This is our Burning Libertarian Question (BLQ) of the day. In a sense, Libertarianism is a branch of Classical Liberalism or could even be classified as Classic or Quasi-Classic (Almost-Classic) Liberalism. Its premise is quite simple. The idea is that every human being is the only master of his/her freedom. Other than the laws of physics, this freedom cannot be limited by anything else other than a person’s volition (will).
What does a person do with this freedom is an entirely different subject.
Some versions of Libertarianism prefer to stay within known political boundaries, and as such they advocate for minimum governments. The full purpose of such governments being basic functions only, such as mutual defense and/or the provision of justice.
Other versions of Libertarianism believe that it is OK to have larger governments, providing that such entities allow for lightly-managed markets and/or free markets.
Yet other versions believe that Libertarianism can take some form of socialism or communal decision-making whereby people (as a group) get to decide what is to be done.
And so on. A good intro can be read in Wikipedia under “Libertarianism”.
Our point of view is unique (why not?) among Libertarians.
We call ourselves Absolute Austro Libertarians, freely recognizing that this is an awful name but at least it is something.
Our analysis indicates that the problem with humanity is not the lack of mutual understanding. Most countries, social groups and religions are based on mutual understanding between the members of a specific group. The problem arises because mutual understanding between groups is often impossible as their points of view, religions and philosophies differ so drastically.
Once we understand this point of view, the point of view that there are and there always will be irreconcilable differences between different points of view, we set ourselves to devise a system that will allow for a minimum common denominator; exactly as in math. This common ground is so basic and so common that no group can reject it without rejecting its own humanity. In our case, we had to go down to biology to find such a common understanding. Once we comprehend this point, we set up to create a set of minimum rules that will allow different groups to simply co-exist together. We are not seeking “understanding” nor “cooperation”. That is too high of a goal. All we want is the simplest system that will allow opposing groups to coexist side-by-side without killing each other off. We found that set of rules and they are:
- Property rights are absolute
- We can only interact with other peoples’ properties through voluntary agreements
- If we fail to do so, we are fully liable for all the undue “interaction” (some would call it “damage”) that we performed
- Slavery is forbidden
That’s pretty much it. On the logistic (practical) side, we also believe that it is possible to form Libertarian groups (we deeply dislike the term “society”) based on a general and overarching mutual agreement or contract. In our case, we call such contract a Master Contract. This contract is a real contract embodying (thus enforcing) our beliefs.
As such, we may be bundled with those Libertarians that advocate for tiny governments. This is reasonable but in error. We do not advocate for governments and a Master Contract is not a Constitution. It does not create a government and it can be dismissed at any time. The Master Contract is simply a contract that makes obvious the most basic rules we live by.
As such, we will answer all questions from our point of view. The majority of the time we will answer from a generic perspective that defines us: no government and entirely free markets. In other occasions, we may answer as Absolute Austro Libertarians.
This is only fair since we advocate for one type of Libertarianism and not for the others. We present our point of view and ask you to think. From that point on, it is up to you to.
Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.