively participated in the late sixties students and workers revolts. In 1968, the International of Anarchist Federations was founded in Carrara, Italy during an international anarchist conference held there in 1968 by the three existing European federations of France, the Italian and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as well as the Bulgarian federation in French exile. The uprisings of May 1968 also led to a small resurgence of interest in left communist ideas. Various small left communist groups emerged around the world, predominantly in the leading capitalist countries. A series of conferences of the communist left began in 1976, with the aim of promoting international and cross-tendency discussion, but these petered out in the 1980s without having increased the profile of the movement or its unity of ideas. Left communist groups existing today include the International Communist Party, International Communist Current and the Internationalist Communist Tendency. The housing and employment crisis in most of Western Europe led to the formation of communes and squatter movements like that of Barcelona, Spain. In Denmark, squatters occupied a disused military base and declared the Freetown Christiania, an autonomous haven in central Copenhagen.
Around the turn of the 21st century, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of the anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti-globalisation movements. Anarchists became known for their involvement in protests against the meetings of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Group of Eight and the World Economic Forum. Some anarchist factions at these protests engaged in rioting, property destruction and violent confrontations with police. These actions were precipitated by ad hoc, leaderless, anonymous cadres known as black blocs and other organizational tactics pioneered in this time include security culture, affinity groups and the use of decentralized technologies such as the Internet. A significant event of this period was the confrontations at WTO conference in Seattle in 1999. For English anarchist scholar Simon Critchley, “contemporary anarchism can be seen as a powerful critique of the pseudo-libertarianism of contemporary neo-liberalism. One might say that contemporary anarchism is about responsibility, whether sexual, ecological or socio-economic; it flows from an experience of conscience about the manifold ways in which the West ravages the rest; it is an ethical outrage at the yawning inequality, impoverishment and disenfranchisment that is so palpable locally and globally”. This might also have been motivated by “the collapse of ‘really existing socialism‘ and the capitulation to neo-liberalism of Western social democracy“.
Libertarian socialists in the early 21st century have been involved in the alter-globalization movement, squatter movement; social centers; infoshops; anti-poverty groups such as Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and Food Not Bombs; tenants’ unions; housing cooperatives; intentional communities generally and egalitarian communities; 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; activist groups protecting the rights of immigrants and promoting the free movement of people, such as the No Border network; worker co-operatives, countercultural and artist groups; and the peace movement.
In the United States, polls (circa 2006) find that the views and voting habits of between 10 and 20 percent (and increasing) of voting age Americans may be classified as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or libertarian”. This is based on pollsters and researchers defining libertarian views as fiscally conservative and socially liberal (based on the common United States meanings of the terms) and against government intervention in economic affairs and for expansion of personal freedoms. Through 20 polls on this topic spanning 13 years, Gallup found that voters who are libertarian on the political spectrum ranged from 17–23% of the United States electorate. However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have no idea what the word means.
2009 saw the rise of the Tea Party movement, an American political movement known for advocating a reduction in the United States national debt and federal budget deficit by reducing government spending and taxes, which had a significant libertarian component despite having contrasts with libertarian values and views in some areas, such as nationalism, free trade, social issues and immigration. A 2011 Reason-Rupe poll found that among those who self-identified as Tea Party supporters, 41 percent leaned libertarian and 59 percent socially conservative. The movement, named after the Boston Tea Party, also contains conservative and populist elements and has sponsored multiple protests and supported various political candidates since 2009. Tea Party activities have declined since 2010 with the number of chapters across the country slipping from about 1,000 to 600. Mostly, Tea Party organizations are said to have shifted away from national demonstrations to local issues. Following the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney‘s 2012 vice presidential running mate, The New York Times declared that Tea Party lawmakers are no longer a fringe of the conservative coalition, but now “indisputably at the core of the modern Republican Party”.
In 2012, anti-war presidential candidates (Libertarian Republican Ron Paul and Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson) raised millions of dollars and garnered millions of votes despite opposition to their obtaining ballot access by Democrats and Republicans. The 2012 Libertarian National Convention, which saw Gary Johnson and James P. Gray nominated as the 2012 presidential ticket for the Libertarian Party, resulted in the most successful result for a third-party presidential candidacy since 2000 and the best in the Libertarian Party’s history by vote number. Johnson received 1% of the popular vote, amounting to more than 1.2 million votes. Johnson has expressed a desire to win at least 5 percent of the vote so that the Libertarian Party candidates could get equal ballot access and federal funding, thus subsequently ending the two-party system.
Contemporary libertarian organizations
Since the 1950s, many American libertarian organizations have adopted a free market stance, as well as supporting civil liberties and non-interventionist foreign policies. These include the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Francisco Marroquín University, the Foundation for Economic Education, Center for Libertarian Studies, the Cato Institute and Liberty International. The activist Free State Project, formed in 2001, works to bring 20,000 libertarians to New Hampshire to influence state policy. Active student organizations include Students for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty.
A number of countries have libertarian parties that run candidates for political office. In the United States, the Libertarian Party was formed in 1972 and is the third largest American political party, with 511,277 voters (0.46% of total electorate) registered as Libertarian in the 31 states that report Libertarian registration statistics and Washington, D.C.
Current international anarchist federations which sometimes identify themselves as libertarian include the International of Anarchist Federations, the International Workers’ Association and International Libertarian Solidarity. The largest organized anarchist movement today is in Spain, in the form of the Confederación General del Trabajo (CGT) and the CNT. CGT membership was estimated to be around 100,000 for 2003. Other active syndicalist movements include the Central Organisation of the Workers of Sweden and the Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation in Sweden; the Unione Sindacale Italiana in Italy; Workers Solidarity Alliance in the United States; and Solidarity Federation in the United Kingdom. The revolutionary industrial unionist Industrial Workers of the World claiming 2,000 paying members as well as the International Workers Association, an anarcho-syndicalist successor to the First International, also remain active. In the United States, there exists the Common Struggle – Libertarian Communist Federation.
Criticism of libertarianism includes ethical, economic, environmental, pragmatic and philosophical concerns, though most of them are mainly related to right-libertarianism. For instance, it has been argued that laissez-faire capitalism does not necessarily produce the best or most efficient outcome, nor does its philosophy of individualism and policies of deregulation prevent the abuse of natural resources.
Authenticity of libertarian goals
Critics such as Corey Robin describe right-libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionary conservative ideology united with more traditional conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations:
Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty—or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force—the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.
John Donahue argues that if political power were radically shifted to local authorities, parochial local interests would predominate at the expense of the whole and that this would exacerbate current problems with collective action.
Here too the co-operation of an infinite number of individuals is absolutely necessary, and this co-operation must be practised during precisely fixed hours so that no accidents may happen. Here, too, the first condition of the job is a dominant will that settles all subordinate questions, whether this will is represented by a single delegate or a committee charged with the execution of the resolutions of the majority of persona interested. In either case there is a very pronounced authority. Moreover, what would happen to the first train dispatched if the authority of the railway employees over the Hon. passengers were abolished?
In the end, it is argued that authority in any form is a natural occurrence which should not be abolished.
“Lack” of real-world examples
Michael Lind has observed that of the 195 countries in the world today, none have fully actualized a society as advocated by right-libertarians:
If libertarianism was a good idea, wouldn’t at least one country have tried it? Wouldn’t there be at least one country, out of nearly two hundred, with minimal government, free trade, open borders, decriminalized drugs, no welfare state and no public education system?
Furthermore, Lind has criticized right-libertarianism as being incompatible with democracy and apologetic towards autocracy. In response, right-libertarian Warren Redlich argues that the United States “was extremely libertarian from the founding until 1860, and still very libertarian until roughly 1930”.
- Sources include the following:
- Marshall, Peter (2008). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Perennial. p. 565. “In its moderate form, right libertarianism embraces laissez-faire liberals like Robert Nozick who call for a minimal State, and in its extreme form, anarcho-capitalists like Murray Rothbard and David Friedman who entirely repudiate the role of the State and look to the market as a means of ensuring social order”.
- Goodway, David (2006). Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 4. ISBN 1846310253, ISBN 978-1846310256. “‘Libertarian’ and ‘libertarianism’ are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for ‘anarchist’ and ‘anarchism’, largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of ‘anarchy’ and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, ‘minimal statism’ and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Murray Rothbard and Robert Nozick and their adoption of the words ‘libertarian’ and ‘libertarianism’. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition”.
- Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism, Edinburgh University Press. p. 43. ISBN 0748634959, ISBN 978-0748634958. “It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard’s anarcho-capitalism). There is a complex debate within this tradition between those like Robert Nozick, who advocate a ‘minimal state’, and those like Rothbard who want to do away with the state altogether and allow all transactions to be governed by the market alone. From an anarchist perspective, however, both positions—the minimal state (minarchist) and the no-state (‘anarchist’) positions—neglect the problem of economic domination; in other words, they neglect the hierarchies, oppressions, and forms of exploitation that would inevitably arise in a laissez-faire ‘free’ market. […] Anarchism, therefore, has no truck with this right-wing libertarianism, not only because it neglects economic inequality and domination, but also because in practice (and theory) it is highly inconsistent and contradictory. The individual freedom invoked by right-wing libertarians is only a narrow economic freedom within the constraints of a capitalist market, which, as anarchists show, is no freedom at all”.
- Boaz, David (30 January 2009). “Libertarianism”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
…libertarianism, political philosophy that takes individual liberty to be the primary political value.
- Woodcock, George (2004). Anarchism: A History Of Libertarian Ideas And Movements. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press. p. 16. ISBN 9781551116297.
for the very nature of the libertarian attitude—its rejection of dogma, its deliberate avoidance of rigidly systematic theory, and, above all, its stress on extreme freedom of choice and on the primacy of the individual judgment
- Boaz, David (1999). “Key Concepts of Libertarianism”. Cato Institute. Retrieved 25 January 2017.
- “What Is Libertarian?”. Institute for Humane Studies. Retrieved 16 February 2017.
- Long, Joseph.W (1996). “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Class”. Social Philosophy and Policy. 15:2 p. 310. “When I speak of ‘libertarianism’… I mean all three of these very different movements. It might be protested that LibCap [libertarian capitalism], LibSoc libertarian socialism and LibPop libertarian populism are too different from one another to be treated as aspects of a single point of view. But they do share a common—or at least an overlapping—intellectual ancestry”.
- Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). “Libertarianism”. In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: Sage Publications. p. 1007. ISBN 1412988764. “There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and left-libertarianism … socialist libertarians … advocate for the simultaneous abolition of both government and capitalism.”
- Kropotkin, Petr (1927). Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings. Courier Dover Publications. p. 150. ISBN 9780486119861.
It attacks not only capital, but also the main sources of the power of capitalism: law, authority, and the State
- Otero, Carlos Peregrin (2003). “Introduction to Chomsky’s Social Theory”. In Carlos Peregrin Otero (ed.). Radical priorities. Noam Chomsky (book author) (3rd ed.). Oakland, CA: AK Press. p. 26. ISBN 1-902593-69-3.; Chomsky, Noam (2003). Carlos Peregrin Otero (ed.). Radical priorities (3rd ed.). Oakland, CA: AK Press. pp. 227–28. ISBN 1-902593-69-3.
- Vallentyne, Peter (March 2009). “Libertarianism”. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2009 ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Retrieved 5 March 2010.
Libertarianism is committed to full self-ownership. A distinction can be made, however, between right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism, depending on the stance taken on how natural resources can be owned
- Hussain, Syed B. (2004). Encyclopedia of Capitalism. Vol. II : H-R. New York: Facts on File Inc. p. 492. ISBN 0816052247.
In the modern world, political ideologies are largely defined by their attitude towards capitalism. Marxists want to overthrow it, liberals to curtail it extensively, conservatives to curtail it moderately. Those who maintain that capitalism is a excellent economic system, unfairly maligned, with little or no need for corrective government policy, are generally known as libertarians.
- Rothbard, Murray N. (2009). The Betrayal of the American Right. Ludwig von Mises Institute. ISBN 1610165012.
One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy… ‘Libertarians’… had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over…
- Fernandez, Frank (2001). Cuban Anarchism. The History of a Movement. Sharp Press. p. 9. “Thus, in the United States, the once exceedingly useful term ‘libertarian’ has been hijacked by egotists who are in fact enemies of liberty in the full sense of the word.”
- William Belsham (1789). Essays. C. Dilly. p. 11Original from the University of Michigan, digitized 21 May 2007
- OED November 2010 edition
- The British Critic. p. 432. “The author’s Latin verses, which are rather more intelligible than his English, mark him for a furious Libertarian (if we may coin such a term) and a zealous admirer of France, and her liberty, under Bonaparte; such liberty!”.
- Seeley, John Robert (1878). Life and Times of Stein: Or Germany and Prussia in the Napoleonic Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3: 355.
- Maitland, Frederick William (July 1901). “William Stubbs, Bishop of Oxford”. English Historical Review. 16[.3]: 419.
- Joseph Déjacque, “De l’être-humain mâle et femelle–Lettre à P.J. Proudhon” (1857).
- Marshall (2009). p. 641. “The word ‘libertarian’ has long been associated with anarchism, and has been used repeatedly throughout this work. The term originally denoted a person who upheld the doctrine of the freedom of the will; in this sense, Godwin was not a ‘libertarian’, but a ‘necessitarian’. It came however to be applied to anyone who approved of liberty in general. In anarchist circles, it was first used by Joseph Déjacque as the title of his anarchist journal Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social published in New York in 1858. At the end of the last century, the anarchist Sebastien Faure took up the word, to stress the difference between anarchists and authoritarian socialists”.
- Robert Graham, ed. (2005). Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas. Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE–1939). Montreal: Black Rose Books. §17.
- “He called himself a “social poet,” and published two volumes of heavily didactic verse—Lazaréennes and Les Pyrénées Nivelées. In New York, from 1858 to 1861, he edited an anarchist paper entitled Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social, in whose pages he printed as a serial his vision of the anarchist Utopia, entitled L’Humanisphére.” George Woodcock. Anarchism: a history of libertarian ideas and movements. Meridian books. 1962. p. 280.
- Mouton, Jean Claude. “Le Libertaire, Journal du mouvement social”.
- Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. London: Freedom Press. p. 162. ISBN 978-0-900384-89-9. OCLC 37529250.
- Colin Ward (2004), Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 62. “For a century, anarchists have used the word ‘libertarian’ as a synonym for ‘anarchist’, both as a noun and an adjective. The celebrated anarchist journal Le Libertaire was founded in 1896. However, much more recently the word has been appropriated by various American free-market philosophers […].”
- Chomsky, Noam (23 February 2002). “The Week Online Interviews Chomsky”. Z Magazine. Z Communications. Archived from the original on 13 January 2013. Retrieved 21 November 2011.
The term libertarian as used in the US means something quite different from what it meant historically and still means in the rest of the world. Historically, the libertarian movement has been the anti-statist wing of the socialist movement. Socialist anarchism was libertarian socialism.
- “Where Does the Term “Libertarian” Come From Anyway?”.
- Paul Cantor, The Invisible Hand in Popular Culture: Liberty Vs. Authority in American Film and TV, University Press of Kentucky, 2012, p. 353, n. 2.
- Boaz, David; Kirby, David (18 October 2006). The Libertarian Vote. Cato Institute.
- Carpenter, Ted Galen; Innocent, Malen (2008). “Foreign Policy”. In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 177–180. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n109. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
- Edward A. Olsen, US National Defense for the Twenty-First Century: The Grand Exit Strategy, Taylor & Francis, 2002, p. 182, ISBN 0714681407, ISBN 9780714681405.
- “‘Libertarian’ and ‘libertarianism’ are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for ‘anarchist’ and ‘anarchism’, largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of ‘anarchy’ and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, ‘minimal statism’ and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Rothbard and Nozick and their adoption of the words ‘libertarian’ and ‘libertarianism’. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition”. Goodway, David (2006). Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 4
- Carlson (2012). p. 1007.
- Boaz, David (1998). Libertarianism: A Primer. Free Press. pp. 22–26.
- Conway, David (2008). “Freedom of Speech”. In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). Liberalism, Classical. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 295–98 at p. 296. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n112. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
Depending on the context, libertarianism can be seen as either the contemporary name for classical liberalism, adopted to avoid confusion in those countries where liberalism is widely understood to denote advocacy of expansive government powers, or as a more radical version of classical liberalism.
- https://www.lp.org/about/ “Libertarians strongly oppose any government interference into their personal, family, and business decisions. Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another”.
- “It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Rothbard’s anarcho-capitalism)”. Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism. Edinburgh University Press. p. 43. ISBN 0748634959.
- Marshall, Peter (2008). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Perennial. p. 565. “In fact, few anarchists would accept the ‘anarcho-capitalists’ into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice, Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practicing voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists”.
- Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books.
- Marshall (2009). p. 42.
- Goodman, Paul (1972). Little Prayers and Finite Experience.
- Marshall (2009). pp. 42–43.
- Marshall (2009). pp. 8–10.
- “The Morality of Libertarianism”. The Future of Freedom Foundation. Retrieved 27 January 2017.
- “The Non-Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism”. Lew Rockwell. Retrieved 27 January 2017.
- “The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism By Wendy McElroy”. Ncc-1776.org. 1 December 1996. Archived from the original on 31 December 2010. Retrieved 20 September 2010.
- “Nicolas Walter. “Anarchism and Religion““. Theanarchistlibrary.org. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
- “The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism By Wendy McElroy”. Ncc-1776.org. 1 December 1996. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
- Emma Goldman: Making Speech Free, 1902–1909. p. 551. “Free Society was the principal English-language forum for anarchist ideas in the United States at the beginning of the twentieth century.”
- “An Anarchist Defense of Pornography by Boston Anarchist Drinking Brigade”. Theanarchistlibrary.org. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
- “Interview with an Anarchist Dominatrix”. Archived from the original on 18 December 2002. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
- “Freethinker – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary”. Merriam-webster.com. 31 August 2012. Retrieved 12 July 2013.
- “Free thought | Define Free thought at Dictionary.com”. Dictionary.reference.com. Retrieved 12 July 2013.
- Geoffrey C. Fidler (Spring–Summer 1985). “The Escuela Moderna Movement of Francisco Ferrer: “Por la Verdad y la Justicia““. History of Education Quarterly. History of Education Society. 25 (1/2): 103–132. doi:10.2307/368893. JSTOR 368893.
- “Francisco Ferrer’s Modern School”. Flag.blackened.net. Archived from the original on 7 August 2010. Retrieved 20 September 2010.
- “Sex-Pol stood for the German Society of Proletarian Sexual Politics”. Danto writes that Reich offered a mixture of “psychoanalytic counseling, Marxist advice and contraceptives,” and argued for a sexual permissiveness, including for young people and the unmarried, that unsettled other psychoanalysts and the political left. The clinics were immediately overcrowded by people seeking help. Danto, Elizabeth Ann (2007). Freud’s Free Clinics: Psychoanalysis & Social Justice, 1918–1938, Columbia University Press, first published 2005., pp. 118–120, 137, 198, 208.
- The Sexual Revolution, 1945 (Die Sexualität im Kulturkampf, translated by Theodore P. Wolfe).
- Chartier, Gary. Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Minor Compositions. p. 1. ISBN 978-1570272424.
- Shermer, Michael (22 May 2009). “Michael Shermer – Science, Skepticism and Libertarianism”. Point of Inquiry. Retrieved 29 January 2010.
- Gregory, Anthory.The Minarchist’s Dilemma. Strike The Root. 10 May 2004.
- Holcombe, Randall G. “Government: Unnecessary but Inevitable” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 July 2009.
- Long, Roderick, Market Anarchism as Constitutionalism, Molinari Institute.
- Plauché, Geoffrey Allan (2006). On the Social Contract and the Persistence of Anarchy, American Political Science Association, (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University).
- Tannehill, Linda; Tannehill Morris. The Market for Liberty. p. 81.
- Carlson (2012). p. 1007. “[Left-libertarians] disagree with right-libertarians with respect to property rights, arguing instead that individuals have no inherent right to natural resources. Namely, these resources must be treated as collective property that is made available on an egalitarian basis.”
- Narveson, Jan; Trenchard, David (2008). “Left Libertarianism”. In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 288–289. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n174. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
[Left libertarians] regard each of us as full self-owners. Left libertarians embrace the view that all natural resources, land, oil, gold, trees, and so on should be held collectively. To the extent that individuals make use of these commonly owned goods, they must do so only with the permission of society, a permission granted only under the provision that a certain payment for their use be made to society at large.
- Vallentyne, Peter (20 July 2010). “Libertarianism”. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved 26 December 2012.
- Becker, Lawrence C.; Becker, Charlotte B. (2001). Encyclopedia of Ethics. 3. New York: Routledge. p. 1562.
- Guérin (1970).
- Mclaverty, Peter (2005). “Socialism and libertarianism”. Journal of Political Ideologies. 10: 185–198. doi:10.1080/13569310500097349.
- Raico, Ralph (2012). Classical Liberalism and the Austrian School. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute. p. 376. ISBN 9781610160032.
- Anarchism”. In Gaus, Gerald F.; D’Agostino, Fred, eds. (2012). The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy. p. 227.
- Bookchin, Murray and Biehl, Janet (1997). The Murray Bookchin Reader. Cassell: p. 170. ISBN 0-304-33873-7
- Kymlicka, Will (2005). “libertarianism, left-“. In Honderich, Ted. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. New York City: Oxford University Press. p. 516. ISBN 978-0199264797. “‘Left-libertarianism’ is a new term for an old conception of justice, dating back to Grotius. It combines the libertarian assumption that each person possesses a natural right of self-ownership over his person with the egalitarian premise that natural resources should be shared equally. Right-wing libertarians argue that the right of self-ownership entails the right to appropriate unequal parts of the external world, such as unequal amounts of land. However, according to left-libertarians the world’s natural resources were initially unowned, or belonged equally to all, and it is illegitimate for anyone to claim exclusive private ownership of these resources to the detriment of others. Such private appropriation is legitimate only if everyone can appropriate an equal amount, or if those who appropriate more are taxed to compensate those who are thereby excluded from what was once common property. Historic proponents of this view include Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, and Henry George. Recent exponents include Philippe Van Parijs and Hillel Steiner”.
- Narveson, Jan; Trenchard, David (2008). “Left libertarianism”. In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 288–289. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n174. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
Left libertarians regard each of us as full self-owners. However, they differ from what we generally understand by the term libertarian in denying the right to private property. We own ourselves, but we do not own nature, at least not as individuals. Left libertarians embrace the view that all natural resources, land, oil, gold, trees, and so on should be held collectively. To the extent that individuals make use of these commonly owned goods, they must do so only with the permission of society, a permission granted only under the proviso that a certain payment for their use be made to society at large.
- Baradat, Leon P. (2015). Political Ideologies. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317345558.
- Kymlicka, Will (2005) “libertarianism, left-“. In Honderich, Ted. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy: New Edition. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 516. ISBN 978-0199264797. “Right-wing libertarians argue that the right of self-ownership entails the right to appropriate unequal parts of the external world, such as unequal amounts of land.”
- Vallentyne, Peter (2007). “Libertarianism and the State”. In Paul, Ellen Frankel; Miller Jr., Fred; Paul, Jeffrey. Liberalism: Old and New: Volume 24. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 13 June 2013. ISBN 978-0521703055. “The best-known versions of libertarianism are right-libertarian theories, which hold that agents have a very strong moral power to acquire full private property rights in external things. Left-libertarians, by contrast, hold that natural resources (e.g., space, land, minerals, air, and water) belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner and thus cannot be appropriated without the consent of, or significant payment to, the members of society”.
- Thaler, Richard H. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Sunstein, Cass R. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300122237. OCLC 181517463.
- Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow (1st ed.). New York City, NY. ISBN 9780374275631. OCLC 706020998.
- Kropotkin, Peter. “Anarchism” from the Encyclopædia Britannica.
In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions
- David Boaz, Preface for the Japanese Edition of Libertarianism: A Primer. Reprinted at Cato Institute. 21 November 1998.
- Libertarianism.org. “A Note on Labels: Why ‘Libertarian’?”, Cato Institute, accessed 4 July 2013. Archived 16 July 2012 at the Wayback Machine
- Adrina Michelle Garbooshian, The Concept of Human Dignity in the French and American Enlightenments: Religion, Virtue, Liberty, ProQuest, 2006, p. 472, ISBN 0542851601, ISBN 9780542851605; quote: “Influenced by Locke and Smith, certain segments of society affirmed classical liberalism, with a libertarian bent.”
- Paul A. Cantor, The Invisible Hand in Popular Culture: Liberty Vs. Authority in American Film and TV, University Press of Kentucky, 2012, p. xiii, ISBN 081314082X, ISBN 9780813140827; quote: “[T]he roots of libertarianism lie in…the classical liberal tradition.”
- Carlos Peregrin Otero, editor, Noam Chomsky: critical assessments, Volumes 2–3, Taylor & Francis US, 1994, p. 617, ISBN 0-415-10694-X, ISBN 9780415106948.
- Rocker, Rudolf (1949). Pioneers of American Freedom: Origin of Liberal and Radical Thought in America. New York: J. J. Little & Ives Company. p. 13. “It was the great service of liberal thinkers like Jefferson and Paine that they recognized the natural limitations of every form of government. That is why they did not want to see the state become a terrestrial Providence which in its infallibility would make on its own every decision, thereby not only blocking the road to higher forms of social development, but also crippling the natural sense of responsibility of the people which is the essential condition for every prosperous society.”
- Tucker, Benjamin. Individual Liberty. New York: Vanguard Press. 1976I. p. 13. “The Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats. They believe that ‘the best government is that which governs least,’ and that that which governs least is no government at all.”
- Scott, James C. (2012). Two Cheers for Anarchism: Six Easy Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaningful Work and Play. Princeton University Press. pp. 79–80. “At one end of an institutional continuum one can place the total institutions that routinely destroy the autonomy and initiative of their subjects. At the other end of this continuum lies, perhaps, some ideal version of Jeffersonian democracy composed of independent, self-reliant, self-respecting, landowning farmers, managers of their own small enterprises, answerable to themselves, free of debt, and more generally with no institutional reason for servility or deference. Such free-standing farmers, Jefferson thought, were the basis of a vigorous and independent public sphere where citizens could speak their mind without fear or favor. Somewhere in between these two poles lies the contemporary situation of most citizens of Western democracies: a relatively open public sphere but a quotidian institutional experience that is largely at cross purposes with the implicit assumptions behind this public sphere and encouraging and often rewarding caution, deference, servility, and conformity.”
- Long, Roderick T (1998). “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Class”. Social Philosophy and Policy. 15 (2): 310. doi:10.1017/s0265052500002028.
- David Boaz, The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman, Simon & Schuster, 2010, p. 123, ISBN 1439118337, ISBN 9781439118337
- Murray Rothbard, The Libertarian Heritage: The American Revolution and Classical Liberalism, excerpted from Rothbard’s For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, 1973; published at LewRockwell.com, 2006.
- Ellen Meiksins Wood. Mind and Politics: An Approach to the Meaning of Liberal and Socialist Individualism. University of California Press. 1972. ISBN 0-520-02029-4. p. 7.
- Charles T. Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, 1913; republished 1995 by Ludwig von Mises Institute, p. 74, ISBN 1610161076, ISBN 9781610161077
- David C. Hoffman, “Paine and Prejudice: Rhetorical Leadership through Perceptual Framing in Common Sense,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Fall 2006, Vol. 9 Issue 3, pp. 373–410.
- Pauline Maier, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence (New York: Knopf, 1997), pp. 90–91.
- Hitchens, Christopher (2006). Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man. Grove Press. p. 37. ISBN 0-8021-4383-0.
- Lamb, Robert (2010). “Liberty, Equality, and the Boundaries of Ownership: Thomas Paine’s Theory of Property Rights”. Review of Politics. 72 (3): 483–511. doi:10.1017/s0034670510000331.
- Ian Ousby, The Cambridge Guide to Literature in English, Cambridge University Press, 1993, p. 305, ISBN 0521440866, ISBN 9780521440868.
- Godwin, William (1793). Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Modern Morals and Happiness. G. G. and J. Robinson. OCLC 2340417.
- “Anarchism”, Encarta Online Encyclopedia 2006 (UK version).
- Everhart, Robert B. The Public School Monopoly: A Critical Analysis of Education and the State in American Society. Pacific Institute for Public Policy Research, 1982. p. 115.
- Philip, Mark (20 May 2006). “William Godwin”. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Peter Kropotkin, “Anarchism”, Encyclopædia Britannica 1910.
- Godwin himself attributed the first anarchist writing to Edmund Burke’s A Vindication of Natural Society. “Most of the above arguments may be found much more at large in Burke’s Vindication of Natural Society; a treatise in which the evils of the existing political institutions are displayed with incomparable force of reasoning and lustre of eloquence…” – footnote, Ch. 2 Political Justice by William Godwin.
- Adams, Ian. Political Ideology Today. Manchester University Press, 2001. p. 116.
- Godwin, William (1796) . Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Modern Morals and Manners. G. G. and J. Robinson. OCLC 2340417.
- Sheehan, Sean. Anarchism, London: Reaktion Books Ltd., 2004. p. 85.
- Graham, Robert (2005). “Preface”. Anarchism: a Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas: from Anarchy to Anarchism. Montréal: Black Rose Books. pp. xi–xiv. ISBN 1-55164-250-6. Retrieved 11 August 2010.
- “What is Communist Anarchism?” Alexander Berkman, in Now and After.
- Joseph Déjacque. De l’être-humain mâle et femelle – Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque (in French).
- Robert Graham, Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas – Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939), Black Rose Books, 2005
- “l’Echange”, article in Le Libertaire no 6, 21 September 1858, New York. .
- Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 145. ISBN 0-900384-89-1.
- Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 162. ISBN 0-900384-89-1.
- “What do I mean by individualism? I mean by individualism the moral doctrine which, relying on no dogma, no tradition, no external determination, appeals only to the individual conscience.”Mini-Manual of Individualism by Han Ryner
- “I do not admit anything except the existence of the individual, as a condition of his sovereignty. To say that the sovereignty of the individual is conditioned by Liberty is simply another way of saying that it is conditioned by itself.””Anarchism and the State” in Individual Liberty
- Goodway, David. Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow. Liverpool University Press, 2006, p. 99.
- Leopold, David (4 August 2006). “Max Stirner”. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- The Encyclopedia Americana: A Library of Universal Knowledge. Encyclopedia Corporation. p. 176.
- Miller, David. “Anarchism”. 1987. The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought. Blackwell Publishing. p. 11.
- Nyberg, Svein Olav. “The union of egoists” (PDF). Non Serviam. Oslo, Norway: Svein Olav Nyberg. 1: 13–14. OCLC 47758413. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 December 2010. Retrieved 1 September 2012.
- Thomas, Paul (1985). Karl Marx and the Anarchists. London: Routledge/Kegan Paul. p. 142. ISBN 0-7102-0685-2.
- Carlson, Andrew (1972). “Philosophical Egoism: German Antecedents”. Anarchism in Germany. Metuchen: Scarecrow Press. ISBN 0-8108-0484-0. Archived from the original on 15 February 2005. Retrieved 4 December 2008.
- Palmer, Brian (29 December 2010). What do anarchists want from us?. Slate.com.
- William Bailie. “Archived copy” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 February 2012. Retrieved 17 June 2013.CS1 maint: Archived copy as title (link) Josiah Warren: The First American Anarchist – A Sociological Study, Boston: Small, Maynard & Co., 1906, p. 20.
- “2. Individualist Anarchism and Reaction”.
- “The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism, By Wendy McElroy”.
- “La insumisión voluntaria: El anarquismo individualista español durante la Dictadura y la Segunda República (1923–1938)” by Xavier Díez. Archived 23 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- “Los anarco-individualistas, G.I.A … Una escisión de la FAI producida en el IX Congreso (Carrara, 1965) se produjo cuando un sector de anarquistas de tendencia humanista rechazan la interpretación que ellos juzgan disciplinaria del pacto asociativo clásico, y crean los GIA (Gruppi di Iniziativa Anarchica). Esta pequeña federación de grupos, hoy nutrida sobre todo de veteranos anarco-individualistas de orientación pacifista, naturista, etcétera defiende la autonomía personal y rechaza a rajatabla toda forma de intervención en los procesos del sistema, como sería por ejemplo el sindicalismo. Su portavoz es L’Internazionale con sede en Ancona. La escisión de los GIA prefiguraba, en sentido contrario, el gran debate que pronto había de comenzar en el seno del movimiento”“El movimiento libertario en Italia” by Bicicleta. REVISTA DE COMUNICACIONES LIBERTARIAS Year 1 No. Noviembre, 1 1977.
- “Proliferarán así diversos grupos que practicarán el excursionismo, el naturismo, el nudismo, la emancipación sexual o el esperantismo, alrededor de asociaciones informales vinculadas de una manera o de otra al anarquismo. Precisamente las limitaciones a las asociaciones obreras impuestas desde la legislación especial de la Dictadura potenciarán indirectamente esta especie de asociacionismo informal en que confluirá el movimiento anarquista con esta heterogeneidad de prácticas y tendencias. Uno de los grupos más destacados, que será el impulsor de la revista individualista Ética será el Ateneo Naturista Ecléctico, con sede en Barcelona, con sus diferentes secciones la más destacada de las cuales será el grupo excursionista Sol y Vida.”“La insumisión voluntaria: El anarquismo individualista español durante la Dictadura y la Segunda República (1923–1938)” by Xavier Díez Archived 23 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- “Les anarchistes individualistes du début du siècle l’avaient bien compris, et intégraient le naturisme dans leurs préoccupations. Il est vraiment dommage que ce discours se soit peu à peu effacé, d’antan plus que nous assistons, en ce moment, à un retour en force du puritanisme (conservateur par essence).”“Anarchisme et naturisme, aujourd’hui.” by Cathy Ytak Archived 25 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine
- anne (30 July 2014). “Culture of Individualist Anarchism in Late 19th Century America” (PDF).
- individualista.pdf Xavier Diez. El anarquismo individualista en España (1923–1939). Virus Editorial. 2007. p. 143.[permanent dead link]
- The “Illegalists”.Archived 8 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Doug Imrie (published by Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed).
- Parry, Richard. The Bonnot Gang. Rebel Press, 1987. p. 15.
- “Anarchism” at the Encyclopedia Britannica online.
- “Anarchosyndicalism: Theory and Practice – The Anarchist Library”.
- Bookchin, Murray (1998). The Spanish Anarchists. pp. 111–114.
- FERMÍN SALVOCHEA ÁLVAREZ, CGT. BIOGRAFÍAS (English translation). Accessed April 2009
- Avrich, Paul (2006). The Russian Anarchists. Stirling: AK Press. pp. 195, 204. ISBN 1-904859-48-8.
- “There Is No Communism in Russia” by Emma Goldman. Quote: “Soviet Russia, it must now be obvious, is an absolute despotism politically and the crassest form of state capitalism economically.”
- Nomad, Max (1966). “The Anarchist Tradition”. In Drachkovitch, Milorad M. (ed.). The Revolutionary Internationals, 1864-1943. Stanford University Press. p. 88. ISBN 0-8047-0293-4.[verification needed]
- Dielo Truda (2006) . Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists (Draft). Italy: FdCA. Retrieved 24 October 2006.
- “The Organizational Platform of the Libertarian Communists”.
- Hakim Bey. “T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism”
- “Die bayerische Revolution 1918/19. Die erste Räterepublik der Literaten”[dead link]
- “1918–1921: The Italian factory occupations – Biennio Rosso” on Libcom.org.
- Holbrow, Marnie, “Daring but Divided” (Socialist Review, November 2002).
- Berry, David. “Fascism or Revolution.” Le Libertaire. August 1936.
- Antony Beevor, The Battle for Spain: The Spanish Civil War 1936–1939, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2006, p. 46, ISBN 978-0-297-84832-5.
- “Anarchist Communism & Libertarian Communism” by Gruppo Comunista Anarchico di Firenze. from “L’informatore di parte”, No. 4, October 1979, quarterly journal of the Gruppo Comunista Anarchico di Firenze, on Libcom.org.
- Murray Bookchin, To Remember Spain: The Anarchist and Syndicalist Revolution of 1936, AK Press, 1994, pp. 2–39, ISBN 9781873176870.
- “inter alia: *George Richard Esenwein, The Spanish Civil War: a Modern Tragedy, 2005, p. 269. *Alexandre Skirda, Facing the Enemy: a History of Anarchist Organization from Proudhon to May 1968: 2002, p. 158. *Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism, 2010, p. 466. *Graham Kelsey”. Anarchosyndicalism, Libertarian Communism, and the State: the CNT in Zaragoza and Aragon, 1930–1937. 1991: 250.
- José Peirats & Chris Ealham, The CNT in the Spanish Revolution, Volume 2: 2001, p. 76. “The anarchist youth movement had been founded soon after the birth of the Second Republic…. Later, they spread throughout the whole of Spain until they came to represent the third branch of the great libertarian family…. The FIJL had agreed upon the following statement of principles: ‘…This Association shall strive to invest young people with a libertarian conviction, as to equip them individually to struggle against authority in all its forms, whether in trade union matters or in ideological ones, so as to attain a libertarian social arrangement'”
- Esenwein, George Richard. The Spanish Civil War: A Modern Tragedy, Routledge, 2005. p. 269.
- Gómez Casas, p. 237.
- “Sí se ha aprobado por unanimidad, también a propuesta de Ciudadanos, dedicar una calle al anarquista Melchor Rodríguez García, el último alcalde de Madrid republicano, ante “el gran consenso social y político” al respecto y por “su gran relevancia para la reconciliación y la concordia tras la Guerra Civil”. El País. Madrid sustituirá las calles franquistas por víctimas del terrorismo
- Jesus Ruiz. Posibilismo libertario. Felix Morga, Alcalde de Najera (1891-1936). El Najerilla-Najera. 2003.
- Renof, Israël Renof (May 1968). Possibilisme libertaire (PDF). Noir et Rouge. n° 41. pp. 16–23.
- “Manifesto of Libertarian Communism – Georges Fontenis”.
- London Federation of Anarchists involvement in Carrara conference, 1968 International Institute of Social History. Retrieved 19 January 2010.
- Short history of the IAF-IFA A-infos news project, Accessed 19 January 2010.
- “The Left-Libertarians – the last of an ancient breed – The Villager Newspaper”. The Villager.
- Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America by Paul Avrich. AK Press. 2005. pp. 471–472.
- Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, AK Press, p. 419.
- Anarchist Voices: An Oral History Of Anarchism In America by Paul Avrich. AK Press. 2005.
- A 1970s associate, subject of David Marr‘s A spirit gone to another place The Sydney Morning Herald obituary, 9 September 2006.
- See Baker A J “Sydney Libertarianism and the Push” or at “Sydney Libertarians and the Push” Archived 3 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine on Prof. W L Morison memorial site.
- Takver. “Sydney Libertarians and Anarchism Index”.
- “Sydney Libertarianism” at the Marxists Internet Archive.
- “Libertarian Marxism? – The Anarchist Library”.
- Ernesto Screpanti, Libertarian communism: Marx Engels and the Political Economy of Freedom, Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2007.
- Draper, Hal. “The Principle of Self-Emancipation in Marx and Engels” Archived 23 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine “The Socialist Register.” Vol 4.
- “A libertarian Marxist tendency map”. Libcom.org. Retrieved 13 May 2014.
- “Root & Branch”.
- “Root & Branch # 7”.
- “papers relating to Libertarian Communism (a splinter group of the SPGB) including journals and miscellaneous correspondence, 1970–1980 (1 box). “Socialist Party of Great Britain” at Archives Hub at the Great Research Centre.
- BEKKEN, Jon, Sam Dolgoff, MiMi Rivera and Jeff Stein PERIODICAL (1 January 1989). “LIBERTARIAN LABOR REVIEW: Anarchosyndicalist Ideas and Discussion. #9 Summer, 1990”. Champaign: Libertarian Labor Review, 1989. – via Amazon.
- “Libertarian Labor Review INDEX #1–24” at syndicalists.us.
- Marshall. p. 496.
- Warren, Josiah (17 February 1872). “The Motives for Communism—How It Worked and What It Led To”. Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly. IV: 14. p. 5.
- Riggenbach, Jeff (25 February 2011). “Josiah Warren: The First American Anarchist”. Mises Daily. Mises Institute.
- Warren, Josiah. Equitable Commerce. “A watch has a cost and a value. The COST consists of the amount of labor bestowed on the mineral or natural wealth, in converting it into metals…”
- Palmer, Brian (29 December 2010) What do anarchists want from us?, Slate.com.
- “Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy – The Anarchist Library”.
- Xavier Diez. L’ANARQUISME INDIVIDUALISTA A ESPANYA 1923–1938 p. 42.
- Madison, Charles A. (1945). “Anarchism in the United States”. Journal of the History of Ideas. 1 (6): 53.
- Bey, Hakim. “The Lemonade Ocean & Modern Times”
- “Su obra más representativa es Walden, aparecida en 1854, aunque redactada entre 1845 y 1847, cuando Thoreau decide instalarse en el aislamiento de una cabaña en el bosque, y vivir en íntimo contacto con la naturaleza, en una vida de soledad y sobriedad. De esta experiencia, su filosofía trata de transmitirnos la idea que resulta necesario un retorno respetuoso a la naturaleza, y que la felicidad es sobre todo fruto de la riqueza interior y de la armonía de los individuos con el entorno natural. Muchos han visto en Thoreau a uno de los precursores del ecologismo y del anarquismo primitivista representado en la actualidad por Jonh Zerzan. Para George Woodcock(8), esta actitud puede estar también motivada por una cierta idea de resistencia al progreso y de rechazo al materialismo creciente que caracteriza la sociedad norteamericana de mediados de siglo XIX.” “La insumisión voluntaria. El anarquismo individualista español durante la dictadura y la segund arepública (1923-1938)” by Xavier Diez Archived 26 May 2006 at the Wayback Machine
- “Resisting the nation state”.
- Zerzan, John. “Against Civilization: Readings And Reflections” – via Amazon.
- Johnson, Ellwood. (2005). The Goodly Word: The Puritan Influence in America Literature. Clements Publishing. p. 138.
- Seligman, Edwin Robert Anderson; Johnson, Alvin Saunders, eds (1937). Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. p. 12.
- “Welcome to Customer Service”.
- Smith, Adam (1776). “Chapter 2, Article 1: Taxes upon the Rent of Houses”. The Wealth of Nations, Book V.
- Suits, Daniel B. (September 1977). “Measurement of Tax Progressivity”. The American Economic Review, published by American Economic Association. 67 (4): 747–752. JSTOR 1813408.
- Suits, Daniel B. (September 1977). “Measurement of Tax Progressivity”. American Economic Review. 67 (4): 747–752. JSTOR 1813408.
- McCluskey, William J.; Franzsen, Riël C. D. (1 January 2005). “Land Value Taxation: An Applied Analysis”. Ashgate – via Google Books.
- Foldvary, Fred. “Geoism Explained”. The Progress Report. Archived from the original on 17 March 2015. Retrieved 12 January 2014.
- “Henry George: Antiprotectionist Giant of American Economics” (PDF). Economic Insights. 10: 2. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
- George, Henry. Progress and Poverty. (1879; Garden City, NY: Doubleday 1912).
- Casal, Paula (2011). “Global Taxes on Natural Resources” (PDF). Journal of Moral Philosophy. 8 (3): 307–27. doi:10.1163/174552411×591339. Retrieved 14 March 2014.
It can also invoke Geoism, a philosophical tradition encompassing the views of John Locke and Henry George …
- “Introduction to Earth Sharing“.
- “Jeffery J. Smith”. Progress.org.
- Foldvary, Fred. “Geoism and Libertarianism” Archived 4 November 2012 at the Wayback Machine“.
- Levy, Carl. “Anarchism”. Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia 2007. Archived from the original on 31 October 2009.
- Spooner, Lysander. “The Law of Intellectual Property“. Archived 24 May 2014 at the Wayback Machine.
- Watner, Carl (1977). “Benjamin Tucker and His Periodical, Liberty” (PDF). (868 KB). In Journal of Libertarian Studies. 1: 4. p. 308.
- Watner, Carl (March 1975). “Spooner Vs. Liberty” (PDF). (1.20 MB). In The Libertarian Forum. 7: 3. ISSN 0047-4517. pp. 5–6.
- Brooks, Frank H. (1994). The Individualist Anarchists: An Anthology of Liberty (1881–1908). Transaction Publishers. p. 75.
- Woodcock, George (1962). Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. p. 459.
- Martin, James J. (1970). Men against the State: The Expositors of Individualist Anarchism in America. Colorado Springs, CO: Myles.
- “Literature of Liberty, Autumn 1981, vol. 4, No. 3 – Online Library of Liberty”.
- Avrich, Paul. 2006. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America. AK Press. p. 6.
- Burns, Jennifer (2009). Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 309. ISBN 978-0-19-532487-7.
- Neilson, Francis (1946). “The Story of ‘The Freeman‘“. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology. 6 (1): 3–53.
- Mencken, H.L. (1926). “The Immortal Democrat”. American Mercury. 9 (33): 123.
- Boaz, David (1997). The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Readings from Lao-Tzu to Milton Friedman. New York: Free Press. p. 31.
- “What was Ayn Rand’s view of the libertarian movement?”. Ayn Rand Institute.
More specifically, I disapprove of, disagree with and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives, the so-called “hippies of the right,” who attempt to snare the younger or more careless ones of my readers by claiming simultaneously to be followers of my philosophy and advocates of anarchism. […] libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication when that fits their purpose.
- Mayhew, Robert (2005). Ayn Rand Answers: The Best of Her Q & A. p. 72.
- Phillips-Fein, Kim (2009). Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan. New York: W. W. Norton. p. 27.
- Galles, Gary (2013). Apostle of Peace: The Radical Mind of Leonard Read. Laissez Faire Books. ISBN 9781621290513.
- Phillips-Fein 2009, p. 27.
- Hazlitt, Henry (1 May 2006) [March 1984]. “The Early History of FEE”. The Freeman. FEE.
The original officers were David M. Goodrich, chairman of the Board (he was then also chairman of the board of the B. F. Goodrich Company); Leonard Read, president; myself, vice-president; Fred R. Fairchild, professor of economics at Yale University, secretary; and Claude Robinson, president of the Opinion Research Institute, treasurer. [The] sixteen [original] trustees […] included H. W. Luhnow, president of William Volker & Company; A. C. Mattei, president of Honolulu Oil Corporation; William A. Paton of the University of Michigan; Charles White, president of the Republic Steel Corporation; Leo Wolman, professor of economics at Columbia; Donaldson Brown, former vice-president of General Motors; Jasper Crane, former vice-president of Du Pont; B. E. Hutchinson, chairman of the finance committee of Chrysler Corporation; Bill Matthews, publisher of the Arizona Star; W. C. Mullendore, president of the Southern California Edison Company.
- Perlstein, Rick (2009). Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus. Nation Books. pp. 113–14. ISBN 9780786744152.
- Raimondo, Justin (2001). An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
- Sabatini, Peter (Fall/Winter 1994–1995). “Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy“. Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed. p. 41.
- Raimondo, Justin (2000). An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-61592-239-3. OCLC 43541222.
- DeLeon, David (1978). The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indigenous Radicalism. Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 127. “only a few individuals like Murray Rothbard, in Power and Market, and some article writers were influenced by [past anarchists like Spooner and Tucker]. Most had not evolved consciously from this tradition; they had been a rather automatic product of the American environment.”
- Rothbard, Murray N. (1965, 2000). “The Spooner-Tucker Doctrine: An Economist’s View“. Journal of Libertarian Studies. 20:1. p. 7. “There is, in the body of thought known as ‘Austrian economics,’ a scientific explanation of the workings of the free market (and of the consequences of government intervention in that market) which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their political and social Weltanschauung [worldview]”.
- Fischler, Steven (Director); Sucher, Joel (Director) (1983). Anarchism in America (DVD). Pacific Street Films. “I was just amazed. When I read Emma Goldman, it was as though everything I had hoped that the Republican Party would stand for suddenly came out—crystallized—in this magnificently clear statement.”
- Halle, Roland; Ladue, Peter (1980). Karl Hess: Toward Liberty. Direct Cinema, Ltd. [M16 2824 K].
- “Spangler Home Improvement Tips – Smart home improvement decisions”. Archived from the original on 8 July 2011.
- From Far Right to Far Left– and Farther– With Karl Hess by James Boyd: 1970 New York Times
- See Raimondo 277–78; Doherty 562–565.
- Murray N. Rothbard, letter to David Bergland, 5 June 1986, qtd. Raimondo 263–264. Rothbard emphasized that this was relevant as a matter of strategy: the failure to pitch the libertarian message to Middle America, he wrote, might result in the loss of “the tight-assed majority.”
- Primary sources by left-wing market anarchists:
- Carson, Kevin A. (2008). Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. Charleston, SC: BookSurge.
- Long, Roderick T. (2008). ““An Interview With Roderick Long”.
- Johnson, Charles W. (2008). “Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism”. Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country?. In Long, Roderick T.; Machan, Tibor. Aldershot: Ashgate pp. 155–188.
- Spangler, Brad (15 September 2006). “Market Anarchism as Stigmergic Socialism”. Archived 10 May 2011 at Archive.today
- Konkin III, Samuel Edward. The New Libertarian Manifesto. Archived 5 June 2014 at the Wayback Machine
- Sheldon Richman (3 February 2011). “Libertarian Left: Free-market anti-capitalism, the unknown ideal.” The American Conservative. Retrieved 5 March 2012.
- Sciabarra, Chris Matthew (2000). Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism. University Park, PA:Pennsylvania State University Press.
- Chartier, Gary (2009). Economic Justice and Natural Law. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
- Bill Winter, “1971–2001: The Libertarian Party’s 30th Anniversary Year: Remembering the first three decades of America’s ‘Party of Principle'”[dead link] LP News
- International Society for Individual Liberty Freedom Network list.
- “The Libertarian Party: A History From Hospers to Johnson · 71 Republic”. 71 Republic. 11 November 2018. Retrieved 22 March 2019.
- National Book Foundation. “National Book Awards: 1975 – Philosophy and Religion”. Archived 9 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- Schaefer, David Lewis (30 April 2008). “Robert Nozick and the Coast of Utopia”. The New York Sun.
- Nozick, Robert (2013). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books. p. 51. ISBN 978-0-465-05100-7.
- Rothbard, Murray N. (2009). The Betrayal of the American Right. Ludwig von Mises Institute. ISBN 1610165012.
- Schneider-Mayerson, Matthew. Peak Oil: Apocalyptic Environmentalism and Libertarian Political Culture. Chicago. ISBN 9780226285573. OCLC 922640625.
- Teles, Steven; Kenney, Daniel A. (2008). “Spreading the Word: The diffusion of American Conservatism in Europe and Beyond”. In Steinmo, Sven (2007). Growing Apart?: America and Europe in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press. pp. 136–169.
- Gregory, Anthony (24 April 2007). “Real World Politics and Radical Libertarianism”. LewRockwell.com. Archived 18 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine
- Thomas 1985, p. 4
- John Patten (28 October 1968). ““These groups had their roots in the anarchist resurgence of the nineteen sixties. Young militants finding their way to anarchism, often from the anti-bomb and anti-Vietnam war movements, linked up with an earlier generation of activists, largely outside the ossified structures of ‘official’ anarchism. Anarchist tactics embraced demonstrations, direct action such as industrial militancy and squatting, protest bombings like those of the First of May Group and Angry Brigade—and a spree of publishing activity.” “Islands of Anarchy: Simian, Cienfuegos, Refract and their support network” by John Patten”. Katesharpleylibrary.net. Archived from the original on 4 June 2011. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
- “Farrell provides a detailed history of the Catholic Workers and their founders Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin. He explains that their pacifism, anarchism, and commitment to the downtrodden were one of the important models and inspirations for the 60s. As Farrell puts it, “Catholic Workers identified the issues of the sixties before the Sixties began, and they offered models of protest long before the protest decade.”“The Spirit of the Sixties: The Making of Postwar Radicalism” by James J. Farrell.
- “While not always formally recognized, much of the protest of the sixties was anarchist. Within the nascent women’s movement, anarchist principles became so widespread that a political science professor denounced what she saw as “The Tyranny of Structurelessness.” Several groups have called themselves “Amazon Anarchists.” After the Stonewall Rebellion, the New York Gay Liberation Front based their organization in part on a reading of Murray Bookchin‘s anarchist writings.” “Anarchism” by Charley Shively in Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. p. 52.
- “Within the movements of the sixties there was much more receptivity to anarchism-in-fact than had existed in the movements of the thirties…But the movements of the sixties were driven by concerns that were more compatible with an expressive style of politics, with hostility to authority in general and state power in particular…By the late sixties, political protest was intertwined with cultural radicalism based on a critique of all authority and all hierarchies of power. Anarchism circulated within the movement along with other radical ideologies. The influence of anarchism was strongest among radical feminists, in the commune movement, and probably in the Weather Underground and elsewhere in the violent fringe of the anti-war movement.” “Anarchism and the Anti-Globalization Movement” by Barbara Epstein.
- London Federation of Anarchists involvement in Carrara conference, 1968 International Institute of Social History, Accessed 19 January 2010
- “The International Conferences of the Communist Left (1976–80) | International Communist Current”. En.internationalism.org. Retrieved 12 July 2013.
- Rupert, Mark (2006). Globalization and International Political Economy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 66. ISBN 0-7425-2943-6.
- Infinitely Demanding by Simon Critchley. Verso. 2007. p. 125.
- Chamsy el- Ojeili. Beyond post-socialism. Dialogues with the far-left. Palgrave Macmillan. 2015. p. 7.
- The Libertarian Vote by David Boaz and David Kirby, Cato Institute, 18 October 2006.
- The ANES Guide to Public Opinion and Electoral Behavior, 1948–2004 American National Election Studies.
- Gallup Poll news release, 7–10 September 2006.
- Kiley, Jocelyn (25 August 2014). “In Search of Libertarians”. Pew Research Center. “14% say the term libertarian describes them well; 77% of those know the definition (11% of total), while 23% do not (3% of total).”
- Kirby, David; Ekins, Emily McClintock (6 August 2012). “Libertarian Roots of the Tea Party”. Cato.
- Brennan, Jason (2012). Libertarianism What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. pp. 142–42.
Is the Tea Party libertarian? Overall, the Tea Party movement is not libertarian, though it has many libertarian elements, and many libertarians are Tea Partiers. […] They share the libertarian view that DC tends to be corrupt, and that Washington often promotes special interests at the expense of the common good. However, Tea Party members are predominantly populist, nationalist, social conservatives rather than libertarians. Polls indicate that most Tea Partiers believe government should have an active role in promoting traditional “family values” or conservative Judeo-Christian values. Many of them oppose free trade and open immigration. They tend to favor less government intervention in the domestic economy but more government intervention in international trade.
- Emily Ekins, Is Half the Tea Party Libertarian?, Reason, 26 September 2011.
- Pauline Arrillaga (14 March 2012). “Tea Party 2012: A Look At The Conservative Movement’s Last Three Years”. Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 17 April 2012.Michelle Boorstein (5 October 2010). “Tea party, religious right often overlap, poll shows”. The Washington Post.Peter Wallsten, Danny Yadron (29 September 2010). “Tea-Party Movement Gathers Strength”. The Wall Street Journal.
- Halloran, Liz (5 February 2010). “What’s Behind The New Populism?”. NPR.Barstow, David (16 February 2010). “Tea Party Lights Fuse for Rebellion on Right”. The New York Times.Fineman, Howard (6 April 2010). “Party Time”. Newsweek.
- Tea Party 2012: A Look At The Conservative Movement’s Last Three Years.
- Tea Party ‘Is Dead’: How the Movement Fizzled in 2012’s GOP Primaries. The Daily Beast. 2 February 2012.
- Ryan Brings the Tea Party to the Ticket. The New York Times. 12 August 2012. Retrieved 13 August 2012.
- Justin Raimondo, Election 2012: Ron Paul’s Revenge!. Antiwar.com. 7 November 2012.
- Tuccile, J.D. (7 November 2012). “Gary Johnson Pulls One Million Votes, One Percent”. Reason. Retrieved 7 November 2012.
- “Libertarian Party buoyant; Greens hopeful”. United Press International. Retrieved 9 November 2012.
- Karoun Demirjian (5 October 2012). “Libertarian candidate makes push for Nevada’s Ron Paul supporters”. Las Vegas Sun. Retrieved 2 November 2012.
- Lucas Eaves (1 November 2012). “Why 5% matters to Gary Johnson”. Independent Voter Network. Retrieved 6 November 2012.
- Texas Politics Today, 2013–2014 Edition – p. 121, William Maxwell, Ernest Crain, Adolfo Santos – 2013.
- Belluck, Pam (27 October 2003). “Libertarians Pursue New Political Goal: State of Their Own”. The New York Times. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
- Elizabeth Hovde (11 May 2009). “Americans mixed on Obama’s big government gamble”. The Oregonian.
- Gairdner, William D. (2007) . The Trouble with Canada: A Citizen Speaks Out. Toronto: BPS Books. pp. 101–102. ISBN 978-0-9784402-2-0.
The first, we would call “libertarianism” today. Libertarians wanted to get all government out of people’s lives. This movement is still very much alive today. In fact, in the United States, it is the third largest political party, and ran 125 candidates during the U.S. election of 1988.
- “August 2017 Ballot Access News Print Edition”. ballot-access.org.
- Carley, Mark (2004). “Trade union membership 1993–2003”. International: SPIRE Associates.
- This includes the view that right-libertarianism has no explicit theory of liberty. See for instance “New-Paradigm Libertarianism: a Very Brief Explanation”.
- “Complexity Economics Shows Us Why Laissez-Faire Economics Always Fails”.
- Matthew, Schneider-Mayerson. Peak Oil: Apocalyptic Environmentalism and Libertarian Political Culture. Chicago. ISBN 9780226285573. OCLC 922640625.
- Robin, Corey (2011). The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin. Oxford University Press. pp. 15–16. ISBN 0199793743.
- Donahue, John. (1 May 1997). “The Devil in Devolution”. American Prospect. 8 (32).
- Engels, Friedrich (1872). On Authority. Marxists Internet Archive.
- Goodwin, Barbara. (2014). Using Political Ideas. Sixth edition. ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey.
- Lind, Michael. (4 June 2013.). “The Question Libertarians Just Can’t Answer”. Salon.
- Lind, Michael. “Why libertarians apologize for autocracy”.
- “Was America Ever Libertarian”. Independent Political Report. 25 April 2017. Retrieved 6 October 2018.
- Attas, Daniel (2010). “Libertarianism”. In Bevir, Mark. Encyclopedia of Political Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. pp. 810–18. ISBN 978-1-4129-5865-3.
- Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). “Libertarianism”. In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: Sage Publications. ISBN 1412988764, 9781412988766.
- Doherty, Brian (2007). Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement. PublicAffairs.
- Graham, Robert (2005). Anarchism: a Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas: from Anarchy to Anarchism. Montréal: Black Rose Books. ISBN 1-55164-250-6.
- Guérin, Daniel (1970). Anarchism: From Theory to Practice. New York: Monthly Review Press. ISBN 978-0853451754.
- Hamowy, Ronald (2008). “General Introduction”. In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. xxv–xxxvii. doi:10.4135/9781412965811. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
- Hospers, John (1971). Libertarianism. Santa Barbara, CA: Reason Press.
- Hunt, E. K. (2003). Property and Prophets: the Evolution of Economic Institutions and Ideologies. New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc. ISBN 0-7656-0608-9.
- Kinna, Ruth (2010). “Anarchism”. In Bevir, Mark. Encyclopedia of Political Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. pp. 34–37. ISBN 978-1-4129-5865-3.
- Marshall, Peter (2009). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. Oakland, CA: PM Press. ISBN 978-1-60486-064-1.
- McLaughlin, Paul (2007). Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism. AshGate.
- Miller, David; Coleman, Janet; Connolly, William; Ryan, Alan (1991). The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0631179443.
- Richardson, James L. (2001). Contending Liberalisms in World Politics: Ideology and Power. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. ISBN 1-55587-939-X.
- Ward, Colin (2004). Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-192804-77-8.
- Woodcock, George (2004). Anarchism. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-1-551116-29-7.