User Rating: 5 / 5

Star activeStar activeStar activeStar activeStar active

This may seem a strange topic to dwell about, but we have stated all along that this site is an experimental one and we are subject to:

a)    Errors

b)    Corrections

It is in this spirit that we welcome all comments and points of view. In a sense, it is trial by fire and this is good. Having said that, we must also point out that for as long as our point of view holds, we will not change it. Fair is fair.

A warning: this topic is somewhat theoretical dealing mostly with our Master Contract and hence it may lack entertainment value. You have been warned.

Additionally, we would like to point out that our view is slightly different from any other Libertarian view. This is so because if there is one universal characteristic of Libertarian people is that they all think differently. There is no one stereotype for the Libertarian person.

Our attempt in this site was to create a variation on a common Libertarian set of beliefs, but one that does not rely on ethics or morality, constitutions or other previously understood laws, regulations or philosophical methods as much as possible. We are starting from scratch in order to create a Libertarian system that is as self-consistent and rooted in biological human reality as much as humanly possible. It is this self-consistency and practicality that provides our system the clarity only obtained in scientific systems. It is our insistence in returning to basic biological principles that brings our system down to the most basic human level, a level where all people can accept and hence co-exist. It is our insistence of using pure logic to derive rules in opposition to adding arbitrary rules like other systems do. Because of this fact, we do not have the luxury to leave any topic untouched and this includes slavery.

The failures of most theories can be found in the most difficult topics, not in the easiest ones.

Additionally, our system stresses practicality. It must be clear and simple to the average person in order to have any value for them. What is the point of discussing the theoretical fine points of praxeology (i.e. the science of human action) if it has no impact on daily human lives?

Lastly, we fully expect our system never to be adopted. We believe it to be so not for technical but evolutionary reasons. As we pointed out in our article When Countries Dissolve, the current tendency towards Libertarianism points towards an anarchic system with no rules of any kind. This would be in line with our Political System Lifecycle view. People have simply not yet evolved from a system imposing rules (i.e. Democracy), to a system without rules (with their inherent disadvantages) and arrived at a self-organized system (i.e. Libertarian). Hence, if the system has any chance of being adopted at all, its chances can only be found in the far, far future.

This may seem a contradiction in terms and a gigantic waste of your and our time, alas, this is far from true. We are interested in showing people that a modern Austro-Libertarian system can easily be constructed using only a small set of axioms (i.e. un-provable truths or beliefs) and that it can work. It is then up to the people to develop their own through experimentation, success and failure. It is our goal to encourage free thinking by stimulating controversy and the very human desire to compete and be right.


Slavery is the ownership of people. Almost the entire world population intuitively understands that slavery is a bad thing. They may do so through ethical, moral, religious, personal, educational and many other means. We would like to point out that we are unquestionably against slavery.


As we explained above, we strive for our system to be logical. However, when it comes to the property of our own bodies, we arrive to one undesirable logical conclusion which must be corrected arbitrarily. We strive to have a minimum number of these corrections, but sometimes in real life they are necessary. The two logical processes are as follows.

Absolute ownership

Our system is based on absolute right of ownership. As the very first property we own is our own body, this implies that we have absolute ownership of it. In other words, we can contract absolutely without limitations. One such contract could be to sell our body into slavery and we find this unacceptable.


In our system people causing damage to other people’s properties are responsible with their own properties to the full extent of the damage. One such property is our own body. Hence, it logically follows that our body could become somebody else’s property. This would be slavery and we find this unacceptable.


A critique of our Master Contract points out that the inclusion of the clause forbidding slavery implies that slavery would otherwise be allowed or worse, that the system would facilitate slavery.

In our system and without the anti-slavery clause, slavery could indeed be possible although not facilitated. It is precisely because of this repugnant possibility that the clause was inserted. To prevent it from ever happening.

We also need to clarify that this logical conclusion that needs addressing takes place only in our system. Other Libertarian systems have other processes and definitions that prevent slavery. Since ours is not based on them, we need to add it. In other words, this is our problem not theirs.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

Continue to The issue of slavery - Part 2


English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It