Rightwing Economics Can Only Go So Far before There’s a Left Reaction of Some Sort
We have Left revolutions constantly all over the world. Look at all the Left revolutions in Latin America recently. There were also quite a few in the Caribbean. There was recently one in Mexico.
All of these revolutions were precipitated by the Right being in power and pushing rightwing economics too far (the breaking point) which is what rightwingers always do. Sane people can only take so much rightwing economics, and as it gets more and more extreme, a typical Left reaction arises, getting more aggressive and even violent as the rightwing economics deepens. Marx laid this out exactly. It really is a law.
Libertarianism or Neoliberalism Always Only Benefits a Small Wealthy Minority, While the Poorer Majority Always Loses Money
People will just not tolerate rightwing economics very much. At some point it becomes so unfair and unequal that almost no one will put up with it. So Libertarians are pining for something that will never happen because frankly nobody wants it. Or better yet, no majority of any country will ever support. Libertarianism and any rightwing economics pushed too far automatically ends up benefiting only 20-33% of the population, while everyone else loses money.
The 1% Are Even Prepared to Screw the Upper Middle Class, Their Pets
In a lot of places, like in the US, everyone but the top 1% is losing money. I think all of the gains since 2008 have all gone to 1% of the population, and everyone else lost money. I remember Libertarian Dick Armey had a flat tax proposal. I assumed that the top 20% would benefit as is typical for Libertarianism, but I was stunned that only the top 1% would benefit according to his tax plan. So the rich will even sacrifice the upper middle class when it comes down to it. And why wouldn’t they? You think they have any more love for the upper middle class than for the rest of the lower classes?
Libertarianism Can Only Be Imposed and Sustained By Force, Hence a “Democratic Libertarianism” Cannot Exist and the Non-Aggression Principle is a Pipe-dream and a Lie
I can’t believe Libertarians even think this is sustainable. Obviously they see themselves as the 20-33% winners, but are they so dumb that they think they can pull the wool over the majority’s eyes and screw them economically and get away with it? Are they high? Can’t they see that this will never work? Can’t they figure out that, as Friedman said, neoliberalism (Libertarianism) can only be imposed by force and kept in power by a dictatorship, and therefore democratic Libertarianism based on the non-aggression principle is dead out the starting gate?
Libertarianism Is a Luxury That Can Only Be Afforded by the Rich
I guess greed blinds people. Libertarianism and neoliberalism are luxuries of the rich. Of course the rich, the upper middle classes, and the business classes support it.
The Business Class Is Always the Same, 550 Years Ago as Today
You can read texts from the Italian Renaissance by early capitalists in Italy in the 1500’s arguing the government is basically useless from the point of view of a businessman, and frankly the less government, the better. Here we are, 500-600 years later, and the business classes are saying the same thing. Plus ca change…
One thought on “Alt Left: The Fatal Flaws of Libertarianism”
Robert, I was arguing with this libertarian about the vicious cycle of inequality in Latin America and this was his response: “Land monopoly is the core problem in Central America. Communism is the main reason the problem was not solved.” I would like your response to his statement please. I personally disagree with his statement.
I think the reason the problem is not solved is because of a deeply poisonous rightwing reactionary elite as well as backward cultural traditions and attitudes that are obstacles to genuine land reform. Moreover, I think American foreign policy support for the rightwing oligarchy as well as the CIA aligning with these interest to overthrow democratic governments that try to correct the problem is a huge obstacle also.
I am not a supporter of Communism, and I think it is a far leftwing version of far rightwing libertarianism that you write about. Like you, I believe a free market economy with sensible regulations and a social safety net is the best solution. Pure capitalism and pure socialism are both two sides of the same coin.