I am much more individualist than libertarian, but agree (and disagree) on some things about libertarianism
Hi folks,
Libertarianism is always a philosophy that inspires me, and just elevates my well being.
That said, if I use any labels at all to describe my political and otherwise philosophy, I am ultimately an Individualist, much more than a libertarian. This is why I am, and always will be, registered as an Independent.
Therefore, as a result, there are points I agree with in libertarianism, but points I definitely diverge with them on.
What I love about libertarianism is its emphasis on the individual. One's own attitude is most important in getting thru life, more than relying so heavily on government or other institutions. They always say that our attitude is ultimately what determines our altitude in life, and I have found it to be so true.
I respect government assistance in many ways. But while help from the government is available in most cases, it should only be taken if all else has failed: the highest responsibility lies with the individual themselves, for their own well being, be it mental, physical, spiritual, etc.
It is also up to each individual to improve society, more than the organization they do or don't represent. Here is an example: let us say, a person lives in the far north, where they have very harsh, very cold winters. It is winter, and he has fallen on hard times financially. Therefore he cannot pay his heating bills, let alone his other bills. The electric company gives him extra time to find the money to pay his heating bills. But after a certain point, the electric company will shut down his heating system, if he doesn't pay the bills in even an extended time period.
What can prevent this person from dying due to freezing in those harsh winters? We can't blame the electric company - that corporation is an entity, not a human being. It is, rather a group of individuals, just like government. They are following their rules, their contract, regardless of the situation of the individual who pays that company for their heating. And we cannot fault a corporation for that.
So what helps that person in distress, therefore, is ultimately the charity of the people around him. Maybe his neighbors can help pay his bills in the meantime, while he tries to find ways to get back on his feet. This help, will prevent him from dying in that bitter cold. Those individuals around him, are likely not part of the electric company, nor the government. They are just common workers, trying to help a friend in dire need.
Therefore, it is ultimately the responsibility of each individual, to be responsible for their well being. And more than an organization or corporation, many (though not all) individuals also have the ability to help others in difficult situations, and elevate society as a whole. It all starts from each individual.
What I also love about libertarians, is they offer very good, very poignant reminders about how limited government is, about how good it can be. Don't get me wrong, I am not NEARLY as anti-government as many of you libertarians are. Do I want to see government smaller than the behemoth it is today? YES. For sure. But I also appreciate the good things government does, and therefore do not ask for nearly as small as the minarchist or near-anarchist society that many of you libertarians aim for.
But again, government, while it does many good things, is also very limited in how good it can be overall. Any central planning authority can only do so much. Read the work "I, Pencil", just to understand this. It is a great essay. The point of the essay is to show that no individual or group can know enough to dictate to others how things that are much more complex should be done. This applies to any central planning authority, like federal government.
This applies to a common libertarian concept of Spontaneous Order - which explains that cultures, markets, languages, etc. were never formed by any one mastermind, or any one central government; they formed randomly, on their own, through the coordination of common people. There was no single mastermind involved. Therefore, central government can, and should, only do so much to re-shape the society of the country it governs. I of course am all for the police, and such safety measures so that people don't harm or physically hurt others, or steal, etc. But as far as a country's habits, their good and bad quirks, their culture, etc...there is little if anything government should ever try to do to control these things. Again, the government, nor any central planner, never invented them, anyway.
Some prominent libertarian or classical liberal economists have also pointed out that we live in a world of physical laws. In other words, scientific and natural laws. And if you are part of any faith or spiritual tradition, we can say that we are bound by spiritual laws too. These laws - natural, physical, spiritual - are more powerful than any government, or even any one person, and their reasoning. So again, government, while it does many good things, has major limitations as to the good it does in society.
All of the things I have said above, are all the things I really appreciate about libertarianism, and those things really correspond well with the individualist philosophy.
Here though, is where I differ from libertarians quite a bit: libertarians, though they have some individualist attributes, still put a lot of reliance on a system, as a solution to society: the free market. Or really better yet, let's just call it the private sector. They love the private sector to the point where they would die on a hill for it, and it almost seems, they worship the private sector/free market.
Here's the kicker: Everything I've mentioned in the above paragraphs apply to both the government AND the private sector.
So, as an individualist, I don't die on a hill for ANY major system. Neither government, nor the private sector. Neither government, nor corporations. Both these systems have their good points and bad points. And we need both of them. Sure, I'm not necessarily drawing a 50-50 equivalence between both systems, and you may "prefer" one system over the other.
But at least, we should acknowledge that both systems have strengths and weaknesses. For example, I don't know how many of you have actually worked for major corporations. I have. For many years. And believe me, some of them, too, similar to government, have very beaurocratic, slow-moving systems that have very slow moving correctional systems. I know of corporations that said they were going to get rid of bad software systems years ago, and yet they are still using them today. Corporations have one thing in common with governments, in that they too are formed by significant groups of people, not just by one individual, and they cannot serve the needs of all customers and employees. Their customer base, and their employee base, like society at large, is too diverse for one company to know all their needs and behaviors.
So again, as an individualist, I absolutely do NOT die on a hill for any major system, be it government or private sector. I rely on my own inner strength, my own attitude, I try to be as good a person as I can be in society, etc. To me, more than any major system: if each individual can work on themselves in this way, only then can society significantly improve.