Libertarians vs. U.S. Libertarians?

Let’s begin this interaction by properly describing what we mean and meaning what we say. So, we will conceptualize every word endanger of being misused. When we conceptualize, we are certain that what we refer to is the same idea and not some misconstrued version of the original idea at hand. We are doing this because original ideas have been modified to become something they were not originally conceived as in the first place. Ideas are also constantly being mislabeled and repackaged as something else in order to conquer the manufactured consent of the collective. Some ideas may have a historical background where we can demonstrate they actually existed in actuality as they were originally conceived. In many instances, these ideas were applied in society for generations, such as the case of Anarchy or direct democracy and the Iroquois Federation for instance. The word anarchy would be first hijacked and modified by Louis XVI who saw anarchists as his biggest threat to his rule or usurped power so he ordered to begin to conceptualize the word anarchy in French literature as something it was not, as disorder. Since then and even today, the original Greek word of no rulers soon becomes something it had no relation with as disorder. The great French philosopher attempted to correct the previous, Joseph Proudhon, by asserting that: anarchy is order.


The word LIBERTARIAN and the Social Contract

One thing we must get straight here and now: There were no political libertarians until Joseph De Jacques used the term in political literature in 1851 with his writings, “Down with the Bosses” was the first time that the word libertarian had been used in a political sense. There are no writings about libertarians or the ludicrous idea that the U.S. founding fathers were “Libertarians” is another one of these common lies and fallacies the ignorant masses sometimes read and never question.  The U.S. founding fathers like Karl Marx read Rousseau hence the heavy impregnation of ideas within the  U.S. Constitution from the Social Contract and Jean Jacques Rousseau. The Social Contract is indeed at the heart of the U.S. Constitution writing yet  no U.S. Constitution lover seem to embrace the Social Contract and instead there is a clear exclusion from it.


It is quite essential that one must see the world within the context of the mid 1700’s until the late 1800’s western world and Europe in order to grasp a clearer view of what was taken place because these ideas are easily dismissed today in a world of confusion created by the Neoliberal doctrines and the manipulation of masses with capitalist Propaganda. As previously stated, ideas are hijacked and soon they lose their meaning. A republic, being a representative democracy, is argued not to be any form of democracy today by those who embrace despotism. Although it is true that there is no inkling of democracy in the U.S. today due to voter suppression, SCOTUS Citizens United decision, gerrymandering, etc. Such previous facts do not disconnect the main issue that the democratic claim exists hidden behind the lies told to the collective.


The word libertarian was typically used by French writers to designate some form of sexual deviance until writer and philosopher Joseph De Jacques wrote the manifesto Down with the Bossesin 1851; at this time, De Jacques used the word Libertarian for the first time in a political sense and fully associated to European socialism or anarchism. The term Libertarian was now, in 1851 after DeJacques’ writings,  associated to be referring to an individual with full rights, Human and Civil Rights, a free individual. The word Libertarian has a different meaning under its European roots than its subsequent bastardization while in U.S. land in the 1960’s with Milton Friedman the father of U.S. Libertarianism. In the U.S, Libertarian means supporter of absolute private tyranny; it also means to be a happy slave or the ultimate right to choose your master while being a docile slave who owns a gun and lives in full blown poverty and scarcity.



The reason for the previous is that our U.S. citizens never get to engage the field of Humanities neither while at school nor while growing up and very seldom get to understand that individuals have Human and Civil Rights. These rights, although insignificant to many, do create a clearly defined idea as to what an imperfect mortal is in front of another imperfect mortal. In the U.S. wealth means intelligence and freedom even if such wealth is always created by the exploitation of others, or the destruction of earth natural resources, or even foreign lands and people who do not want the wealth producer in there land. To put it mildly:


There is a universal MYTH in the west and this is that there are benevolent masters and rulers. Human beings read a lot of religion in the the west and mainly in the U.S.,  people read the Christian Bible and related books yet they have not understood that: One must “..Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves…” (Matthew 10:16). There is this naivete that people carry within when they turn the tube on (TV) or engage political figures of their same ethnicity; they simply believe everything the corrupt politician tells them, pardon my redundancy, if it is a politician then it must be corrupt.


So, What about LEFT vs. RIGHT?

The previous set of ideas is going to confuse many of those already confused. The main problem here is that great ideas get hijacked and soon an idea becomes something which it was not originally; in fact, in most instances ideas are hijacked to be changed into the opposite they originally were or represented. For example, and regarding the previous, being a Liberal was a label to designate most economic liberalism which meant Capitalism, Adam Smith and David Ricardo in the early and mid-1800’s; yet today, a liberal is no longer a right winger but a quasi-lefty implying social liberalism only. Today, the right wing of economic theory is described as Neoliberalism and it encapsulates not only U.S. Libertarians and Neoliberals and their evil twin economic policy of privatized democracy, an oxymoron in the making.


So, What Do You Mean by Capitalism?

Capitalism is understood as the private ownership of the means of production; by the previous, one must also take into account the monetary system which was privatized in the U.S. since 1913 with the Federal Reserve Banking System. The theory of Free Markets has become an attachment to Capitalism yet this idea may exist without capital as mere trade and without protectionism. The monetary system alone is intrinsically parasitic as it is today; first because money is now a private not a public creation. Second, whether money is protected by gold or any other precious metal it is quite irrelevant since the creation of money still excludes the common good and it has become the pseudo wealth creator of our time via private money creation by typing amounts on a keyboard; including large inflation and deficits which always follow this monetary scheme.


So, What Do You Mean by Socialism?

The term socialism has been re-conceptualized so many times that it becomes a challenge for the common person to even understand what the term means; not even when vehemently calling Obama what he has never been, a socialist. Socialism, as the term suggests, refers to societal groupings of individuals for the common good. Under historical sociopolitical context, socialism means that the means of production, or societal wealth, is under control of the social groups, being these the workers. So, if the workers controlled all means of production then we can argue that we indeed had socialism. Although the term socialism means more than just workers controlling the means of production, via organized entities. We must first consider that socialism developed during the time that the U.S. had cooperatives as the primary means of association and the corporate personhood had not taken shape yet, early 1800’s.


So, What Do You Mean by Communism?

Communists probably tell you, and righteously so, that all recent theories and interpretations of communism are fully mistaken. Communism has been misinterpreted by the opposition but even worse, by everyone else including followers of this ideology. Professor Richard Wolff from Harvard and Standford University has presented socialists and communists ideas clarifying where the interpretation goes wrong. So, the best way to know if we are referring to the same idea is by comparing what each of us perceives from this idea to be. As ideas are so often hijacked and become something else, the concept of describing, conceptualizing, what we are referring to does indeed guarantee the accuracy of what we refer to. Since most precepts related to socialism and then to subsequent communism were introduced during the mid to late 1800’s then we must also consider the state of the western world at the time.


Communism & Anarchism in 10 Minutes:

One key issue here is how corporations and cooperatives behaved as these had a great deal of regulation before corporate personhood was granted by the U.S. courts. So, when anyone invokes socialism or even communism we must take in to account not only that the means of production were to be controlled by workers and never by an elite such as the case of state capitalism misrepresented as socialism. We must also consider that the two main entity formats regarding societal structuring and labor grouping were originally similar and restricted to perform duties for the public good not for profit as pay was applied in equal portions to most workers. These entities were also shield from business monopolies as they couldn’t own another corporation or create monopolies as it commonly takes place today due to deregulation.   The previous caused the ever intervening hand of the markets and capital to create not only monopolies but oligarchies out of corporations. After the corporate personhood laws were passed all corporations started behaving more like despotic institutions than those original tenants that were established while these entities had originally being created.

Modern Corporation: The Pathology of profit BEFORE People and Planet:


Several stages must occur during the type of socialism which aims at morphing into communism. By socialism we meant that the workers, via cooperatives and other means, had already taken full blown control of the means of production.

From the Anarchist Library:

Phases of Communism

It is for such reasons that libertarian communists have often presented the change to a fully communist society as taking place over time, being phased-in after the revolution. Marx proposed a higher and lower phase of communism. Bakunin implied the same. Even Kropotkin (as Anarcho has pointed out in last month’s discussion) suggested a sort of phasing-in of full communism. Immediately after a revolution, Kropotkin indicated, able-bodied adult working people would be required to work a half day (5 hours) in order to get a decent amount of food, clothing, and shelter. Most goods would still be scarce so they would have to be rationed by the community. Over time, as productivity improved, the economy would develop into full communism. Most goods would be plentiful and people could freely take them off the shelves of community warehouses. Work would be done out of social conscience and a desire to keep active. But this would not be immediately possible.

There is another factor. A revolution is likely to be carried out by a united front of anti-capitalist political groupings. For example, North America or Europe is so large and complex that no one revolutionary organization will have all the best ideas and all the best militants. They will have to work together. But some will be anarchist-communists while others will not. Leaving aside out-and-out authoritarian statists, we are likely to be in coalition with pareconists, noncommunist anarchists, revolutionary-democratic socialists, various types of Greens, and so on. We cannot force all these people to live under anarchist-communism. Compulsory libertarian communism is a contradiction in terms! The majority of one region may decide to live under anarchist communism, but a neighboring region may decide for parecon (“participatory economics”). So long as workers are not exploited, the anarchist-communists will not start a civil war inside the revolution. In an experimental way, different approaches may be tried out in different regions and we will learn from each other.

Malatesta wrote (1984), “Imposed communism would be the most detestable tyranny that the human mind could conceive. And free and voluntary communism is ironical if one has not the right and the possibility to live in a different regime, collectivist, mutualist, individualist — as one wishes, always on condition that there is no oppression or exploitation of others” (p. 103). He expected some sort of anarchist-communism to win out eventually, but felt that this might take considerable time to achieve everywhere.

Regarding the previous, the reader must conclude that communism marks the return to a more humane primitive world not based on a fiat monetary system, or servitude, or strata, or hierarchical order, or scarcity or profit or wealth such as the present world is. Instead, in this achieved communist world there could only be cooperation and not competition as resources are shared and not rationed by a fraudulent monetary system or group as it takes place under capitalism.


So, What Do You Mean by Co-ops versus the Corporation?

As stated in our discussion above, the corporation and cooperatives behaved quite similar and their final end was the common good and never profit alone as this had been relegated to the back of the list due to strict regulations until corporate personhood was passed by the SCOTUS using the Fourteenth Amendment and giving priority to corporate entities as persons instead of former slaves as the Fourteenth Amendment had originally being passed into law, to protect recently freed slaves, human beings not legal entities.  Corporations, unlike cooperatives, have become the most recent remade of the feudal castle having the same tyrannical despotic tyranny at its core fully ignoring the needs of the workers and the responsibilities to the planet and the environment. Workers no longer had rights under this new version of the corporation as passed by the SCOTUS during the 1800’s. Furthermore, labor rights had to be fought almost reaching a national revolution by the time some of these rights were passed into laws and acquired with much effort and blood by the labor movements of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.


Cooperatives tend to function in a more egalitarian manner as these entities even today restrict the owners and managerial strata within from excess salaries, bonuses or pay offs as these take place under corporate rule. While corporations needed rescuing from the Public sectors all over the world, privatized profits while socialized debt. The cooperatives never needed rescuing as they did not exceed their realm by over paying anyone as corporations did. A great example of a profitable and egalitarian cooperative where workers have a voice and a vote, unlike corporations, is the Mondragón cooperative in Basque country Spain. Mondragón is the result of priest Arizmendi who participated in the anarchist revolt during the Spanish revolution.


So, What Do You Mean by the Public Citizen?

Being a citizen is a universal act and never an idea that can be linked to the state or any other political institutions. A Citizen can only be a human being and never an institution regardless of what the SCOTUS fraudulent decision may claim. ALL human beings are citizens. Aristotle tried to link it to the concept of the republic or state but failed. Citizens United, the SCOTUS illegal purchased decision, does not have any reflection as to what true citizenship represents as it turns an unaccountable tyranny and non-human organism into a human being when linked to corporate personhood. A Public Citizen is any human individual with full blown Human and Civil Rights. To interpret the term properly, a Public Citizen is the only entity with these full blown rights including the right to privacy which turns the Public Citizen into a Private Public Citizen.


So, What Do You Mean by a Private Citizen?

Since the courts are open to be sold to private means in our capitalistic and hierarchical society, some court decisions have been made to protect and shield capital from responsibilities and the never ending externalities that its reach causes in society. Due to this lack of jurisprudence of law with regards to many SCOTUS decisions, the Fourteenth Amendment became a protection for private corporations not private individuals hence the need to return and fully reverse these concepts to their original integrity: ONLY a Public Citizen can be a PRIVATE Citizen.


So, What Do You Mean by Libertarian?

A Libertarian can only be a left wing Libertarian or a Libertarian Socialist when engaging the true meaning of word. But because we live in a twisted society which calls slavery freedom; we therefore must allow for the distortion of meaning such as the concept of U.S. Libertarianism when an individual is considered free by being poor and starving under full scarcity while owning a gun. Furthermore, we have gone as far in our irrational conceptualization of ideas as to call the unaccountable tyranny, also known as the remade of Feudalism in the Corporate model of today, as to conceive that an unaccountable despotic tyranny is directly linked to freedom. Concepts can become perverse such is the fact of hierarchies within am imperfect Mortal set of beings over the planet and the granting of strata among them. The previous is not only anti-democratic but inhuman and violates all ideas as they relate to Human and Civil rights in our twisted version of society.


A true Libertarian is a Libertarian Socialist since true equality comes from horizontal rule without bosses or authority. Our society of brown nosers and masochists built within the realm of the social constructed pathology tends to view those who claim their Human and Civil rights as undeserving radicals while viewing the obedient masochists to authority as well behaved citizens who deserve all the tyranny of the state. A true Libertarian does not have a master or authority above and can contribute to society in a direct manner and this contribution will never be lost as it takes place billions of times in our present capitalist society based on masters and serfs where the masters live in full abundance and the vast majority live in full blown scarcity of all resources.  Libertarian means a society of citizens who live not only with full blown Human and Civil Rights but where citizens enjoy full access to society resources without the need for payment or rank as deserving and non-deserving. The concept of Libertarian is directly link to the concept of Anarchy and it means direct democracy and it was the original format of the primitive humans prior to the appearance of the pyramids all over the world and the fall of men.


So, What Do You Mean by U.S. Libertarian?

A U.S. Libertarian is a master or a slave who lives in a society of full blown Human and Civil Rights for the upper strata and no Human or Civil Rights for the serfs living in poverty or the vast majority. A master under this concept may have access to all resources but the serf only have access to a flag, a bible and a gun while they live in absolute poverty and scarcity thinking that any common good is evil and any good for the gods in the upper strata is divine. U.S. Libertarians are a contradiction waiting to wake up.


So, What Do You Mean by Anarchy?

Anarchy is the world of abundance that Capitalism and the hierarchical world will never allow. Anarchy will continue to be utopia if the world of current scarcity and hierarchical order continues. Anarchy is no longer utopia but reality if the current hierarchical order comes to an end by revolution or by the grace of a proletarian mutiny. Anarchy is direct democracy where every human being has a vote and belongs to the same rank as all other imperfect mortals. Anarchy means no masters above and no one below you. Anarchy means a world fully absent of the social pathology of scarcity and despotism we currently live under. Anarchy is Libertarian Socialism. Capitalism and anarchy can never co-exist as these two terms are in full opposition, capitalism is slavery disguised as wealth for a few and strata and hierarchical despotic order while Anarchy means no masters , no gods, no one above you and no one below you. Anarchy is the intrinsic reality of what human beings innately are without the artificially constructed reality of hierarchical order.



TAKE the TEST by Political Compass! If after taking the political test you do not find yourself inside the Left Green Bottom Quadrant then you may not support Human and Civil Rights and it is time to start reading until you realize that individuals are equal imperfect mortals ruled by lesser mortals. To be FREE one must not have to respond to authority of any kind within a cooperative society that fosters kindness, abundance and prosperity for all not just a few.

Representative Democracy is NOT Democracy:


Direct Democracy AKA Participatory Democracy, Horizontal Rule or Anarchy: