Sunday, September 29, 2013

On Left Libertarianism

Mike Hoffman emails:
 I've been loving the material on the website lately Robert. A friend of mine is an anarcho capitalist like me, but has been reading the works of Roderick Long and Kevin Carson as have I. I seem to think the Left libertarians make a few good points on some things but don't see too much difference between them and Ancaps. Whats your postion on Left Libertarians as another "off shoot" of Libertarianism when compared to yours and others associated with the Mises Institute?
While they are good on many points, I see them as holding some very odd views relative to pure libertarianism. They are anti-corporatist and pro-labor, which to me seems to be in contradiction with the libertarianism. If a group of people want to form a corporation, and others want to trade with them, what's the problem? It is only if a corporation joins with government to use coercion in some manner that I see a problem, but not in corporations, themselves.

The pro-labor view is also an odd one from my perspective. If you just allow free transactions between individuals, there is no need for a "pro-labor" stand, just allow markets to determine the nature of transactions and group formations. However, Sheldon Richman writes, "left-libertarians favor worker solidarity vis-à-vis bosses." What if someone just wants a job and doesn't care about "worker solidarity"? Free markets are about promoting free exchange and free organizations, it is odd to promote one type of organization, especially one that would seem to have limited possibilities of forming in a free market.

Richman also writes, "left-libertarians tend to harbor a bias against wage employment." What is the problem with wage employment? Many people seemingly want to put in a good day's work and leave the headaches of dealing with marketing, overall production and matching up different laborers for projects, to others. I know lots of people like this.What is wrong with this?

Richman writes, "In a freed market left-libertarians expect to see less wage employment and more worker-owned enterprises, co-ops, partnerships, and single proprietorships." Naturally, any type of worker organization should be allowed in a libertarian society, but nothing stops worker-owned organisations and co-ops  from operating now, that they don't, in general, suggests they are not very efficient. And, again, if you are a laborer with a certain skill, why would you want to spend your time in co-op meetings, where every nut job in the room gets to advance his nutty theory? Why not leave business running to businessmen, where you don't have to worry about anything but doing your job?

Bottom line: I see left libertarians as those who  would like you to join into different organizations that don't appear to be very efficient. I would take them over a coercive government , but I wonder what side of the line they would fall on if they got to see their non-coercive world develop in a way that resulted in many larges corporations (in addition to small ones)  forming and mostly non-labor union work forces. Would they remain anti-government intervention? If so, they are simply libertarians, with I believe, impractical views on how a libertarian society would develop. If not, well then they are simply interventionists, with a helluva a cover story. .

11 comments:

  1. I agree completely regarding worker-owned organisations and co-ops. If they were efficient, we would be more of them now.

    However, I also believe that a libertarian society would have many more single proprietorships than we do now. Over the years I have seen many very skillful people end up working for wages simply because they were unable to handle the buckets of tax regulations that were dumped on their heads. Their misfortune is good for people like me, who are good at wading through such regulations. We are able to hire good tradesmen for less than we would have otherwise. However, I have always thought that it was unfair to the workers. Why should a good plumber also have to be a good accountant? It is unfair to the plumber, it destroys division of labor and is therefore bad for society overall.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I agree completely regarding worker-owned organisations and co-ops. If they were efficient, we would be more of them now. "

      This is a flawed argument. To see why, qualify the concluding statement to read "if they were efficient, we would be [seeing] more of them now [in the crony capitalist system we currently have]"

      Delete
    2. I don't think that it is a flawed argument because I don't see anything in particular in our current crony capitalist system that specifically affects worker-owned organizations or co-ops. Whereas, I am aware of a particular issue in the current system that specifically affects single proprietorships.

      Actually, with respect to worker-owned organizations, it could be argued that there are some crony capitalist type laws that currently favor them.

      Delete
  2. I wholeheartedly agree, Bob.

    One nitpicking detail; "If a group of people want to form a corporation, and others want to trade with them, what's the problem?" Corporations are entities backed up by government violence which limits their liability. There wouldn't be a government to enforce their limited liability, so I'm not sure corporations would exist without the state.

    Overall, I think left-libertarians are libertarians that do not want to give up all of the causes they righteously (so they think) championed for. Calling yourself a left-libertarian and saying your views are defined by the belief that there would be more entrepreneurs than what we have now is kind of like saying, "well I'm a forest-anarcho-capitalist, and I what differentiates me from anarcho-capitalists is I think there will be more forests."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob, curious to your thoughts on the argument that, absent government, the limited-liability corporation would not exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is my question also. Corporations are creatures of government. Free association is a product of society. Since governments are coercive by definition, anything that comes from government will be coercive, including corporate law. Corporate law was invented to make the crimes of government legal in the world of commerce.

      I have no issue with anyone forming associations to create and continue commercial endeavors, be it as a freely contracted employee or as a mere investor. Only the most hardened scion of The State opposes human industry. But Bastiat's "legal plunder" is exemplified by the American Corporate-Intelligence State.

      Delete
  4. http://permaculture.tv/save-the-triumph-bonneville-the-inside-story-of-the-meriden-workers-co-op-by-john-rosamond/

    http://www.labour-history.org.uk/support_files/Meriden1.PDF

    http://www.labour-history.org.uk/support_files/Meriden2.pdf

    "The language doth suffer mightily...". The Meriden Cooperative is a Front and Center Study for the entanglement of Leftist Politics and machine production and the hazards of "Leftist Libertarianism". There is so much here! Google "Meriden Cooperative" for more.

    CW

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have to say though, The Left Libertarians do have a point on the misconception of capitalism in America since the beginning. usually its the conservatives who spout the "Milton Friedman" type free market, which isnt really free. But sometimes even Libertarians make this mistake too, and yes on occasion an Ancap might do so as well. For example, Walmart is NOT a free market organization, because its the recipient of Eminant Domain, from the government. Doesnt matter how they do business, theyve been given a privledge they would have not gotten in a free society.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I take issue with the claim that co-ops are inherently inefficient. REI does over US$2 billion in sales each year. Their brand products are excellent and they have a lifetime return policy. It is one of the best run businesses in the US. I also heard that they use REI as a case study in MBA programs. So when lefties complain about exploitation, I ask them: What is stopping people from starting more co-ops?

    ReplyDelete
  7. <<
    Many people seemingly want to put in a good day's work and leave the headaches of dealing with marketing, overall production and matching up different laborers for projects, to others. I know lots of people like this.What is wrong with this?
    >>

    It's not efficient. In a truly free market it would be weeded out to a great degree because of that. When someone is insulated from price signals, then they are flying blind economically. Also it results in misaligned incentives. Read this for more detail:

    http://www.whatgov.com/notx.php?res=jobs

    Marion McCoskey

    ReplyDelete
  8. If a group of people want to form a corporation, and others want to trade with them, what's the problem?

    The problem is that the purpose of incorporation is to limit shareholder liability. When losses exceed assets, the losses are collectivized and picked up by those outside the corporation. No libertarian can support limited liability entities ( C or S corps, limited partnerships, LLCs). A general partnership where the partners face civil liability for losses that exceed assets is the only business entity a true libertarian can support.

    ReplyDelete