3 ms·

regarding "free market maximalists who think humanity's survival and progress hinges on a few Great Men rather than the unsophisticated masses" - Libertarianis

regarding "free market maximalists who think humanity's survival and progress hinges on a few Great Men rather than the unsophisticated masses" - Libertarianism may have changed in character, or perhaps more in how it is characterized in media, but it used to be that libertarians believed in lots of little people acting freely and that states and the large corporations they are mutually supported by are the opposite of what they want. Hopefully it is because the little people have largely left the relatively pointless large media spaces online and does not represent a genuine change in how the majority of libertarians, who used to not be terribly wealthy if they were wealthy at all, think.

hnbad 5y ago
I think this is a common misunderstanding because "libertarianism" nowadays can refer both to what is now called "libertarian socialism" (i.e. anarchism, individuals cooperating voluntarily for the common good) and right-wing libertarianism (i.e. laissez-faire capitalism or "anarcho-capitalism", natural selection via the free market). The latter generally believe some people are inherently superior (though they will not always make a point of where this comes from) and that everyone therefore deserves their lot in life because those at the bottom either are inherently inferior (and thus undeserving) or failed to activate their potential (and thus undeserving). The former generally believe we don't stand on the shoulders of giants so much as on the shoulders of billions and billions of people no worse or better than us. Some individuals may have genuine innate talent making them better at one thing or another without trying but while that may make their opinion on those matters more qualified it doesn't justify any claim to power as societal decisions (such as allocation of resources) should be reached by gaining consent from everyone affected. Without regulation, markets naturally tend towards centralization and thus a significant power imbalance. Heck, if you were to fully abolish the public commons and the state, you would inevitably reinvent feudalism as the owners of the largest corporations would need to hire private militias to subdue their workers and defend their property claims against competitors, customers and colonies. This is why many right-wing libertarians still want a public police and military and why libertarian socialists generally don't want markets as a political instrument even if they may be favorable towards coops as an intermediate step or for the production of commodity goods.

hnbad 5y ago

I think this is a common misunderstanding because "libertarianism" nowadays can refer both to what is now called "libertarian socialism" (i.e. anarchism, individuals cooperating voluntarily for the common good) and right-wing libertarianism (i.e. laissez-faire capitalism or "anarcho-capitalism", natural selection via the free market). The latter generally believe some people are inherently superior (though they will not always make a point of where this comes from) and that everyone therefore deserves their lot in life because those at the bottom either are inherently inferior (and thus undeserving) or failed to activate their potential (and thus undeserving). The former generally believe we don't stand on the shoulders of giants so much as on the shoulders of billions and billions of people no worse or better than us. Some individuals may have genuine innate talent making them better at one thing or another without trying but while that may make their opinion on those matters more qualified it doesn't justify any claim to power as societal decisions (such as allocation of resources) should be reached by gaining consent from everyone affected. Without regulation, markets naturally tend towards centralization and thus a significant power imbalance. Heck, if you were to fully abolish the public commons and the state, you would inevitably reinvent feudalism as the owners of the largest corporations would need to hire private militias to subdue their workers and defend their property claims against competitors, customers and colonies. This is why many right-wing libertarians still want a public police and military and why libertarian socialists generally don't want markets as a political instrument even if they may be favorable towards coops as an intermediate step or for the production of commodity goods.