Sunday, June 11, 2017

When Worlds Collude: Hoppe, Bruenig, and their shared vision of the libertarian future (II)

When Worlds Collude: Hoppe, Bruenig, and their shared vision of the libertarian future (II) - George J. Dance, Nolan Chart:

June 10, 2017 - "Paleolibertarian economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and  progressive lawyer and internet troll Matt Bruenig, would appear to have little in common; yet they both have the same idea of what a libertarian world would look like.

"In this two-part article  (Part I is here), I argue that (1) the very idea of libertarianism that Bruenig claims libertarians should be following (2) is not only compatible with, but looks like it would result in, Hoppe’s theorized libertarian society of  the future; furthermore, while (3) Hoppe’s account of that society suffers from serious flaws and errors, (4) Bruenig’s account of that future society, being almost identical to Hoppe’s, has the same flaws and errors.

(3) Where Hoppe goes wrong

"Hoppe’s vision of what a libertarian world of proprietary communities would look like seems riddled with false assumptions. Let us examine a few:

"(1) 'the restoration of private property rights and laissez-faire economics implies a sharp and drastic increase in social ‘discrimination’ and will swiftly eliminate most if not all of the multi-cultural-egalitarian life style experiments.'

"No; there is no reason discrimination would increase sharply or drastically. Some property owners might discriminate on this or that grounds, but there is no reason to think that everyone would: no reason to think that any original community would stop people of different races, religions, or sexual orientations, from living together in it. Nor is there any reason for a community to prohibit “life style experiments,” from same-sex marriage to rock ‘n roll or hip-hop to marijuana use. Proprietary communities would be established for one reason only – to protect the residents’ property rights, and with it the division of labor – not for this other stuff.

"If there were enough people who wished to discriminate, they would be free to sell their homes, leave with their money, buy new land and set up their own new communities. However, for every one of those set up, discrimination would actually decrease in the communities those people left.

"(2) 'towns and villages could and would do what they did as a matter of course until well into the nineteenth century in Europe and the United States: to post signs regarding entrance requirements to the town, and once in town for entering specific pieces of property (no beggars, bums, or homeless, but also no Moslems, Hindus, Jews, Catholics, etc.); to expel as trespassers those who do not fulfill these requirements.'

"Yes, they could; but no, they probably would not. Why would any town or village in 21st-century America do, or even care about, what towns and villages did in 19th-century Europe? In today’s America, Moslems, Hindus, Jews (both Sephardic and Ashkenazi), and Catholics (Hispanic, Italian, Irish, and more) live and own property in existing small towns and villages all over the country. Why in the world would they agree to a community covenant whereby they immediately had their real property seized and were expelled 'as trespassers'?

"If Hoppe wanted to live in a community with such rules, he would be free to join with other grumpy old white men, leave, and found his own community somewhere; but he would have no freedom or power to take over and ethnically cleanse any existing community."

Read more:
'via Blog this'

No comments:

Post a Comment