Print
Share
Add to MyMises
Subscribe

Are Libertarians "Anarchists"?

Mises Daily by Murray N.=20 Rothbard | Posted on 1/4/2008 12:00:00 AM

[This article was written in the mid-1950s under the byline "Aubrey = Herbert," a pseudonym Rothbard used in the periodical Faith and=20 Freedom. It was never published.]

3D""=20 The libertarian = who is=20 happily engaged expounding his political philosophy in the full glory of = his=20 convictions is almost sure to be brought short by one unfailing gambit = of the=20 statist. As the libertarian is denouncing public education or the Post = Office,=20 or refers to taxation as legalized robbery, the statist invariably = challenges.=20 "Well, then are you an anarchist?" The libertarian is reduced = to=20 sputtering "No, no, of course I'm not an anarchist." "Well, then, what=20 governmental measures do you favor? What type of taxes = do you=20 wish to impose?" The statist has irretrievably gained the offensive, = and, having=20 no answer to the first question, the libertarian finds himself = surrendering his=20 case.

Thus, the libertarian will usually reply: "Well, I believe in a = limited=20 government, the government being limited to the defense of the = person or=20 property or the individual against invasion by force or fraud." I have = tried to=20 show in my article, "The Real=20 Aggressor" in the April 1954 Faith and Freedom that this = leaves the=20 conservative helpless before the argument "necessary for defense," when = it is=20 used for gigantic measures of statism and bloodshed. There are other=20 consequences equally or more grave. The statist can pursue the matter = further:=20 "If you grant that it is legitimate for people to band together and = allow the=20 State to coerce individuals to pay taxes for a certain service =E2=80=94 = "defense" =E2=80=94 why=20 is it not equally moral and legitimate for people to join in a similar = way and=20 allow the State the right to provide other services =E2=80=94 such as = post offices,=20 "welfare," steel, power, etc.? If a State supported by a majority can = morally do=20 one, why not morally do the others?" I confess that I see no answer to = this=20 question. If it is proper and legitimate to coerce an unwilling Henry = Thoreau=20 into paying taxes for his own "protection" to a coercive state monopoly, = I see=20 no reason why it should not be equally proper to force him to pay the = State for=20 any other services, whether they be groceries, charity, newspapers, or = steel. We=20 are left to conclude that the pure libertarian must advocate a society = where an=20 individual may voluntarily support none or any police or judicial agency = that he=20 deems to be efficient and worthy of his custom.

I do not here intend to engage in a detailed exposition of this = system, but=20 only to answer the question, is this anarchism? This seemingly simple = question=20 is actually a very difficult one to answer in a sentence, or in a brief=20 yes-or-no reply. In the first place, there is no accepted meaning to the = word=20 "anarchism" itself. The average person may think he knows what = it=20 means, especially that it is bad, but actually he does not. In that = sense, the=20 word has become something like the lamented word "liberal," except that = the=20 latter has "good" connotations in the emotions of the average man. The = almost=20 insuperable distortions and confusions have come both from the opponents = and the=20 adherents of anarchism. The former have completely distorted anarchist = tenets=20 and made various fallacious charges, while the latter have been split = into=20 numerous warring camps with political philosophies that are literally as = far=20 apart as communism and individualism. The situation is further confused = by the=20 fact that, often, the various anarchist groups themselves did not = recognize the=20 enormous ideological conflict between them.

One very popular charge against anarchism is that it "means chaos." = Whether a=20 specific type of anarchism would lead to "chaos" is a matter for = analysis; no=20 anarchist, however, ever deliberately wanted to bring about chaos. = Whatever else=20 he or she may have been, no anarchist has ever deliberately willed chaos = or=20 world destruction. Indeed, anarchists have always believed that the=20 establishment of their system would eliminate the chaotic elements now = troubling=20 the world. One amusing incident, illuminating this misconception, = occurred after=20 the end of the war when a young enthusiast for world government wrote a = book=20 entitled One World or Anarchy, and Canada's leading anarchist = shot back=20 with a work entitled Anarchy or Chaos.

The major difficulty in any analysis of anarchism is that the term = covers=20 extremely conflicting doctrines. The root of the word comes from the = term=20 anarche, meaning opposition to authority or commands. This is = broad=20 enough to cover a host of different political doctrines. Generally these = doctrines have been lumped together as "anarchist" because of their = common=20 hostility to the existence of the State, the coercive monopolist of = force and=20 authority. Anarchism arose in the 19th century, and since then the most = active=20 and dominant anarchist doctrine has been that of "anarchist communism." = This is=20 an apt tern for a doctrine which has also been called "collectivist = anarchism,"=20 "anarcho-syndicalism," and "libertarian communism." We may term this set = of=20 related doctrines "left-wing anarchism." Anarchist communism is = primarily of=20 Russian origin, forged by Prince Peter Kropotkin and Michael Bakunin, = and it is=20 this form that has connoted "anarchism" throughout the continent of = Europe.

The principal feature of anarchist communism is that it attacks = private=20 property just as vigorously as it attacks the State. Capitalism is = considered as=20 much of a tyranny, "in the economic realm," as the State in the = political realm.=20 The left-wing anarchist hates capitalism and private property with = perhaps even=20 more fervor than does the socialist or Communist. Like the Marxists, the = left-wing anarchist is convinced that the capitalists exploit and = dominate the=20 workers, and also that the landlords invariably are exploiting peasants. = The=20 economic views of the anarchists present them with a crucial dilemma, = the=20 pons asinorum of left-wing anarchy: how can capitalism and = private=20 property be abolished, while the State is abolished at the same time? = The=20 socialists proclaim the glory of the State, and the use of the State to = abolish=20 private property =E2=80=94 for them the dilemma does not exist. The = orthodox Marxist=20 Communist, who pays lip service to the ideal of left-wing anarchy, = resolves the=20 dilemma by use of the Hegelian dialectic: that mysterious process by = which=20 something is converted into its opposite. The Marxists would enlarge the = State=20 to the maximum and abolish capitalism, and then sit back confidently to = wait=20 upon the State's "withering away."

The spurious logic of the dialectic is not open to the left-wing = anarchists,=20 who wish to abolish the State and capitalism simultaneously. The nearest = those=20 anarchists have come to resolving the problem has been to uphold = syndicalism as=20 the ideal. In syndicalism, each group of workers and peasants is = supposed to own=20 its means of production in common, and plan for itself, while = cooperating with=20 other collectives and communes. Logical analysis of these schemes would = readily=20 show that the whole program is nonsense. Either of two things would = occur: one=20 central agency would plan for and direct the various subgroups, or the=20 collectives themselves would be really autonomous. But the crucial = question is=20 whether these agencies would be empowered to use force to put their = decisions=20 into effect. All of the left-wing anarchists have agreed that force is = necessary=20 against recalcitrants. But then the first possibility means nothing more = nor=20 less than Communism, while the second leads to a real chaos of diverse = and=20 clashing Communisms, that would probably lead finally to some central = Communism=20 after a period of social war. Thus, left-wing anarchism must in practice = signify=20 either regular Communism or a true chaos of communistic syndics. In both = cases,=20 the actual result must be that the State is reestablished under = another=20 name. It is the tragic irony of left-wing anarchism that, despite = the hopes=20 of its supporters, it is not really anarchism at all. It is either = Communism or=20 chaos.

It is no wonder therefore that the term "anarchism" has received a = bad press.=20 The leading anarchists, particularly in Europe, have always been of the=20 left-wing variety, and today the anarchists are exclusively in the = left-wing=20 camp. Add to that the tradition of revolutionary violence stemming from = European=20 conditions, and it is little wonder that anarchism is discredited. = Anarchism was=20 politically very powerful in Spain, and during the Spanish Civil War, = anarchists=20 established communes and collectives wielding coercive authority. One of = their=20 first steps was to abolish the use of money on the pain of a death = penalty. It=20 is obvious that the supposed anarchist hatred of coercion had gone very = much=20 awry. The reason was the insoluble contradiction between the antistate = and the=20 antiproperty tenets of left-wing anarchy.

How is it, then, that despite the fatal logical contradictions in = left-wing=20 anarchism, there are a highly influential group of British intellectuals = who=20 currently belong to this school, including the art critic Sir Herbert = Read, and=20 the psychiatrist Alex Comfort? The answer is that anarchists, perhaps=20 unconsciously seeing the hopelessness of their position, have made a = point of=20 rejecting logic and reason entirely. They stress spontaneity, emotions,=20 instincts, rather than allegedly cold and inhuman logic. By so doing, = they can=20 of course remain blind to the irrationality of their position. Of = economics,=20 which would show them the impossibility of their system, they are = completely=20 ignorant, perhaps more so than any other group of political theorists. = The=20 dilemma about coercion they attempt to resolve by the absurd theory that = crime=20 would simply disappear if the State were abolished, so that no coercion = would=20 have to be used. Irrationality indeed permeates almost all of the views = of the=20 left-wing anarchists. They reject industrialism as well as private = property, and=20 tend to favor returning to the handicraft and simple peasant conditions = or the=20 Middle Ages. They are fanatically in favor of modern art, which they = consider=20 "anarchist" art. They have an intense hatred of money and of material=20 improvements. Living a simple peasant existence, in communes, is = extolled as=20 "living the anarchist life," while a civilized person is supposed to be=20 viciously bourgeois and unanarchist. Thus, the ideas of the left-wing = anarchists=20 have become a nonsensical jumble, far more irrational than that of the = Marxists,=20 and deservedly looked upon with contempt by almost everyone as = hopelessly=20 "crackpot." Unfortunately the result is that the good criticisms that = they=20 sometimes make of State tyranny tend to be tarred with the same = "crackpot"=20 brush.

Considering the dominant anarchists, it is obvious that the question = "are=20 libertarians anarchists?" must be answered unhesitatingly in the = negative. We=20 are at completely opposite poles. Confusion enters, however, because of = the=20 existence in the past, particularly in the United States, of a small but = brilliant group of "individualist anarchists" headed by Benjamin R. = Tucker. Here=20 we come to a different breed. The individualist anarchists have = contributed a=20 great deal to libertarian thought. They have provided some of the best=20 statements of individualism and antistatism that have ever been penned. = In the=20 political sphere, the individualist anarchists were generally = sound=20 libertarians. They favored private property, extolled free competition, = and=20 battled all forms of governmental intervention. Politically, the Tucker=20 anarchists had two principal defects: (1) they failed to advocate = defense of=20 private landholdings beyond what the owner used personally; (2) they = relied too=20 heavily on juries and failed to see the necessity for a body of = constitutional=20 libertarian law which the private courts would have to uphold.

Contrasted to their minor political failings, however, they fell into = grievous economic error. They believed that interest and profit were=20 exploitative, due to an allegedly artificial restriction on the money = supply.=20 Let the State and its monetary regulations be removed, and free banking = be=20 established, they believed, and everyone would print as much money as he = needed,=20 and interest and profits would fall to zero. This hyperinflationist = doctrine,=20 acquired from the Frenchman Proudhon, is economic nonsense. We must = remember,=20 however, that "respectable" economics, then and now, has been permeated = with=20 inflationist errors, and very few economists have grasped the essentials = of=20 monetary phenomena. The inflationists simply take the more genteel = inflationism=20 of fashionable economics and courageously push it to its logical = conclusion.

The irony of this situation was that while the individualist = anarchists laid=20 great stress on their nonsensical banking theories, their political = order that=20 they advocated would have led to economic results directly contrary to = what they=20 believed. They thought that free banking would lead to indefinite = expansion of=20 the money supply, whereas the truth is precisely the reverse: it would = lead to=20 "hard money" and absence of inflation. The economic fallacies of the = Tuckerites,=20 however, are of a completely different order than those of the = collectivist=20 anarchists. The errors of the collectivists led them to advocate virtual = political Communism, while the economic errors of the individualists = still=20 permitted them to advocate a nearly libertarian system. The superficial = might=20 easily confuse the two, because the individualists were led to attack=20 "capitalists," whom they felt were exploiting the workers through State=20 restriction of the money supply.

These "right-wing" anarchists did not take the foolish position that = crime=20 would disappear in the anarchist society. Yet they did tend to = underestimate the=20 crime problem, and as a result never recognized the need for a fixed = libertarian=20 constitution. Without such a constitution, the private judicial process = might=20 become truly "anarchic" in the popular sense.

The Tucker wing of anarchism flourished in the 19th century, but died = out by=20 World War I. Many libertarian thinkers in that Golden Age of liberalism = were=20 working on doctrines that were similar in many respects. These genuine=20 libertarians never referred to themselves as anarchists, however; = probably the=20 main reason was that all the anarchist groups, even the right wingers, = possessed=20 socialistic economic doctrines in common.

Here we should note still a third variety of anarchist thought, one=20 completely different from either the collectivists or individualists. = This is=20 the absolute pacifism of Leo Tolstoy. This preaches a society where = force would=20 not even be used to defend person and property, whether by State or = private=20 organizations. Tolstoy's program of nonviolence has influenced many = alleged=20 pacifists today, mainly through Gandhi, but the latter do not realize = that there=20 can be no genuinely complete pacifism unless the State and other defense = agencies are eliminated. This type of anarchism, above all others, rests = on an=20 excessively idealistic view of human nature. It could only work in a = community=20 of saints.

	$15 $11
"Perhaps, then, = we could=20 call ourselves by a new=20 = name=E2=80=A6"

We must conclude that the question "are libertarians anarchists?" = simply=20 cannot be answered on etymological grounds. The vagueness of the term = itself is=20 such that the libertarian system would be considered anarchist by some = people=20 and archist by others. We must therefore turn to history for = enlightenment; here=20 we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the=20 libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and=20 socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all = of the=20 current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at = opposite poles=20 from our position. We must therefore conclude that we are not=20 anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm = etymological=20 ground, and are being completely unhistorical. On the other hand, it is = clear=20 that we are not archists either: we do not believe in = establishing a=20 tyrannical central authority that will coerce the noninvasive as well as = the=20 invasive. Perhaps, then, we could call ourselves by a new name:=20 nonarchist. Then, when, in the jousting of debate, the = inevitable=20 challenge "are you an anarchist?" is heard, we can, for perhaps the = first and=20 last time, find ourselves in the luxury of the "middle of the road" and = say,=20 "Sir, I am neither an anarchist nor an archist, but am squarely down the = nonarchic middle of the road."

Murray N. Rothbard = (1926=E2=80=931995)=20 was dean of the Austrian School. See his archive. = Comment on the=20 blog.

This article was written in the mid-1950s under the byline "Aubrey = Herbert,"=20 a pseudonym Rothbard used in the periodical Faith and Freedom. = It was=20 never published.

You can receive the Mises Dailies in your inbox. = Go here to subscribe or=20 unsubscribe.

User-Contributed Tags: =

Anarcho-Capitalism anarchism collectivism bakounin

What is 2 + 3? =20 (Sign in to turn off = the=20 captcha.)=20

Add a=20 Tag =20 (Ex: Human Action, Inflation)

Print
Share
Add to MyMises
Subscribe

Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Newsvine
StumbleUpon

Search

">Advance= d Search=20 =C2=BB=20

The = Bailout=20 Reader

Mises Daily Search

rss=20

About the Author

Murray N. = Rothbard=20

Murray N. Rothbard (1926=E2=80=931995) was dean of the Austrian = School. He was an=20 economist, economic historian, and libertarian political philosopher. =

view = archives

Featured

=20

Capital and = Interest=20 (Hardcover)

Author: Boehm-Bawerk, Eugen=20 von
$50.00
view = all=E2=80=A6=20

Mises Community

Tech-support hold = music=20 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:48:20 -0600 by Jeffrey = Tucker=20
32. "Gold, the = Golden Rule,=20 and Government: Civil Society and the End of the State," by D.G. White = [Libertarian Papers] Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:11:00 -0600 by Stephan = Kinsella=20
33. "Reply to Matt = Mortellaro=20 on 'Block's Paradox': Causation, Responsibility, Libertarian Law, = Entrapment,=20 Threats and Blackmail," by Walter Block [Libertarian Papers] = Thu, 06=20 Aug 2009 10:10:58 -0600 by Stephan = Kinsella=20
The Real Right to = Medical=20 Care versus Socialized Medicine Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:54:19 = -0600 by George = Reisman=20
Rereading Our = Enemy, the=20 State Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:51:38 -0600 by Mises.org = Updates=20
Obama and the = Economy=20 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:46:49 -0600 by Llewellyn H. = Rockwell,=20 Jr.
How Not to Bring = Broadband to=20 All Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:42:09 -0600 by Mises.org = Updates=20

view all=E2=80=A6 mises blog = rss

I= f you=20 don't like it... 8/5/2009 11:54:00 PM by thedo= =20
= A View=20 from the Trenches, August 6th, 2009: "Not so fast!" 8/5/2009 = 8:52:00=20 PM by Tinc= ho=20 Sibileau
a=20 poem 8/5/2009 4:17:00 AM by Solre= yus=20
= A View=20 from the Trenches, August 5th, 2009: An interesting day = 8/4/2009=20 7:29:00 PM by Tinc= ho=20 Sibileau
= A View=20 from the Trenches, August 4th, 2009: "Updating the forecast" = 8/4/2009=20 7:55:00 AM by Tinc= ho=20 Sibileau
Ask=20 Not... 8/3/2009 3:53:00 PM by Futbo= lGuru=20
Obama=20 Proves Tax Cuts Stimulate Economy 8/3/2009 3:33:00 PM by Futbo= lGuru=20
Environmentalism=20 and the Austrian Response 8/2/2009 12:07:00 PM by roma= ntivist=20
M= ore=20 Thoughts on Categorizing Economic Schools 8/1/2009 5:08:00 PM = by zirag= t=20
E= ntrevista=20 6 agosto 2009 como artista pict=C3=B3rico 8/1/2009 2:36:00 PM = by rroop= str=20
Mises=20 Daily Editing Group Newsletter 2 7/31/2009 4:39:38 PM by natma= rcus=20
A=20 Teachable Moment 7/31/2009 10:20:00 AM by Futbo= lGuru=20
Econ= omics=20 in One Lesson=E7=BC=96=E6=A0=A1the proofreading plan for Chinese = translation 7/30/2009=20 9:54:00 PM by Dingd= ong=20 Pu
T= he=20 Importance of Fellow Travelers 7/30/2009 3:39:00 PM by zirag= t=20
= A View=20 from the Trenches, July 30th, 2009: "A quick summary of main = thoughts"=20 7/29/2009 10:26:00 PM by Tinc= ho=20 Sibileau
Jatropha=20 biofuel, Third World exploitation 7/29/2009 1:41:00 PM by Charl= es=20 Anthony
Econ= omics=20 in One Lesson=E6=A0=A1=E8=AF=91=E4=B9=8B24. The Assault on Saving = (4-1,2) 7/29/2009 3:31:00 AM=20 by Dingd= ong=20 Pu
= A View=20 from the Trenches, July 29th, 2009: "On systemic risk and savings" = 7/28/2009 11:19:00 PM by Tinc= ho=20 Sibileau
Econ= omics=20 in One Lesson=E6=A0=A1=E8=AF=91=E4=B9=8B A NOTE ON BOOKS = 7/28/2009 7:43:00 PM by Dingd= ong=20 Pu
E= jemplos=20 de escasez causada por el control de precios 7/28/2009 3:29:00 = PM by=20 rroop= str=20

view all=E2=80=A6=20 user blogs=20 rss

Mises=20 Blog
User = Blogs
Forums

Is = BitCoin the=20 currency of the future? 8/6/2009 1:09:15 PM by ama=20 gi
On the=20 non-optimality of free markets. 8/1/2009 7:43:28 PM by mick= anomics=20
Children's=20 rights 8/1/2009 1:02:38 PM by Indiv= idualist=20
FEE = audio=20 files 8/6/2009 12:27:46 PM by Giles= Stratton=20
Fractional = Reserve=20 Banking 7/28/2009 7:54:59 PM by adam = knott
Mises.org = Articles=20 Legacy Links 404 8/6/2009 12:58:58 PM by liber= ty=20 student
Open = market=20 operations and inflation 8/6/2009 12:07:50 PM by Esur= ic=20
who are = your=20 favorite economists and why? 7/30/2009 3:26:53 PM by faken= ame=20
How do = natural=20 rights theories cross the is/ought divide? 8/1/2009 8:20:29 PM = by Lilb= urne=20
If ALL = Animals=20 Have Rights... 7/25/2009 2:51:29 PM by Danie= lSanchez=20
Grant Me = The=20 Wisdom and Intelligence 8/5/2009 9:22:26 PM by limit= gov=20
Be = careful on=20 stocks. This is an extremely dangerous time to own stocks. = 8/6/2009=20 10:09:10 AM by billo= tt1=20
Actual = Logical=20 Proof of Natural Law 8/5/2009 6:56:04 AM by Aman= ojack=20
The = Truth about=20 Marriage License: you belong to the State 8/6/2009 9:38:24 AM = by Natal= ie=20
Sourcing = From=20 Thomas Woods' Meltdown 8/5/2009 3:14:36 PM by Moun= tainGoat=20
Critiques of=20 Austrian Economics. 8/4/2009 4:23:43 PM by raze= rfish=20
Help = finding an=20 essay about parallels between Marxism & Libertarianism = 8/5/2009=20 11:50:31 PM by yoshi= mura=20
How much = did the=20 Window cost? And perhaps a new malinvestment? 8/5/2009 = 10:32:30 PM by=20 roma= ntivist=20
Did the = founding=20 fathers believe in anarchy? 8/4/2009 6:15:20 AM by libe= rtyman=20
Cash for = Clunkers 8/5/2009 8:07:48 PM by Anton= =20 Batey

view all=E2=80=A6 forums = rss

Literature

rss=20

= Reply=20 to Matt Mortellaro on "Block=E2=80=99s Paradox": Causation, = Responsibility,=20 Libertarian Law, Entrapment, Threats and Blackmail by Walter=20 Block
Gold, = the Golden=20 Rule, and Government: Civil Society and the End of the State = by D. G.=20 White
History of = American=20 Socialisms by John Humphrey Noyes
The Freeman 1999 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
The Freeman 1997 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
The Freeman 1996 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
Pro= perty,=20 Freedom, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe by = J=C3=B6rg=20 Guido H=C3=BClsmann
The Freeman 1995 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
The Freeman 1986 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
The Freeman 1985 = by=20 Foundation for Economic Education
The Libertarian = Review December=20 1980 by Libertarian Review
The Libertarian Review = September=20 1980 by Libertarian Review

view all=E2=80=A6

Upcoming Events

rss=20

San Francisco, California, = Intercontinental Hotel August 29, 2009
= =20
Dealing with Economic Depression (Mises Circle sponsored by Mark = L. Hart=20 III)
Seattle, Washington=20 September 12, 2009
=20
The Greatest Depression? (Mises Circle, sponsored by James M.=20 Wolfe)
Greenville, South = Carolina=20 October 3, 2009
=20
Depression, Monetary Destruction, and the Path to Sound Money = (Mises=20 Circle sponsored by Atlantic Bullion and Coin, and Professional = Planning of=20 Easley LLC)
Salamanca, Spain = October=20 21-24, 2009
=20
The Birthplace of Economic Theory: A Trip to Salamanca,=20 Spain

view=20 all=E2=80=A6

Ludwig von Mises Institute

Are Libertarians "Anarchists"?

User-Contributed Tags: =

Search

The = Bailout=20 Reader

Mises Daily Search

About the Author

Murray N. = Rothbard=20

Related

Featured

Capital and = Interest=20 (Hardcover)

Mises Community

Literature

Upcoming Events

San Francisco, California, = Intercontinental Hotel August 29, 2009

Dealing with Economic Depression (Mises Circle sponsored by Mark = L. Hart=20 III)

Seattle, Washington=20 September 12, 2009

The Greatest Depression? (Mises Circle, sponsored by James M.=20 Wolfe)

Greenville, South = Carolina=20 October 3, 2009

Depression, Monetary Destruction, and the Path to Sound Money = (Mises=20 Circle sponsored by Atlantic Bullion and Coin, and Professional = Planning of=20 Easley LLC)

Salamanca, Spain = October=20 21-24, 2009

The Birthplace of Economic Theory: A Trip to Salamanca,=20 Spain

The Quotable = Mises