Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 18:53:26 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us> Subject: Re: M-TH: Whether Freedom Has Any Chance Chris thinks that ideas can bring about a libertarian society without there being a social basis to those ideas. I guess I don't see it. A good thing, I think, since I think that freedom depends on our getting socialism, not libertarrianism. --jks On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Chris M. Sciabarra wrote: > My apologies to my fellow thaxians and to Justin for not being as timely > in my response. I'm dealing with a new computer system and new > communications software, and things don't function like they used to. > > I believe that Justin asked me what material conditions could give rise to > the libertarian belief -- in either the nightwatchman state or otherwise. > I'm not sure how to answer this. I think that one can be dialectical > without necessarily being a materialist, and that one's view of the > potential of social forces, historical and otherwise, is ultimately > informed by what we believe to be the driving modus operandi. I'm not > sure that material conditions are that modus operandi. I think they are > important, but they are dialectically interconnected with ideas. The fact > that libertarianism has gained in both stature and popularity in the last > half of the 20th century may be an indication of the fact that the > material conditions as such signify a crisis in contemporary political > economy. Since the state is at the heart of this contemporary political > economy, in my view, it is certainly understandable that much of the > analysis and discussion coming from the libertarian right centers on the > state. I think a good case can be made for the kind of class analysis > that liberals and neo-liberals are famous for -- analyzing the state as > both a perpetuator and creator of group conflict. The revolt against the > modern state is akin to a revolt against a kind of ancien regime of > privilege that has found new impetus in the last hundred years. Pete > Boettke makes an interesting case that the rise of statism and various > forms of it is indicative of a kind of new mercantilism. Throwing off the > "chains" of political privilege that fuel this mercantilism is in my view, > the "ought" that proceeds from the "is." > Ah, but you ask, Justin, does the "can" proceed from the "ought"? > I don't know if we "can" affect the kind of change that libertarians seek. > I'd suspect that a lot depends on the "subjective" or ideational > conditions -- a raising of consciousness so-to-speak, on what precisely is > wrong with the current social structure. But this is ultimately dependent > upon one's acceptance of the libertarian << analysis >> of that structure. > > All this reminds me of what Bertell Ollman once said in response > to my own libertarian musings: "Libertarians," he said, "are like people > who go into a Chinese restaurant and order pizza." The implication here > is that pizza is simply not on the menu of available choices. But who is > to say WHAT is available, especiallly when my esteemed mentor himself, > advocates a vision of communism, that in my view, is NOT on the list of > feasible alternatives, since it entails the absence of markets. On > somedays, I suppose, I am led to a kind of eternal pessimism; I'm not sure > that I'll see any change radical enough to qualify as "radical" in the > exalted sense that I mean. But "a man's reach must exceed his grasp, or > what's a heaven for?" We need only examine our own inevitable utopianism, > or vision of an ideal society, in a self-critical fashion at all times. > > - Chris > ==========================================> Chris Matthew Sciabarra, Ph.D > Visiting Scholar > New York University Department of Politics > Email: sciabrrc-AT-is2.nyu.edu > Website: http://pages.nyu.edu/~sciabrrc > ==========================================> > --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005