Excellent argument by Richard Moore. I agree with the general thrust of
this post, however one clarification needs to be made.
We need to be careful about constructing a monolithic definition of
libertarianism vis-a-vis the definition presented by Moore.
If you are talking about the anti-tax/anti-government protestors who call
themselves "libertarians" then I agree; they need to wake up. The
devolution of power (and this was recently pointed out in an excellent
article by Noam Chomsky in a recent edition of the Progressive) means an
increase in the tyranny of private capital. The goal is to dissolve the
democratic structures of the state (what little has been achieved over
the past 100 years or so) so that monopoly capital can have a freer
reign over the people of the world. Indeed, the surveillance-carceral
functions of the state are increasing (both to meet the increasing need
for coercion in lieu of the pacifying effects of social democratic
measures, and because of the general trend towards crisis in the capitalist
world-system).
However, you should not characterize what has historically been called
libertarianism, that is communist-anarchist, in such a fashion. The
efforts by libertarians since the first Internationale has been to
democratize the economy, thereby avoiding the state socialist phase
(the "dictatorship of the proletariat") in the transition to economic
democracy (i.e. communism).
To move towards a truer democracy will involve mass organization, I agree,
but this is not at odds with the goals of libertarianism. Chomsky, for
example, has argued cogently that his libertarianism is not at odds with
an increasing public sphere. Libertarians seek to remove the state -- not
government.
In any event, I agree that utopia is only an ideal, a goal that we strive
for. But since human beings are self-creating, we must work towards
this goal. And I also agree with the Moore's argument concerning the
breaking up of old ground before planting a fresh garden. If this is a
metaphor for the world worker revolution then I can only say: What are we
waiting for?
In solidarity,
Andrew Austin
P.S. Check out my website Theory and Praxis
(http://www.mtsu.edu/~aaustin). Under the section concerning capitalism
and fascism (the Political Right) I have a working essay (very
short and very raw right now -- it is a thought piece for the
time being) entitled "Dissimulating the Panopticon: What is Global
Corporatism?" It discuss the historical development of the new global
corporatism and its political culture of imperial stealth fascism.
On Mon, 4 Mar
1996, chris chase-dunn wrote:
>
> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 13:20:07 +0000
> From: "Richard K. Moore" <rkmoore@IOL.IE>
>
> [Please Cc: rkmoore@iol.ie on any responses.]
>
> Someone wrote to me:
> >The way i see out of the situation is to move power closer to people,
> >eliminating most of federal bureaucracy entirely. The transnationals
> >would face quite a challenge dealing with miriads of local governments
> >instead of bribing few Washington "insiders".
>
> >...The big question is how to prevent global monopolism, i.e. situations
> >when huge transnational companies capture the entire market. I do not
> >think any global ruling bodies are necessary to combat the threat; rather,
> >local governments may impose import fees depending on the global market
> >share of the supplier.
>
> Please observe the current power relationship between
> transnationals and the various countries of the world. The TN's _thrive_
> on lots of little countries, each strapped for cash, looking to global
> trade to pull them out of debt. The TN's play them off against one
> another. The TN's are consequently controlling not only global trade and
> finance, but increasingly the internal affairs of each country. They no
> longer need or want power concentrated in DC, Berlin, or London.
>
> Your vision of robust autonomous local governments, each able to
> thumb its nose at EXON via arbitrary tariffs, is utopian. If you're
> talking about bio-region autonomy, sustainable development, and healthy,
> functioning, democratic processes, then it is a utopian vision I happen to
> share.
>
> But utopias are long-term-goal scenarios -- typically not workable
> as immediate political objectives. That's what the hippies found out when
> they migrated to Oregon in the sixties to form self-sufficient communities.
> Rather than serving as the seeds of a new social/economic paradigm, they
> became irrelevant drop-outs and gradually dissolved away due to economic
> unviability and organizational inexperience.
>
> To _actually_ move toward your utopia, you need to understand what
> forces in the world prevent the viability of your vision, and work on those
> forces first. The power dynamics have to be changed appropriately, and
> when the conditions are right, the utopia can be proposed as an objective.
> Just like when you plant a garden, you first clear and dig-up the area --
> only then do you begin planting.
>
> In our world today, the power-dynamics is primarily a matter of
> giant corporations running things, with national government being the only
> entities of a sufficient scale to even enter into the power dialog. The
> cutting-edge changes being implemented currently by the corporate
> power-structure _is_ the dismantlement of government -- but it is not in
> the direction of your utopia, it is in the direction of weakened, shrunken,
> and indebted national entities, which internally exhibit increasingly
> fascist regimes. The TN's don't want to have to dialog with _anyone_ about
> their plans, they want to be in total control.
>
> Under these current conditions of power and change, your support
> for devolution serves only to accelerate the trend toward fascism /
> corporate-feudalism, and makes the realization of your utopia impossible.
>
> You libertarians are being duped big time. You're eager to drink
> your kool-aid, and you're helping to burn down the compound around all of
> us.
>
> Until you wake up from your trance, you remain part of the problem,
> not the solution. May this flame disturb your slumber.
>
>
> Regards,
> Richard
>
>
> ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
> Posted by Richard K. Moore - rkmoore@iol.ie - Wexford, Ireland
> (WWW or FTP) --> ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore/cyberlib
> ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
> Nikolai S. Rozov
> Professor of Philosophy
>
> Moderator of the mailing list PHILOFHI
> (PHILosophy OF HIstory and theoretical history)
> http://darwin.clas.virginia.edu/~dew7e/anthronet/subscribe
> /philofhi.html
>
> Dept. of Philosophy
> Novosibirsk State University Fax.: (3832) 355237
> 630090, Novosibirsk E-mail: rozov@cnit.nsu.ru
> Pirogova 2
> RUSSIA
>