Respect from One’s Neighbors
by Phil Jacobson
(to table of contents
of archives) (to start of essay)
Outline
1- Legitimizing a Libertarian
Regime
2- Respect for Libertarian
Philosophy
- 2.1- Levels of Respect
- 2.2- Respect from
Neighboring Communities
-- 2.2.1- Collective
Opinion
-- 2.2.2- Pirates
and Ideologues
-- 2.2.3- "Mainstream"
Regimes
- 2.3- Respect from
Neighboring Individuals
3- Respecting Libertarian
Rules - Individual Morality
4- Respecting Libertarian
Rules - Morality within Communities
- 4.1- Libertarianism
within a Libertarian Community
- 4.2- "Resident
Aliens" within a Libertarian Community
5- False Idols
- 5.1- A Broad Approach
is Needed
- 5.2- The Idol of
Written Constitutions and Other Contracts
- 5.3- The Idol of
Geography
- 5.4- The Idol of
Property
- 5.5- The Idol of
Ignorance
- 5.6- The Idol of
Economics
6- Conclusion
1—Legitimizing a Libertarian Regime
I have written before about the notion that all "rights" can be viewed as a form of property, and that all property is a matter of permissions given from one person or persons to another. As libertarians we can use this terminology to describe the rules of a possible libertarian society. But having done that, serious problems remain. We must get people to adopt these rules. And these people must become associated with one another in a community or set of communities, where such rules are respected. Further, at least some respect must be accorded to the community and its rules by neighboring peoples. These are the problems of legitimacy.
I will present here some thoughts about the factors which would affect the legitimacy of a libertarian regime. But despite the many influential factors, I think that the most important thing we can do to prepare a future libertarian regime to be accepted as legitimate, is to enact as much of it as possible as soon as possible. The most important contributor to the legitimacy of a regime is that regime’s grounding in a tradition.
No two persons agree completely. Yet people holding widely differing opinions can be neighbors. The same is true of communities. A new libertarian community will need to get along with its neighbors at some minimum level to survive and at some higher level to thrive. At the very least, a libertarian community needs for the neighbors to refrain from destroying or driving out the libertarians. And within the libertarian community, there is a need for the choices of each libertarian individual to be granted legitimacy by the other libertarians. Hopefully, despite their differences, the neighbors would grant legitimacy to the libertarian regime. Hopefully, despite their differences, the libertarians would grant legitimacy to each other.
It is possible to divide a given
community into segments, into separate institutions, and to appraise the
problem of legitimacy with regard to them separately. However, in this
essay I wish to address the more general problem of establishing and maintaining
legitimacy for the whole libertarian community. This is certainly a community-to-community
issue. But because the boundaries between one community and another are
not always sharp, it is inevitably a community-to-individual issue, and
even an individual-to-individual issue. The libertarian community should
have as much legitimacy as possible in the eyes of its neighbors, both
in terms of philosophy and some notion of "character". But it must also
have legitimacy in the eyes of its own citizens. Without such legitimacy,
all its component institutions are threatened.
2—Respect for Libertarian Philosophy
2.1 Levels of Respect
Before legitimacy comes respect. One person judges one another on first contact, to some degree. This begins a process, however subtle, wherein the question, "How much do I respect this person?" is answered. Respect for another’s philosophy is not always associated with agreement, nor even with the philosophy itself. Respect may merely be a matter of acceptance, possibly admiration, of a package of many personal qualities that will to some extent be associated with personal philosophy.
Respect begins at a very basic level. The mere physical existence of a neighbor engenders a form of respect. "That libertarian neighbor of mine has enough common sense, luck or friends to stay alive—and even thrive—at the level I see," might be all that the libertarian’s neighbors think to themselves. And this level of respect can be accorded even to those one does not like.
Yet the neighbors may not yet grant legitimacy to the libertarians. Legitimacy, it seems to me, requires a recognition that another has the right to exist—that the other ought to be allowed to exist. A libertarian community’s neighbors might consent to allow the libertarian community to exist. This would grant the libertarians a minimum degree of legitimacy in that the neighbor, as a practical matter, willfully refrains from active efforts to subvert the libertarian community. But the neighbors might still prefer that the libertarian community collapse from its own weight.
Hopefully, the libertarian community could foster an active, even if small, desire on the part of its neighbors to see it survive. It might not be reasonable for the libertarians to expect their neighbors to expend much effort on their, the libertarians’, behalf. But even a mildly beneficent attitude will confirm the feeling of legitimacy and provide a basis for increasingly positive levels of respect.
Given some positive respect and an opportunity to profit, the neighbor may be willing to trade with some or all of the libertarians. Even if the neighbor has some non-libertarian choices in trading partners, the libertarians who have achieved this level of respect might begin actively trading simply by offering competitive prices. Economy of transportation alone should allow the libertarians to find some service or product which they can trade. In doing so, a network would be formed with the neighbors. In time this network may develop into a larger society, within which the libertarians share with non-libertarian neighbors.
In addition to economic benefits, neighbors could begin to see the military advantages to having libertarians nearby. As the neighbors begin to become acquainted with the libertarians, it would seem likely that the neighbors would begin to appreciate the simple fact that the libertarians never initiate force against them, and are philosophically opposed to doing so. No matter the intentions of the neighbors, a new dimension of security will ensue. For many neighbors, this will translate into a form of respect accorded by the libertarians, and the respect will be reciprocated.
Other admirable traits may be observed of the libertarians by their neighbors. The list is endless, and will vary considerably from neighbor to neighbor, and from libertarian to libertarian. Not all neighbors will be favorably impressed by the libertarians, of course. But wherever the libertarians make a good impression, higher respect and/or legitimacy will tend to follow.
At some point, some individuals in neighboring communities may themselves become libertarians. Similarly, some individual neighbors will have been libertarians prior to contact with the libertarian community, and will make themselves known to the libertarian community without joining it. Either way, the existence of individual libertarian members of non-libertarian neighboring communities will help the libertarian community gain respect within the non-libertarian community. Like it or not, these "foreign" libertarians will be mini-ambassadors, even if they never overtly identify themselves as "libertarians". In all likelihood, the neighboring community, influenced by both these internal libertarians and by the libertarian neighbor community, will develop some sympathy for the libertarian philosophy. Even if the neighbor community does not fully adopt a libertarian philosophy, it may become more libertarian than it was originally.
Conceivably, a neighboring community
might start non-libertarian, only to gradually adopt the libertarian philosophy.
While these neighbors may, for various reasons, feel a distinct identity
such that they do not want to formally merge with the original libertarian
community, the neighbor community would be likely to cooperate very closely
with the original libertarian community along a wide spectrum of issues.
2.2 Respect from Neighboring Communities
2.2.1 Collective Opinion
Many libertarians, especially those in the USA, tend to be "individualists", who scoff at any notion of "collective opinion". Yet there is a real political fact at work when a mob or other collective human action occurs. Often a community will harbor sentiments that are not discussed very much in the open. Other times open discussion will be distorted by traditional means of expression or lip service given to traditional ideas. These sentiments come into play with various forms of collective behavior. The buying habits of consumers, the progression of rumors through a community, the willingness of persons to support a social movement—each of these can be critically influenced by collective sentiments which are distinct from ideas discussed in "polite" or "proper" conversation. Such collective sentiments can be the basis for opinions about a neighboring community—and may then become dominant forces, setting the range of "policy" within which community leaders can operate.
That said, it remains true that a community’s leaders will have their own ideas, which may or may not be "orthodox" according to prevailing community sentiments. Even so, the leaders will be pressured by collective opinion with regard to issues like the legitimacy of a libertarian neighbor community. So the libertarians will be well advised to take collective sentiment into account, regardless of what they may hear from various individuals. It is very important that the prevailing collective sentiment towards the libertarians be positive. If this can be achieved, the libertarian community may be granted de facto legitimacy regardless of official pronouncements or individuals statements to the contrary.
Different types of neighbors, discussed below, will have different basic collective sentiments towards "neighbors" generally. The libertarian community’s "foreign policy" (possibly an informal one) can foster legitimacy for the libertarian community if it adapts to the qualities of these neighbor communities.
Generally, the presence of libertarians
on a neighbor’s border will be less of a burden than any other randomly
selected group the neighbor might need to encounter. Therefore, any community
which finds itself with a libertarian neighboring community, will probably
develop some kind of respect for the libertarians. Only two exceptions
to this seem possible. In one of these, the neighbors are pirates. In the
other the neighbors are ideological zealots who feel compelled to convert
others by force.
2.2.2 Pirates and Ideologues
A pirate neighbor presents no special problem for libertarians, as opposed to the pirate’s relations with other communities. If the libertarian community is seen as weak, there is a military problem, which is independent of the concerns of this essay. Indeed, the libertarians may be seen as being willing to let the pirates mind their own business, so long as the libertarians themselves are not attacked. Possibly, the libertarians would develop an alliance with a third community against the pirates as part of trade relations with the third community. This might involve extradition arrangements or military cooperation in the event that a pirate tried to attack members of the third community, even though that pirate may not have attacked the libertarians. Again, this is really a military question. While it would be well within the libertarian philosophy to help someone from such a third community retaliate against initiated force launched by the pirates, the libertarians would have no philosophical requirement to do so. And if the resulting entanglement put the libertarians at a serious military disadvantage, such an alliance with a third community might simply be unwise on military grounds.
As with the pirates, should the libertarians
have neighbors who believe in forcing their ideals on others, the libertarians
will have no special problems that non-libertarian communities would not
also have. The fundamental military concerns would be similar to those
mentioned above for the pirates. The fact that libertarianism is itself
an ideology might cause special concern on the part of the ideological
neighbors. But this is a two-edged sword, since the strength of belief
of the libertarians could be a source of respect. The neighbors might hesitate
to attack another group of "true believers" knowing the cohesiveness that
ideological solidarity can bring. And since the libertarians will not attack
first, the ideological neighbors will have some tendency to want to conquer
others before addressing the libertarians with force. Again, the ability
of the libertarians to militarily defend themselves is the real question.
2.2.3 "Mainstream" Regimes
It is important to note that most statist regimes are run by opportunists who masquerade as mild ideologues. Some statist regimes derive directly from warlord estates that have adopted an ideological veneer to fit into a world that values high-sounding rhetoric. Many had begun as ideological communities, only to run out of steam in their attempts to convert everyone by force. In either case, an elite group of opportunists will tend to pick up the reigns of power, specializing in giving ideological rationales for essentially pirate behavior. And while ideological constraints may limit the range of their pirate behavior, the actions of such regimes will be far more opportunist than either "cutthroat" or "righteous" in practice.
The best way for a libertarian community to win the respect of the opportunists who control most statist regimes is by building trade. In most cases it will be possible to develop a set of goods and services which neighboring opportunist elites will be willing to buy at reasonable prices–even though ordinary citizens in these regimes may not be given equal access to trading opportunities. It should be possible to find some combination of goods and/or services upon which to build a trading relationship. Indeed, this will be the tendency of entrepreneurs in the libertarian community.
As long as the libertarian community
does not become too eager to convert all its neighbors to libertarianism,
the libertarians will gain a minimum necessary level of respect from the
opportunists who rule any neighboring statist communities. This is not
to say that the libertarian community can never function as a haven for
political exiles from neighboring communities. It may be militarily unwise
for the libertarians to give foreign rebels a lot of overt assistance.
But the libertarians will be unlikely to be of one voice regarding this
issue. Nor are they likely to give as much voluntary assistance to any
foreigners as most comparably sized communities tend to spend on state-sponsored
foreign interventions of various kinds. The best, and most likely the dominant,
"foreign policy" of a free nation is likely to be a combination of setting
an example and of allowing foreigners to try living a free lifestyle as
individuals. In this way legitimacy with opportunist foreign elites is
maintained, while a slow corruption of foreign statist ideology proceeds.
2.3 Respect from Neighboring Individuals
No matter the official "foreign policy" of a neighboring community, a significant amount of respect can be granted by individual neighbors, often in contrast to the official position of any groups with which a given neighbor is associated. Indeed, since any community policy is ultimately made by agreements between individuals, the opinions of enough individuals, especially influential ones, will ultimately become community policy.
The process whereby the libertarian
community acquires the respect of its individual neighbors is much the
same as the process for gaining respect from entire neighboring communities.
First non-aggression by the libertarians is a convenience to the neighbor.
Then opportunities for trade create mutual self-interest, etc. The main
difference is that the individual neighbors may be at odds with their home
communities. So an individual neighbor who begins to give the libertarians
increasing levels of respect may need to do so covertly. The libertarian
community may find its greatest support from individuals on the "outside"—from
those who live fairly autonomous lives.
3—Respecting Libertarian Rules—Individual Morality
To some extent, the libertarian philosophy is self-evident to many people. Most however learn libertarian ideas, in addition to their own intuitive insights, from contact with other people. Certainly the vast majority of individuals have made a conscious commitment to the "non-aggression principle" only after having heard someone else quote it. Some individuals learned this in childhood, having been raised by overtly self-described libertarian parents. But as of this writing, most are converts.
Even when raised libertarian by the same libertarian parents, no two libertarian children are likely to understand the philosophy in the exact same way. Consequentially, the particular interpretation of libertarianism which each individual in a libertarian community might have, will be unique. Regarding their sense of morality, such individuals are each a culture of one, in alliance with other cultures. This is probably true of most belief systems to a very large extent. But since libertarianism stresses voluntary choices by individuals, differences between individual beliefs are emphasized and made more conscious. So each libertarian individual will tend to be aware of ideological differences with other libertarians and be making appraisals regarding their legitimacy, where adherents of other belief systems might try to ignore or even deny such differences.
So while it will be hard enough to start a "free nation" with exclusively libertarian membership, it seems unlikely that there will be a uniform interpretation of the philosophy amongst the members of this community. Thus the first limitation on the legitimacy of the libertarian community will come from the distinctions between individuals regarding the interpretation of the libertarian philosophy itself. Libertarians will need to develop a keen sense of tolerance regarding the varieties of interpretation of the philosophy found in their own community. The whole range of "respect" accorded to a neighbor mentioned above, applies equally to the relations between individuals within the libertarian community itself.
Fortunately, the libertarian philosophy automatically provides for a minimum degree of legitimacy. That is, anyone who refrains from initiating force should be accorded a right to exist by any libertarian. And until the libertarians themselves become a major force in the broader human ecology in which their community is located, each libertarian will place special value on merely having other libertarians nearby, regardless of ideological technicalities. In this context the temptation to ignore differences will be great—but it will be artificial.
Later, if libertarianism becomes fairly common (thus a less valuable local resource), individuals should be expected to accord somewhat less respect to variations on the libertarian theme which they find "strange". And at that point each individual will begin to consider fellow libertarians with different beliefs more critically. This would be natural. But it will be important to establish traditions which legitimize the very notion of lack of respect within a basic libertarian framework—especially if it has taken a while to build up a large population of libertarians.
It would be best if such diversity
were explored and celebrated overtly, yet politely, while the libertarian
community is new. Perhaps "safe" arenas where diverse interpretations of
libertarian belief could be presented, discussed, or even debated should
be part of many community holidays. School children should be given regular
exposure to this diversity as part of "civics" education, etc. Yet in each
of these situations, the right of the individual to quietly, even covertly
disagree should also be respected. Even those traditions which encourage
the health of the libertarian community must be voluntary.
4—Respecting Libertarian Rules—Morality within Communities
4.1 Libertarianism within a Libertarian Community
Given that a "nation’s" worth of individuals have come together to form a single libertarian community, it will be likely that a specific citizen will find more in common, for various reasons, with some of their libertarian neighbors than with others. A given citizen might find it useful to network with some neighbors more than with others, to the point where they formed a caucus, or sub-culture within the broader libertarian community.
Quite conceivably a caucus or sub-culture might reach the point where it chose to secede from the original free nation to form another free nation. In such a case, the new nation might find that members of the old nation gave them less respect than they had been accorded before the split. However, the respect which members of the new nation accorded to each other might be much greater than the average respect accorded by these citizens to random fellow citizens before the split. Relations between libertarian sub-cultures will be somewhat "international" in character. This would be true whether or not a given libertarian subculture within a specific libertarian community chose to formally secede and form a new, separate, libertarian community.
True feuds should be expected between libertarian sub-cultures, especially where the overall libertarian community is strong and stable. Most visions of a new libertarian nation fail to recognize this. But a new libertarian "nation" should be prepared to accept a wide spectrum of mutual legitimacy accorded between its sub-cultural components. Towards this end, institutions of conflict resolution must, from the beginning, be prepared to deal with relatively low levels of legitimacy accorded between genuine libertarians.
This is probably important at all points in the history of the new nation. As a new nation is merely being conceived, the planners should develop traditions of honest disagreement, designed to openly test the mutual compatibility of would-be members of the new community. As the process of working together exposes these initial adherents of the free nation to each others’ quirks, conflict resolution institutions should encourage open discussion of the degree to which each point of view is granted respect by the others. Early conflicts should be explicitly addressed and resolved by formal or informal traditions for diplomacy or arbitration.
These traditions should be exercised
as frequently as new problems of mutual respect are found. It is important
to do so for several reasons. First, the problems themselves are dealt
with. Also, a tradition of honest disagreement is established which, hopefully,
includes social institutions for expressing and discussing these disagreements.
Most importantly, the institutions of dispute resolution, heretofore a
purely theoretical construct, will be tested, perfected, and habituated
by the time a real nation is formed. There will probably be precious little
time to develop real conflict resolution once the nation is under way.
The legitimacy of the conflict resolution institutions will be critical,
both to the survival of the nation itself, and to the legitimacy of other
institutions.
4.2 "Resident Aliens" within a Libertarian Community
Conceivably, it would be possible to establish a relatively isolated libertarian community, which made little contact with non-libertarians. But in an increasingly "global" economy, we can expect that most if not all libertarian communities would have extensive contacts with non-libertarian neighbors. Further, we could expect that this contact would to some extent require non-libertarian persons to live, for varying periods of time, within the libertarian community itself. These "resident aliens" would need to be integrated with the libertarians at least to the extent that minimal respect was accorded between the aliens and their libertarian hosts. The problems involved in maintaining this mutual respect increase as libertarians allow larger and larger numbers of aliens to live amongst them.
Should the libertarian community be geographically dispersed (not a single block of contiguous territory), or perhaps even a completely non-geographic "nation", the "alien" problems are compounded. We may think of this concern as a spectrum. The more highly dispersed the libertarians are, the more their "nation" is like an ethnic group, or professional association, or church denomination, not really in complete command of a separate territory. At the furthest extreme, the "nation" is virtual, not really based on land at all. At the other extreme, the libertarians allow no resident aliens at all within some "home" territory. While one can imagine a fully dispersed "virtual" libertarian nation, it is difficult to imagine a territory where no non-libertarians were allowed—at least not one of any significant size. This level of purity would require a major commitment on the part of all the libertarians to exclude "foreigners" completely, even as personal guests or customers and does not seem feasible in the near future. So a libertarian community is likely to have a significant resident-alien population.
It would seem likely that the libertarians would only allow aliens to live amongst them if those aliens seemed likely to adhere to—would respect at least behaviorally—libertarian standards of conduct. But how might such "likelihood" be established? Some "aliens" might in fact be libertarians who simply do not establish citizenship within the libertarian community in which they reside. Other aliens might in fact have little sympathy for libertarian ideals, though they might respect the economic opportunities a libertarian community might offer. In the former case, a set of prior libertarian associations might serve as a "character reference" for the resident alien. But where an alien seeks residency merely for profit, loyalty to libertarian ideals may be quite shallow. Indeed such an alien might try to gain full citizenship, yet still harbor significant disrespect for libertarian ideals. But it is also true that a "resident alien" may value foreign citizenship while becoming a de facto member of the libertarian community. Such a person’s loyalty to the libertarians might exceed the loyalty still given to an official "homeland". The line between "citizen" and "alien" is more about sentiments than credentials.
I see two factors which should be of concern to the libertarians who wish their community to remain libertarian in character. First, there should be some clear sense of identity for the libertarian community, which "foreigners" might respect but would not join. This can be a de facto "citizenship", not necessarily an official set of papers, and might be more a function of informal association than any formal membership. But the "insiders" should be able to clearly identify their fellows. In some ways this would be easier for a virtual community than for a geographically contiguous one. But again, the issue is more one of sentiments.
The second variable would be to allow,
recognize, and even encourage each resident-alien community to have its
own identity. To the extent that resident aliens become a distinct community,
the libertarians may consider the need for them to do so formally and take
some of the libertarian community’s resources with them. It may be that
this is just another kind of libertarian community, the same "splitting"
process whereby long-established libertarian subcultures break away. Or
it may be that the resident aliens want to set up–for themselves, a non-libertarian
community nearby. This is where the "virtual" libertarian community has
an advantage, for the new non-libertarian neighbors can be treated just
as old non-libertarian neighbors had been treated. But for a contiguous
libertarian community, the breakaway process may run afoul of some sense
of monopoly, which the libertarians had hoped to impose and keep over the
geography. If serious conflict is to be avoided, the contiguous libertarian
community will have to trade isolation for flexibility from its inception,
and discourage resident aliens in the first place. Worldwide, even this
strategy generally has not worked in the long run.
5—False Idols
5.1 A Broad Approach Is Needed
All too often, libertarians have concluded that some single institution is wrong with statist societies. In each case, the assumption is made that when this institution is corrected, all other social institutions will conform to it, thus transforming the statist society into a libertarian one. But societies emerge from ecological contexts, not from drawing boards. To the extent a society is a function of purposeful planning, that achievement is more akin to gardening than to the design of a new machine.
Attempts to establish legitimacy exclusively via well formulated social philosophical tracts justifying the legitimacy of a proposed libertarian regime are inadequate. While this tool is useful, the key to the adoption of any social philosophy is in the establishment of a working political tradition wherein that philosophy is both respected and of practical value. This task precedes the formation of any functional separate society.
Thus the problem of legitimacy in a libertarian society requires consideration of many institutions. A libertarian society, like any other, will be functional only if all its institutions are compatible with one another. Those who would envision a libertarian society should consider the full spectrum of institutions, realizing that even then each real society will have unique characteristics.
Many libertarian thinkers seek an end to politics. Politics is simply the pursuit of human action via informal, extra-legal alliances between individuals. By extra-legal I do not necessarily mean illegal but merely the building of alliances based on perceived mutual self-interest, where such alliances are not enforceable by any legal or even a traditional authority. Both traditional and legal factors may also influence a political alliance, but the basic glue is diplomacy.
The human use of political alliances
to address serious issues is a biological trait, which cannot be legislated
out of existence. An attempt to build an "anti-political" tradition will
simply weaken the natural strength of the community. Indeed, it is politics
which is the natural human vehicle for consciously planned social change.
Politics is the tool of the social gardener, not a weed to be driven out.
Politics is essential to building legitimacy.
5.2 The Idol of Written Constitutions and Other Contracts
Most libertarians, living in the statist societies which currently dominate the globe, feel oppressed by rules which have been made into law by the work of political alliances. Many libertarian thinkers seek a new "politics free" society where citizens would arrange all significant relations between themselves via voluntary contracts. These mechanistic social engineers often believe that the only significant tasks of libertarians are to formulate a code of conduct for a libertarian society and to get other individuals to contract with one another to adhere to this code. Legitimacy would presumably follow.
While these two achievements are laudable, they are inadequate for the formation of any society—a libertarian society being no exception. New societies do not spring whole from the plans of men, but rather are modifications made when a part of an older society breaks away. Such breaks may be consciously conceived, but cohesion for the new group will not be achieved simply on the basis of contracts. Deeper belief systems already in place provide the basis for a code of conduct. The break-away group may have some very distinct beliefs from the older society. But the beliefs of the new group will depend more on the older group’s beliefs than on any new beliefs that distinguish the new community. Over a period of years, after the separation, further new ideas may effect the new group, evolving it further away from the old. But it will take generations before the new group is based on largely different principle than the old.
Contracts, while a useful tool to
the social gardener, are brittle cultural machines which will break or
fade out of significance as social change follows from inevitable shifts
in ecology. Deeper, traditional values must be available from which to
forge alternatives when contracts reach the limits of their value.
5.3 The Idol of Geography
A few cultures have thrived in geographical isolation. Some who plan libertarian communities assume that a libertarian community could thrive if geographically isolated from other communities. If nothing else, a contiguous piece of real estate with a well-guarded border is planned, to keep non-libertarians out of the new community. If only libertarians are allowed inside, it is reasoned, then the legitimacy of the community is assured.
Two problems exist when depending on geographic isolation to ensure legitimacy for a libertarian community. First, the libertarians themselves will not agree on everything. A very narrow interpretation of libertarianism, say Orthodox Objectivism, might keep all inside the community within the same ideological sphere. But it is unlikely a sizable community could be assembled with such narrow beliefs. Indeed the very nature of libertarianism itself makes for a wide variety of individual beliefs. Internal diversity will plague the community if it depends on geographic isolation alone.
Secondly, the border of most libertarian
communities will not likely be so strict as to allow for an easily enforced
policy of orthodoxy regarding immigration and resident aliens. As free
traders, most libertarians will want extensive economic and cultural exchange
with non-libertarian neighbors. A significant pressure will thus exist
for a lax border policy–laissez passer.
5.4 The Idol of Property
Some libertarians call themselves or are called by others, "propertarians". Many of them rely heavily on property claims to establish legitimacy. It is often thought that if one can acquire a valid property claim to real estate or other assets, one can assume the legitimacy of what one does with them.
I myself like to use property claims as a basis for analyzing social systems. But in doing so I always like to point out that these claims are subject to dispute. So while it may be true that to get someone to agree that something is your property is to get them to give your use of it legitimacy, we are merely playing with words to say so.
Property claims are often hard to
validate. While a claim may be traced back across many transfers of "ownership",
the original claim may still be in dispute. Further, there is considerable
disagreement between cultures and political traditions as to what things
can become property. Most cultures disavow slavery, the ownership of one
human by another. But many also disavow "intellectual property". Rules
regarding homesteading vary. Rules for establishing abandonment vary. Respect
for various systems of inheritance vary. Property claims which originate
in conquest are often questioned. More often than not, property claims
are respected because of good relations between the people involved, rather
than as a result of abstract legal theory. A good theory and chain of documentation
is fine. But politics and diplomacy will often trump them.
5.5 The Idol of Ignorance
In most societies most persons have a poor understanding of why they respect or disrespect the legitimacy of the institutions around them. Such persons usually grant respect or legitimacy on the basis of emotion, only to copy "their reasons" for these sentiments from other, more verbally adept persons around them. This tendency leads many community leaders to take ignorance for granted, and to cultivate an atmosphere where claims to legitimacy will be settled by "experts", the common citizen being expected merely to obey. We like to think that libertarian citizens would not be fooled by such tactics and that libertarian leaders would not resort to them. But even in a libertarian community, there will be some reliance on citizen ignorance on the part of leaders who seek to confer legitimacy upon the communities institutions.
However, being libertarian the citizens
will be equally if not more susceptible than non-libertarians to calls
for critical examination of institutions when the institutions perform
poorly. And any participants in the libertarian community who are not libertarians
may not only embrace criticisms of institutions which are dysfunctional,
but may further question the libertarian foundation of the community at
large, when allegedly "libertarian" institutions fail. Thus a reliance
on public ignorance to grant default legitimacy to a libertarian community’s
institutions is a poor strategy.
5.6 The Idol of Economics
When the economy of a community does well, people often accept the community’s institutions because they assume that these institutions contribute to prosperity. To some extent this can be valid reasoning. It would probably be more so in the case of a libertarian community, since most libertarian theory alleges that libertarianism fosters prosperity.
But legitimacy requires more than a feeling of economic well-being. Those who find themselves without economic insecurities may indeed lapse into a carefree state with respect to other issues. But others in the same position may grow restless, seeking new challenges. It is common for instance, for the children of well-to-do persons to join crusades for "social reform". It is also common for those who have set aside feelings of injustice while they strove to attain economic prosperity, to seek to use a new position of strength to settle old scores.
When these forms of prosperous restlessness
develop, it will be all the more important for the non-economic libertarian
institutions to command respect. Institutions which foster justice and
tolerance will be needed at these times. They should not be called into
being only at the last minute, but should be available as a result of long-standing
tradition. Leaders should not grow dependent on buying off dissent, though
this tool may be useful much of the time. Active traditions of diplomacy
and mediation of disputes should be available to maximize the legitimacy
of resolutions found within solidly libertarian institutions of conflict
resolution which value tolerance and individual responsibility.
6—Conclusion
The "idols" I observe above do not represent completely futile efforts at obtaining legitimacy. Each has value, used appropriately (yes, even the inevitable inertia provided by ignorance). But the legitimacy of a libertarian society will also require strong institutions for educating citizens and will require institutions which foster a "mythology" for the society. These I have discussed in other essays for Formulations [see "Political Curriculum: Education Essential to Keep a Free Society", Formulations Vol. III, No. 3 and "Sacred Choice: Myths for a Free Nation" Formulations Vol. VI, No. 3]. But above all, the legitimacy of the libertarian society must be a living thing. It must exist in the here and now, not just in cleverly worded stories and essays.
FNF’s Statement of Purpose calls
for "formulations": "clear and believable descriptions of those voluntary
institutions [of civil mutual consent]". This is good. It is a necessary
step to the establishment of a free nation somewhere. But the Statement
of Purpose also calls for "building communities of people who share confidence
in these descriptions." I say that such communities will be much easier
to build, and the confidence will be much stronger, if the people in them
actually use the institutions involved–even before any group of them breaks
fully away from the statist societies in which they currently live. This
can be done, prior to anyone changing residence, prior to any claim to
separate geography, prior even to a Declaration of Independence. The legitimacy
of the free nation will be enhanced by such early community building. Indeed,
that legitimacy and the very survival of the new community may require
pre-secession practice.D
(to table of contents of archives) (to outline) (to top of page)